Artificial lakes as runways

Avimimus

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
15 December 2007
Messages
2,233
Reaction score
498
Hello,

I was wondering if anyone had considered creating artificial lakes or flooded runways as a means for aircraft to take off? In conditions where there are nearby sources of water and evaporation is low it could be relatively cheap to maintain (especially if it could be dried out periodically).

I thought it was an idle curiosity that is interesting enough to be worth raising.

S!
 
I moved this subject to this section, which is more appropriate, I think, as such
ideas may have been more around during the post war years, too, when the fear of an
immobilized airforce, due to destroyed runways was increasing.
But I don't know, if building such "wet runways" would have been necessary, as in many
countries you can find a lot of rivers and channels. Or did you think of attempts, to built
take-off and landing sites for commercial seaplanes in otherwise "waterless" regions ?
Well, so a flying boat like a Boeing Clipper or a Shorts Sandringham could have brought
passengers directly into a valley in the Alps.
 
A few years ago I experienced a weather condition in georgia, us, where heavy rain followed by freezing. In the morning, everything turned to ice. At that time, no cars are to be found in the street. The reason is that the streets are extremely slippery due to the layers of ice above them. I suspect the same problem would occur on an ice runway?

This is not to mention that the friction creating by breaking wheels would melt the smooth layer of ice and making it uneven for safe operations?
 
Jemiba said:
I moved this subject to this section, which is more appropriate, I think, as such
ideas may have been more around during the post war years, too, when the fear of an
immobilized airforce, due to destroyed runways was increasing.
But I don't know, if building such "wet runways" would have been necessary, as in many
countries you can find a lot of rivers and channels. Or did you think of attempts, to built
take-off and landing sites for commercial seaplanes in otherwise "waterless" regions ?
Well, so a flying boat like a Boeing Clipper or a Shorts Sandringham could have brought
passengers directly into a valley in the Alps.

Yes, it is a hard topic to classify isn't it?

I was actually thinking of three possibilities:
- Expanding the reach of commercial flying boats for direct flights. Such runways would have provided an ability for relatively large craft with long take-off roles to service inland locations.
- Making cheap temporary runways which cost less to maintain. Modifying existing rivers/lakes or building overflow areas from small rivers that could flood several fields might be attractive in remote areas.
- Finally, avoiding cratering of runways (which would be difficult as a disposable pontoon/hydrofoil would be required for each aircraft - but probably cheaper than the proposed hovercraft solution). Of course such a design would be vulnerable to 5 kg aquatic area-denial mines...


donnage99 said:
A few years ago I experienced a weather condition in georgia, us, where heavy rain followed by freezing. In the morning, everything turned to ice. At that time, no cars are to be found in the street. The reason is that the streets are extremely slippery due to the layers of ice above them. I suspect the same problem would occur on an ice runway?

This is not to mention that the friction creating by breaking wheels would melt the smooth layer of ice and making it uneven for safe operations?

Definitely. Ice tends to produce unpredictable and slippery conditions. You are right to mention the liquefying of the upper layer under pressure (pressure can do this even without much friction) in addition to conditions where rain falls on top of the ice etc. I'm a Canadian and there is always a one and a half week period in the early winter where a certain percentage of the more inexperienced drivers fly off the roads. Its important to watch out for other drivers during this period. We lose the occasional bus as well.

For this reason landings are carried out on packed snow runways using skis (where the snow can crumple under pressure and the skis can provide high surface area). Of course, our major airports use expensively maintained and regularly cleared runways.

Sometimes pilots aren't always so lucky. I recall Olga Lisikova had one of her most frightening experiences landing on ice (she was also hunted by a Bf-109 while in a U-2 bi-plane and had to fly an Li-2 under desperate near zero visibility conditions to try and resupply her husband's tank unit).

The incident is near the end of this excellent interview:
http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/lisikova/index.htm
 
I live a country with ice and snow every winter and it is entirely handleable, but it costs a lot. You plow of course, also spread salt to melt the ice. You also need separate winter tires, most of them have tiny spikes to grip the ice. They are still drivable on asphalt.
http://www.moonlightmotorsport.fi/verkkokauppa/images/KW_22.jpg
Would they work on an airplane? Well, the spikes would probably fly out since the small aircraft wheels spin very very fast. You'd need special technology for this.

Skis of course are a tried and true technology for airplanes, and weigh much less than pontons. During the war they were used here with some success, with some bases using lake runways. Perhaps on clear ice they might sideslip, though you could have sharp rails on them to avoid that. Or you could frost the surface so it's got bite sideways. Most of the time natural ice isn't mirror clear anyway, there's always some snow and frost.
Skis are used by airplanes naturally in cold climates all the time, like supplying south pole with DC-3:s, Twin Otters and C-130s etc. where they have skis attached to the wheels. I don't know how they land / take off at the other end.
 
mz said:
Skis are used by airplanes naturally in cold climates all the time, like supplying south pole with DC-3:s, Twin Otters and C-130s etc. where they have skis attached to the wheels. I don't know how they land / take off at the other end.

It varies. Some aircraft with skis require snow at both ends. Others are designed so that the skis allow the wheels to protrude slightly below the ski surface. Or the skis can have a mechanism that allows them to move up and down relative to the wheels. Some versions even extend a plate to block off the wheel hole and make a continuous surface once the ski is lowered.
 
Jemiba said:
such ideas may have been more around during the post war years, too, when the fear of an immobilized airforce, due to destroyed runways was increasing. But I don't know, if building such "wet runways" would have been necessary, as in many countries you can find a lot of rivers and channels.

There was the late '70s Lockheed seaplane fighter designed to operate from canals: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,645.0.html

Or did you think of attempts, to built take-off and landing sites for commercial seaplanes in otherwise "waterless" regions ? Well, so a flying boat like a Boeing Clipper or a Shorts Sandringham could have brought passengers directly into a valley in the Alps.

Seaplanes don't have to operate from the sea. Sunderlands CASEVACed Chindit casualties from Lake Indawgyi and flew salt into Berlin during the Blockade. OTOH, flooded non-aquatic areas tend to dry out, so permanent water features have an obvious advantage.
 
Couldn't find data with a quick search, but seaplanes/flying boats generally need
a longer take-off run, than comparable land planes. Using the sea or lakes, this
mostly doesn't matter, but if building an artificial lake, it has to be taken into account.
 
In the Finnish Petsamo district the Luftwaffe often operated from ice runways on lakes.

Does anybody remember the DHC-4 / UA Army C-7 Caribou fitted with an inflatable skirt under it's fuselage for landings on bogs or marshes?

Anyone can produce a photo or link for it please?
 
Here's a 3-view from Aviation Week 1971 of the DHC-8 Buffalo
with an additional aircushion landing gear. With the auxiliary floats,
it would have been able to land on water, too. During the norwegian
campaign 1940, the RAF and RNoAF was using frozen lakes as runways
as well. But apart from a better diversification, such runways probably
don't have a better survivability, than conventional ones, I think.
 

Attachments

  • DHC-8_AirCushion.jpg
    DHC-8_AirCushion.jpg
    30.8 KB · Views: 31

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom