/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12705155

2MiB, 1600x1066, imagem_2021-02-14_155638.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Big flying

Anonymous Sun 14 Feb 15:56:52 2021 No.12705155 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>12705182 >>12705200 >>12705337 >>12706868

Is there a limit on how large we can make a flying machine? Like, do you think those 1 Km long dreadnaughts we see on Sci-Fi will ever be possible?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Feb 2021 16:04:13 No.12705182 Report

Quoted By:

>>12705155
>Is there a limit on how large we can make a flying machine?
No, as long as the perpendicular force pushing away the object relative to the surface of the planet is stronger than the gravitational force attracting the object to the earth.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Feb 2021 16:11:46 No.12705200 Report

Quoted By: >>12705205 >>12705297

>>12705155
Nuclear aeroplan aircraft carrier when?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Feb 2021 16:14:32 No.12705205 Report

Quoted By: >>12705297

>>12705200
Wonder if it would ever actually be possible

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Feb 2021 16:52:33 No.12705297 Report

Quoted By:

>>12705200
>>12705205
I think the Russians are developing a nuclear power missile. The thing blew up some time ago.
The Americans gave it up years ago.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Feb 2021 17:06:17 No.12705337 Report

Quoted By: >>12705375

>>12705155
Yes because at a certain point materials science becomes a bottleneck.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Feb 2021 17:21:16 No.12705375 Report

Quoted By:

>>12705337
This

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 64yp7f0byet41.jpg, 62KiB, 828x813

Anonymous Mon 15 Feb 2021 01:58:47 No.12706868 Report

Quoted By: >>12708122

>>12705155
Aero fag here. The problem is going to be the moment induced at the wing attachment. As your span increases (which it would have to) your center of lift will keep being farther from the attachment point to the plane, increasing both the force and the moment.

Also, lift is a function of wing area, where as the weight is a function of wing volume. Aka square cube law is going against us here.

Also accelerating these huge beasts would require an extremely long runway for takeoff and landing, as well as super beefy landing gear, all which add weight.

Theoretically we could make something much larger than the an-225 but there would be no purpose. It would need it's own engines, it's own special runways etc and for what.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Feb 2021 01:59:04 No.12706869 Report

Quoted By: >>12706950 >>12708046

Dude aren't planes more of a /transportation/ topic why are there 3 plane threads on math&science

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Feb 2021 02:30:40 No.12706950 Report

Quoted By:

>>12706869
engineerchads run /sci/, math nerd

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Feb 2021 11:06:08 No.12708046 Report

Quoted By:

>>12706869
cause this is an engineering related question

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Feb 2021 11:48:51 No.12708122 Report

Quoted By:

>>12706868
everything you say is true but
it has been 118 years since the last breakthrough
it is about time someone came up with something new

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO KjqDPbV.png, 1MiB, 2048x2048

Anonymous Mon 15 Feb 2021 12:16:05 No.12708162 Report

Quoted By:

>you'll never captain an nuclear-powered aircraft carrier plane
Why even live

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches