41–50 of 73 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Except with steel as the tensile material, you can probably use pressures up around 1000 psi, making the whole structure have an amazing strength to weight ratio. Congratulations, you have created a bomb.
Wasn’t the Centaur upper stage pressurised. I remember an incident where one collapsed under load because the tank lost pressure.
Today this would most likely have the same drawbacks as the inflatable kayaks we see for sale. Saves on space (and money?) and could be good as an entry into a hobby but at any intermediate to advanced level there are better options to choose from. With the high barrier to entry to flying I think most pilots would opt for the most reliable option from the start. I would not want to be caught in inclement weather in a…
What if you are stuck in north korea and the duffel bag containing this landed just at your patio ? I am surprised this was not pursued more aggressively, in fact.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, rockets are essentially bombs we try to make explode in a controlled manned. The "controlled" part is not always successful. Fueled rockets are treated like live bombs. No one around except for people who really need to be (like astronauts).
> The "controlled" part is not always successful. I'm assuming you're referring to the unnominal situations resulting in the unscheduled rapid disassembly procedures? I wonder how many people watch launches with similar intent as NASCAR races where they're just looking for the crashes or hockey games looking for the fights?
But for, say the JWST launch, it really wasn't with the same intent.
In the former, it is just SpaceX way of doing business, no big deal, no significant payload being destroyed and the next rocket is on the line. The latter is the result of billions of dollars, many years of work and great scientific promises that could be blown to pieces.
And of course, for manned flight, who in their right mind wants astronauts dead?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The "controlled" part is not always successful. I'm assuming you're referring to the unnominal situations resulting in the unscheduled rapid disassembly procedures? I wonder how many people watch launches with similar intent as NASCAR races where they're just looking for the crashes or hockey games looking for the fights?
I must admit I tend to watch SpaceX test flights for the potential fireworks. But for, say the JWST launch, it really wasn't with the same intent. In the former, it is just SpaceX way of doing business, no big deal, no significant payload being destroyed and the next rocket is on the line. The latter is the result of billions of dollars, many years of work and great scientific promises that could be blown to pieces.…
Which begs the question, who wants to fly Starliner?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21249801 (26 comments)
While a cool concept, subsequent ultralight aircraft made this design obsolete.
Just don't get shot at or have a leak. While it could be very compact to transport, it's not very practical or robust.
Also, the service ceiling and service floor(?) could vary based on temperature. For example, if it started at sea level and very cold conditions, it's possible it could not exceed a certain altitude below the need for a pressurized cabin and below its performance coffin corner.
People knew how to name things back then.
Would inflatable wings/bodies work on Mars or a similar low pressure environment?
A proposal demonstrator of this was suggested in a paper:
https://www.icas.org/ICAS_ARCHIVE/ICAS2014/data/papers/2014_...
I've always wanted one of these - they seem like an awesome way to explore the world. I once fantasized about getting a couple of them dropped in some remote location, spend a few days or weeks hiking out there, and then flying back. Wonder what a modern variant would look like?
Something like a powered paraglider comes to mind. It has the additional benefit of being reusable.
I wonder if this is more practical nowadays. Modern “drop stitch” inflatable kayaks and paddle boards are extremely rigid, strong, light, and reliable. They also have precise 3D shapes determined by the length and position of the internal drop stitch threads. Has anyone tried using that tech to create an inflatable airplane?
My inflatable SUP is nice, and it is impressively rigid, but I wouldn't say it's light. I got the inflatable because it can be stored and transported compactly. Competition paddleboards and kayaks are fiberglass/composite foam sandwiches, and way lighter than the inflatable variants. I think the inflatable SUPs and kayaks are as heavy as they are because of the thick layers of vinyl and nylon that prevent punctures a…
I don't have experience with hard SUPs but have a cheap RetroSpec weekender 10'6" SUP at 17.5lbs - I quickly looked up the weight of similar size composite boards (e.g. Isle 2) and was seeing more like 24lbs. I googled "competition SUP" and found some at 17lbs in the same length as my inflatable, but much narrower and 100lbs lower in max weight capacity than the inflatable SUP of the same weight.
For kayaks, high end drop stitch kayaks are about half the weight of rotomolded plastic ones of the same size, and only slightly heavier than skin on frame kayaks made from exotic materials, which are the lightest kayak technology and slightly lighter overall.