A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Soaring on Mars



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 26th 03, 08:41 PM
C.Fleming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Correction:

Before any of you nit-pick over one word, change "airspeed" to simply
"speed."

The revised text should read:

Your assumption is that the air density is adequate to provide sufficient
lift -- which it's not. The speed which would be required to produce
enough lift would be extremely fast -- well over the speed of sound (many
times over) -- which would rip a conventional glider apart.

The air density on Mars is only 1% of Earth's (1) -- at the Martian
equivalent of MSL. Just like on Earth, air density rapidly decreases with
altitude, so the air density just a few thousand feet above the Martian
surface may only be 1/10th of 1% of Earth's (I don't know the exact number,
I'm not a rocket scientist for JPL). So, as I said: you might as well be
trying to soar on the moon.

-Chris

(1)
"Bill Daniels" wrote in message
Air is about 1% as dense as on Earth





  #2  
Old August 26th 03, 11:45 PM
Mike Borgelt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 15:41:42 -0400, "C.Fleming"
wrote:

Correction:

Before any of you nit-pick over one word, change "airspeed" to simply
"speed."

The revised text should read:

Your assumption is that the air density is adequate to provide sufficient
lift -- which it's not. The speed which would be required to produce
enough lift would be extremely fast -- well over the speed of sound (many
times over) -- which would rip a conventional glider apart.

The air density on Mars is only 1% of Earth's (1) -- at the Martian
equivalent of MSL. Just like on Earth, air density rapidly decreases with
altitude, so the air density just a few thousand feet above the Martian
surface may only be 1/10th of 1% of Earth's (I don't know the exact number,
I'm not a rocket scientist for JPL). So, as I said: you might as well be
trying to soar on the moon.

-Chris

Not just like on Earth. The lower gravity means the density doesn't
drop off as quickly with altitude as on Earth.

The glider wouldn't be ripped apart by flying at high TAS(q is still
low) unless there was a flutter problem which could be induced by the
shockwaves you are going to get by flying at some large fraction of
the local speed of sound or supersonically unless your aircraft design
takes care of this, which can be done.

The folks at NASA are doing studies on Mars airplanes. It isn't that
easy but obviously someone thinks it is doable.
1% density means the TAS/IAS ratio is 10.

Mike Borgelt
  #3  
Old August 27th 03, 12:05 AM
C.Fleming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mike Borgelt" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 15:41:42 -0400, "C.Fleming"
wrote:

Not just like on Earth. The lower gravity means the density doesn't
drop off as quickly with altitude as on Earth.


Air density decreases with altitude. Both here and on Mars. The already
thin air on Mars at the surface is even thinner aloft. That's my point.


The glider wouldn't be ripped apart by flying at high TAS(q is still
low) unless there was a flutter problem which could be induced by the
shockwaves you are going to get by flying at some large fraction of
the local speed of sound or supersonically unless your aircraft design
takes care of this, which can be done.


That's what I said. Flying supersonically would rip the glider apart.


The folks at NASA are doing studies on Mars airplanes. It isn't that
easy but obviously someone thinks it is doable.


That's why I clearly said 'conventional glider.'

1% density means the TAS/IAS ratio is 10.

Mike Borgelt




  #4  
Old August 28th 03, 01:36 PM
root
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mike Borgelt wrote:
...
The folks at NASA are doing studies on Mars airplanes. It isn't that
easy but obviously someone thinks it is doable.
1% density means the TAS/IAS ratio is 10.
...


And also that the same glider on Mars has to fly 10 times faster in
order to obtain the same lift, balancing the same weight. But due to
the lower gravity on Mars, its weight would be lower, so the normal
(best L/D) speed on Mars would be less than 10 times this speed on the
earth. This speed can further be reduced by reducing the wing loading,
which provides some benefits on the earth that are no more valuable on
Mars, like speed, which is rather to high, and penetration, which makes
little sense. So it is not unbelievable that soaring may happen on Mars
at speeds between mach 0.5 and 0.7.
  #5  
Old August 28th 03, 05:08 PM
C.Fleming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"root" wrote in message
...

And also that the same glider on Mars has to fly 10 times faster in
order to obtain the same lift, balancing the same weight. But due to
the lower gravity on Mars, its weight would be lower, so the normal
(best L/D) speed on Mars would be less than 10 times this speed on the
earth. This speed can further be reduced by reducing the wing loading,
which provides some benefits on the earth that are no more valuable on
Mars, like speed, which is rather to high, and penetration, which makes
little sense. So it is not unbelievable that soaring may happen on Mars
at speeds between mach 0.5 and 0.7.


Most of that sounds ok -- except your guess at mach speeds. Where do you
come up with 0.5 to 0.7 mach? Remember that as air density decreases, so
does the indicated airspeed at which we reach 1.0 mach. From memory (of
many hours staring at airspeed/mach indicators), on Earth: 340 knots ias =
0.8 mach at approx. 28,000 ft., while at 39,000 ft., the ias drops to 260
knots while maintaining 0.8 mach. On Mars, with an air density of less than
1% of Earth's, it appears clear to me that because mach 1.0 will be reached
at a very low indicated airspeed, a conventional glider (the original post
referenced a PW-5) wouldn't have a chance.

On a lighter note: what a view of Mars! I live in Manhattan, and even with
a clear sky, we rarely can see more than the moon. But Mars is there for
anyone who chooses to look up! While crossing the North Atlantic, Mars is
so bright, you almost need to wear sunglasses as it comes over the eastern
horizon! Some flight attendants refused to believe me that it was Mars,
they thought it was another airplane!

-Chris


  #6  
Old August 28th 03, 06:05 PM
Robert Ehrlich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"C.Fleming" wrote:

"root" wrote in message
...

And also that the same glider on Mars has to fly 10 times faster in
order to obtain the same lift, balancing the same weight. But due to
the lower gravity on Mars, its weight would be lower, so the normal
(best L/D) speed on Mars would be less than 10 times this speed on the
earth. This speed can further be reduced by reducing the wing loading,
which provides some benefits on the earth that are no more valuable on
Mars, like speed, which is rather to high, and penetration, which makes
little sense. So it is not unbelievable that soaring may happen on Mars
at speeds between mach 0.5 and 0.7.


Most of that sounds ok -- except your guess at mach speeds. Where do you
come up with 0.5 to 0.7 mach? Remember that as air density decreases, so
does the indicated airspeed at which we reach 1.0 mach. From memory (of
many hours staring at airspeed/mach indicators), on Earth: 340 knots ias =
0.8 mach at approx. 28,000 ft., while at 39,000 ft., the ias drops to 260
knots while maintaining 0.8 mach. On Mars, with an air density of less than
1% of Earth's, it appears clear to me that because mach 1.0 will be reached
at a very low indicated airspeed, a conventional glider (the original post
referenced a PW-5) wouldn't have a chance.


Sorry, your calculations with weird units don't have an obvious meaning to
my metric educated mind. I never thought of indicated airspeed, only tried to
evaluate the ratio of true airspeeds on Mars and the earth to ensure similar
(e.g. best L/D) flight conditions. My idea was that the speed of sound, while
affected by the change in conditions, should not be affected by a very important
factor. The factors involved are absolute temperature, molecular weight of the
gas(es) and gamma (Cp/Cv). Gamma depends only on the atomicity. While I don't
know exactly what are the components of the martian atmosphere, I guess it is
not methane or CO2, but rather diatomic gases with molecular weigth near O2 and
N2 as found on the earth. As all this is under a square root, changes must be
huge to become significative, same thing for temperature. Halving the temperature
on earth only decreases the speed of sound by a factor 0.7, and this is pretty
cold.

So 10 times the gliding speed on the earth is about the speed of sound on the earth,
if the reduction of gravity and wing loading gives a factor that overrides
the change in the speed of sound, subsonic soaring may be possible on Mars.
  #7  
Old August 28th 03, 07:40 PM
C.Fleming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mach, Knots Indicated Airspeed (kias), and Feet: weird aeronautical units?
Last I checked, those were standard on both sides of the ocean, unless
you're in Russia.

Indicated airspeed and mach ratios are the two most important factors to
consider! The glider needs to reach a specific Indicated Airspeed in order
to produce adequate lift, which in the extremely thin Martian air would be
an extremely fast True Airspeed. The minimum Indicated Airspeed needed is
open for debate, but it certainly is significantly faster than 40 kias, due
to slow-speed-buffet limits in the extremely thin air. We are also limited
by the Mach Ratio, which for a conventional high-aspect ratio glider is
quite low, nowhere close to 0.85 Mach-limited swept-wing subsonic jets. So,
without asking a Boeing-McDonnell-Douglas Engineer to help me with the math,
I think it's pretty safe to say that the minimum speed required of our PW-5
would be significantly faster than the maximum allowable speed; Hence, our
glider no worky-worky.

-Chris




"Robert Ehrlich" wrote in message
...

Sorry, your calculations with weird units don't have an obvious meaning to
my metric educated mind. I never thought of indicated airspeed, only tried

to
evaluate the ratio of true airspeeds on Mars and the earth to ensure

similar
(e.g. best L/D) flight conditions. My idea was that the speed of sound,

while
affected by the change in conditions, should not be affected by a very

important
factor. The factors involved are absolute temperature, molecular weight of

the
gas(es) and gamma (Cp/Cv). Gamma depends only on the atomicity. While I

don't
know exactly what are the components of the martian atmosphere, I guess it

is
not methane or CO2, but rather diatomic gases with molecular weigth near

O2 and
N2 as found on the earth. As all this is under a square root, changes must

be
huge to become significative, same thing for temperature. Halving the

temperature
on earth only decreases the speed of sound by a factor 0.7, and this is

pretty
cold.

So 10 times the gliding speed on the earth is about the speed of sound on

the earth,
if the reduction of gravity and wing loading gives a factor that overrides
the change in the speed of sound, subsonic soaring may be possible on

Mars.


  #8  
Old August 28th 03, 11:59 PM
Mike Borgelt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 17:05:10 +0000, Robert Ehrlich
wrote:

. My idea was that the speed of sound, while
affected by the change in conditions, should not be affected by a very important
factor. The factors involved are absolute temperature, molecular weight of the
gas(es) and gamma (Cp/Cv). Gamma depends only on the atomicity. While I don't
know exactly what are the components of the martian atmosphere, I guess it is
not methane or CO2, but rather diatomic gases with molecular weigth near O2 and
N2 as found on the earth. As all this is under a square root, changes must be
huge to become significative, same thing for temperature. Halving the temperature
on earth only decreases the speed of sound by a factor 0.7, and this is pretty
cold.

So 10 times the gliding speed on the earth is about the speed of sound on the earth,
if the reduction of gravity and wing loading gives a factor that overrides
the change in the speed of sound, subsonic soaring may be possible on Mars.



The Martian atmosphere is mostly CO2. Anyone have a number for the
speed of sound in CO2 at say 220 degrees K ? Then we can do the real
numbers.

Mike Borgelt
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Soaring Society of America National Convention, Feb 10-12 Ontario,CA Jim Skydell Home Built 1 January 31st 05 04:33 AM
Martin Mars wreckage found John Szalay Naval Aviation 12 December 16th 04 11:40 PM
Advanced Soaring Seminar - Eastern PA B Lacovara Home Built 0 February 9th 04 01:55 AM
Advanced Soaring Seminar - Eastern PA B Lacovara Piloting 0 February 9th 04 01:54 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.