|
Tetraptous posted:
Most pictures really don't do the Mi-26 justice. Here's a better illustration of just how huge it really is - that little thing underneath that it's carrying is a loving Chinook. 
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2010 17:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 02:20 |
|
|
What about a Viking engine? http://www.vikingaircraftengines.com/ Honda-based, 110hp, a little lighter than the Corvair, and $13,500 which is about as cheap as you're gonna get for a brand new aircraft engine. The Corvair is only cheaper if you rebuild the whole thing yourself (the turnkey motors start at $9-10k last I heard). Mind if I ask what plane you're building to stick this thing in?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2012 01:48
|
|
|
Wow, it's like a BD-4 hosed a Bonanza... and their kid had dwarfism 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2012 07:25
|
|
|
Ola posted:By the way, another alternative engine which is fun. Not a conversion, but an original design. How's a three cylinder, dual charged, water cooled, two stroke diesel for alternative?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2012 17:31
|
|
|
kmcormick9 posted:because you dont want planes autonomously descending thousands of feet in congested airspace? I know at least one bizjet's auto-descend feature (which only works with autopilot and autothrottle on) does a 90-degree turn then descends, the idea being that the biggest collision risk is something flying along the same path at a different flight level.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2012 19:33
|
|
|
MrChips posted:Airlines don't really care for the Q400, as the super speed comes with super fuel bills.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2012 20:20
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:Hah, there was a recent post on Tumblr about a passenger being removed from an airline flight for making sexist comments about the pilot. This was the picture they used: 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2012 18:07
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:What, did they find a cache of spare parts somewhere? Or is 3-D printing going to insane new levels?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2012 23:51
|
|
|
Chiwie posted:Piper tried that. Well, there's the solution to the Super Tucano vs AT-6 standoff. Just bring this puppy back with a 2-seat cockpit and modern avionics, and a formal proposal consisting of two words: "MUSTANGS, BITCH."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2012 17:31
|
|
|
Ugh, why would anyone think it's a CIA plane? That's what shell corporations are for!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2012 00:54
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:There was a unmarked C-130 at a certain airbase that was whitewashed, had multiple NVIS cameras on the outside and multiple satellite antennas. We were told that if our aircraft or theirs bumped into ours, we were to ignore it and claim it was weather damaged Really, at this point it doesn't even matter what line item the money came from or who "owns" it. Beerios fucked around with this message at 03:48 on Jul 22, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2012 03:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 02:20 |
|
|
Phanatic posted:But detonation is inherently less efficient than combustion. Heat of combustion of TNT, pinch a piece of the stuff off and burn it, you get about 15kJ/gram of thermal energy. If you take that same piece of TNT and detonate it in an unconfined fashion, you only get 2.5 kJ/gram out of it. Heat of detonation is *lousy* compared to heat of combustion, the only reason you want poo poo to detonate instead of deflagrate is because you want high pressures more than you want thermal efficiency. So how can a PDE even begin to offer greater efficiency than a conventional Brayton-cycle turbine? With TNT, you're comparing apples to oranges, since in the first case it's reacting with oxygen and in the second it's just decomposing without any other substances involved. A fuel/air mixture, on the other hand, has the same potential chemical energy whether it detonates or deflagrates, the difference being in how combustion propogates through the mixture.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2012 19:25
|
|