RCAF Canso (Catalina), early 1950s. I've no idea why they did this; its not like they lacked runway-length.
Posted by Madeline_Basset@reddit | WeirdWings | View on Reddit | 47 comments

MightyOGS@reddit
Many militaries put rockets on their seaplanes for one big reason, and one minor one. The minor reason is that older designs like the PBY don't have many steps in their hull, or any other features to help them break free of the surface of the water. I've been told by a vet that they sometimes had to run the engines at takeoff power for 10 minutes when the sea was too smooth to get a good break from the suction. Later flying boats like the PB2Y Coronado had a channel built in to help air get under the hull and break the suction. The really big reason though was range. All aircraft consume vast amounts of fuel at takeoff; flying boats especially. Any reduction in the takeoff run for long range aircraft directly translated into meaningful fuel reserves. Even before their runways started to resemble the surface of the moon, the Germans were strapping their little rocket pods to nearly every bomber they had at one point or another to increase their range
Gutter_Snoop@reddit
It was the '50s. They were strapping rockets on everything, because why not?
theArcticChiller@reddit
Hmm, as a seaplane pilot I would assume it was for heavy takeoffs. During the takeoff run there is a maximum drag, commonly called the hump. This is where the airplane has to overcome the drag of the water and become supported by it (going on the step). If you lack the power to get over the hump, you'll never leave the water. So, maybe it's a good solution to get an overweight plane off the sea
I_am_BrokenCog@reddit
and ... being on water doesn't imply limitless takeoff run distance!
KokoTheTalkingApe@reddit
That's fascinating!
In sailing, there's a thing called getting up on a plane (not an airplane), where the boat goes fast enough to sort of rise out of the hole in the water it was sitting in, and just skims across the water. The boat outpaces the water's reaction to its passage. Drag goes way down and speed goes way up. The bow drops slightly so the boat is more level. Is that related somehow?
Taxus_Calyx@reddit
Just to be clear, and you may know this already, in sailing this only applies to non-displacement hulled boats (planing hulls). Boats with displacement hulls (the majority of cruising sailboats) cannot get up on step.
KokoTheTalkingApe@reddit
OhI forgot about that, thanks! I only ever played with the little, fast boats.
theArcticChiller@reddit
It's exactly that, yes. The first phase is plow (full aft elevator), then over the hump (release elevator after maximum pitch), onto the step (hold minimum hydro drag pitch attitude).
In glassy water (no wind) there is additional drag due to water tension. It helps to plow or go in circles before the takeoff run and then go over your own wakes for lower drag
GlockAF@reddit
Shorter/ quicker takeoffs also minimize the time you spend pounding the hull/airframe in rough seas
winchester_mcsweet@reddit
Thanks for that explanation, I honestly hadn't considered that before. Also as a side note I'd love to go for a seaplane flight, they're really cool!
Madeline_Basset@reddit (OP)
Interesting.
So I imagine it makes quite a difference if you're operating off fresh water, compared with salt water. As the plane will float a little bit lower and have more drag. But on the other hand, salt water has a higher viscosity.
Past_Guarantee700@reddit
I've listened to a podcast about the first world circumnavigation in 1924 with Douglas World Cruisers and they talked about how they sometimes needed multiple miles of running the water before being able to get airborne
HotOstrich@reddit
And a certain amount of chop helps them get up on the step. Glassy smooth water is stickier.
BlacksmithNZ@reddit
A Catalina in the water is a boat with wings; to make boat fly like an aircraft, you need to take off, and that is hard when you are sitting in water which has a lot of drag.
I have heard of bigger flying boats with marginal power and heavy load struggle to take off regardless how long they spend trying to accelerate. On a smooth bit of water, the water overcomes the ability for the aircraft to accelerate. One technique they used was to get a speed boat to cross in front of an aircraft so the wake would be enough to help unstick the flying boat.
Best explanation I found was (surprisingly) Quora:
https://www.quora.com/Why-the-step-circled-in-the-picture-found-in-almost-seaplanes-does-this-step-cause-aerodynamic-difficiency-after-take-off
Scrappy_The_Crow@reddit
What an excellent explanation!
fullouterjoin@reddit
That is neat. You could pump air through jets just under the waterline to aerate the water. Or you could plumb an exhaust bypass for under the water?
BlacksmithNZ@reddit
Or... rockets, like the picture
Hydro foils are another answer; I am always impressed by modern America's Cup yachts that lift themselves out of the water so sail powered boats can hit insane speeds where they outrun most powered boats
propsie@reddit
To be fair, wingsails are crazy efficient.
The team that won the last two America's cup also recently set a land speed record with a wingsail-powered car of 225km/h in ~40km/h of breeze
there's a documentary if you've got an hour to kill
BlacksmithNZ@reddit
Am a kiwi, so very familiar with that team :-)
Yes, the wingsail is generating massive amount of power to drive the boat (or land yacht), but if they sat in the water like a traditional monohull, they could never hit the speeds they do. You need to get up on foils
Foiling speed boats and fast float planes pre-date WW2, but not seen a lot in modern designs. Landing in rough water could be an issue, but retracting foils like in the America's Cup boats could be part of the answer
3_man@reddit
That would also reduce the buoyancy of the water and create a counteracting force (the flying boat would sink more into the water). Ships have been lost into bodies of water that gas is leaking through.
Neat idea though. It would help if it reduces the hydrodynamic sticking force more than the buoyancy.
KokoTheTalkingApe@reddit
Could just a pulse of air help the plane break free?
3_man@reddit
Maybe if it was applied at just the right time? Would be fiendishly difficult to judge though.
fullouterjoin@reddit
Yeah, I saw demo where aerated water was able to sink a test craft, it was wild.
francis2559@reddit
IIRC Japans newest seaplane has a dedicated engine just for blown flaps. A bit of a different approach for the same problem. I’d love to see it in person, the videos are wild.
Foreign_Athlete_7693@reddit
That was a technicue suggested in my 60s era aircraft design book...... unfortunately I don't know if it's ever been reliability implemented
Scrappy_The_Crow@reddit
Weight could be high, altitude could be high, temperature could be high. The takeoff area might be limited (lake, calm bay with rough seas past the inlet) and/or there might be obstructions you need to clear (trees, bridges, etc.).
semyorka7@reddit
tjc__@reddit
There’s a lake in Bolivia 5900m above sea level. That’s pretty high.
blackteashirt@reddit
Could be used when trying to get out of short lakes.
Effective_Iron8188@reddit
Because they could 😜
Pattern_Is_Movement@reddit
Never seen this before!! Great photo, but don't you dare call my PBY a wierd wing!!
r/PBYCatalina approved
Madeline_Basset@reddit (OP)
I posted this a while back -
https://www.reddit.com/r/WWIIplanes/comments/11vj4dx/pby_catalina_on_the_greenland_icecap_1943_flown/
Fenriss_Wolf@reddit
Not directly related, but how do icy waters affect seaplane take offs? At a minimum, I assume there will be added drag, along with added hazards to the integrity of the float structures, similar to a water surface with lots of wooden branches or something...
sporbywg@reddit
This is the Royal Canadian Air Force, buddy; that is why we did that.
HughJorgens@reddit
Canada looks huge but it's actually only the size of Rhode Island. /s
foolproofphilosophy@reddit
Jatolina!
West-Ad6320@reddit
All this talk of rocket assisted take off reminds me of the secretly modified C130 Hercules designed to rescue US embassy hostages in Iran. It also had rocket assisted braking.
Two4theworld@reddit
Why would you think they lack runway length? These aircraft land on lakes all the time. Not every lake is miles long and not every lake is at sea level…..
DaphniaDuck@reddit
Well, they're commonly called seaplanes (not "lakeplanes") so it would be a logical assumption for a seaplane taking off from the sea.
daveashaw@reddit
To save fuel, and thereby increase range.
The physics of getting a hull sitting in the water airborne are pretty daunting.
Luthais327@reddit
Whatever the actual reason is there is always one more reason.
It's fun
jt64@reddit
There was a short time where they wanted to stick assist rockets on everything.
But as others have mentioned heavy take off weight would have been the technical reason.
Wen_Tinto@reddit
Lot of lakes in Canada.
Unhappy-Finance7535@reddit
Isn't the minimum take-off speed for these beauties like...35 knots? Maybe it was a high climb rate test? Get as high as fast as you can to carry on with Search and Rescue operations at effective patrol altitudes.
Scrappy_The_Crow@reddit
Nope, it was 70 knots.
jacksmachiningreveng@reddit
If you're carrying too much fuel then it doesn't matter how long the runway is, you will never get airborne without an extra boost.
Calm_Pea9710@reddit
I'd guess they'd already strapped them to every other airframe....and had a few left over 😋