Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About IsaacAsimov

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Favorite Area of Science

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. First of all, there is acceleration. Racing cars can accelerate very quickly, so they can reach takeoff speed in a short time and a short distance. Secondly, you could put 2 turbofans on the left and right rear of a racing car. Turbofans don't use a lot of fuel, and they don't hurt the environment very much. They can also rotate very quickly, providing a large amount of thrust. Third, there's only 1 person in the car (the driver), so not much force is needed to get airborne. Fourth, racing cars are very safe, and that's why they cost millions of dollars. You could reduce the cos
  2. If they could get a real lawnmower to fly, that would be something. It would already have a motor, a propeller on the bottom, and a gas tank. Racing cars aren't that heavy, either, so they can gain more speed. It's just a matter of building one that will fly, sort of like the fake lawn mower. Yes, but racing cars have superb acceleration, so the takeoff and landing strip (you would take off and land in the same direction) could be really short. I agree that vertical takeoff and landing would be better, but so far nobody has been able to do it. You take what you can get. Of cour
  3. That was hilarious! I've never seen a flying lawnmower before. Yes, it would be something like that, only it would be a full-size racing car. Cheers!!! With racing cars, you can get up to aircraft speed before taking off, making it easier to get airborne. Turbo fans can rotate very fast, so they also make it easier to take off, and they don't use as much fuel as jet engines, so they wouldn't harm the environment as much.
  4. Okay, maybe we shouldn't use jet engines. How about 2 electric powered rotating turbofans mounted on the left and right side of the back of the car? If 1 of the turbofans failed, a parachute near the back of the car would open and the car would float to the ground. You may ask: Don't racing cars cost millions of dollars? That's true because they have a lot of safety features. The cars could be mass-produced on assembly lines, driving down the price. In addition, we could put advertising all over the cars, just like the real racing cars, which would also reduce the price. Of course, the
  5. No, the car doesn't have to be submersible. However, this is one of the best ideas I've ever created. I think it could actually work. The purpose of the vehicle would be to transport people from place to place 1 at a time. It would be a modified racing car designed to fly. However, there might be a problem with the fan. The middle of the fan would touch the jet engine, so the central jet engine wouldn't fit. Instead, there would be 2 jet engines, 1 on each side of the back of the car, stabilizing it. If 1 of the engines failed, a parachute near the back of the vehicle would open, and th
  6. There would be a giant fan running from the front to the back of the racing car that would fold out like a hand fan in both directions (left and right) at the same time. It would probably look similar to the flying car in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. I know it sounds crazy, but it just might work! Since a racing car usually only holds 1 person (the driver), the car could probably lift the weight of that person into the air easily.
  7. I didn't think about turning or landing. How about having two wings underneath the car that spread out just before the jet propulsion goes into effect?
  8. Here's how to make racing cars fly: Put raised spoilers on the front and back of racing cars to create lift. The more speed the racing car has, the more lift it will have, and racing cars can go really fast. When the car starts flying, turn on jet propulsion on the back. The spoilers will continue to create lift, and the car will fly. There, you have it! Sincerely, Marlon Schmitt
  9. It can't hurt to read the manual. It will tell you which control will affect which surface of the vehicle, and will give you some insight as to how the machine works.
  10. Eise, I don't know what you mean by flight model simulator, especially the word model. Was it a full-scale model that you sit in, or a remote-controlled small helicopter about the size of a drone? I have a more realistic helicopter simulator for my Commodore 64 than Infiltrator. It's called Gunship Apache-64 Simulator, and has so many functions that you need a keyboard overlay to play it properly. Cheers!
  11. I've read in an article called How to Fly a Helicopter that it takes both hands and both feet to fly one of them. It shouldn't be that difficult. I have two computer games called Infiltrator 1 and Infiltrator 2 for the Commodore 64 (in the year 1986) that only requires 1 joystick with a fire button and a keyboard to fly an attack/defense helicopter. I'll describe how it works: First, use the keyboard to press B,S, and I for Battery, Systems and Ignition. Let the RPM indicator increase to 3240 RPM's. Pull back on the joystick to increase altitude to 2000 ft. Since your horizontal velocity is 0,
  12. Plan D has promise, because the deuterium atoms are travelling at such a high velocity (Mach 4) that they could get in close proximity to stationary deuterium atoms and cause fusion. Plan E: Muons are much heavier than electrons, so would pull the hydrogen atoms together as they orbited around them. However, muons decay rapidly, but travel at such a high velocity after leaving the cyclotron, that they experience time dilation, so they last much longer than stationary muons. We could try using other negatively charged particles, such as kaons and pions, in place of electrons. Plan F:
  13. I appreciate you responding, Sensei. Thank you for doing the calculations to a high degree of accuracy, even though it proves that deuterium collisions would produce less energy than is put in. Well, there's still Plans C - F. Sincerely, IsaacAsimov
  14. The Chinese have almost perfected hot fusion. I think we should take a look at cold fusion again. I have made some notes on the subject. Here they are: Plan A: Collide 2 deuterium nuclei. Deuterium (or hydrogen-2) is one of two stable isotopes of hydrogen (the other being protium, or hydrogen-1). The nucleus of a deuterium atom, called a deuteron, contains one proton and one neutron, whereas the far more common protium has no neutron in the nucleus. Deuterium has an abundance in Earth's oceans of about one atom in 6420 of hydrogen. My idea: collide 2 deuterium nuclei at high speeds in o
  15. I agree that doing two seems to be achievable, such as a car and a flying car, where all 4 wheels would be used for vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL), and then tilted forward for flight. The key to these vehicles would be the 4 wheels of the car, which would have blades to produce thrust. If they don't work in a flying car, use jet engines. For three (a boat), the car's wheels would be tilted at an angle and its blades would be partially submerged to give it forward thrust. For four (a submarine), the wheels would be vertical, but at right angles to the direction of travel, so that the car c
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.