Flying Saucer as a real spacecraft design - pros & cons

Dilandu said:
Sorry, I was kinda unclear here. I meant, that lenticular form have advantages during re-entry of spacecraft into the atmosphere. Its flat bottom serves as geat shield during early phases of high-speed re-entry, and the disk shape produce lift when most velocity is bled away.
Click to expand...

Not really. How does it transition from one direction to the other ? And what is the crew orientation?
 
publiusr said:
But a real flying saucer need not be a rocket...perhaps a HAVOK/Powell airship From orbit/LOFTID combo.

Inflate like Echo, solar electric propulsion...slow into Venus atmosphere over time.

Then you can use that lifter/ion wind propulsion in atmosphere.
Click to expand...
Hasn't been proven possible
publiusr said:
For more hardy solid craft...I imagine a saucer might be better for a lithobraking slide-out than a tube that's just going to roll into rocks and dent itself all over as opposed to a saucer that only takes damage on its underbelly that can serve as crush space.

Now that wide saucer can double as a landing pad when flattened...or a big communication dish... something that opens up like a lady's compact.
Click to expand...
No, a saucer would dig in and flip.

And what is going to pound out the bottom and make it flat.

Too thick and heavy for a comm antenna, plus it was all beat up from landing
 
southwestforests said:
Reentry heating exists in and of itself as a standalone thing caused by the physical friction of an object moving at high velocity through atmospheric particles.
Click to expand...
No, it is not from the friction of the atmosphere but from the compression of the atmosphere from the shock wave.
 
Byeman said:
Not really. How does it transition from one direction to the other ? And what is the crew orientation?
Click to expand...
Erm... you re-entry belly-forward, as any space capsule do, then, when the velocity is low enough, you start to change the angle so your hull would provide more lift. Essentially how Shuttle done it; entering the atmosphere belly-forward, then gliding.
 
Dilandu said:
Erm... you re-entry belly-forward, as any space capsule do, then, when the velocity is low enough, you start to change the angle so your hull would provide more lift. Essentially how Shuttle done it; entering the atmosphere belly-forward, then gliding.
Click to expand...
The shuttle is not belly forward. It enters at a 40 degree AOA and has aerosurfaces to lower the AOA as it gets slower.

What is going to make the change in attitude for the saucer?
 
southwestforests said:
The term Non-sequitur comes to mind.
Reentry heating is totally independent of propulsion method, as evidenced by things which have no propulsion whatsoever suffering reentry, or entry, heating when entering Earth's atmosphere.
Reentry heating exists in and of itself as a standalone thing caused by the physical friction of an object moving at high velocity through atmospheric particles.
By what means you are moving through said atmosphere is irrelevant - the movement itself is the cause.

And yes you will care - your moving craft has to DO something with that heating.
And has to be built to take it to begin with.

Thanks to orbital mechanics, there is no way to get around heating during atmospheric entry.
You Will Heat.
Whether you want to or not.
Click to expand...
If your engines allow you to drop to minimal speed before touching the atmosphere, you don't get re-entry heat.



quellish said:
If you slow your vehicle to 1 m/s, you’re not going to be experiencing reentry heating. That was my point.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
Nicknick said:
how will you use vacuum for propulsion??? Even if there would be a black hole in a spacecraft which would suck in air from the front (or the back) side, it wouldn't create any propulsion. The black hole would need to fly in front of the spacecraft to create any lifting force, how will you achieve this? I know, there are some very theoretical ideas of flying with more than lightspeed with such ideas but to me this seems not to be a very practical idea...
Click to expand...
They are Schauberger's thoughts on making a vacuum in the front part of the plane using cold air and bringing the plane into that space with reduced air pressure. Schauberger got the idea from a trout fish. This drawing, as he thought, the aircraft should move through the air. Something similar to the Russian cavitation torpedo. 1704926991244.jpeg
 
kocovgoce said:
Something similar to the Russian cavitation torpedo.
Click to expand...
"Cavitation torpedoes" are not sucked through the water by a lower pressure region ahead of them. The effect is for drag reduction. Drag produced by high velocity in the water created by a friggen' powerful propulsion system at the ass end of the torpedo.
 
Orionblamblam said:
"Cavitation torpedoes" are not sucked through the water by a lower pressure region ahead of them. The effect is for drag reduction. Drag produced by high velocity in the water created by a friggen' powerful propulsion system at the ass end of the torpedo.
Click to expand...
I know how cavitation torpedoes work by releasing gas at the top of the torpedo in order to make less drag. Schauberg's torpedo was supposed to be in the front which on the front part makes less resistance, while the same turbine which is pulsed through horn-shaped spark tubes it will decompose into hydrogen and oxygen gas and these cavitation bubbles will be released on the surface of the torpedo in order to reduce the resistance of water
 

Attachments

  • 4c50bf636cbc52e1d59411765818e49f.jpg
    4c50bf636cbc52e1d59411765818e49f.jpg
    22.8 KB · Views: 21
this is a proposal from the 30s with the aim of reducing air resistance with the help of high voltage electrical energy on a conical aircraft also, a larger amount of air had to be drawn into the interior in order to have a higher pressure for lift, while for propulsion my opinion maybe they were been a rocket engine or a jet, although in the 30s these engines were the beginning of testing. The author of the sketch is unknown to me
 

Attachments

  • статиц1.jpg
    статиц1.jpg
    28.7 KB · Views: 14
kocovgoce said:
They are Schauberger's thoughts on making a vacuum in the front part of the plane using cold air and bringing the plane into that space with reduced air pressure. Schauberger got the idea from a trout fish. This drawing, as he thought, the aircraft should move through the air. Something similar to the Russian cavitation torpedo.View attachment 716707
Click to expand...
Oh, now I'm totally convinced, this must work! Did you allready built it? It looks rather simple...

Which trout fish did tell him the idea of the vacuum propulsion and shouldn't we appreciate this super clever trout fish more than Schauberger himself?
 
Nicknick said:
Oh, now I'm totally convinced, this must work! Did you allready built it? It looks rather simple...

Which trout fish did tell him the idea of the vacuum propulsion and shouldn't we appreciate this super clever trout fish more than Schauberger himself?
Click to expand...
I am just writing what they had read about his ideas about using fish in making one of his machines.
Тhe idea is to reduce the frontal drag by creating a vortex


This guy in the clips had done something based on Schauberger's research
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EUlJF9CBAU&list=PLjTjDeW8mrXd4dUSCS_xYMO6xSKUVOpQJ

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jPenxQp6Ps

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3IrO4d1-J8

and this one is something with the Tesla turbine that makes a vortex in close vessel
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5sjxWdVtBY
 

Attachments

  • fg_2.jpg
    fg_2.jpg
    488.2 KB · Views: 11

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom