Looks like something out of Ace Combat
| Shipbucket http://67.205.157.234/forums/ |
|
| AWWA Sky Whale http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5750 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Rusel [ December 11th, 2014, 4:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | AWWA Sky Whale |
Now this is very very cool https://www.behance.net/gallery/AWWA-Sk ... e/11891085 |
|
| Author: | Judah14 [ December 11th, 2014, 7:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AWWA Sky Whale |
Looks like something out of Ace Combat
|
|
| Author: | apdsmith [ December 11th, 2014, 7:56 am ] | |
| Post subject: | Re: AWWA Sky Whale | |
It does look cool, but I'd be interested to see if there has been a demo of this bit:
The aircraft's engines could use both fuel to burn in the engine's core, and electricity to turn the turbofan when the core is powered down
That sounds really hard to do on a plane sort of weight. Plus, I'm kind of curious as to the cost \ benefit (and, again, weight \ benefit) of solar panels on a commercial aircraft.Regards, Ad |
||
| Author: | heuhen [ December 11th, 2014, 8:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AWWA Sky Whale |
The hull it self looks like it can generate some lift by it self. Thus reducing amount of power needed. |
|
| Author: | Rusel [ December 11th, 2014, 11:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AWWA Sky Whale |
Many of the new thin film PV systems have very little weight in the absorption "panel" component of the system. If some of the spray on tech works out there will little weight at all. http://www.gizmag.com/new-method-cheap- ... lar/35100/ but this is only 7% efficiency. While here our UNSW has achieved 40% for solid panels so the revolution continues! http://www.gizmag.com/unsw-world-record ... ion/35098/ Combining the two types of technology is very exciting! |
|
| Author: | TimothyC [ December 11th, 2014, 4:57 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Re: AWWA Sky Whale | ||
It does look cool, but I'd be interested to see if there has been a demo of this bit:
That is actually the only part of this design that doesn't suck so hard I could use it to make a near-perfect vacuum. The fact is you only need full power for a small part of the entire flight, and this does save fuel. It's not likely to show up until the N+2 aircraft (the aircraft that are two generations removed from the current generation - That is the 737NGs), but it is likely to show up. It actually avoids the electric storage issues by having some (likely all for redundancy) of the engines have a generator, and some (again, likely all) have the electric motors. The other option is to use energy storage in the form of batteries/capacitors or fuel cells. This has major weight issues.
The aircraft's engines could use both fuel to burn in the engine's core, and electricity to turn the turbofan when the core is powered down
That sounds really hard to do on a plane sort of weight. Plus, I'm kind of curious as to the cost \ benefit (and, again, weight \ benefit) of solar panels on a commercial aircraft.Regards, Ad |
|||
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|