Fuzzy Dunlop
Banned
Have the Boeing PELICAN enter service with the US or any other armed forces.
Bonus points if you can put it in service for any civilian roles.
Much obliged!
Last edited:
Have the Boeing PELICAN enter service
- Thread starter Fuzzy Dunlop
- Start date
Have the Boeing PELICAN enter service with the US or any other armed forces.
Bonus points if you can put it in service for any civilian roles.
Much obliged!
Like many ekranoplans, the Pelican was designed to be able to fly at a significant altitudes if conditions got too rough, though skimming was the main planned mode of operation (due to the higher efficiency).
Fair enough. Still, there's also the point that the aircraft as was eventually designed, was going to struggle to use any existing infrastructure.
It could be useful giving commuter service between the Hawaiian islands
It could also be useful in the gulf of Mexico carrying supplies to oil rigs
It could also be useful in the gulf of Mexico carrying supplies to oil rigs
How is that going to work given that it explicitly cannot land other than on a runway?
It lands near the oil platform taxis close to it then small boats unload the supplies and personnel
The same way they do it with the supply ship
Did you miss the bit where it can't land on water (odd for an aircraft named after an aquatic bird to be sure, but there you go)?
Maybe as a sight-seeing/touring plane in Florida/Hawaii/SoCal? Hauling tourists and vacationers between choice locations, while passing by scenery. Maybe a Miami-Key Largo run, Miami-Bermuda run, something around the Catalinas from San Diego, an islands tour in Hawaii. Put some big windows down the sides, let people walk around, serve good food, make it a semi-luxurious ride. That's probably still only a 10-15 plane market, though.
Honestly thought you meant the XF-32 when you said 'Pelican', already had this link ready to go.
www.thedrive.com
This Is What A Boeing F-32 Would've Looked Like If Lockheed Lost The JSF Competition
To this day the X-32 is lambasted for its atrocious looks, but Boeing's final vision for its F-32 fighter was markedly different in appearance.
www.thedrive.com
Why wasn't it designed to land and take off on water, would making that change help get it accepted?
Making it amphibious would make it heavier (water landing needs a stronger lower hull), and would be pretty situational (needs a long, clear, straight water-way, which may well not be available).
The thing was ENORMOUS, as in carry 3,000 passengers or 17 Abrams MBT enormous, with a max lift of 1,400 tons. It makes the AN-225 look like a C-130.
In the Cold War it would have been a gimmie to get at least a hundred of them built. 40 aircraft could lift an entire Armored Division from the U.S. to Europe in a day. They would have been terrific during the Gulf War. Instead of facing the entire, tank heavy, Iraqi Army with RDF light units it would have been the 1st & 3rd ID there virtually from Day One.
To get it built you would need that sort of mission or at least a Congress that could be convinced that the U.S. needed to be able to put half the U.S. Army half a world away in a week (which, to be frank, it does, but try convincing Congress). One selling point might be that the U.S. would need to forward deploy less material and standing troop commitments in Europe could be reduced.
In the Cold War it would have been a gimmie to get at least a hundred of them built. 40 aircraft could lift an entire Armored Division from the U.S. to Europe in a day. They would have been terrific during the Gulf War. Instead of facing the entire, tank heavy, Iraqi Army with RDF light units it would have been the 1st & 3rd ID there virtually from Day One.
To get it built you would need that sort of mission or at least a Congress that could be convinced that the U.S. needed to be able to put half the U.S. Army half a world away in a week (which, to be frank, it does, but try convincing Congress). One selling point might be that the U.S. would need to forward deploy less material and standing troop commitments in Europe could be reduced.
I missed that part
so it would be relegated to island hopping in the Pacific and the Caribbean
It could be difficult but they would Mark areas off
But eventually some drunken idiot would get his boat run over by a pelican
Boaters would become a little more careful after that
If there's a collision, the Pelican is going to suffer significant damage.
Driftless
Donor
A boat load of refugees goes down, there's outrage, but nothing happens. A boatload of seniors on a fishing junket gets swamped, there's outrage, and maybe the Pelican is parked for a time, while the Coast Guard investigates. One of the bigshot politicos/uber-wealthies gets swamped, the public rejoices and the Pelican is grounded. That's what would happen.
And some boat owner's insurance company is going to be in serious trouble