bloodhound Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 whats this "LARGER" you pple are on about. I think you mean LAGER. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nave Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 i highly doubt that the scram jet will actually be used in a commerical flight use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 Why? If the technology becomes reliable enough it's a viable possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nave Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 well first off even if the technology was reliable then what is the speed going to have an impact on the passenger. i mean how many g's would that speed be? and like what Rasori mentioned "wouldn't you need to start the flight in Hawaii, accelerate until about LA, and then decelerate from NY on in order to actually keep the passengers in the realm of the living (slight exaggeration given, of course)?" thats the best point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 For an object going that fast, it would need a large deceleration time. Maybe if the flight went past it's target and was able to turn around in flight while decelerating. I don't know too much about this. Does that make any sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 They could have it accelerate for the first half and decelerate for the second half. It decreases the average speed but it's more manageable. Or, perhaps, have it accelerate a while, then, decelerate in the landing pattern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nave Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 Either way what effect would this have on the human body? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alt_f13 Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 Moving fast does nothing to you. It's the accelleration that hurts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 They could have it accelerate for the first half and decelerate for the second half. It decreases the average speed but it's more manageable.Or' date=' perhaps, have it accelerate a while, then, decelerate in the landing pattern.[/quote'] just to get some numbers 7000 mph is about 3000 meters per second so at one gee acceleration it would take 300 seconds to attain that speed that is 5 minutes I dont know what acceleration you imagine people will put up with but one gee is physically not all that bad (we endure it constantly and get used to it) and 5 minutes at the beginning of the trip doesnt seem too bad either during that 5 minute acceleration period you would go about 450 kilometers to me it doesnt seem likely that people would want to travel that fast on regular commercial flights---but what do I know?---some might like it as a onetime thrill---or even as a preferred way of travel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nave Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 Ok.. so it wouldnt have a huge factor on the body when ur accelerating or anything but I wonder what a air bump would feel like at 7,000mph? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 At the altitudes these things fly there is no turbulence. Or it's just that the plane is going so fast the bump hardly influences it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nave Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 What ever goes up must come down.... but w/e about the effects i still doubt that it will go into commerical use.. if it does i doubt it would in our life time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasori Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 I would agree with Nave for one main reason--as yet, we have not had a single successful supersonic commercial jet. The Concorde wasn't enough to keep itself in business, due to sound and fuel problems. I can, however, see people wanting scramjet speed quite soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nave Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 However unlike the concord this isnt going to have fuel problems... yet i still dont think that this gonna go into commercial flight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now