Live data from Hacker News

Circular Runways [video]

bbc.com

1–10 of 47 posts

Re: Circular Runways [video]

#6
post #4

Yeah. Not so much. http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1357935#p1941...

I'm having trouble recreating the poster's numbers. I'm sure it's my own ignorance, so I'd appreciate some correction.

radius is 3500m velocity is 82m/s

82^2/3500 ~ 1.92

atan(1.92/9.81) ~ 0.19 or 10 degrees of bank.

Where have I gone wrong?

Re: Circular Runways [video]

#7

Appears to be an idea that's been around before [1] - might be interesting to build a smaller scale one that's explicitly for drone swarms. [1] http://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/these-circular-runways-were-d...

For fixed-wing drone airports, I feel like you'd have better luck making an inclined runway for landings, and a railgun-assisted runway for takeoff. Given that the biggest challenge is finding clearance at both ends of the run way, it would be nice not to have to find 360° clearance for both takeoff and landing.

Re: Circular Runways [video]

#8
Okay only slightly related, I had an idea a long while ago for putting satellites into orbit where you just fling them? I didn't think it good for humans because of the G but for stuff. The win being that the power required is all on earth and you don't have to carry fuel with the payload. You could spin them up on a centrifuge and then let go at just the right time (and angle). I was going to mention it to Elon one day...

Re: Circular Runways [video]

#9

Okay only slightly related, I had an idea a long while ago for putting satellites into orbit where you just fling them? I didn't think it good for humans because of the G but for stuff. The win being that the power required is all on earth and you don't have to carry fuel with the payload. You could spin them up on a centrifuge and then let go at just the right time (and angle). I was going to mention it to Elon one…

Wouldn't the force required push the satellite so far towards the edge that it would get crushed?

Re: Circular Runways [video]

#10
post #6
post #4

Yeah. Not so much. http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1357935#p1941...

I'm having trouble recreating the poster's numbers. I'm sure it's my own ignorance, so I'd appreciate some correction. radius is 3500m velocity is 82m/s 82^2/3500 ~ 1.92 atan(1.92/9.81) ~ 0.19 or 10 degrees of bank. Where have I gone wrong?

It looks like you used 3500m as the radius when 3500m is the diameter.
Post reply on HN