The Practicality of Hovering Vehicles

[JMBuilder]

I've got a type of hover technology in mind. I don't want to reveal how it works because I seriously want to get a patent for it. It may take a while, especially since I'm still in high school.

I just want to go over and discuss some advantages of hovering vehicles concerning both everyday and military use. This might be a long thread, so I don't recommend this for anybody with bad cases of TL;DR.

HOVER TANKS

Even though tanks today can engage enemies without even having a visual on them, there are still cases, especially in urban environments, where long-range engagements are nearly impossible. In general, the toughest armor on a tank is on the front. If a tank had to round a corner to engage an enemy, it could turn its turret to fire, but its weaker side armor would be exposed.

A hovering tank wouldn't need a turret because of its ability to side strafe, keeping its strong front armor facing the enemy. It could move effortlessly across any form of terrain and even across water. Its ability to cross water would allow it to rapidly deploy on beaches without the need of naval transport.

Because it never makes contact with the ground (except for when it isn't in use), it could cross minefields without detonating any mines. No more tedious minesweeping and detouring.

As for heavy weaponry, anything with high recoil is basically out of the question. The recoil would send the hover tank reeling backwards. Because of this, the tank would need to be armed with something like recoilless guns or missiles.

HOVER CARS

Considering the fuel consumption of regular cars and the energy consumption of this hover tech, they would basically break even. However, it would solve something that has been the bane of many people's driving: Parallel parking. Instead of having to back into a parking space at a wierd angle and then straightening out in an awkwardly small area, you could simply shift sideways into the parking space.

With a hover car, you wouldn't have to worry about hydroplaning. Heck, you wouldn't even have to worry about completely flooded streets. You could just drive blissfully over the flooded area.

HOVER BOARDS

Seriously, though. Hover boards. Why? Because hover boards.

[Nibb31]

I don't know what sort of hover technology you are envisioning (thrusters, electromagnetic, superconductors?), but I can think of all sorts of problems that make hover vehicles a bad idea.

First of all, propulsion. To move your vehicle, you are going to have to push against a fluid, which means using some sort of propeller, jet engine, or rocket thruster. Those are much less efficient that using wheels, which use friction on a solid surface.

The energy consumption is going to be horrendous. You are going to need to spend massive amount of energy just to keep the thing afloat versus moving it. Basically, a large part of your energy is going to be spent fighting gravity that is going to be pulling that 50 ton tank down. Then, a small part of that energy is going to have to push the tank forward. Wheels can do the same job for very little energy.

As for solving your problem of parking sideways or strafing, what's wrong with pivoting wheels ?

[Tommygun]

Well it's hard to comment without knowing what you have in mind.

A few random thoughts on conventional hovercraft to think about:

With hover cars, are blowing rocks at nearby cars and damaging paint going to be a problem with your design?

Can your design handle driving parallel to long slopes and stay easily on a straight line?

Will the hover boards blow dirt all over other pedestrians?

[Meecrob]

How do you stop? Also with regards to minefields - there has to be an upwards force to make the tank hover equal to the weight of a tank. This force will set of mines just the same as tank treads.

[Armchair Rocket Scientist]

HOVER TANKS

Even though tanks today can engage enemies without even having a visual on them, there are still cases, especially in urban environments, where long-range engagements are nearly impossible. In general, the toughest armor on a tank is on the front. If a tank had to round a corner to engage an enemy, it could turn its turret to fire, but its weaker side armor would be exposed.

A hovering tank wouldn't need a turret because of its ability to side strafe, keeping its strong front armor facing the enemy. It could move effortlessly across any form of terrain and even across water. Its ability to cross water would allow it to rapidly deploy on beaches without the need of naval transport.

Because it never makes contact with the ground (except for when it isn't in use), it could cross minefields without detonating any mines. No more tedious minesweeping and detouring.

As for heavy weaponry, anything with high recoil is basically out of the question. The recoil would send the hover tank reeling backwards. Because of this, the tank would need to be armed with something like recoilless guns or missiles.

Tanks are very compact and very heavy, which translates into not much surface area for an air cushion. A hover tank would likely be unbuildable period. If it were built, tanks need to be able to cover very rough terrain including steep slopes, which could cause an air cushion to "high-center" and scrape against the ground. Finally, you mentioned that a high-recoil weapon would send the tank drifting all over the place. Wouldn't being hit by an enemy weapon do almost the same thing?

And then what if somebody uses a remotely-detonated mine with a GoPro, or one triggered by the proximity of metal objects? An IED that wouldn't even scratch a conventional tank's tracks would tear an air cushion to pieces.

HOVER CARS

Considering the fuel consumption of regular cars and the energy consumption of this hover tech, they would basically break even.

VERY doubtful, especially considering that cars are getting more efficient all the time.

However, it would solve something that has been the bane of many people's driving: Parallel parking. Instead of having to back into a parking space at a wierd angle and then straightening out in an awkwardly small area, you could simply shift sideways into the parking space.

Your car would also drift on a slope unless you constantly compensated.

With a hover car, you wouldn't have to worry about hydroplaning. Heck, you wouldn't even have to worry about completely flooded streets. You could just drive blissfully over the flooded area.

Instead, they'd go flying sideways even on perfectly dry pavement whenever something went wrong with whatever provided thrust. You'd probably need a computer to operate the thing at all.

HOVER BOARDS

Seriously, though. Hover boards. Why? Because hover boards.

Expensive as heck.

[magnemoe]

How do you stop? Also with regards to minefields - there has to be an upwards force to make the tank hover equal to the weight of a tank. This force will set of mines just the same as tank treads.

Modern anti tank mines are triggered by magnetic in addition to pressure. This has the benefit of having the benefit of both having an larger area it can trigger on and an under the tank it will destroy the tank and kill the crew not only destroy a belt.

[Tex_NL]

Apart from all control issues already mentioned hover tanks have another issue to deal with:

A hover tank might be able to pass over current technology anti tank mines but the arms race never sleeps. If your tanks can outsmart conventional mines what's stopping him to develop more capable mines?

Conventional hover craft could easily be taken out by mines responding to a sudden increase of air pressure. If you use an electromagnetic field to hover (pure sci-fi but theoretically not impossible) the EM fluctuation can be use as a trigger.

[Frozen_Heart]

Unless you've invented something that can store massive amounts of energy in a very compact manner, and a room temperature superconductor to go with it, you aren't going to be making a MBT float any time soon.

[Meecrob]

Modern anti tank mines are triggered by magnetic in addition to pressure. This has the benefit of having the benefit of both having an larger area it can trigger on and an under the tank it will destroy the tank and kill the crew not only destroy a belt.

So basically he's gotta have a helium-filled neutral-buoyant, CFRP hovering tank to get through minefields if I understand you.

[Guest]

I watched a fun movie involving a fraudulent army sergeant building a hovertank with all above mentioned consequences

[Tex_NL]

I watched a fun movie involving a fraudulent army sergeant building a hovertank with all above mentioned consequences

First movie that came to mind was Stripes, with Bill Muray. Boy was I wrong. Of course it was Sgt. Bilko with Steve Martin and Dan Aykroyd.

http://www.anyclip.com/movies/sgt-bilko/presenting-the-hover-tank/

[Guest]

First movie that came to mind was Stripes, with Bill Muray. Boy was I wrong. Of course it was Sgt. Bilko with Steve Martin and Dan Aykroyd.

http://www.anyclip.com/movies/sgt-bilko/presenting-the-hover-tank/

I think that clip tells it all. Not only tank has to be built from tin foil to be able to hover, firing the main gun provided it all necessary momentum to crush grateful audience.

[Technical Ben]

Unless you've invented something that can store massive amounts of energy in a very compact manner, and a room temperature superconductor to go with it, you aren't going to be making a MBT float any time soon.

Yep. The only animals that "float" are those that "swim". You have to be light enough to float in air, or jump into the water. No easy way to do it.

[Wanderfound]

So basically he's gotta have a helium-filled neutral-buoyant, CFRP hovering tank to get through minefields if I understand you.

Still won't work. Proximity fuses are established tech; it's how ye olde anti aircraft guns worked.

Modern minefields are not simplistic boobytraps. A few years ago, DARPA was working on a networked minefield that could randomly rescatter itself to defeat mineclearing, open a path in itself to allow the passage of friendly troops, and return to the operator for recovery when instructed. Relative to that, triggering in response to a hovering vehicle is a very simple problem.

It's doable even with low-tech gear. During the American war in Vietnam, the VC/NVA would rig claymore mines in the treetops. As the helicopters came in, the downdraft from the rotors would make the tree branches sway, triggering the mines.

[JMBuilder]

It's incredible how many negative "it will never work" comments inventors get. Sure, it might not work. But what if it does?

Watched the clip. My idea doesn't involve jet engines. I can say that it involves magnetics, but not in the usual way. Propulsion isn't a problem.

As for energy consumption, yeah, it might be a bit high, but not by too much.

Edited October 26, 2014 by JMBuilder

[Wanderfound]

It's incredible how many negative "it will never work" comments inventors get. Sure, it might not work. But what if it does?

Then the inventor will be very happy, and everyone else will be very surprised.

They laughed at Galileo, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. There are a lot more Bozos than there are Galileos. The vast majority of inventions that claim to overturn established physics are useless trash. The context of this particular proposal ("I'm sure it'll work, but I won't tell you how, and BTW I'm still in high school") does not tilt the odds away from the normal expectation.

Invention, like science and writing, is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration. Ideas are easy. Making ideas into reality is the hard bit.

[magnemoe]

So basically he's gotta have a helium-filled neutral-buoyant, CFRP hovering tank to get through minefields if I understand you.

Yes or do some other tricks, an magnetic field might be able to trigger the mine well in front of you. You want to trigger mines anyway as you usually have trucks and other stuff following you.

[magnemoe]

Then the inventor will be very happy, and everyone else will be very surprised.

They laughed at Galileo, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. There are a lot more Bozos than there are Galileos. The vast majority of inventions that claim to overturn established physics are useless trash. The context of this particular proposal ("I'm sure it'll work, but I won't tell you how, and BTW I'm still in high school") does not tilt the odds away from the normal expectation.

Invention, like science and writing, is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration. Ideas are easy. Making ideas into reality is the hard bit.

Yes, howecrafts works well, they are very nice for shallow draft seas, swamps and other flat areas, they are not good in uneven terrain or slopes, they are amphibious with an strong focus on water just as most amphibious car is focused on land, you can cross water with it but not much more.

Electrical/ magnetic requires structures in the road, works for levitating trains and some other special uses.

[JMBuilder]

Electrical/ magnetic requires structures in the road, works for levitating trains and some other special uses.

Not with my idea.

[cantab]

At best, it falls into a solution in search of a problem. Cars with pivoting wheels have been built and indeed are capable of easily parking in tighter spots. The military uses tracked, wheeled, and hovering vehicles as appropriate.

[KerikBalm]

Not with my idea.

Then file a patent and stop with the secrecy.

[Kryten]

HOVER TANKS

Even though tanks today can engage enemies without even having a visual on them, there are still cases, especially in urban environments, where long-range engagements are nearly impossible. In general, the toughest armor on a tank is on the front. If a tank had to round a corner to engage an enemy, it could turn its turret to fire, but its weaker side armor would be exposed.

A hovering tank wouldn't need a turret because of its ability to side strafe, keeping its strong front armor facing the enemy. It could move effortlessly across any form of terrain and even across water. Its ability to cross water would allow it to rapidly deploy on beaches without the need of naval transport.

Leaving aside the potential problems with the actual hovering bit, the whole issue with urban warfare is that you can't assume your enemy will be in front of you. A vehicle with thin side, back, and top armour in an environment where every window or rooftop could harbour a guy with an RPG is a spectacularly bad idea. Vulnerable thrusters/rubber skirts/sidewalls/impossibly powerful magnets/throatwarbler mangroves are just the icing on the cake.

Edited October 26, 2014 by Kryten

[qeveren]

Ground-effect vehicles are too fragile, unmaneuverable, and terrain-limited to be useful in urban combat. Any damage to the plenum and it will lose all drive.

[NFUN]

Ground-effect vehicles are too fragile, unmaneuverable, and terrain-limited to be useful in urban combat. Any damage to the plenum and it will lose all drive.

Phlebotinum?

Edited October 27, 2014 by NFUN

[JMBuilder]

I don't understand why you guys seem annoyed and dismal about the things I post about technology and the like. You guys have to admit that this is far more feasible than cold fusion, which I was obsessing over (I haven't given up on it yet).