past and present black secrets

a reply to: CiTrus90

Lol I didn't even notice that till right there.

I liked iceman better anyway

Hell... Forget about whole airframes, what they're doing with next Gen turbines is verging on magic. One project is closing in on an engine a third the length with 3 fewer stages double digit drop in airflow and diameter huge leap in fuel economy all while meeting or exceeding thrust and etc of the best turbines we have!

Now most people probably won't understand the big deal here, but some of us understand how this is serious business. People who follow the programs closer than I do, and mock anything even vaguely pseudoscience are starting to bring up names like schauberger in reference to how these performance goals are being achieved..

In a semi related note I stumbled upon several items which have verified a pet theory of mine involving the most puzzling aspect of American submarine design, and subsequently lead me to a pretty good insight into how the f35 radar plays it's reindeer games lol.

And as a side benefit that lead me to a very underutilized patent from the 60's courtesy of the nuclear arms race.

a reply to: roguetechie

Some kind of LIDAR perhaps?

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Radar is one of those systems that are very close hold. You might find bands and basic information, but not how it does what it does.

a reply to: roguetechie

With the schauberger reference that would infer some sort of vacuum related tech wouldn't it? interesting.

WARNING -Crazy Bassplyr speculation and illogic below:

I envision efficiency and range being extended by the magic of plasma IN the engine. plasma on the turbines blades to make them compress air more efficient. Plasma on the intake ducts to finesse the air flow . plasma like a pseudo buzzard ramscoop concept to guide airflow to the intake before hand kinda like a high tech no moving parts supercharger. plasma in the rear to guide the exhaust smoothly out the back. From the rear I would envision if one were to get a clear look at the exhaust duct a neat pulsing light show going on inside with plasma doing all sorts of funky things. Submarines. true masters of making themselves look like anything but what they are.

Orangetom has some excellent, excellent posts regarding the topic. but he doesn't come around much these days. Also, their screws blade designs show a lot of promise in transferring the concepts and principles to aerodynamic designs I would imagine.

Add the ADVENT and bypass designs and we got some sweet turbines and engines coming out soon.

a reply to: roguetechie

Next gen ANYTHING in engine technology seems like magic compared to stuff from 20-30 years ago. Computers, man, computers...

a reply to: Zaphod58

Perhaps my imagination is wild...but I could envision a type of radar that could determine the type of substance it was hitting, based on the return frequencies. Perhaps just because a plane's RCS is tiny, the return signature indicates what material its made of, thus giving away the "stealth" factor of the plane?

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Which if true would be why it would be a cool idea to adapt the sub's strategy to the air force and make the enemy sensors and radar see what you want them to see. which could range from one of their own to nothing at all. Can't defeat the fact that you will be detected by the radar then make the radar tell the human handling it that everything is fine.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Zaphod already shot down my laminar flow engine speculation

Suggested that it would give a few percent engine efficiency.

On a related note, I totally buy plasma on intakes and outlets, but I don't know if I'd put it right on the turbine and/or compressor blades. If I understand jet engines correctly you actually want the blades to smack the air around a little bit. Zaphod?

a reply to: framedragged

The more you can compress the air, the more efficient you can make an engine. That's why most have multiple turbine blades before the combustion chamber.

a reply to: framedragged

smack the air around yes. But you also want the air to get smacked around smoothly and with a lot less turbulence at the blade tips I would think. = better compression in my opinion.

But, I am just a speculating enthusiast with no real insight other than what would make sense to me. Look at me sorta like the Aviation forum jackass. If there was a war movie based on a platoon made up of ATS aviation forum members. I would be the comic relief who gets capped while doing something moronic halfway through.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I think of you as more the plucky annoying guy that gets whacked in the first five minutes.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The over confident no nothing who begs the squad leader to send him in first cause he thinks he can. Bout right.

"Send me in Zaph! I'll clear those machine gun nests!!!!"

Zaph: 'Wait NO!!!! There's a M-

BOOOOOM!!!!

Zaph: "field- I was going to tell him there was a mine field."

Bass parts rain down around the squad making plopping sounds in the desert sand.

Mystik: "AUUUGGHH And I thought he smelled bad on the outside!"

a reply to: Zaphod58

My thinking was that if the air can just slip past the turbine blades then it's not really gonna get compressed. That it would just pass through the engine with less interaction with the plane. I just see diminishing returns since we need to impart some force to the incoming air particles, and a plasma sheath is gonna limit that.

I.E., perfect laminar flow over and under a wing means no lift.

I guess we don't need to go all the way to the limiting case though, and reducing turbulence is always desirable.

Keep that stators plasma free?

a reply to: framedragged

It's like a ground vehicle engine. If you can compress the air enough, and mix it with the fuel you get a more efficient engine. The fan pulls air in and starts the compression process. Then the stators continue the process.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Yeah, I get the the compression. I'm still just thinking about the limiting case with perfect laminar flow and how I don't think it'll compress as well. But I think I found the hole in my logic, as I was comparing the axial case of a jet engine and the longitudinal case of a plane taking off. In one case the slipped air just goes back to the atmosphere, but in the engine case the slipped air does move into the engine. So even in the perfect laminar flow case a jet engine would still compress air

I still don't think the intake velocity will be as high, since we're talking about just displacing the air into the engine, instead of smacking it in. Pressure will still increase and we will get thrust though.

Wonder where the balance point is.

a reply to: framedragged

The problem with perfect laminar flow through the engine is you can't do it all the way through the engine. So you'd end up with a turbulent boundary somewhere around the stators, making the engine less efficient.

originally posted by: Zaphod58

If it was perfect all the way through the engine then we're never imparting any momentum to the air and will never increase its pressure in the engine. Leave plasma off the stators and you can compress again, but then it's a bunch of discontinuous turbulence points between each rotor/stator set.

Leaving a nice layer on the walls seems like a damn good idea though. That would definitely keep inlet/outlet flow smooth and omnidirectional

a reply to: Zaphod58

Wouldn't suck on the inlet though.

a reply to: framedragged

The problem is those points where you stop the flow control. It becomes incredibly turbulent when the it stops being controlled. Engines really don't like turbulent air going through them.