Expeditionary basing, logistics and seaplanes (yeah it's a seaplane thread)

[Clark Griswold]

https://www.stripes.com/branches/air_force/2021-11-10/air-force-seaplanes-special-operations-command-japan-3563136.html
  Interesting AFSOC visit to the Land of the Rising Sun

Nice
Runway independence has a nice ring to it also


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[arg]

Another problem is the pilots will have to learn Japanese to read the gauges. 😆

[contraildash]

On 11/6/2021 at 4:21 PM, DirkDiggler said:

AFSOC is a C-130 command; the Pave Low/CV-22 mafia, AC-130, and MC-130 and this group exerts a huge influence in what happens within the command.

FIFY

 

[DirkDiggler]

On 11/19/2021 at 7:56 PM, contraildash said:

FIFY

 

Lol agree to disagree, at least for the present.  Last two AFSOC/CCs have been Pave guys.  As that generation retires and with the pending "long term storage" of a big chunk of the CV-22 fleet, that dynamic will probably shift but its definitely here for the present.  Going forward, I'll be interested to see how the RPA and U-28 communities influence the higher up AFSOC hierarchy, but I'll probably be a Mr. long before then (interesting side note, Slife has been pushing STO guys into some Grp and the AFSOC A3 position, not sure if that trend will continue once he's on to bigger things).

Break Break

Clark Griswold, you wanna post your top names for this new seaplane?  Here's mine, in no particular order 

1. Typhoon (harkens back to British aircraft in WWII)

2. Sea Witch (goes back to Russian WWII Night Witches)

3. Sea Drag-in (those big draggy floats....GET IT!!....I'll be here all day)

4. BUWF--Big Ugly Walrus Fucker (unlikely I admit, but I'm a Broken Lizard fan)

[Clark Griswold]

Lol agree to disagree, at least for the present.  Last two AFSOC/CCs have been Pave guys.  As that generation retires and with the pending "long term storage" of a big chunk of the CV-22 fleet, that dynamic will probably shift but its definitely here for the present.  Going forward, I'll be interested to see how the RPA and U-28 communities influence the higher up AFSOC hierarchy, but I'll probably be a Mr. long before then (interesting side note, Slife has been pushing STO guys into some Grp and the AFSOC A3 position, not sure if that trend will continue once he's on to bigger things).
Break Break
Clark Griswold, you wanna post your top names for this new seaplane?  Here's mine, in no particular order 
1. Typhoon (harkens back to British aircraft in WWII)
2. Sea Witch (goes back to Russian WWII Night Witches)
3. Sea Drag-in (those big draggy floats....GET IT!!....I'll be here all day)
4. BUWF--Big Ugly Walrus er (unlikely I admit, but I'm a Broken Lizard fan)

Greek mythology was my favorite elective so I’ve got a soft spot sts for classical references, my vote Odysseus
He wandered the sea on a mission and got out of some tough spots
That’s my rationale

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

I hope this happens…

https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/31162-why-is-australia-returning-to-a-70-year-old-seaplane?fbclid=IwAR3IHepbMggYO1S0Yq-eS9B7_HR8CuREdBNbBDs4bvOciv1VeE9IunxbMWw

 

Company website on vaporware (as of now) revived Albatross 

G-111T — Amphibian Aerospace Industries (amphibaircraft.com)

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited June 9, 2022 by Clark Griswold
added company website

[skibum]

Plenty of opportunity out there already...

[Clark Griswold]

20 hours ago, skibum said:

Plenty of opportunity out there already...

True 

To get it to happen (a US military seaplane) I think the requirement needs to be stated as a military, humanitarian and law enforcement requirement.  Military support to those not explicitly military missions stated formally as a military responsibility as those missions will be ad hoc as needed and the military mission will be stated as capability to be kept at the ready at all times.  

As it is an expensive platform and has a niche capability it has to have a strong argument for it, looking at the likelihood of military contingencies in the Pacific along with sea based or coastal areas in crisis (NEOs, mass migration events, piracy, illegal fishing, territorial aggression on disputed islands, etc…) in other areas like the Caribbean, Mediterranean and Baltic, there is a legitimate argument for acquiring a capability to infiltrate/exfiltrate X sized military force or securely move X people into/out of a crisis area.

What that requirement is - X people, X lbs of gear, X range, etc… is a great 6.9 billion dollar question…

A WAG at what could be a feasible capability to maintain would be 40-50 Shinmaywa US-2 seaplanes in 3-4 squadrons/dets; 2 Pacific based in Australia and Japan, 1 Europe based in Italy and possibly 1 based in Alaska primarily focused on Arctic ops but could also support Indo-Pacific.

 

[skybert]

 

[Clark Griswold]

Just saw this, seems like this is gonna happen

Looking at this rendering which seems pretty close to what I'd imagine a real MAC 130 would look life IRL, could you drive that on to beach, embark / disembark troops / vehicles then launch again from that beach?

Just considering it, high floatation tires in a side by side truck disperse enough weight to not get sunk / stuck on sand that's fairly compacted?  

[McJay Pilot]

6 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Just saw this, seems like this is gonna happen

Looking at this rendering which seems pretty close to what I'd imagine a real MAC 130 would look life IRL, could you drive that on to beach, embark / disembark troops / vehicles then launch again from that beach?

Just considering it, high floatation tires in a side by side truck disperse enough weight to not get sunk / stuck on sand that's fairly compacted?  

Disembarking troops from the crew entrance door would take FOR-EV-ER. Plus, if the beach is wide enough to taxi onto, regular MC-130’s can land on it.

[HerkPerfMan]

1 hour ago, McJay Pilot said:

Disembarking troops from the crew entrance door would take FOR-EV-ER. Plus, if the beach is wide enough to taxi onto, regular MC-130’s can land on it.

I'm all for a "flying boat" C-130, but it can already hit the beach...

 

[Biff_T]

26 minutes ago, HerkPerfMan said:

I'm all for a "flying boat" C-130, but it can already hit the beach...

 

Cool video!

[arg]

2 hours ago, McJay Pilot said:

Disembarking troops from the crew entrance door would take FOR-EV-ER. Plus, if the beach is wide enough to taxi onto, regular MC-130’s can land on it.

Who's first to land on Navarre beach? Bonus points if you land just east of Navarre beach, that's where the Nekid beach is.

[Clark Griswold]

Disembarking troops from the crew entrance door would take FOR-EV-ER. Plus, if the beach is wide enough to taxi onto, regular MC-130’s can land on it.

I think it will still have its ramp but I should have been more specific, I was envisioning a scenario where the beach is not suitable for landing necessitating a water landing and beaching to offload


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[McJay Pilot]

1 hour ago, Clark Griswold said:

I think it will still have its ramp but I should have been more specific, I was envisioning a scenario where the beach is not suitable for landing necessitating a water landing and beaching to offload


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fair enough. Combat offloads for all my friends!

[GrndPndr]

12 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

I think it will still have its ramp but I should have been more specific, I was envisioning a scenario where the beach is not suitable for landing necessitating a water landing and beaching to offload

Sounds like lots of fishing poles and water skis.  Fast taxi for water skiing (maybe two engines only for that).  Maybe get MX to make a special water-ski/Surf board rack.  Speaking of racks...

[ClearedHot]

Serious concerns about VMCA using dual pontoons...

[Swizzle]

24 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Serious concerns about VMCA using dual pontoons...

But digital modeling...

[Clark Griswold]

Serious concerns about VMCA using dual pontoons...

Software change / update for the ATCS to deal with Vmca issues if it is above rotation speed?
No sea or float plane experience but I’m guessing there is a maximum in water taxi-takeoff-landing speed that is above but likely close to rotation or landing speeds so delaying rotation to get faster but still skiing in the water is likely not possible

US-2 has a BLC system, can that be adjusted automatically to prevent roll over before full aerodynamic control effectiveness has been reached in a asymmetric thrust of flight control situation?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ClearedHot]

On 11/6/2021 at 4:21 PM, DirkDiggler said:

AFSOC is a very tribal incestuous command; the Pave Low/CV-22 mafia, AC-130, and MC-130 groups exert a huge influence in what happens within the command. 

FIFY

[Clark Griswold]

Float C-130 taking a few laps in development

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/mc-130j-seaplane-wont-fly-for-two-to-three-more-years

Define requirement, acquire low risk already flying US-2, profit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

One more:

Heavy lift capability concepts 

https://spectrum.ieee.org/darpa-liberty-lifter-2659392219

[DirkDiggler]

1 hour ago, Clark Griswold said:

Float C-130 taking a few laps in development

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/mc-130j-seaplane-wont-fly-for-two-to-three-more-years

Define requirement, acquire low risk already flying US-2, profit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s pretty much dead at this point.

[Clark Griswold]

It’s pretty much dead at this point.

Figures
The concept art was cool, the concept not necessarily crazy but if you really want a seaplane just got get a plane that was built as a seaplane
A Fiero with a fiberglass Lamborghini body kit is still ultimately a Fiero


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk