this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
178 points (99.4% liked)

Cranes, trains, planes and excavators and stuff like that

261 readers
1 users here now

A place for all things cranes, trains, and excavators, and stuff like that.

Recommended title format: XKCD or something else. Optional additional factual info in text field or comments.

founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
laverabe@lemmy.world
178
Lun-class ekranoplan (ground effect vehicle) from 1987 (files.catbox.moe)
submitted 7 months ago by infeeeee@lemm.ee to c/cranetrainexcavators@lemmy.world
26 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lun-class_ekranoplan

Only one built, and it's still on the shore of the Caspian sea:

General characteristics

  • Crew: 15 (6 officers, 9 enlisted)
  • Capacity: 137 t (302,000 lb)
  • Length: 73.8 m (242 ft 2 in)
  • Wingspan: 44 m (144 ft 4 in)
  • Height: 19.2 m (63 ft 0 in)
  • Wing area: 550 m2 (5,900 sq ft)
  • Empty weight: 286,000 kg (630,522 lb)
  • Max takeoff weight: 380,000 kg (837,757 lb)
  • Powerplant: 8 × Kuznetsov NK-87 turbofans, 127.4 kN (28,600 lbf) thrust each

Performance

  • Maximum speed: 550 km/h (340 mph, 300 kn)
  • Cruise speed: 450 km/h (280 mph, 240 kn) at 2.5 m (8 ft)
  • Range: 2,000 km (1,200 mi, 1,100 nmi)
  • Service ceiling: 5 m (16 ft) in ground effect

Armament

  • Guns: two 23mm Pl-23 cannon in a twin tail turret and two 23mm Pl-23 cannon in a twin turret under forward missile tubes
  • Missiles: six launchers for P-270 Moskit Sunburn antiship missiles
top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] owen@lemmy.ca 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It would be scary as shit to see this mf approaching

[–] Zron@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

At 300 miles per hour top speed, I think you’ll just hear the jet engines and then either see a gray blur or die.

Unless you happen to be behind a decent sized hill, then you’ll just go deaf and wonder what the fuck that noise was. A 5 meter service ceiling is impressively low for a craft that is 19 meters tall.

[–] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I just found it funny they put service ceiling in the specs. Look at other aircraft

42,000m

38,000m

...

5

[–] Zron@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It is technically an aircraft.

I just can’t think of any use for this thing that an actual airplane or conventional truck couldn’t accomplish. A truck can transport equipment and personnel over long distances. And an airplane can provide much better close air support by overflying the enemy.

But giant hovercraft is really cool.

[–] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It was preliminary conceived as a platform for anti ship missiles. Because it was so low, it could get within 10 to 20 miles before showing up on ship based radar. Basically think of it as a ship but with the speed of an aircraft. When the Americans first photographed it with a satellite they called it the Caspian sea monster. They had no idea what it could do and were genuinely worried at first.

Ultimately it proved too hard to fly. It had to be hand flown with a vertical margin of error of just a meter or two.

[–] Zron@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I can’t imagine how sweaty my hands would be having to hand fly that monster over water.

One good gust of wind and now you’re trying to swim at 300 miles an hour

[–] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah I was watching a video about these things a little bit ago. If I am remembering correctly in rough weather the pilots had to switch every 20-30 minutes due to exhaustion.

[–] Zron@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Was half the crew pilots?

[–] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

It never made it out of flight tests. I think they usually had 3 or 4 pilots and a few engineers, plus the designer on board for most tests.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It gets better fuel efficiency than an airplane and goes 5x faster than a truck. Essentially you're sacrificing the ability to go high for a more efficient way of staying off the ground.

Iran uses modern tiny ones. Presumably they're cheaper than helicoptors or planes that could carry a similar payload.

[–] dalekcaan@lemm.ee 10 points 7 months ago (2 children)

There's something to be said for the aesthetic of old Soviet technology. It feels almost surreal, like an engineer's fever dream.

[–] CptEnder@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

This is like the Endgame of hovercrafts lmao

[–] bfg9k@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

I love it. It looks like it shouldn't work, but it did and it did it well

[–] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago (2 children)

wow, could only fly a few meters above sea level, so anytime the water was choppy, this thing just... wouldn't be able to fly. Such an odd design

[–] owen@lemmy.ca 10 points 7 months ago

It was probably developed to push the limits of ground effect, since it can provide such a great advantage to travel efficiency. Think min-maxing to find the meta in a new competitive game.

[–] infeeeee@lemm.ee 7 points 7 months ago

This and other older ekranoplanes were only used on the Caspian, Black and Baltic sea, where huge waves are rare.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

This looks like something that would chase after Mel Gibson in a modded GT falcon.

[–] TheGiantKorean@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Kind of reminds me of the Yamato from Star Blazers.

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Would be interesting to see how that thing would fare in a modern war. On the one hand, it can deliver a shit ton of missiles very quickly. On the other hand it has a radar echo like, well, nothing like it I guess, and it certainly flies slower than any missile.

[–] teejay@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I would guess that it would survive about as long as it would take a $200 fpv drone to collide with one of the engine arrays. Then nautical drones would do their thing to turn it into an artificial reef.

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

In flight it's way faster than any FPV or naval drone.

[–] teejay@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Sure, in a dead heat and as long as there aren't any big waves. Also, you do realize that it's possible to attack this thing from other directions than directly behind it while it's at full speed, right?

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If you attack it head on you have a very short window of opportunity before it's past you and if you try from the side you'll have to be really really good at geometry. And that thing won't go in a straight line while it's in enemy range.

[–] teejay@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

If you attack it head on you have a very short window of opportunity before it’s past you

So, you have to be accurate. Like we've been doing for hundreds of years with projectiles, even non-guided ones. Check.

if you try from the side you’ll have to be really really good at geometry

So... good like as in a computer doing the math? Check.

And that thing won’t go in a straight line while it’s in enemy range.

Bad news friend, they can't turn for shit due to ground effect, and they can't ascend or descend either. There's a reason these things were immediately abandoned as a viable concept after only 3 years in operation and without seeing any combat.

[–] llii@feddit.de 1 points 7 months ago

Choo choo!

[–] johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Definitely thought this was AI at first.