Aerospace engineers and all the research and development departments of all the engineering schools and colleges in the country are constantly coming up with more efficient ways to build an aircraft, and anticipating new materials to do it with. That's incredible really; we've come a long way since the Wright brothers, who can deny that? Nevertheless, we keep talking about modifying the aircraft, why isn't anyone talking about modifying the atmosphere that the aircraft is flying through?
You would think that was an obvious question, surely it has occurred to someone, and yet very few aerospace students that I've ever mentioned this to have ever followed along without first giving me a blank stare. I would submit to you that we have the capacity now to drill holes in the atmosphere, creating a situation where we can fly through evacuated air, air molecules which have been pushed aside allowing us to fly without dealing with the air pressure of the relative wind.
As I have explained this concept to various aerospace engineers over the last 15-years and my theory of how to do this, they agree that it can be done, although they are not physicists so they don't know exactly how to do it, only they agree in theory that it could be done, and once it's done we must then redesign the aircraft; precisely! Rather than designing the aircraft for flying through the atmosphere as we know it, we should be changing the atmosphere and flying through this evacuated airspace using a more suitable platform and design. Okay so let's talk about designs, conceptually that is, and if this bothers you let's pretend were talking about UFOs or something like that, and playing around with science fiction fantasyland - this way you can suspend your belief system just long enough to get your mind out of the wind tunnel and into a new space, literally.
You see, there was an interesting article in the Practical Sailor Journal back in the early 90s which had a couple of pictures of a unique design for a tandem keel which was designed by Paul Thackaberry. It was 9,000 pounds, it had a "fairly standard NACA lead foil which prepares water flow for the trailing WGA style foil and flattened bulb which helps reduce drag." Now then, this design would lend itself well to my new theory of atmospheric modification for efficient flight.
There was another interesting design which was on a 60' boat in the same journal. The Groupe Sceta had a very deep keel, 14' in fact, with a long wing like support that looked like a wing, consider an early model Beechcraft Bonanza with those non-flying tip tanks, it kind of looked like that.
By having the engines and motors on the outside in the regular air, and flying the fuselage of the aircraft within the evacuated non-atmospheric tube we've created we can still have air for the jet engines and even thicker air because it is bunched up and it came from the center or where we are now operating the aircraft, non-air-craft, spacecraft, or whatever you wish to call it. Wouldn't that work a lot better, imagine that? Imagine the performance, acceleration, fuel economy, efficiency, and the ability to carry extremely large loads.