Slightly OT. Can you do this to a disco?

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
Disco Duck vaguely muttered something like ...
> I can see this would be real useful in the swamps of Florida.
>
> Hud
>
> http://www.terrawind.com/H2oex.htm

Now that looks like a nice, nimble, little runabout that would do well in
RTV trials ....

Jeez, just how big and stupid looking do these things have to be ... :)

--
Paul ...

(8(|) Homer Rules !!!
http://paul-xxx.blogspot.com/ Just started a blog ..
"A tosser is a tosser, no matter what mode of transport they're using."


 
On or around Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:33:30 +0100, Rory Manton
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>in article [email protected], Disco Duck at [email protected]
>wrote on 21/9/04 10:48:
>
>> I can see this would be real useful in the swamps of Florida.
>>
>> Hud
>>
>> http://www.terrawind.com/H2oex.htm
>>
>Didn't Land rover do that with a couple of Srs 2's a fue years ago, make 'em
>float I mean?

I've seen pictures in one of the mags of a floating SII, was rather better
done than that, too.

I still reckon the airbag style flotation kit is better, as it can be taken
off when you're not trying to float it.
 
It is american, it has to be as big as possible and it doesn't matter how
stupid it looks......suprised there's no guns on it!
Here's a good link to other stupid cars....
http://www.stupidnorthernmonkey.co.uk/
....I'm a bit ****ed off at the site's name, I am northern, I am not
completely stupid and the last time I checked...I was not a monkey!

--
Wolverine
Big Red '93 110 CSW


 
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 13:20:34 +0100, "Paul - xxx"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Disco Duck vaguely muttered something like ...
>> I can see this would be real useful in the swamps of Florida.
>>
>> Hud
>>
>> http://www.terrawind.com/H2oex.htm
>
>Now that looks like a nice, nimble, little runabout that would do well in
>RTV trials ....
>
>Jeez, just how big and stupid looking do these things have to be ... :)

It looks to me like somebody just decided to stick a load of old
cereal boxes to an american SUV. Call me picky but if I wanted an
amhibious vehicle, I'd go and get one that doesn't look like a mad
inventor had an afterthought of floatation tanks.

Something like a Stalwart or DUKW springs to mind as rather more
capable.

Alex
 
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:39:20 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On or around Tue, 21 Sep 2004 21:29:23 GMT, Alex <[email protected]>
>enlightened us thusly:
>
>>It looks to me like somebody just decided to stick a load of old
>>cereal boxes to an american SUV. Call me picky but if I wanted an
>>amhibious vehicle, I'd go and get one that doesn't look like a mad
>>inventor had an afterthought of floatation tanks.
>>
>>Something like a Stalwart or DUKW springs to mind as rather more
>>capable.
>
>DUKW may be pronounced "duck" but it's far from efficient in water.
>
>the series LR I've seen pictures of was a much nicer job, basically they'd
>kept near enough the normal body shape but sealed in all the wings and
>wheelboxes for bouyancy tanks and sealed all the doors shut.

Could be the OTAL (One Tonne Amphibious Landrover) or the APGP (Air
Portable General Purpose). Neither were particularly successfull.

The APGP is here
http://www.dunsfoldcollection.co.uk/Gallery/Gallery1htms/apgp.htm and
was basically a modified Series II with flotation bags.

The OTAL is here
http://www.dunsfoldcollection.co.uk/Gallery/Gallery2htms/ausamph.htm
and was a more custom job, originally for the Aus army.

Alex


 
On or around Tue, 21 Sep 2004 23:18:29 GMT, Alex <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>Could be the OTAL (One Tonne Amphibious Landrover) or the APGP (Air
>Portable General Purpose). Neither were particularly successfull.
>
>The APGP is here
>http://www.dunsfoldcollection.co.uk/Gallery/Gallery1htms/apgp.htm and
>was basically a modified Series II with flotation bags.
>
>The OTAL is here
>http://www.dunsfoldcollection.co.uk/Gallery/Gallery2htms/ausamph.htm
>and was a more custom job, originally for the Aus army.

I reckon it was this one, or one like it. still looks better than the thing
that started this discussion.

 
Ahh.But thats ok because its"friendly fire" it must just tap you lightly on
the shoulder and ask you politely to stop doing that!!!
Icky
"Nige" <nigel.inceNO****[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Disco Duck" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > I can see this would be real useful in the swamps of Florida.
> >
> > Hud
> >
> > http://www.terrawind.com/H2oex.htm
> >
>
> LOL!!! You would expect a load of US Marines to come bursting out of the
front & if you happened to be in
> the UK army, shoot you dead, or possibly miss & shoot themselves dead!
>
> Nige
>
>


 
On Tuesday, in article
<[email protected]>
[email protected] "Alex" wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 13:20:34 +0100, "Paul - xxx"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Disco Duck vaguely muttered something like ...
> >> I can see this would be real useful in the swamps of Florida.
> >>
> >> Hud
> >>
> >> http://www.terrawind.com/H2oex.htm
> >
> >Now that looks like a nice, nimble, little runabout that would do well in
> >RTV trials ....
> >
> >Jeez, just how big and stupid looking do these things have to be ... :)
>
> It looks to me like somebody just decided to stick a load of old
> cereal boxes to an american SUV. Call me picky but if I wanted an
> amhibious vehicle, I'd go and get one that doesn't look like a mad
> inventor had an afterthought of floatation tanks.
>
> Something like a Stalwart or DUKW springs to mind as rather more
> capable.

There was an amphibious jeep with some general resemblance to a DUKW.
That is, a boatlike body on an existing chassis.

I don't know how the weight of an SWB Land Rover compares to an original
Jeep, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility of an amphibious SWB in
the same general style.

--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

"History shows that the Singularity started when Sir Tim Berners-Lee
was bitten by a radioactive spider."
 
On or around Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:23:10 +0100 (BST),
[email protected] ("David G. Bell") enlightened us thusly:

>There was an amphibious jeep with some general resemblance to a DUKW.
>That is, a boatlike body on an existing chassis.
>
>I don't know how the weight of an SWB Land Rover compares to an original
>Jeep, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility of an amphibious SWB in
>the same general style.

There was a thing called amphi-ranger which looked dead handy. may still be
for all I know.

here's a picture or 2:

http://www.amphib2000.com/info/amphiranger.htm

another site says they've not produced it for 10 years. Pity, really.


I daresay you could do a bit with that closed-cell foam stuff they use for
floatation in boats, and fill all the wheel arch spaces and so on on a
series. Whether you'd get enough floation, I don't know.

 
>I daresay you could do a bit with that closed-cell foam stuff they use for
>floatation in boats, and fill all the wheel arch spaces and so on on a
>series. Whether you'd get enough floation, I don't know.

On the basis of a loaded Series 2 weighing 2 tonnes, you need to
displace 2 cubic metres of water to get it to float.

If you can

a) seal the passenger compartment and
b) fit floatation stuff in the wing spaces and
c) add some flotation tanks fore and aft

then it shouldn't be that difficult to get 2 cubic metres of fresh air
underwater.

I have to note, however, that Solihull never managed (a) from above,
let alone from below.


--

Tim Hobbs

'58 Series 2 88" aka "Stig"
'77 101FC Ambulance aka "Burrt"
'03 Volvo V70

My Landies? http://www.seriesii.co.uk
Barcoding? http://www.bartec-systems.com
Tony Luckwill web archive at http://www.luckwill.com
 
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 11:18:05 +0100, Tim Hobbs
<[email protected]> wrote:

>>I daresay you could do a bit with that closed-cell foam stuff they use for
>>floatation in boats, and fill all the wheel arch spaces and so on on a
>>series. Whether you'd get enough floation, I don't know.
>
>On the basis of a loaded Series 2 weighing 2 tonnes, you need to
>displace 2 cubic metres of water to get it to float.
>
>If you can
>
>a) seal the passenger compartment and
>b) fit floatation stuff in the wing spaces and
>c) add some flotation tanks fore and aft
>
>then it shouldn't be that difficult to get 2 cubic metres of fresh air
>underwater.
>
>I have to note, however, that Solihull never managed (a) from above,
>let alone from below.

TV show "Monster Garage" did this with a New Beetle (I think).

Actually went a stage further and put a airscrew in the back to
convert it into an everglades style air boat.

The thing was clearly sinking by the end of the program, and IMHO the
most impressive thing was watching the proper airboat they were
"racing" against drive itself out of the water and back onto its
trailer. No winches, no wheels just a BIG fan attached to a healthy
sounding V8.

Not that I watch this rubbish, of course.

David
 
On Wednesday, in article
<[email protected]>
[email protected] "Tim Hobbs" wrote:

> >I daresay you could do a bit with that closed-cell foam stuff they use for
> >floatation in boats, and fill all the wheel arch spaces and so on on a
> >series. Whether you'd get enough floation, I don't know.
>
> On the basis of a loaded Series 2 weighing 2 tonnes, you need to
> displace 2 cubic metres of water to get it to float.
>
> If you can
>
> a) seal the passenger compartment and
> b) fit floatation stuff in the wing spaces and
> c) add some flotation tanks fore and aft
>
> then it shouldn't be that difficult to get 2 cubic metres of fresh air
> underwater.
>
> I have to note, however, that Solihull never managed (a) from above,
> let alone from below.

I think you'd also have to take into account the weight distribution.
It would be nose-heavy unloaded and, while you could easily add
flotation between the chassis rails, that would reduce stability.

That's partly why the amphibious Jeep of WW2 had a purpose-built hull,
like the DUKW. No doors, for one thing.

I expect the hull would seal to the transfer box, so that axle movement
wouldn't affect the seals, but engine/transmission movement relative the
the chassis would still be a difficulty. Bilge pumps, of course.

So you end up with a bigger vehicle, likely with a reduced off-road
capacity on land, and of a type not intended for front-line tactical
use, SAS notwithstanding. And you can't fit as many on a landing craft.

An amphibious truck has some point, running between the ship and the
supply dump, but the smaller vehicles seem of rather less use.

--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

"History shows that the Singularity started when Sir Tim Berners-Lee
was bitten by a radioactive spider."
 
David G. Bell wrote:

> On Wednesday, in article
> <[email protected]>
> [email protected] "Tim Hobbs" wrote:
>
>> >I daresay you could do a bit with that closed-cell foam stuff they use
>> >for floatation in boats, and fill all the wheel arch spaces and so on on
>> >a
>> >series. Whether you'd get enough floation, I don't know.
>>
>> On the basis of a loaded Series 2 weighing 2 tonnes, you need to
>> displace 2 cubic metres of water to get it to float.
>>
>> If you can
>>
>> a) seal the passenger compartment and
>> b) fit floatation stuff in the wing spaces and
>> c) add some flotation tanks fore and aft
>>
>> then it shouldn't be that difficult to get 2 cubic metres of fresh air
>> underwater.
>>
>> I have to note, however, that Solihull never managed (a) from above,
>> let alone from below.
>
> I think you'd also have to take into account the weight distribution.
> It would be nose-heavy unloaded and, while you could easily add
> flotation between the chassis rails, that would reduce stability.
>
> That's partly why the amphibious Jeep of WW2 had a purpose-built hull,
> like the DUKW. No doors, for one thing.
>
> I expect the hull would seal to the transfer box, so that axle movement
> wouldn't affect the seals, but engine/transmission movement relative the
> the chassis would still be a difficulty. Bilge pumps, of course.
>
> So you end up with a bigger vehicle, likely with a reduced off-road
> capacity on land, and of a type not intended for front-line tactical
> use, SAS notwithstanding. And you can't fit as many on a landing craft.
>
> An amphibious truck has some point, running between the ship and the
> supply dump, but the smaller vehicles seem of rather less use.
>

You could take a substantially easier approach - namely the same one as used
by the Sherman-DD (Duplex Drive).

Yes, that is a Sherman Tank.

It waterproofed the cabin and then used a canvas screen which extended well
above the turret to act as a hull - duplex drive referred to its water
propulsion system.

http://www.battletanks.com/m4_w_dd.htm

P.




--
The email address above is real.

http://www.geekstuff.tv/Landies/
 
Paul S. Brown vaguely muttered something like ...
> David G. Bell wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, in article
>> <[email protected]>
>> [email protected] "Tim Hobbs" wrote:
>>
>>>> I daresay you could do a bit with that closed-cell foam stuff they use
>>>> for floatation in boats, and fill all the wheel arch spaces and so on
>>>> on a
>>>> series. Whether you'd get enough floation, I don't know.
>>>
>>> On the basis of a loaded Series 2 weighing 2 tonnes, you need to
>>> displace 2 cubic metres of water to get it to float.
>>>
>>> If you can
>>>
>>> a) seal the passenger compartment and
>>> b) fit floatation stuff in the wing spaces and
>>> c) add some flotation tanks fore and aft
>>>
>>> then it shouldn't be that difficult to get 2 cubic metres of fresh air
>>> underwater.
>>>
>>> I have to note, however, that Solihull never managed (a) from above,
>>> let alone from below.
>>
>> I think you'd also have to take into account the weight distribution.
>> It would be nose-heavy unloaded and, while you could easily add
>> flotation between the chassis rails, that would reduce stability.
>>
>> That's partly why the amphibious Jeep of WW2 had a purpose-built hull,
>> like the DUKW. No doors, for one thing.
>>
>> I expect the hull would seal to the transfer box, so that axle movement
>> wouldn't affect the seals, but engine/transmission movement relative the
>> the chassis would still be a difficulty. Bilge pumps, of course.
>>
>> So you end up with a bigger vehicle, likely with a reduced off-road
>> capacity on land, and of a type not intended for front-line tactical
>> use, SAS notwithstanding. And you can't fit as many on a landing craft.
>>
>> An amphibious truck has some point, running between the ship and the
>> supply dump, but the smaller vehicles seem of rather less use.
>>
>
> You could take a substantially easier approach - namely the same one as
> used by the Sherman-DD (Duplex Drive).
>
> Yes, that is a Sherman Tank.
>
> It waterproofed the cabin and then used a canvas screen which extended
> well above the turret to act as a hull - duplex drive referred to its
> water propulsion system.
>
> http://www.battletanks.com/m4_w_dd.htm

Which also didn't work ... and which IIRC actually killed a few crews simply
by not working ...

--
Paul ...

(8(|) Homer Rules !!!
http://paul-xxx.blogspot.com/ Just started a blog ..
"A tosser is a tosser, no matter what mode of transport they're using."


 
Paul - xxx <[email protected]> writes:

> Which also didn't work ... and which IIRC actually killed a few crews simply
> by not working ...

In calm conditions for which it was designed, it worked very well.
Unfortunately on D-Day the conditions were anything but calm. This
was compounded by the Shermans being launched 6 miles out to sea.
By the time they arrived at the beach the tide was running and
the crews didn't have the nautical nous to turn into the waves.

There's a picture in ILRO this month of two guys driving a 110
across the Irish Sea. Uses 2 giant float bags, one either side.

And then there's the VW schwimvagen (sp?).

Pete


--
____________________________________________________________________
Pete Young [email protected] Remove .dot to reply
"Just another crouton, floating on the bouillabaisse of life"
 
In article <[email protected]>, Paul - xxx wrote:
> Paul S. Brown vaguely muttered something like ...
>>
>> Yes, that is a Sherman Tank.
>>
>> It waterproofed the cabin and then used a canvas screen which extended
>> well above the turret to act as a hull - duplex drive referred to its
>> water propulsion system.
>>
>> http://www.battletanks.com/m4_w_dd.htm
>
> Which also didn't work ... and which IIRC actually killed a few crews simply
> by not working ...
>

If your ever down Dorchester way try and get to the tank museum at Bovington.

They have got one of the these tanks kitted out with the canvas screen. Indeed
it may be the only one left. It's also a fantastic place to spend a day if you
like that sort of thing, which I do. The kids liked it but the missus was
bored sh****ss.

--
simon at sbarr dot demon dot co dot uk
Simon Barr.
'97 110 300Tdi.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
New LR DISCO 4 v6 3.0 TD
Replies
1
Views
246
lynall
L
D
longest throttle cable - 200tdi LHD?
Replies
4
Views
434
DefCon1
D
L
DISCO V8 NO HEAD GASKET FITTED!!??
Replies
8
Views
628
Stanleysteamer
Stanleysteamer
S
Hi.. I am new to the forums but, I am kind of new to Land Rovers.
Replies
3
Views
868
brianp38dse
brianp38dse
F
Tyre Choice Thread ... another one! Same old questions, sorry ...
Replies
7
Views
788
Nodge68
Nodge68
Back
Top