I don't know about everyone else, but I'm not going to spend half an hour preflighting an airplane so I can spend 10 minutes flying to the store, when I could just spend 10 minutes driving instead...Originally Posted by Stan
I don't know about everyone else, but I'm not going to spend half an hour preflighting an airplane so I can spend 10 minutes flying to the store, when I could just spend 10 minutes driving instead...
LOL. You guys are great. As another small "Segway", You may not realize how close those two topics (bicycles and airplanes) are actually tied together by the Wrights. I have been studying their works on the 1911 glider (complete with autopilot) for the last couple years. Think about this. A bicycle is an unstable vehicle with relatively good control ... so were the Wright airplanes ... by design.
Hi Joe, yes cars will eventually " go away " as the primary mode of transportation just as the horse and carriage did when Ford made them obsolete in 1914. The environmental and cost benefit in eliminating roads and bridges is enormous. The estimated world population growth will demand the elimination of the car to prevent global gridlock on the ground. I envision that the major cities will have landing areas on the perimeter to lead to mass transportation in the city with no cars allowed. The aircraft will use the FAA's NextGen system for guidance to the high density areas. The whole process will be a natural progression to the air as more people purchase the aircraft to replace their car just as people switched from the horse and carriage to the auto.Stan,
Do you really think that cars will "go away" and the "obvious" replacement will be something that flys?
The only question is affordability and that is only possible with mass production. I imagine that nobody in 1869 would have believed that a vehicle would be developed by 1969 that would have transported people to the moon.
Last edited by Stan; 02-03-2012 at 06:38 AM.
Stan, you're missing one thing: Aircraft by nature require far more energy than an equivalent size car, since a lot of that energy is used just to hold it up in the air... not to mention the noise. Until another Einstein shows us the way to build a silent antigravity machine. And people don't want to use mass transportation to get home from "landing areas on the perimeter"; then want to drive their own car (with trunk full of groceries or whatever) directly to their house.
They do? Isn't this relative? A typical GA airplane gets ~16-18 mpg at a speed of 120 mph (yes, there are large possibilities in speed; I just picked one). How many mpg would a Prius get at 120 mph ... if it could get there? A car has all the aerodynamic drag of a poor shape, rolling resistance, tire deformation, etc.
Yes, it takes more energy to go faster, but speed to speed, an airplane is much cleaner (especially homebuilts).
The prototype using the inefficient two pt6a-20 turbines will get 8.26mpg at 475mph cruise for 2958 sm. Using proposed rotary engines burning natural gas the aircraft will get 15 mpg at 475 mph.
The aircraft has very small wings which minimize drag and maximize performance. All non VTOL aircraft need large wings for takeoff and landing. At optimum cruise of 475 mph very, very small wing surfaces are needed.
Stan I agree,
The cost to build and maintain surface transportation across the country is enormous, and may disappear. A more likely scenario is a population connected electronically where the individual need of owning a vehicle for personal travel cannot be economically or environmentally practical. Mass production does reduce costs but the energy, material, and environmental impacts aren't free. North America is culturally in love with individual transportation. A modern integrated mass transportation system is quite convenient, imagine the impact on a family budget without owning a couple of cars. No loan payments, no insurance premiums, no license fees, or personal property taxes, plus no fuel costs. Today you can buy a ten-T ticket package in most european countries for about 8 Euros, that work on rail and bus systems in all the major cities. Yes it's hard to imagine not owning a vehicle. Eventually, we'll get over it. When we have 600 million people living in the US, and the world population doubles every 10 years there will be big changes required. I have no doubt that the world will look a lot more amazing in the future, but predicting that future is no easy task. If we could come back and see the world in say 150 years I'm sure we'd all be surprised!
Joe
Are you planning on cruising down low like a Reno racer or up high like a business jet? Propeller efficiencies (I should really say TSFC - thrust specific fuel consumption) at those high speeds is terrible. And q (dynamic pressure) when you're up high is actually fairly low (indicated airspeed is ~1/2 true airspeed). High altitude business jets are adding winglets to increase their wing area ... they're not all just for the "look".
I can't believe I'm going to ask this, but do you have a website with artist renderings?
Last edited by Ron Blum; 02-03-2012 at 10:59 AM.
Hi Ron, the optimum cruise altitude for longer distances is FL250. The optimum flight path would be an arc depending on the distance traveled. I will not have a website until I find out about DARPA funding. All detailed information will only be disclosed to potential investors until the prototype is under construction.
Of course any detailed info about a potential military vehicle is confidential, that is why the discussion is in general terms. I appreciate all of the comments so that I can address them if they are valid.
Thanks, Stan
Speed's another thing where we can't compare apples to apples. Yes, the plane is faster, but when you figure in getting to the airport, preflighting, etc. the total trip time (and thus average speed) may be the same. Most cars today get far better than 15 mpg, and those that don't (SUV's and trucks) can carry a lot more than, say, a C-172. Also new energy efficient technologies that make sense for cars (hybrid powerplants, regenerative braking, etc.) don't apply as well (or at all) to aircraft.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote