If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   Once upon a time, the Russians designed a hovercraft so strange we had no idea what the hell it was   (io9.com) divider line 69
    More: Interesting, Russians, Russians designed, Caspian Sea, Soviet Military, LiveJournal  
•       •       •

8108 clicks; posted to Geek » on 01 Mar 2013 at 6:32 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



69 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-01 03:17:31 PM
I love the Caspian Sea Monster.
 
2013-03-01 03:19:00 PM
Was it full of eels?
 
2013-03-01 03:34:40 PM
In the mid-1960s, the Soviets were testing something they called an ekranoplan, which is essentially a hovercraft.

No, no it isn't.
 
2013-03-01 03:55:28 PM

costermonger: In the mid-1960s, the Soviets were testing something they called an ekranoplan, which is essentially a hovercraft.

No, no it isn't.


Both the Caspian Sea Monster and conventional hovercraft are air cushion vehicles, but they use different
methods to achieve said air cushion.

'Hovercraft', while technically imprecise, is an accepted shorthand description of an ACV.
 
2013-03-01 04:32:37 PM

DjangoStonereaver: Both the Caspian Sea Monster and conventional hovercraft are air cushion vehicles, but they use different
methods to achieve said air cushion.

'Hovercraft', while technically imprecise, is an accepted shorthand description of an ACV.


C'mon, that's like interchanging helicopter and aeroplane because they're both aircraft. It's not just imprecise, it's incorrect. Hovercrafts are ACVs, and so are ground effect vehicles, but ground effect vehicles cannot hover. That's kind of an essential characteristic for anything you want to call a hovercraft.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-03-01 04:50:17 PM
With all due disrespect to io9, a wing in ground effect is not like a hovercraft.
 
2013-03-01 04:57:54 PM

costermonger: DjangoStonereaver: Both the Caspian Sea Monster and conventional hovercraft are air cushion vehicles, but they use different
methods to achieve said air cushion.

'Hovercraft', while technically imprecise, is an accepted shorthand description of an ACV.

C'mon, that's like interchanging helicopter and aeroplane because they're both aircraft. It's not just imprecise, it's incorrect. Hovercrafts are ACVs, and so are ground effect vehicles, but ground effect vehicles cannot hover. That's kind of an essential characteristic for anything you want to call a hovercraft.


Probably has a very low eel capacity, too
 
2013-03-01 06:40:17 PM
Technically the Caspian Sea Monster and it's ilk (water borne GEVs that make use of a wing or lifting body) are called Flarecraft.
 
2013-03-01 06:42:33 PM
I love all of this insanely huge shiat the Russians tried to build. It's amazing the deeper you dig, just how much they tried...
 
2013-03-01 06:42:44 PM
All arguments aside...I like the sound of "Jet Punk"
 
2013-03-01 06:43:16 PM

costermonger: DjangoStonereaver: Both the Caspian Sea Monster and conventional hovercraft are air cushion vehicles, but they use different
methods to achieve said air cushion.

'Hovercraft', while technically imprecise, is an accepted shorthand description of an ACV.

C'mon, that's like interchanging helicopter and aeroplane because they're both aircraft. It's not just imprecise, it's incorrect. Hovercrafts are ACVs, and so are ground effect vehicles, but ground effect vehicles cannot hover. That's kind of an essential characteristic for anything you want to call a hovercraft.


Came here to say this. If it can't hover, it's not a hover craft.

Especially as the author says "essentially a hover craft", implying that this vehicle, though unfamiliar, is at it's essence the same mechanism as a conventional hovercraft. It is not.
 
2013-03-01 06:44:25 PM
 
2013-03-01 06:45:16 PM

Mikey1969: I love all of this insanely huge shiat the Russians tried to build. It's amazing the deeper you dig, just how much they tried...


I especially love the screw propulsion stuff (though they weren't the only ones to try it).

Did the Russians also ever really get into giant arctic exploration vehicles/land trains, or was that more a USA thing?
 
2013-03-01 06:50:54 PM
In a year some other site will do a piece on this thing and we'll see it again on Fark. It's tradition.

I don't mind the repeat, though. That thing is just cool.
 
2013-03-01 06:52:48 PM
It's not a hovercraft.
 
2013-03-01 06:53:00 PM
Russkis don't take a dump without a plan, son...
 
2013-03-01 07:00:01 PM
Wow, that is a cool hovercraft.
 
2013-03-01 07:01:18 PM
www.vinylrecords.ch
 
2013-03-01 07:01:30 PM
Red Bull should buy it, restore it and use it to pull water skiers. I'm not sure what the jet exhaust would do to the skiers, but it would be cool...Red Bull cool!
 
2013-03-01 07:06:56 PM
Ekranoplan
 
2013-03-01 07:09:48 PM

hackalope: Technically the Caspian Sea Monster and it's ilk (water borne GEVs that make use of a wing or lifting body) are called Flarecraft.


cynicritics.files.wordpress.com

"That is probably the stupidest name I've ever heard."

I'll give you all your point on this not being a hovercraft; I was merely pointing out that for a lot of people (especially
non technically savvy 20 something web writers) ACV = hovercraft.
 
2013-03-01 07:23:14 PM

DjangoStonereaver: hackalope: Technically the Caspian Sea Monster and it's ilk (water borne GEVs that make use of a wing or lifting body) are called Flarecraft.

[cynicritics.files.wordpress.com image 400x300]

"That is probably the stupidest name I've ever heard."

I'll give you all your point on this not being a hovercraft; I was merely pointing out that for a lot of people (especially
non technically savvy 20 something web writers) ACV = hovercraft.


A lot of people say "reckon" instead of "guess". They're still wrong. And so were you. But don't stop backpeddling. It's fun to watch.
 
2013-03-01 07:26:59 PM

Whatthefark: Red Bull should buy it, restore it and use it to pull water skiers. I'm not sure what the jet exhaust would do to the skiers, but it would be cool...Red Bull cool!


...I'd pay money to see that.
 
2013-03-01 07:28:34 PM

Ed Grubermann: DjangoStonereaver: hackalope: Technically the Caspian Sea Monster and it's ilk (water borne GEVs that make use of a wing or lifting body) are called Flarecraft.

[cynicritics.files.wordpress.com image 400x300]

"That is probably the stupidest name I've ever heard."

I'll give you all your point on this not being a hovercraft; I was merely pointing out that for a lot of people (especially
non technically savvy 20 something web writers) ACV = hovercraft.

A lot of people say "reckon" instead of "guess". They're still wrong. And so were you. But don't stop backpeddling. It's fun to watch.


Next please tell us how you feel about the term "jetpack".
 
2013-03-01 07:29:19 PM
mitglied.multimania.de
Max
 
2013-03-01 07:29:59 PM

HereNorThere: Ekranoplan


Lisa needs braces
 
2013-03-01 07:39:16 PM

LewDux: [mitglied.multimania.de image 640x427]
Max


2 planes were were, 81 person person was killed and that's not counting those who built it


oi45.tinypic.comGREAT SUCCESS
 
2013-03-01 07:39:49 PM
Ed Grubermann: DjangoStonereaver: hackalope: Technically the Caspian Sea Monster and it's ilk (water borne GEVs that make use of a wing or lifting body) are called Flarecraft.

[cynicritics.files.wordpress.com image 400x300]

"That is probably the stupidest name I've ever heard."

I'll give you all your point on this not being a hovercraft; I was merely pointing out that for a lot of people (especially
non technically savvy 20 something web writers) ACV = hovercraft.

A lot of people say "reckon" instead of "guess". They're still wrong. And so were you. But don't stop backpeddling backpedaling It's fun to watch.

That has to have been a purposeful misspelling.

Otherwise, your attempt to shame me for imprecise language is the most amusing thing I've seen all day.

/Why yes, I do dial my cell phone.  Why do you ask?
 
2013-03-01 07:48:32 PM
This thing "flew" just above the water.  The air bouncing back up from the water's surface gave it just enough lift.

This is also real and even cooler looking:

It was a jet engine powered snow melter on a tank.

i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-01 07:58:19 PM
(before clicking) "I wonder if it's the ekranoplan."

(clicks) "Yup."

Mikey1969: I love all of this insanely huge shiat the Russians tried to build. It's amazing the deeper you dig, just how much they tried...


Ditto. It's like they had no filter at all in between conceptualization and prototyping/production. They never stopped to ask "Now, does this seem like something that would work properly and be worthy of mass production?" Hell no, they built one or two and gave it a whirl.

Gotta respect it, even if it is a silly way to go about much of anything. They tried a lot of neat ideas, even if in practice they just weren't going to go anywhere.
 
2013-03-01 07:58:51 PM
Oh, it's the Progveg-T Gasdynamic Trawler.  They also used them to clear minefields.
 
2013-03-01 07:59:42 PM
When I first heard about this, around the time it was built, the opinion was that the engines were positioned to bounce their exhaust off the water and under the wing to provide additional lift. The video makes it clear that this is not the case.
 
2013-03-01 08:06:15 PM

vudutek: Was it full of eels?


No, but seeing it *did* make my nipples explode with delight, sooo...
 
2013-03-01 08:09:42 PM
I want to see the dash cam footage.
 
2013-03-01 08:11:03 PM

natazha: When I first heard about this, around the time it was built, the opinion was that the engines were positioned to bounce their exhaust off the water and under the wing to provide additional lift. The video makes it clear that this is not the case.


They did have one with that feature:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-90_Orlyonok
 
2013-03-01 08:11:15 PM

akula: (before clicking) "I wonder if it's the ekranoplan."

(clicks) "Yup."

Mikey1969: I love all of this insanely huge shiat the Russians tried to build. It's amazing the deeper you dig, just how much they tried...

Ditto. It's like they had no filter at all in between conceptualization and prototyping/production. They never stopped to ask "Now, does this seem like something that would work properly and be worthy of mass production?" Hell no, they built one or two and gave it a whirl.

Gotta respect it, even if it is a silly way to go about much of anything. They tried a lot of neat ideas, even if in practice they just weren't going to go anywhere.


That was the Soviet way.
 
2013-03-01 08:17:11 PM
Huh, that's weird.  "In S o vi e t_®  u s s i a" gets filterowned.  I know it's very old and tired, but it still can be funny.  I guess just to me.

Still, just deleting it is lazy.  Why not change S o v i e t_®  u s s i a  to "my mom's bedroom" or something?
 
2013-03-01 08:21:08 PM
One time while very high in college, I challenged a friend to build a flying thing better than mine. Mine was a canard-style thing with the front wings aimed straight and the back wings just scooping downward. It didn't make any sense but mine flew like a bird for a very long ways. It was very cool. His was something less memorable and didn't do as well.
 
2013-03-01 08:23:18 PM

costermonger: natazha: When I first heard about this, around the time it was built, the opinion was that the engines were positioned to bounce their exhaust off the water and under the wing to provide additional lift. The video makes it clear that this is not the case.

They did have one with that feature:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-90_Orlyonok


fc01.deviantart.net
 
2013-03-01 08:32:46 PM
Whatever, Theoretically we (USA) went to the moon and landed and came back. So, whatever.
 
2013-03-01 08:39:45 PM

JWMcLoud: This thing "flew" just above the water.  The air bouncing back up from the water's surface gave it just enough lift.

This is also real and even cooler looking:

It was a jet engine powered snow melter on a tank.


That's kind of like the tracked jet engine thing we used in Iraq to snuff out burning oil wells.
 
xcv
2013-03-01 08:55:23 PM
No idea,really? As a kid I read a Cold War thriller where the Soviets were going to use a fleet of these as troop transports to invade Northern Europe, somehow avoiding radar and satellite imagery.
 
2013-03-01 08:57:23 PM
Is that time of year again? Maybe it's been almost two years since this was last repeated. I know it's one of those annual things.
 
2013-03-01 08:58:47 PM

ZAZ: With all due disrespect to io9, a wing in ground effect is not like a hovercraft.


And with no respect to io9...

The instant I saw the picture I said, 'Its a transport plane designed to take advantage of ground effect, WTF is hard to figure out about that?'

I hate the damned 'breathless awe' articles that get churned out by pseudo-tech sites whenever military how is involved.

/granted I am an engineer in the aerospace/defense industry, so maybe I'm just jaded to what is cool?
//still, any Aero guy would know what that aircraft is in a glance.
///I've actually not RTFA, so was my guess of ground effect transport correct?
 
2013-03-01 09:01:47 PM

xcv: No idea,really? As a kid I read a Cold War thriller where the Soviets were going to use a fleet of these as troop transports to invade Northern Europe, somehow avoiding radar and satellite imagery.


It would be a useful way to move a decent amount of troops across a body of water in a hurry. It's only effective IF it's not discovered. If it's spotted and fighters are vectored in, well, that's going to be pretty easy to destroy. The one with the anti ship missiles might be not a bad way to take on a battle group not that far off the coast, but again, it depends on not being spotted.
 
2013-03-01 09:02:15 PM
and it's not a "type of hovercraft" It's a flare craft. It uses ground effect to fly on a cushion of air. It can not hover at all. If anything it would actually be considered a boat.

anyway, watch this
 
2013-03-01 09:03:54 PM

kim jong-un: I've actually not RTFA, so was my guess of ground effect transport correct?


Yeah.

If you've never seen or heard of the things before, it sounds neat, but in practice even the Soviets realized there wasn't much use for the things.
 
2013-03-01 09:07:19 PM

cgraves67: That's kind of like the tracked jet engine thing we used in Iraq to snuff out burning oil wells.


The Hungarians came up with that one, but at least they were using old Soviet parts (T-34 and a couple of Mig-21 engines). So at least it fits the theme.
 
2013-03-01 09:11:45 PM

akula: If you've never seen or heard of the things before, it sounds neat, but in practice even the Soviets realized there wasn't much use for the things.


lolwut?
 
2013-03-01 09:30:12 PM
If you're gonna link to an article about ekranoplans, link to one that doesn't suck ...
 
Displayed 50 of 69 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report