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.
No comments:
Post a Comment