Moler's Skycar Successfully Transitions From Vertical to HorizontalFlight

On 3 Apr 2005 18:49:25 -0700, "Harry K"
wrote:


Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired wrote:
Well, to be technical about it was a picture I cut out of a magazine
and
folded into a paper airplane. It flew rather nicelly.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Levity aside, I am certain that the Moller air car -can- achieve
horizontal flight. At least for a short distance off a carriers
catapult.

From what I have seen, Theoretically it should with proper power and
controls be able to fly, BUT the practicality of 4 ducted fans,
reliability and power balancing makes the Osprey tilt rotor look safe
to me.

To provide an operable car should not be beyond reach, but to make
them safe and controllable would probably put them in the price class
of a TBM-700.

I have heard several engineers say they could fix most any thing...
given enough money, but then again one of the engineers working on the
land speed record made the statement (quite a few years ago), Given
enough HP they could even blast the Queen Mary through the sound
barrier.

I guess I'd rate the practicality of both pretty much in the same
region.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Harry K

In article ,
Roger wrote:

[[.. munch ..]]

I have heard several engineers say they could fix most any thing...
given enough money, but then again one of the engineers working on the
land speed record made the statement (quite a few years ago), Given
enough HP they could even blast the Queen Mary through the sound
barrier.

Google for "orion spacecraft". Getting the Queen Mary to Mach 1 is a
_trivial_ job for that kind of propulsion system. grin

Robert Bonomi wrote:

Google for "orion spacecraft". Getting the Queen Mary to Mach 1 is a
_trivial_ job for that kind of propulsion system. grin


The orion was like shooting a bullet shaped 10 story building into
space. It's a shame the project was scrapped. The fallout from it
would have been less than from the 3rd world countries doing nuke tests.

I taped the show on the Orion from the History channel and I'm over due
to watch it again...

Tony

Anthony W wrote:

Robert Bonomi wrote:

Google for "orion spacsatellite Getting the Queen Mary to Mach 1 is a
_trivial_ job for that kind of propulsion system. grin


The orion was like shooting a bullet shaped 10 story building into
space. It's a shame the project was scrapped. The fallout from it
would have been less than from the 3rd world countries doing nuke tests.

I taped the show on the Orion from the History channel and I'm over due
to watch it again...

Tony

Well reading one article it notes that the fallout was way underestimated
because they figured to use nuclear fusion vice fission so would have
significantly less fallout unfortunately the required fission triggers
would mostly make up for any savings in fallout, the net affect is a very
dirty launch.
The biggest problem from what I read is EMP which would take out any
satellite within about 1000 miles which wasn't a big deal in early 70's
when there wasn't any satellites but these day's would take out hundreds of
satellites cost billions and billions plus ****ing off more than a few
countries g!
John

UltraJohn wrote:
Anthony W wrote:


Robert Bonomi wrote:


Google for "orion spacsatellite Getting the Queen Mary to Mach 1 is a
_trivial_ job for that kind of propulsion system. grin

The orion was like shooting a bullet shaped 10 story building into
space. It's a shame the project was scrapped. The fallout from it
would have been less than from the 3rd world countries doing nuke tests.

I taped the show on the Orion from the History channel and I'm over due
to watch it again...

Tony


Well reading one article it notes that the fallout was way underestimated
because they figured to use nuclear fusion vice fission so would have
significantly less fallout unfortunately the required fission triggers
would mostly make up for any savings in fallout, the net affect is a very
dirty launch.
The biggest problem from what I read is EMP which would take out any
satellite within about 1000 miles which wasn't a big deal in early 70's
when there wasn't any satellites but these day's would take out hundreds of
satellites cost billions and billions plus ****ing off more than a few
countries g!
John

As I recall they had a target launch date in the early 1960s and
ecpected to reach the outter edge of the solar system by 1970. EMP
wouldn't have been a problem in 1963... Doubt there will be anything
remotely like like the Orion in my life time.

Tony

Haaa-haaa.... got me, got me goood!

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired wrote:
Well, to be technical about it was a picture I cut out of a magazine
and
folded into a paper airplane. It flew rather nicelly.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


I found the graph below interesting:
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/char...=2-6-9-0-0-512

I'm not sure if it's their stock price or the altitude graph during 'hover
tests', measured in Inch..

Rob

Rob Turk wrote:

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired wrote:

Well, to be technical about it was a picture I cut out of a magazine

and

folded into a paper airplane. It flew rather nicelly.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


I found the graph below interesting:
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/char...=2-6-9-0-0-512

I'm not sure if it's their stock price or the altitude graph during 'hover
tests', measured in Inch..

Rob


The scary part is people are still investing in this toy. Personally I'd
laugh my butt off if some whiz kid could develop a workable sytem before
Moller does.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired