[ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Trump - Steely_D - Feb 21, 2018 - 9:08am
 
Guns - Steely_D - Feb 21, 2018 - 9:06am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos; Please Limit to 510 ... - ScottFromWyoming - Feb 21, 2018 - 9:03am
 
Baseball, anyone? - spammer - Feb 21, 2018 - 8:55am
 
Things you Thought Yesterday that You Were Just Reminded ... - Proclivities - Feb 21, 2018 - 7:48am
 
Bad Poetry - oldviolin - Feb 21, 2018 - 7:13am
 
FOUR WORDS - sdwright - Feb 21, 2018 - 7:13am
 
Things that piss me off - helenofjoy - Feb 21, 2018 - 6:58am
 
Things You Thought Today - helenofjoy - Feb 21, 2018 - 6:48am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - helenofjoy - Feb 21, 2018 - 6:40am
 
Animal Cruelty / Factory Farming - sdwright - Feb 21, 2018 - 6:32am
 
Today in History - Coaxial - Feb 21, 2018 - 6:26am
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Feb 21, 2018 - 6:14am
 
Any Nurses out there? - sdwright - Feb 21, 2018 - 5:59am
 
Bill and Rebeca on-air together! - sunybuny - Feb 21, 2018 - 5:57am
 
Band Names !!! - sdwright - Feb 21, 2018 - 5:11am
 
How's the weather? - Southern_Boy - Feb 21, 2018 - 5:08am
 
The war on Funk is over! - rhahl - Feb 21, 2018 - 3:32am
 
Anti-Intellectualism in American Life - R_P - Feb 21, 2018 - 12:55am
 
Live Music - R_P - Feb 20, 2018 - 11:10pm
 
FLAC Roll Out - robt2379 - Feb 20, 2018 - 10:21pm
 
RP Daily Trivia Challenge - KurtfromLaQuinta - Feb 20, 2018 - 8:23pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Feb 20, 2018 - 8:14pm
 
ten dollar tuesday - Coaxial - Feb 20, 2018 - 7:27pm
 
Classical Music - R_P - Feb 20, 2018 - 7:00pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - R_P - Feb 20, 2018 - 6:41pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - haresfur - Feb 20, 2018 - 5:23pm
 
Another Gun rampage in The U.S - earthbased - Feb 20, 2018 - 5:18pm
 
OUR CATS!! - lily34 - Feb 20, 2018 - 3:52pm
 
Make Gerbilzendogs Laugh - katzendogs - Feb 20, 2018 - 3:31pm
 
NEED A COMPUTER GEEK! - Red_Dragon - Feb 20, 2018 - 2:58pm
 
RP App for Android - rkray - Feb 20, 2018 - 1:55pm
 
Error: Could not retrieve offline list - rkray - Feb 20, 2018 - 1:49pm
 
Breaking News - Red_Dragon - Feb 20, 2018 - 10:44am
 
the Todd Rundgren topic - steeler - Feb 20, 2018 - 10:21am
 
Strange signs, marquees, billboards, etc. - Coaxial - Feb 20, 2018 - 10:19am
 
Counting with Pictures - pigtail - Feb 20, 2018 - 10:09am
 
Gawd, are we such dumb low lifes?..... Sophie Gregoire T... - cc_rider - Feb 20, 2018 - 9:31am
 
-PUNS- OLYMPICS - sdwright - Feb 20, 2018 - 9:29am
 
Poetry Forum - sdwright - Feb 20, 2018 - 9:17am
 
Russia - sdwright - Feb 20, 2018 - 8:36am
 
Celebrity Face Recognition - sdwright - Feb 20, 2018 - 8:24am
 
Gotta Get Your Drink On - Antigone - Feb 20, 2018 - 8:05am
 
What Time Is It ? - Red_Dragon - Feb 20, 2018 - 6:27am
 
They're made out of meat. - sdwright - Feb 20, 2018 - 5:02am
 
• • • • Name My Possum • • • - sdwright - Feb 20, 2018 - 4:34am
 
Where Are The Guns??? - sdwright - Feb 20, 2018 - 3:43am
 
Regarding dogs - haresfur - Feb 19, 2018 - 9:57pm
 
That's good advice - sdwright - Feb 19, 2018 - 9:15pm
 
What's With All the "Fish"? - sdwright - Feb 19, 2018 - 6:04pm
 
What makes you smile? - Coaxial - Feb 19, 2018 - 5:53pm
 
Coffee - sdwright - Feb 19, 2018 - 5:43pm
 
Freedom of speech? - sdwright - Feb 19, 2018 - 4:29pm
 
Favorite President - sdwright - Feb 19, 2018 - 4:13pm
 
Fake News*    ?    ! - sdwright - Feb 19, 2018 - 4:08pm
 
• • •  What's For Dinner ? • • •  - triskele - Feb 19, 2018 - 3:20pm
 
Signs of Spring - kctomato - Feb 19, 2018 - 2:42pm
 
Cache Issue on IPhone5s - Katywu - Feb 19, 2018 - 2:36pm
 
Curling? (Small town news) - haresfur - Feb 19, 2018 - 2:24pm
 
Testing your Metal? - Proclivities - Feb 19, 2018 - 12:47pm
 
China - R_P - Feb 19, 2018 - 10:59am
 
WTF??!! - miamizsun - Feb 19, 2018 - 8:12am
 
Apple HomePod - miamizsun - Feb 19, 2018 - 7:43am
 
The Moon - Proclivities - Feb 19, 2018 - 6:18am
 
Your Current Crush - sdwright - Feb 19, 2018 - 3:29am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - ColdMiser - Feb 18, 2018 - 4:41pm
 
Google's Creative Logos - sdwright - Feb 18, 2018 - 3:20pm
 
What are you listening to now? - SeriousLee - Feb 18, 2018 - 2:55pm
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - bevgerry - Feb 18, 2018 - 2:42pm
 
The Dragons' Roost - SeriousLee - Feb 18, 2018 - 11:32am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - SeriousLee - Feb 18, 2018 - 11:27am
 
James Brown: The Real Story on CNN - Steely_D - Feb 18, 2018 - 11:13am
 
Olympics - Is anybody interested - sdwright - Feb 18, 2018 - 9:59am
 
True Confessions - Coaxial - Feb 18, 2018 - 9:38am
 
Capitalism and Consumerism... now what? - sdwright - Feb 18, 2018 - 9:06am
 
Index » Internet/Computer » The Web » Tech & Science Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 179, 180, 181  Next
Post to this Topic
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 7, 2018 - 5:10am

 miamizsun wrote:

Five Questions for Steven Pinker

The prolific science author and Harvard professor of psychology takes questions on language, journalism, and our historical moment.

The Undark Five — that would be five questions that we put to researchers who are influential, provocative, sometimes controversial — premiers this month with Harvard University psychologist Steven Pinker.

Pinker is the Johnstone Family Professor in the Department of Psychology, where he conducts research on language and cognition. He is the author of ten books, including the recent bestsellers “The Better Angels of Our Nature” and “The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person’s Guide to Writing in the 21st Century.” He is a recognized expert in the development of language and linguistics.

As such, Pinker is also a scientist who is demonstrably adept at communicating about science, conveying complex ideas directly to the public, not only through his books but as a public speaker, magazine author, and prolific user of Twitter. From that perspective, he has often looked critically at the way journalists distill and interpret science on behalf of the public — a topic on which he has strong opinions.

more...



 

a little blurb with bill (pinker has a new book coming out too)



miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 7, 2018 - 5:06am

 miamizsun wrote:


 
and this might be promising...

Researchers Discover Dye That’s Safe and Effective for Treating Malaria

New research has shown the dye methylene blue kills malaria parasites at an unparalleled rate and is safe for human use. In the recent study, which was conducted in Mali by scientists at Radboud University Medical Center, the University of California (UCSF), and the Malaria Research and Training Center (MRTC), malaria patients were treated with a combination of the blue dye and artemisinin-based combination therapy (a fairly standard treatment). Within two days, the patients were cured of malaria and were also no longer able to transmit malaria parasites if they were bitten by a mosquito again.

The research, which will be published in the journal The Lancet Infectious Diseasesthis week, marks a significant breakthrough in the treatment of malaria. Malaria parasites are growing increasingly resistant to existing drug treatments. When they are effective, current medications still do not prevent the spread of parasites — meaning that even if a patient’s symptoms are treated successfully, when they are bitten by another species of mosquito that spreads malaria, it could transmit the disease to someone else.

The Only Drawback

The researchers have noted just one side effect of using the blue dye. “I have used it myself,” Bousema said “and it turns your urine bright blue. This is something that we need to solve because it could stop people from using it.”

While the side effect may be strange and could be alarming if patients weren’t aware that it could happen, it doesn’t appear to be harmful. As Bousema pointed out, if researchers aren’t able to suppress the dye’s effect on urine, providers who use the treatment will need to communicate the possible side effect, its cause, and explain that it isn’t a cause for concern in order to assure it doesn’t dissuade patients from starting or completing treatment.

 

 {#Lol}


miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 26, 2018 - 1:49pm

How Graphene Research Is Taking Aim at 5 of the World’s Biggest Problems

In September 2015, world leaders gathered at a historic UN summit to adopt the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These are 17 ambitious targets and indicators that help guide and coordinate governments and international organizations to alleviate global problems. For example, SDG 3 is to “ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages.” Others include access to clean water, reducing the effects of climate change, and affordable healthcare.

If you think these goals might be difficult to meet, you’re right. Reports show progress is lacking in many of the 17 categories, implying they may not be met by the target date of 2030. However, paired with progress in social and political arenas, advances in science and technology could be a key accelerant to progress too.

Just one example? Graphene, a futuristic material with a growing set of potential applications.

Graphene is comprised of tightly-knit carbon atoms arranged into a sheet only one atom thick. This makes it the thinnest substance ever made, yet it is 200 times stronger than steel, flexible, stretchable, self-healing, transparent, more conductive than copper, and even superconductive. A square meter of graphene weighing a mere 0.0077 grams can support four kilograms. It is a truly remarkable material—but this isn’t news to science and tech geeks.

Headlines touting graphene as the next wonder material have been a regular occurrence in the last decade, and the trip from promise to practicality has felt a bit lengthy. But that’s not unexpected; it can take time for new materials to go mainstream. Meanwhile, the years researching graphene have yielded a long list of reasons to keep at it.


NoEnzLefttoSplit
Being Norwegian is over-rated.
NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male
Zodiac: Taurus
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Dec 28, 2017 - 12:22pm

 Lazy8 wrote:
 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
While we are at it, what are you views of the ReactionEngine air breathing rocket engine I posted a link to below? Is it possible to store / handle the hydrogen/kerosene mix this thing runs on? 
Presuming we get a cheap supply of clean electricity, does it make sense to use pure hydrogen engines or are the handling problems still too difficult to solve?

The handling problems are the least of it, but those problems are severe. We measure the utility of rocket fuels by specific impulse: thrust/unit mass. Liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen is hard to beat by that metric. Unfortunately they are very fluffy; the tanks required are huge. Remember the space shuttle, with that enormous external tank? Remember its boosters? the boosters were solid fuel, very dense. They fit into the package much better. The Saturn V used liquid kerosene/liquid oxygen for a better mas/size tradeoff.

Hydrogen doesn't keep or store or transport very well. While it's not as dangerous as it has been made out to be in some quarters it's a pain in the ass, all things considered.

This engine is going to be terribly inefficient as a subsonic power source, so it's never going to be practical for ordinary air travel. If you want to build a Firefly-style atmo-to-low-orbit craft or an around-the-world-by-lunch transport it might be just the ticket, but the Concorde proved there just isn't enough demand for that to pay for it.

 
hmm. so it looks like liquid fuels will be with us for a while then. damn. Thx for your input. Appreciate it. 
Lazy8
human
Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 28, 2017 - 12:10pm

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
While we are at it, what are you views of the ReactionEngine air breathing rocket engine I posted a link to below? Is it possible to store / handle the hydrogen/kerosene mix this thing runs on? 
Presuming we get a cheap supply of clean electricity, does it make sense to use pure hydrogen engines or are the handling problems still too difficult to solve?

The handling problems are the least of it, but those problems are severe. We measure the utility of rocket fuels by specific impulse: thrust/unit mass. Liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen is hard to beat by that metric. Unfortunately they are very fluffy; the tanks required are huge. Remember the space shuttle, with that enormous external tank? Remember its boosters? the boosters were solid fuel, very dense. They fit into the package much better. The Saturn V used liquid kerosene/liquid oxygen for a better mas/size tradeoff.

Hydrogen doesn't keep or store or transport very well. While it's not as dangerous as it has been made out to be in some quarters it's a pain in the ass, all things considered.

This engine is going to be terribly inefficient as a subsonic power source, so it's never going to be practical for ordinary air travel. If you want to build a Firefly-style atmo-to-low-orbit craft or an around-the-world-by-lunch transport it might be just the ticket, but the Concorde proved there just isn't enough demand for that to pay for it.
haresfur
I get around
haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 28, 2017 - 12:07pm

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

well I guess that's progress. The above system is merely a testbed. It's not out to be efficient or "sensible" at this stage. The one engine idea is merely to see how the thing performs on a moderately large plane. Once it works, they'll install two fans and test that. I doubt whether this hybrid system described was ever intended as a working solution, given the weight it would entail.

I fully realise electrically powered planes will only make sense when the power to weight ratio of battery storage reaches something approaching that of liquid fuel (which I believe still means something like a 50-fold improvement!!). But if it gets close enough, economic and environmental considerations will come into play (and yes I live near an airport and would like quieter planes). They are only talking of short hops. Nothing more.

 
On my recent trip westward across the Pacific, they didn't let the standby passengers on because there were headwinds and needed to cut the weight. One of the standby geeks was explaining how needing to carry some extra fuel for the headwinds meant that they needed a lot more fuel to take off.  Then we sat on the ground for 10 minutes burning off excess fuel. I was happy about the open seat next to me but not about the carbon footprint. So the calculations get complicated when you get into the details. But it does seem to be a point that you are likely to get the biggest gain from just enough battery power to take off. And if you factor in the difficult to monetize lower GHG and social benefit of quieter conditions surrounding the airports...
NoEnzLefttoSplit
Being Norwegian is over-rated.
NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male
Zodiac: Taurus
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Dec 28, 2017 - 11:21am

While we are at it, what are you views of the ReactionEngine air breathing rocket engine I posted a link to below? Is it possible to store / handle the hydrogen/kerosene mix this thing runs on? 
Presuming we get a cheap supply of clean electricity, does it make sense to use pure hydrogen engines or are the handling problems still too difficult to solve?
Lazy8
human
Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 28, 2017 - 11:12am

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
sure. And it's not new. 20 years ago a mate of mine was involved in an aviation project using fuel cells that also um, stalled. But I think you are being overly pessimistic. Forget the hybrid concept. The whole thing with electric planes hinges on how much power a battery can store for given weight. The rest of it is purely economics, how much will fuel cost in future compared to electricity? Other considerations are the time spent refuelling as compared to just plugging in new batteries, etc. 
The noise thing is not quite correct. The noise is from the violent expansion of gas (which admittedly comes rushing out the arse end of the machine) but a fan doesn't push air using thermal expansion like that. They will definitely be quieter. Siemens tested this and unless they are fudging their figures big time, the e-fan has about half the noise emission of a comparable combustion-powered machine.

As for the battery issue...exactly. Get us a battery that makes sense for a passenger airplane and you can make electric airplanes that compete with combustion airplanes. We don't have them. We don't have anything within an order of magnitude of what we need. Electric airplanes are a waste of time and effort until we do.

As for comparing an electric motor to a piston engine...sure, electric motors are quieter. Compared to a turbine? If there's a difference it will be small. There are small (<=20 passenger) piston-powered airliners still flying but they represent a tiny portion of the fleet. They just aren't as efficient (or—surprise!—as quiet) as turboprops. Turbine engines don't go "bang"*, they go "whoosh".

Refueling time is under 15 minutes for most commercial airplanes (it takes about 45 for a 747). Servicing the cabin and getting passengers in and out takes longer. Removing a battery (a not-insignificant amount of weight, and weight that can't share structural duties like a fuel tank if it has to be removable) and reconnecting is going to take significant time. The airplane's safety depends on that connection and attachment so it's not going to be like popping a new AA in your flashlight. Fuel loads are also spread all over the non-passenger areas of airplanes—like the wings. You can do that with batteries as well but they aren't coming off to swap out if you do. Turn-around time for battery-powered airplanes will be a disadvantage to overcome, not an advantage to exploit.

*Unless something goes very very wrong.
NoEnzLefttoSplit
Being Norwegian is over-rated.
NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male
Zodiac: Taurus
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Dec 28, 2017 - 10:16am

 Lazy8 wrote:

The goal of the project is to build an electric-powered airplane. That's it.

Not we want to build an electric-powered airplane because it will do X better than what we have but build an electric airplane.

Can we turn a fan with an electric motor? Of course. Can we mount electric motors on airplanes? Of course. No breakthrus here. As a next step in this development I have a suggestion: Instead of burning jet fuel to turn a generator to turn electric motors to spin fans, burn jet fuel to turn the fans directly and haul the generator and electric motor around in the cargo bay, strapped down and inert. Efficiency will go up and they can herald it as a milestone in electric airplane development.

If you think this is going to be quieter you're in for a rude surprise. The noise doesn't come from combustion (which, in this case, goes on regardless) but from all that air rushing out the ass end of the propulsion device. You want to make airplanes quieter? Make them lighter so they don't have to move so much air. Of course that will require more airplanes taking off to carry the same passenger load, but hey.

The electric airplane, at present, is a ginormous virtue signal. Look at us being all green! This is Potemkin Village technology, like building  a teleportation subway station. We'll just use trains until the actual teleportation is practical. But look! Proof of concept.

 
sure. And it's not new. 20 years ago a mate of mine was involved in an aviation project using fuel cells that also um, stalled. But I think you are being overly pessimistic. Forget the hybrid concept. The whole thing with electric planes hinges on how much power a battery can store for given weight. The rest of it is purely economics, how much will fuel cost in future compared to electricity? Other considerations are the time spent refuelling as compared to just plugging in new batteries, etc. 
The noise thing is not quite correct. The noise is from the violent expansion of gas (which admittedly comes rushing out the arse end of the machine) but a fan doesn't push air using thermal expansion like that. They will definitely be quieter. Siemens tested this and unless they are fudging their figures big time, the e-fan has about half the noise emission of a comparable combustion-powered machine. 

 


aflanigan
Be ashamed to die until you have won some victory for humanity
aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male
Zodiac: Aquarius
Chinese Yr: Rat


Posted: Dec 28, 2017 - 9:58am

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

well I guess that's progress. The above system is merely a testbed. It's not out to be efficient or "sensible" at this stage. The one engine idea is merely to see how the thing performs on a moderately large plane. Once it works, they'll install two fans and test that. I doubt whether this hybrid system described was ever intended as a working solution, given the weight it would entail.

I fully realise electrically powered planes will only make sense when the power to weight ratio of battery storage reaches something approaching that of liquid fuel (which I believe still means something like a 50-fold improvement!!). But if it gets close enough, economic and environmental considerations will come into play (and yes I live near an airport and would like quieter planes). They are only talking of short hops. Nothing more.

 
Or to put it more prosaically, you could probably throw a frisbee® as far as the Wright brothers' utterly impractical prototype flying machine went in 1913 on its maiden voyage.
Lazy8
human
Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 28, 2017 - 9:58am

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
well I guess that's progress. The above system is merely a testbed. It's not out to be efficient or "sensible" at this stage. The one engine idea is merely to see how the thing performs on a moderately large plane. Once it works, they'll install two fans and test that. I doubt whether this hybrid system described was ever intended as a working solution, given the weight it would entail.

I fully realise electrically powered planes will only make sense when the power to weight ratio of battery storage reaches something approaching that of liquid fuel (which I believe still means something like a 50-fold improvement!!). But if it gets close enough, economic and environmental considerations will come into play (and yes I live near an airport and would like quieter planes). They are only talking of short hops. Nothing more.

The goal of the project is to build an electric-powered airplane. That's it.

Not we want to build an electric-powered airplane because it will do X better than what we have but build an electric airplane.

Can we turn a fan with an electric motor? Of course. Can we mount electric motors on airplanes? Of course. No breakthrus here. As a next step in this development I have a suggestion: Instead of burning jet fuel to turn a generator to turn electric motors to spin fans, burn jet fuel to turn the fans directly and haul the generator and electric motor around in the cargo bay, strapped down and inert. Efficiency will go up and they can herald it as a milestone in electric airplane development.

If you think this is going to be quieter you're in for a rude surprise. The noise doesn't come from combustion (which, in this case, goes on regardless) but from all that air rushing out the ass end of the propulsion device. You want to make airplanes quieter? Make them lighter so they don't have to move so much air. Of course that will require more airplanes taking off to carry the same passenger load, but hey.

The electric airplane, at present, is a ginormous virtue signal. Look at us being all green! This is Potemkin Village technology, like building  a teleportation subway station. We'll just use trains until the actual teleportation is practical. But look! Proof of concept.
NoEnzLefttoSplit
Being Norwegian is over-rated.
NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male
Zodiac: Taurus
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Dec 28, 2017 - 9:31am

 Lazy8 wrote:

"The BAE 146 demo aircraft, a jet that seats up to 100 people, will at first have one of its four gas turbine engines replaced with the hybrid engine. This engine will be powered by batteries and an onboard generator using jet fuel."

This is not the silliest idea I've ever heard but it's in the top ten.

 
well I guess that's progress. The above system is merely a testbed. It's not out to be efficient or "sensible" at this stage. The one engine idea is merely to see how the thing performs on a moderately large plane. Once it works, they'll install two fans and test that. I doubt whether this hybrid system described was ever intended as a working solution, given the weight it would entail.

I fully realise electrically powered planes will only make sense when the power to weight ratio of battery storage reaches something approaching that of liquid fuel (which I believe still means something like a 50-fold improvement!!). But if it gets close enough, economic and environmental considerations will come into play (and yes I live near an airport and would like quieter planes). They are only talking of short hops. Nothing more.


Lazy8
human
Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 28, 2017 - 8:56am

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote: 
"The BAE 146 demo aircraft, a jet that seats up to 100 people, will at first have one of its four gas turbine engines replaced with the hybrid engine. This engine will be powered by batteries and an onboard generator using jet fuel."

This is not the silliest idea I've ever heard but it's in the top ten.
NoEnzLefttoSplit
Being Norwegian is over-rated.
NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male
Zodiac: Taurus
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Dec 28, 2017 - 12:20am

ha, and this just in.. 
NoEnzLefttoSplit
Being Norwegian is over-rated.
NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male
Zodiac: Taurus
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Dec 27, 2017 - 11:07pm

 haresfur wrote:

Well in that case, just use a really long extension cord that will pop unplugged after takeoff. Put it on a reel on the ground, wind it back up and plug into the next plane.

Oh wait, you should never yank on a cord to unplug. nvm

 
I like the way you think.. and actually that is not such a dumb idea. patent it!
haresfur
I get around
haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 27, 2017 - 11:00pm

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

exactly, that is the crux.. one idea is to create a hybrid system with a small turbine/generator at the back of the plane. Given that most energy is expended at take-off I could imagine that working too.

 
Well in that case, just use a really long extension cord that will pop unplugged after takeoff. Put it on a reel on the ground, wind it back up and plug into the next plane.

Oh wait, you should never yank on a cord to unplug. nvm
NoEnzLefttoSplit
Being Norwegian is over-rated.
NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male
Zodiac: Taurus
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Dec 27, 2017 - 10:56pm


NoEnzLefttoSplit
Being Norwegian is over-rated.
NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male
Zodiac: Taurus
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Dec 27, 2017 - 10:07pm

 haresfur wrote:

I suppose you need to consider the drive train plus the battery weight for longer flights and you need low-carbon footprint electricity.

 
exactly, that is the crux.. one idea is to create a hybrid system with a small turbine/generator at the back of the plane. Given that most energy is expended at take-off I could imagine that working too.
NoEnzLefttoSplit
Being Norwegian is over-rated.
NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male
Zodiac: Taurus
Chinese Yr: Tiger


Posted: Dec 27, 2017 - 10:06pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

Cool. Fixed your link tho.

 
thx!
haresfur
I get around
haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 27, 2017 - 10:03pm

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
And electric engines for short-haul flights are looking increasingly viable.

 
I suppose you need to consider the drive train plus the battery weight for longer flights and you need low-carbon footprint electricity.
Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 179, 180, 181  Next