Using gravity to get off the ground

Submitted by Lorenz on June 11, 2006 - 12:25am

I just found an article about a new concept aircraft that would use gravity to fly...using helium or vacum to lift the aircraft into the air, and when it is heading down it will have 40 miles of horizontal distance for every mile it falls.

here is the link

http://www.machinedesign.com/ASP/viewSelectedArticle.asp?strArticleId=56635&strSite=MDSite&Screen=AEROSPACE&catId=379

‹ mouseover text text box Windows Vista ›

Comments

Why it won't work PHYSICS

by harv - Jun 11 2006 - 7:12am

Why it won't work

PHYSICS STUFF
first, yes a balloon can go that high for a one time event, but with a commercial payload and re-useable there are additional factors

the article talks about lift based on 0.0628 lbs/cu.ft. of helium at sea level
at sea level air pressure is 14.96 psi
20,000 feet 6.76
55,000 feet 1.33
so at his launch altitude for horizontal flight air pressure is less than 1/10th of that at sea level - he is going to need one massive sized airframe/balloon - the sketch in the article is off by several orders of magnitude - this creates new problems since a large "helium bladder" will be so large that the aerodynamics for the 40:1 glide are lost.

I am not commenting on the "vacuum" bladder - it will need a "sky hook" to work (engineering joke). There is a whole conservation of energy to create the vacuum that will negate the fuel saved etc. etc. etc.

At 55,000 feet if there is a cabin depressurization you're dead - no air mask will help, you would have to be in a space suit. There are very few commercial aircraft that are certified to that altitude, such as the Gulfstream G-IV's, the old Concorde. Normal commercial aircraft like a 737 operate at 35,000 feet with a maximum altitude of 37,000 to 41,000.

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1997/news.release.970319.html

PRACTICAL STUFF
limited range - at 400 miles there are many alternative travel modes
this would seem to be the commuter runs of NY to Boston, Philly and DC,
lots of other ways to skin that cat.

at times airports get backed up and planes need to circle in the pattern awaiting approval for landing - this puppy can't circle

bad weather - any bad weather moves in on the way up and this thing is done for it cannot maneuver around the weather - there are strict weather limits on flying blimp/balloon/dirigibles

on a cost per mile flown I doubt this will be competitive - no, I have not done the actual calculation this part is only a gut level hunch

The things that will promote synaptic activity on a Sunday morning.

One question...

by Haddock-Boy - Jun 11 2006 - 11:08am

...and I'm not even trying to be a smartass (this time).

Why?

It seems like a nifty idea and all, and if the answer is something like "why not?" or "to see if I can" then that's fine, but there doesn't seem to be any practical upshot to this whatsoever. I'm no physicist, so I can't comment on the scientific viability of a project like this, but it seems like a bit of a waste of space to have something twice as large as a 747 that can carry nothing but the stuff that it uses to fly, (or rather fall with style, to borrow from Toy Story) doesn't it?

Maybe I'm missing the point, but if you're that desparate to get 400 miles without using fossil fuels, why not just give yourself a bunch more time and ride a bike, or a horse, or walk?

- HB

I have to admit, I only read

by sikboy - Jun 11 2006 - 11:32am

I have to admit, I only read the start of the article, up to the part where they described buoyancy as "a form of gravity". Then I shut the webpage quietly, shook my head and went about my day.

This Space For Rent

After a little more

by harv - Jun 11 2006 - 1:15pm

After a little more thought,
this deserved a closer look,
so let's look at the company and the owner

The company is Hunt Aviation
http://www.fuellessflight.com/

The owner is Robert Hunt
he is also a shareholder on Encore Clean Energy
http://www.fuellessflight.com/partners.htm
http://www.encorecleanenergy.com/
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001267208%252D03%252D000001%252Etxt%26filepath%3D%255C2003%255C10%255C17%255C&symbol=ECLN

Encore Clean Energy, Inc. - ticker symbol ECLN
an over the counter or Pink Sheets stock
this is NOT an NYSE or NASDAQ stock
http://www.pinksheets.com/otcguide/investors_index.jsp

some basic info about the company can be found at
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/company_profile.jsp?symbol=ECLN

Company Notes:
Formerly=Realm Production & Entertainment, Inc. until 11-99
Formerly=tvtravel.com, Inc. until 12-99
Formerly=emailthatpays.com, Inc. until 5-02. State of Incorporation Florida changed to Delaware concurrent with name change.
Formerly=Forge, Inc. until 12-03

On Jan 16, 2006 Mr. Hunt filed a form 5 with the SEC
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/print_filings.jsp?url=%2Fredirect.asp%3Ffilename%3D0001267208%252D06%252D000001%252Etxt%26filepath%3D%255C2006%255C02%255C16%255C&symbol=ECLN
it shows that on Jan 11, 2006
Mr. Hunt acquired a further 510,000 shares of ECLN at $0.10 per share
and sold them the same day at $0.23 per share
he is still the largest single shareholder in ECLN with over two million shares

I also note that the 10Q filed with the SEC Dec 15 2005 shows
cash on hand of $165.00
but current liabilities of $3,828,385.00

some interesting comments in the 10Q

"The Company incurred a net loss in the quarter ending September 30, 2005, and has sustained negative cash flows from operations since its inception. At September 30, 2005, the Company has negative working capital of $3,651,970. "

" We are currently engaged in the following businesses:

(i) The Encore Business : The Encore Business involves developing and commercializing proprietary “clean-energy” technologies that we have acquired through our acquisition of Cryotherm. Our plan for this segment of our business involves creating products that will be targeted at creating lower-cost, cleaner ways to generate electricity without the burning of fossil fuels.

(ii) The Ignite Business : Prior to our acquisition of Cryotherm, our primary business was the Ignite Business of providing “permission-based” email marketing and integrated advertising services. We continue to carry on this segment of our business through our wholly owned subsidiary, Ignite Communications Inc. (“Ignite”). "

Please note that I am making absolutely no comment about these businesses good or bad,
I am making no comment about Mr. Hunt, good or bad.
I am making no comment about the quality or suitability of this, or any stock, for anyone's investment.
I am simply pointing to further sources of information.

Technologies based on

by CMack - Jun 15 2006 - 12:42am

Technologies based on alternative/non-conventional ways of applying technology are often controversial. But if he can make it work and become a reality, then it doesn't really matter what the critics say about it today.

If a website crashes on the Internet and no one is there to view it, did it really exist at all?

Yeah, but there is a

by sikboy - Jun 15 2006 - 10:12am

Yeah, but there is a difference between applying technology in a new way and flat-out making shit up. I personally believe that if you dont call people on bad science when you see it, you end up giving a license to unscrupulous people to fleece "Investors" into giving them money for perpetual motion machines, engines that are claimed to "run on water" and other flim-flammery.

This Space For Rent

Flim-flammery

by Cuddlemonster - Jun 17 2006 - 5:05am

"perpetual motion machines, engines that are claimed to "run on water" and other flim-flammery."

 Hahahahah, such are the derogatory terms of the engineer.   I concur, too much flim-flammery and hogwash.  Off with his head!  Laughing

 

Marg

I'm the cousin of this Geek called Steph...

~~ www.marula.ca ~~