|
fonephat (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
@OlDoinyo Look up 71000 on youtube ,they claim it's 87% eff.
redreaper2020 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
@ObiTrev LOL!! I knew they had wooden biplanes for night fighting, but...WOW...the mental images that conjures up...
ObiTrev (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
@redreaper2020 The Russians tried to make a stealth aircraft, it was made of translucent sheets. This was before WWII of course. The only problem was that a man holding onto an aircraft engine up in the sky was more noticeable than a regular opaque aeroplane at that time.
redreaper2020 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
no sound? Hm. I'm sorry, a no-sound turbine would be pretty stealthy.I still think COGAS could work for airliners. Turbine with 3x the efficiency. :D
OlDoinyo (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
@gabrialswings Reciprocating steam engines are typically only 7-10% efficient. That's why they aren't around any more. I doubt the plane pictured had any real cruising range.
KJLesnick (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Nathan C. Price went too far with the Lockheed L-1000/XJ37 turbojet. The complexity was out of this world.
freeman8128 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Chuff, Chuff - I love it - & the background music, quacky singing etc.- Dear Santa....
TheHeusinator (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
@starkfm it isn't the temperature that takes a lot of energy to maintain or achieve, it is the phase change that takes most of the energy.
oldfart387 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Steam is amazing. Go to Jay Lenos Garage, he has a steam powered car that can run faster than most others. Downside would be waiting on enough steam to go.
SMGJohn (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
@fizzguts yes maybe but they doesn't have the same development as the Combustion engines had. Between 1900 to 2000 the Steam engine only good a small development they where made more high tech for factory use only, a few car producers have also developed prototype engines |