Message:

Remove ads from this guestbook - starting at just EUR2,50
2:56am 05-18-2014
Here drawings like two wings facing each other bellies they give huge wind acceleration and negative pressure which we introduce inside the wings. If the wings will be mounted permanently, with sufficient clearance between them, and may be greater plenty of slots, a big part of the lift force will turn on underpressure which will be inside the wings could create a fairly low pressure and large its quantitative yield .. If so it will already know how to use a vacuum with a good efficiency, for example by the vane pump is running, vacuum-as a motor ... the motor can drive the generators or.... propeller ...

2:41am 05-18-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bocolo View Post
But the wings will be damaged when they start banging each other. Right? /

No Bocolo, this film is just a demonstration, designed to show that between wings have been observed even small wind evolves very large force, which causes a vacuum. . It falls, but sparkled with momentum hits for himself .. because a large force was driven to such behavior. Of course, between the wings should give solid struts, which will determine the distance between them, chosen in the laboratory and Unclassifiable biggest Underpressure .. Then the vacuum should enter into the slit inside the wings of NACA FELIKS and further from the center of the wings for the help of some pipes, where we will be the most comfortable .. Of course at the end of the pipes have to give some engines vacuum, for example, a simple turbine, or a vane pump working as a motor ....
2:40am 05-18-2014
Well think again about the Red Baron. something on you tube not much you can see these vibrations..

The effect of two teaspoons on the wings of aviation profile facing each other stomachs. Wind from an ordinary hair dryer ... you can hear the clatter of high-frequency wing strokes of each other. That is, the vacuum, despite the very light wind is enormous. Disappears, as the wings come closer and then again .. Hence arises the clatter.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10203982831115507&l=2864657966928125097

Andrew
11:53am 05-13-2014
Quote Originally Posted by Power5 View Post
Wow I am unsubscribing now. I have absolutely no idea what you were trying to say in the last post. Maximum takeoff weight of a 747 is indeed over 900,000 lbs meaning the maximum weight needed to FLOAT, if it crashes into one of your easy to find body of waters, is 900,000 lbs. You keep mentioning empty weight and calling yourself an engineer. You need to work from worst case scenario for engineering not best case.

via my Note 3
So the maximum takeoff weight is 900 ... 000 pounds .. but this is 400 000 pouds fuel which can take with each other on the flight .. And now if you want to land at the airport, the weights can not exceed the Maximum landing weight . if exceeds the value of the fuel to be released before landing .. I assume that the landing on the water also should land the aircraft without fuel . So the buoyancy should you protect 555,000 pounds to the weight . Now empty the tanks operate this same preferred to buoyancy . So we have to subtract the weight of the displacement of these tanks or 350 000 pounds of buoyancy . Now 555 000 pounds minus the 350 000 gives us 205 000 pounds. Also with this burden should be removed buoyancy metal aircraft, which is made from aluminiu m , or 7,000 pounds. M ^ 3 . Now quantity is 205 000 divided by 7000 gives us ~ 30 m ^ 3 buoyancy will give us aluminum. That is 60 000 pounds , we can subtract . Sumary is 205000 minus 60 000 = 145 000 pounds to buoyancy , or 70 meters cubic of foam .. and 747 after draining the fuel floats 100% Together with the luggage and peoples..

LD1 and luggage container is almost ~~ 5 m ^ 3 or 14 containers of foam sufficient to provide buoyancy once already built 747. Everybody takes a plane 32 such containers LD1. .

http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/com...f/747_perf.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LD3
11:48am 05-13-2014
Those who stand in the wings afraid of the plane can sink .. If they knew that the plane does not sink .. they would have been in the middle of the aircraft. and so much stress would not survive ..

aaaaa

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747

Yes and empty fuel tanks, will have a displacement of 400 000 pouds, that you only need to protect the 200 000 pouds buoyancy to swim and then the plane at 100% will not sink
11:44am 05-13-2014
Quote Originally Posted by Power5 View Post
I have tried to read all your posts as if written by a person nearly black out drunk but I ha e no idea what you are trying to say in the last 2. I like how all your "wasted space" pictures show spaces nearly completely filled. Again a 747 is 900,000 pounds. That is a lot of foam needed to float. Please use float instead of swim. Planes don't swim. Neither do boats. There are numerous translate sites. Find one or at least find a new one.

via my Note 3/Quote

I I see the data stating the weight of the aircraft, give false information .. apparently you want to convince me that this plane but can not swim. Do not know what you have in this business, or humiliation to me as an engineer, whether people like to be melted and aircraft in oceans die .. Because only the two causes of your weight falsification of view ... And I, however, fortresses that can .. There is such a parameter, which they report is not even in this article in wikipedia The maximum weight of the aircraft for landing .. So how has too much fuel, it must drain .. 747 is 400, 000 pounds of fuel .. ie much less can have while charging their weight, whether it will land at the airport, or on the ocean. The best example is the "miracle on the Hudson", from the aircraft even without the foam can swim .. As if he got some more foam, then you certainly will not sink. And this can be packed in this portable luggage space .. Here a picture of this that can ..
11:42am 05-13-2014
Well, unfortunately, it is impossible to quickly enter such changes to this foam to fill the empty spaces of the aircraft. You have to do the best aircraft production. But for existing aircraft, you can enter such a recommendation to aircraft flying over the sea, could "complement your luggage hatch, depending on its use, such LD3 containers filled with polystyrene foam, which like the 787 and puts the 20 to free space Baggage, presumably, property owned by swimming in the water. this is the case only the relevant rules and then we have security at increased significantly

aaaaa
11:37am 05-13-2014
Quote Originally Posted by Power5 View Post
Wool did not start that fire. Electrical probably did. Wool is non toxic when it burns. So even though that plane was on fire the wool did not add to the seriousness of the situation. As for picking water to land on that is not the softest landing either. At speed water is as hard as concrete. Pilot should aim for rice patties since they are very soft and provide the best crash landing scenarios. I mean finding one on all routes should be as easy as your aiming for water theory.

via my Note 3 / quote

Well, yes, indeed, this "non-flammable wate" overlaps made ​​of plastic covers, window holes, Luggage carriers and blades for ventilation and lighting of the seats. It is all made ​​of plastic. Now the same plastic should lather suitable gas and do it with foam. So there will be a difference or will burn 10 kg of plastic, or 11 kg ..

11:31am 05-13-2014
View Post
How fire retardant is your magic foam? Wool is one of the least combustible materials and even prevents the fire spread by charring. And is non toxic when I burns. I really doubt your foam can say the same. /Quote

Sorry to have to give this picture, want you saw this also with your wool also on fire .. and it is good, as you can see in the picture.Because the plane is burning mostly always highly flammable fuel ... And how on fire inside the plane, unfortunately, are small WARRANTIES survival for passengers of different reasons .. So with my "magic foam" which would be specially made ​​for the purpose, with technologies of the 21st century certainly not deteriorated to the flammability plane ...Because the plane is burning mostly always highly flammable fuel ... And how on fire inside the plane, unfortunately, are small WARRANTIES survival for passengers of different reasons .. So with my "magic foam" which would be specially made ​​for the purpose, with technologies of the 21st century certainly not deteriorated to the flammability plane ... However, each pilot if he was sure that his plane did not sink, for each emergency landing chose to water .. And either sea or river, or lake .. Because he has almost 100% guarantee that it will not set the fire. using this method of emergency landing.Why still used wool? . No because, at the time of the Second World War, it was the best material for insulation and soundproofing aircraft .. And so it all got used to it. But we have now twenty-first century and outstanding technologies that should wake up, because in terms of our lives. So I Catch the phone and call us to Wicht, so they awakened and provided even much greater safety in emergency situations ...

11:26am 05-13-2014
Also in the hull filling soundproofing could have been a foam instead of wool.
Wool absorbs water very quickly ..Surely you would need to develop now and again a special material, teeth had been closed and not soaked with water. and was close to the damping properties of wool. It is a big challenge, but with the quantity of aircraft produced, certainly to perform .. It's just to follow in this direction







Andrew
11:25am 05-13-2014
All of these flaps, ailerons and rudders are completely empty inside .. You have to be flame-retardant foam fill special for these air targets, and made in the form of fittings.
Clearly, the wings are half the space




11:23am 05-13-2014
So they go on the road foam, administer (at least for ships) foam glass, which is maybe a little heavier than styrofoam, but it resists 600 degrees Celsius temperature ..

to get the buoyancy as the ferry Sewol, it would have to be about 800 tonnes of such glass foam .. the same as the volume of polystyrene...
aaaaa

bbbbb

ccccc

Video
9:47am 04-27-2014
Dieselduck

[quote="Big Pete"]There s also the issue of internal inspection of the tanks. All the regulatory authorities require internal visual inspections of the tanks and pressure testing through the life of the ship, and Ultra Sonic thickness testing of the steel plates, how can you do any of these things if the tank has been pumped full of foam?

If the Hull is damaged and a section of damaged steel has to be cut out and new steel welded in, what happens to the foam?

Lots of practical difficulties.

BP[/quote]

It is a pity that very carelessly read my posts and you watch my pictures .. clearly wrote that it does not have to be foam, but moldings, such as in this link

Also on section plane clearly can see that but there is a lot of free The places, and not how you think you .. Here is another one photo of the crash TU 154
I think that you should carefully read my poste, and certainly you will become a proponent of my solutions, and we will not have to cry after drowning our children in the future

9:44am 04-27-2014
All of these egg-shaped holes, a transition service .. next unused spaces .. There are rules that from a certain size vessels must have a double side and bottom. Fill the space with Styrofoam prevent sinking ....



By education , I am Eng. mechanic. But I dealt with making the sound at concerts my apparatus .. It so happened that a few times , even ten times , I made a concert in Gdansk Shipyard Hall (which is then burned )
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Po%C5%BCar_w_hali_Stoczni_Gda%C5%84skiej .
We have always had a pass to the shipyard , because the entrance to the hall was the scene from the side yard. I as the driver of the car, after a few hours of driving , I've always had a break , and my employees were unloading acoustic equipment and lined it . I have two hours of free time , and this pass, always walked across the yard and spied on how the technology of shipbuilding . Often talked with employees who explained to me the various ins and outs of building ships . Then I met shipbuilding quite accurately , because she was always very interested mechanics ... Then I came to realize concert .. With these trips , I know how much free space is on a big ship . Here I present figure of the ferry , which sink .. Knowing its importance , which is 6800 tons , and subtracting approximately 1,500 tons , steel, wood , fuel , and such a variety can displace water , leaves us to displace the water about 5300 tons. , And then ship will not drown .. an average of 5300 tonnes divided by the length of the vessel is 146 meters = one meter will fall an average of 36 tons. so much water should displace to get afloat .. Now the height of each side of the free spaces submerged to 2 x 10 meters. .. For the average 15 meters wide double bottom .. together gives us 35 running meters , part of the flotation technique around the ship ( floating section ) .. So enough that the average thickness of 1 m polystyrene foam , applied to each inner metal shell of the ship , provided the to always buoyancy of the ship .... only 1 meter thick ..



When it comes to airplanes, it also thoroughly know their structures .. In carrying about 1,000 concerts in the former Soviet Union, every change of concerts, took place only airplanes * Once was a car, but I said 'never again' J. I had to upilnowania 40 boxes with equipment weighing about 3 tons .. Always, as soon as possible, guarding the proper loading and unloading, personally entered the baggage compartments, aircraft, whom the trip was .. And these were the aircraft from AN2 to Il 82 all types which were in the Soviet Union .. So exactly what I learned there are opportunities. And I know that a lot of them too .. Especially as it applies molded styrofoam possible to remove, to do the service ..
https://www.google.com/search?q=Styrofoam+packaging&newwindow=1&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=IwRRU_qPA8eK7AaQ_YCAAQ&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=778&bih=436
11:09pm 03-31-2014
Quote
Andrew,

I subscribe to this thread and have always enjoyed your posts, so keep them going.

Regarding the use of foam to prevent aircraft from sinking when lost at sea, I don’t have the statistics, but anecdotally, I assume that most deaths are not due to drowning, but due to impact, or other high energy violent endings. I believe the scenarios you are discussing likely have adequate solutions in place (life rafts, etc.).

I think an excellent area for the use of that type of foam would be in help reduce the death toll for passenger and roll on/off ferry accidents. These seem to happen in rough seas, or in overcrowding conditions with sometimes large loss of life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_maritime_disasters

Richard

Thank you very much Richard for a good link and my subscriptions. I Normally you need only the broad outlines of the new ideas I present .. they require much development, by many people .. then they really for us is profitable ..
Such inspirational posts like yours, Richard causes that describes more about the innovation ..

Here I would like to say that the majority of pilots for emergency landing was going to make sure you water, if she was sure that the plane did not sink .. The waters, even on land is not much, for example, a lake or river. This launch is a big advantage. There is minimal risk of fire aircraft .. The most spectacular example is the "Miracle on the Hudson"
Here you can see how little is needed to plane could swim ..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549

CNN

Andrew
Messages: 31 until 45 of 368.
Number of pages: 25
Newer1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7Older