Re: Fighters and Hangers

At 3:50 PM +0000 2/26/04, agoodall@att.net wrote:
>Ryan wrote:
>>  Men with hoses and ordinance handing gear work the same on an LPH as
>>  they do on a CV as they do on the ground next to trucks and
>>  hovercraft. You're probably pumping the same kind of fuels if you're
>>  smart about your fuel trains.
>
>Trucks and hover craft use different fuels from aircraft, today. 
>This is due to the need for higher performance fuel in aircraft and 
>the higher cost of that fuel. But let's assume that your fuel is the 
>same, or you have no need of fuel but you do have a need for oxygen 
>in all sizes of small craft.

HUH? No they don't. They all run on JP4/JP8. MoGas and Diesel is 
becoming a thing of the past.

>The big difference is the size of the fuel/oxygen tanks. The hoses 
>needed to fill the tanks of a fighter are going to be smaller and 
>have a slower flow rate than those needed to fill a pinance, or a 
>scout craft, or even a corvette sitting in a larger ship's hold. You 
>probably won't have interchangeable

Corvette sized craft are getting beyond the size we're talking about 
here. I'm speaking of small craft 1-4 mass that don't have normal 
drives (not that we don't have any real system for these). Craft, not 
ships.

>nozzles between these classes of vehicles. Even if the nozzle size 
>is the same, you have problems with flow. Too much flow and you may 
>rip the nozzle right out of the receptacle with the force of the 
>backwash (yes, you can build it to handle a higher flow rate, but 
>then you have to stress the fighter better for higher flow, which 
>adds weight, and weight kills a fighter's maneuverability). Too 
>little flow and you take forever to fill up that larger ship, which 
>is why they would probably have larger hoses.

Ok, you have two pumps and two sets of hoses. I don't think the 
Navy/Marine guys have too much trouble fueling their LCAC and AAV7s 
along side their CH-53s and Harriers.

>You could make the hoses multi-purpose, tuning the flow rate. You 
>run the risk of hooking up a hose and not setting the flow rate 
>properly in the heat of battle. I also think you wouldn't want the 
>same sized hose for physical reasons (the surface area of a fighter 
>is so much smaller than that of a scout ship that it stands to 
>reason your hose sizes would be smaller).

Train train train. They set the tension on the Recovery cables for 
every single aircraft that lands based on type and fuel/ordinance 
state.

>In a fighter bay, you have to have the ability to refuel several 
>fighters at once. This isn't a problem in a regular bay. This means 
>redundant capture, release, refueling, and rearming equipment in the 
>fighter bay, which means that a smaller percentage of volume is 
>available for the craft, and could very well get in the way if you 
>tried to park a bigger craft in the same bay. If it doesn't get in 
>the way, then you have excess volume when the bay is used for 
>fighters.

Stowage and design considerations is what this sounds like. They 
aren't exclusive items.

>In other words you could make a generic bay, but it would not be 
>optimized for any craft.
>
>This is all just PSB that I thought of when I saw that ships needed 
>special fighter bays.

But its a question of small multiple bays or One big bay with 
multiple types of craft. With a larger bay you do gain some economy 
of scale.
-- 
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
-		  Data Center Operations Group		      -
-		http://web.turner.com/data_center/	       -
----------------------------------------------------------------
- Ryan Montieth Gill		       One CNN Center SE0813 E -
- Internet Technologies   --   Data Center Operations Manager  -
- Hours 11am - 7pm Mon - Fri	    (8Sdc, 10Sdc IT@3Ndc)      -
- Cellular: 404-545-6205	     e-mail: Ryan.Gill@cnn.com -
- Office: 404-588-6191					       -
----------------------------------------------------------------
-	      Emergency Power-off != Door release!	       -
----------------------------------------------------------------