[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 / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/n/ - Transportation

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


"cancelled" projects
>>
>>1710413
If its nuclear, what is propelling those turbines? Steam?
>>
>>1710423
>Power would be derived from the heat generated by a nuclear reactor and transferred to four jet engines where it would superheat the air passing through to provide thrust
>>
File: 5b91af434bad3.image.jpg (261 KB, 1200x856)
261 KB
261 KB JPG
>>1710423
>if it's nuclear, what is propelling those turbines? steam?
/n/ is once again the most delusional board
>>
File: 1628707704570.jpg (28 KB, 301x301)
28 KB
28 KB JPG
>>1710600

What did he mean by this
>>
File: Vva14-3.jpg (35 KB, 729x438)
35 KB
35 KB JPG
>>
>>1710633
Supersonic long range high altitude erkanoplane
>>
>>1710600
Nuclear reactor convection cooled with air .
Air comes through fan/compressor creates heat as it cools reactor and increases air pressure. This air is put through the turbine and subsequent exhaust.
Just replaces the fuel.
>>
>>1711020
a high altitude ground effects plane? wut.
>>
>>1711709
DON'T INTERRUPT MY FANTASY
>>
File: Boeing 2707.jpg (50 KB, 640x501)
50 KB
50 KB JPG
>>
>>1710633
wasn't this piece of shit impossible to build? the concept was way ahead of the engineering capabilities of its time
>>
>>1711709
Yes.

The thing was supposed to be able to fly high, and use ground effect.

https://youtu.be/UD7xiWWs-bs
>>
>>1710413
Impressive it could get off the ground with the amount of shielding required.
>>
>>1711839
>the concept was way ahead of the engineering capabilities of its time
and it still is
>>
>>1712163

Lad in the 1950s they had flight crews moving fission cores from a birdcage to the delivery system barehanded.
>>
>>1712172
Could probably work now. Using composites to reduce weight. Replace all the lift jerseys with a pair of bypass jets that power lift fans and vector thrust like the f35.
>>
File: file_2171086.jpg (583 KB, 3993x2800)
583 KB
583 KB JPG
>>
>>1710631
KHAAAAAAAN
>>
File: aerion_052014.jpg (287 KB, 2000x1272)
287 KB
287 KB JPG
too soon?
>>
>>1712187
Based
>>
>>1710633
Checked and cool looking plane desu
>>1711839
>>1712172
>Impossible to build
>and it still is
>Unironically saying this while responding to an image of said "impossible to build" plane flying in the air
Retards
>>
>>1710413
>>
File: 1303340647815.jpg (145 KB, 1268x1010)
145 KB
145 KB JPG
"All modern aircraft have four dimensions: span, length, height and politics. TSR-2 simply got the first three right." -Sydney Camm
>>
The Fairey Rotodyne could have been a very useful aircraft if the flaws had been ironed out.
>>
>>1717315
I'm almost sure they were, but the Cosa Nostra had already crapped all over it by the time it happened.

I'm not in the mood to post a new thread for this, but this is another approach for affordable fuel cells:

https://news.rub.de/english/2021-05-12-biocatalyst-enzyme-system-hydrogen-industry

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/biofuel-cell-platinum/
>>
>>1717315

I don't know that you can iron out the flaws of a rotorcraft when the primary flaw is that it is a rotorcraft.
>>
>>1717315
They could make it function, but they'd never actually convince cities to allow their use for their intended purpose of skyscraper to skyscraper transit between cities. They'd find a niche but they'd never take off.
>>
>>1718136

Forget cities. You couldn't fly the fucking thing within two hundred miles of land. Noise problems killed the Concord.
>>
The single largest leap in air-to-air combat technology until the F-35, one can only imagine a world where the US government didn't force Canada to shut it down.
>>
>>1718141

The idea that Canadian interceptors could successfully defend against an attack by supersonic bombers launched from Vladivostok is beyond comical. Nobody could possibly have ever taken that project seriously, except as a great way to funnel public money to war profiteers.
>>
>>1718141
Canada peaked in the 60s and it’s been downhill ever since
>>
>>1718216
It's the Trudeaus.
>>
File: 1531372783015.jpg (218 KB, 1024x731)
218 KB
218 KB JPG
>>
>>1717315
>>1718130
there's not a lot of ways to fix "hot tipjet rotors are hellishly loud" other than removing the tipjets themsleves.

And now you have to stick a tail rotor on it, and have just built "big helicopter"
>>
>>1718141
The reason it got shut down is that a mach 2 point defense interceptor with a combat range of 200 miles at intercept speed is totally useless as a defense against nuclear attack in a world with ICBMs. By the time the Arrow got canceled, it was clear that nuclear war wasn't going to entail Bear bombers flying over the north pole.

It was a plane designed with cutting-edge technology to address a threat model that only existed for ~7 years.

The USA canceled the F-108 (a very similar aircraft) at the same time. Everything related to ever-faster bombers and correspondingly fast interceptors got killed in this period. The only reason anyone remembers the Arrow vs all the other cancelled projects is that it was literally the only thing going on in the cannuk aerospace world. The *way* in which the Arrow got cancelled was simply insulting, and one does wonder if they could have done it in a way that didn't decimate the entire country's aerospace sector.
>>
>>1718620
>The *way* in which the Arrow got cancelled was simply insulting, and one does wonder if they could have done it in a way that didn't decimate the entire country's aerospace sector
Probably not, but even if such aircraft didn't have the 30+ years of service that is hoped out of such craft, the fact of the matter is that the UK and France wanted enough of them to justify the cost of the project being completed and would have built a good backbone for Avro and Bombardier to have built their expanding aerospace arms on.
>>
File: F-14VertHJ.jpg (153 KB, 1227x1635)
153 KB
153 KB JPG
>>
>>1711867
>fly high, and use ground effect
Not at the same time
>>
File: Lockheed L-2000 SST.jpg (111 KB, 1493x453)
111 KB
111 KB JPG
>>
>>1718854
>>
>>1713383
Wait, wasn´t that that plan to power a spaceship by exploding nukes behind it?
I still can´t get over the fact that somebody really thought this was a good diea.
>>
>>1719390
If it's stupid but it works, it ain't stupid
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Sv5y6iHUM
>>
>>1718657
>UK and France wanted enough of them to justify the cost of the project being completed

The little nuclear rockets would actually have made excellent ground attack weapons against the soviet tank forces. Would've worked great in 'nam for that matter.
>>
File: k7hjcfcwrygz1dmr5log.jpg (73 KB, 1164x631)
73 KB
73 KB JPG
>>
>>1718911
"prototype" - pretty sure that's just paint or sticker windows, neither aircraft was ever modified for passengers
>>
>>1717975
Also I couldn't find about Carbon Nitride when I searched about hydrogen storage methods. It seems to work very well (10% w.t. H2).

Another thing that wasn't so clear. Metal-air batteries can work as flow batteries, so its capacity can be increased by having a bigger tank storing metal slurry:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zinc%E2%80%93air_battery#Alternative_configurations

In this configuration there is only one anode catalyst, oxygen membrane and other expensive component, chosen proportionally to the required power output and not total storage capacity.

Also filters made for separating oxygen from the air have improved a lot and were tested on combustion engines, using a separate component releasing pre-filtered oxygen into the porous catalyst at the cathode may be better than the current approach of mixing all functions into one component (the cathode and the oxygen capture).

>>1718613
It got down into levels that passed some requirements (still loud). But the whole series of events that led to it being cancelled looked very suspicious and african.
>>
>>1710413

>1100 foot winspan

Are you under the impression the Air Force can somehow fly this thing without anyone seeing it?
>>
>>
>>1720080
pluto was just too based for this world... just like Linear Aerospike and Venturestar.
>>
File: 1618621392248.png (638 KB, 720x687)
638 KB
638 KB PNG
how would they get into the planes if they were under the wing of the carrier plane?
>>
>>1725068
whats the sauce on that
>>
>>1725076
>>1725068
this is very important
>>
>>1719390
Arriving in a solar sistem by decelerating with nukes is the most assertive way to present yourself to a new civilization.
>>
>>1711801
Ah finally
Someone took my first grade paper plane and made it a thing
>>
>>1717132
It's a still photo with no background reference
It could be on freefall and you wouldn't notice any difference in the pic
>>
File: ears.jpg (2.27 MB, 1869x1499)
2.27 MB
2.27 MB JPG
retooling,,thread.,
,,issue,,Transportation,,in theage of Imperial intangelments.,,,and how toavoid unwanted,,,touching.,
,,,like,maybe canoe?,,or simple dogsled.,
>>
>>1711801
Supersonic passenger aircraft are unimaginably based, but they are also boondoggles for anyone trying to design and build one. You hear about a new design every couple of years, and then radio silence afterwards when the project inevitably goes belly-up.
>>
File: 3D_AvroArrow_Full.jpg (1.08 MB, 1200x1600)
1.08 MB
1.08 MB JPG
>>1718141
>>1718620
We're still coping and seething about it to this day. I agree that it definitely could have been done better, since it left us with the current dire straits of having the Fr*nch as the only aircraft builders in the country, but even then I'm not sure how. Canada doesn't even have the tax base to maintain a single shitty highway from coast to coast, let alone a massive aerospace and defense industry.

The arrow was definitely a based design though, it's too bad it got cancelled and the company dissolved right after.
>>
>>1717312
Seen one irl at Duxford, amazing looking plane.
>>
File: yfd4lpmcbyry.jpg (726 KB, 2667x932)
726 KB
726 KB JPG
The Saunders Roe Princess
>>
File: Saro_Duchess-02.jpg (598 KB, 1316x1723)
598 KB
598 KB JPG
The Saunders Roe Duchess, a jet powered passenger sea plane.
>>
File: zlkgaye2wk541.jpg (56 KB, 960x540)
56 KB
56 KB JPG
The Saunders Roe Queen, a 1000 passenger behemoth with a 24 engines.
>>
>>1730122
>>1730123
Based Saunders-Roe enjoyer. >>1730125 This one looks like a coked-out Fallout 4 design though.
>>
>>1710413
Make it s blimp and you have something.

>>1710633
>sky
>or just above the water
Pick one

>>1718509
Why don't we have this? We have sky crane.

>>1711801
>>1716105
>>1718854
>>1718911
>burn twice the fuel to just sit around for 6 hours once you get there anyway
Makes sense.

>>1730122
>>1730123
>>1730125
Why not just fly two of whatever the sweet spot largest plane is instead

>>1718730
So it did this for about ....one second?

>>1717315
>giant rotary wing, giant winglets fighting the down force.
>Should have been working on a tilt rotor the whole time

>>1713383
>>1720080
>>1724692
>>1724515
How do these compare to Sea Dragon?


>>1718141
>>1729981
Turns out, living on the big bad U.S.s back like mold does not a critical mass of an economy make.
>>
>>1716105
I remember this being shilled everywhere for some reason. Guess they weren't good enough.
>>
>>1731421
There was a huge article cover story article in Popular Science in 1998 about why it never worked. Thought that would have ended it. Yet here we are.
>>
>>1711801
i wish they made this 757 sized rather than a widebody. that would have actually been somewhat more feasible and could have resulted in one actually being built.
>>
>>1731681
Swing wings are terribly maintenance intensive.
>>
>>1718141
I’m convinced everyone who shills the arrow is just being contrarian.
>>
>>1731355
>Why don't we have this?
Because it is simpler, cheaper, more flexible and more reliable to make shaped containers that go inside the plane instead of a single large detachable external container.
>>
>>1731694
do sky crane is only for logging?
>>
>>1731686
i mean, if boeing can secure orders then whatever happens after it leaves the factory floor isnt their problem.



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.