[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/n/ - Transportation

[Advertise on 4chan]

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 6 posters in this thread.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


Self-serve ads are available again! Check out our new advertising page here.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: mothballedplane.jpg (332 KB, 962x1443)
332 KB
332 KB JPG
Could one in theory use old fuselages from retired planes for cheap alternatives to ground transportation? The reason planes are retired is because they can no longer handle the stress of constant pressurization and changing expansions from changing altitudes. So if one were to say, take these old fuselages and throw them on some rails or a bus, couldn't it prove a cheap and viable alternative to creating a whole new body? Seems relatively simple from a manufacturing level.

Perhaps there are laws restricting or banning this kind of re-use. but a quick google search reveals that aircraft boneyards frequently re-sell/use vehicle parts. So why not use the fuselage for ground transport? Is it simply too expensive?
>>
>>1576582
Turning radius is the most obvious issue, not to mention a lack of good structural support for mounting wheels.

Bet u think shipping containers are good for housing, too. The glove don't always fit, despite the appearance of the hand.
>>
>>1576583
idk about shipping container homes. they are cheap but they (like the fuselage idea) are for saving money. So they'd only be good for a slum or government housing for people in chronic homelessness who need a roof urgently. The idea behind this is essentially just a way to make manufacturing in transportation cheap and simple. not to make a vehicle with a performance comparable to top of the line professional designs. .

However, you're forgetting that these fuselages can be deformed/re-shaped. To an extent they are mainly aluminium tubes with windows and some supporting frames, so you could probably make them easily become some sort of train car. However I am myself also perplexed by how they could be placed on wheels. perhaps by cutting the tubes in half by length in order to have a more conventional shaped vehicle body?
>>
>>1576583
any suggestions to expand the idea? I'd like to hear what people think of this.
>>
File: cockpitontracks.jpg (91 KB, 1280x720)
91 KB
91 KB JPG
It's been done in fiction.
>>
Someone made a boat from an airplane fuselage.
>>
File: Copie-de-accordion.png (57 KB, 866x440)
57 KB
57 KB PNG
>>1576582
>The reason planes are retired is because they can no longer handle the stress of constant pressurization and changing expansions from changing altitudes.
I remember seeing this somewhere, you can't rely on the material to resist this kind of stress. You need to have a dedicated structure that reduces the fatigue on the surfaces.
The image is too exaggerated for this end and maybe some well thought sliding rings on the fuselage are enough.
>>
>>1576606
Container homes can’t breathe, there’s no way for moisture to leave.

Buses are a nonstarter due to road safety requirements. Probably the same for trains, but I’m not 100% sure.

And it’s difficult and expensive to reverse engineer drawings and electronics of an aircraft cabin. Why don’t you you see production cars with old Cessna bodies? Same reasons.
>>
>>1576832
hmm I see.

If this is the case, would there be a reasonable way to fully recycle old airplanes? I don't really get why we just let them sit in deserts for decades instead of smelting the entire things for cheap aluminum. There are probably some non-recyclable parts (like the coating and seats) but still, it seems quite wasteful.
>>
>>1576863
They are recycled
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_recycling
>>
>>1576826
Related:

https://phys.org/news/2020-04-pressure-bioinspired-material-shapeshift-external.html

But this adapts to long term stress, I thought about a way to dynamically adapt to short term changes the same way the respiratory or digestive system of animals does.
>>
>>1576832
Parts of small composite airplanes may be used for this, I guess:
>>1576805
>>
File: o1.gif (56 KB, 405x246)
56 KB
56 KB GIF
>>1576888
This is closer to what I'm trying to find:

https://www.oilandgasonline.com/doc/flexible-pipe-becoming-deepwater-staple-0001
>>
>>1576606
Aluminum is already dirt cheap, and it's not hard to form--so there is not really any market for this kind of thing.

Repurposing old aircraft bodies might sense in countries where industry is underdeveloped. But the cost of transporting the craft there is likely higher than what could be done with materials which are already locally sourceable.

The shipping container thing might be good inspiration for what can be done locally, though. I know that people have made homes out of old aircraft fuesalages before--but there could be a sizeable market for people who want to chop them up into 20 and 40 ft. sections and make them into RVs or tiny homes on a chassis.





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.