well your talking way slower than the speed of light. we need something that can do multipule lvls of c. or superluminal speeds to even get somewhere with out dieing 1/100 of the way there. And yes it is very possible to optain those speeds.
They are 2 different things. Plasma propulsion is much less powerful and suited more for long distance interplanetary space travel rather than hypersonic, high altitude intercontinental travel (since ramjets require air).
Modern day jet engines are the result of pithy jet engines of a few decades ago. Ion propulsion technology will improve and become more practicable for commercial use rather than simply propelling inter-planetary probes and maintaining orbits.
well in space, the deceleration from friction is almost null or actually null itself, so any acceleration in space will be kept
like say, if u have that farting engine that gives 1m/s2 of acceleration, the spacecraft will continue to accelerate at that 1m/s2, comparing to IN earth atmosphere, there's gravity to take care of even moving up... and theres air resistance to take care of moving faster and faster, this is not for space as an object can continue to accelerate forever
@kjun13 The device you are talking about is a ion wind generator - like in a air purifier with no parts. Still J. hutchison is on to somethin..
I was talking about the theoretical 39 days to mars argon plasma assisted rocket mission with working prototypes to prove claims.
But the ions I was talking about originally, I meant to say sub atomic particles of some yet to be determined type which could be released @ 99% of the speed of light for a long period of time. Einstein may be disproven!?
When these engines finally get perfected, we may yet see airliners that can cut the travel time across the Pacific from the current 12hrs down to maybe 2hrs.
Not when you take into account the fact that airliners with these engines fitted on will travel at three times the altitude height that current airliners fly at.
Exactly, that is why planes like the SR-71, Rumored aurora, etc are meant to travel at high altitudes, less air resistance and better thrust using the same or less energy. The only thing is I don't know how smooth of a ride it will be traveling so high at speeds of mach 4 and higher lol.
@boomshanka its gonna suck if you ov er shoot your destination by a 100 miles and if ur 3 times higher then ur decent ad ascent is goin to be extremely quick depending on the distance traveled.
that wont happen bro. Its possible. But its just not worth it. The ends dont justify the means. If they did Concord would still be around despite the crash...RIP. The wealthiest of the wealthy that could justify the testing dont need to cross the pond in a hurry in mass anymore. As fast as we can fly we cant go faster than the internet.
speed is not the problem only acceleration and deceleration (both are the same actualy only a matte rof reference frame) are dangerous ( the fall wont kill you , the impact does. to put it that way ^^)
sory for my bad english ( im not a native english speaker)
@Kivencito g force is caused by rapid acceleration and deceleration. thats why if you travel at 100 miles per hour on the highway at a constant it feel the same as 20 miles per hour in a city.
If at all we do make ScramJets passenger ready..., how the FUK are we gonna stop this thing, slow it down !? lol
jetairteam 2 months ago
thumbs up for me seeing my first intelligent conversation on youtube
MistahRandum 1 year ago
LOL, the next thing NASA will be trying out will be smthing like electron gun propulsion i guess
FRANKGU968 1 year ago
such a nice windtunnel...
WTB Hypersonic Windtunnel
22 Dollars and four nickels! Email please
TopGunMan 1 year ago
well your talking way slower than the speed of light. we need something that can do multipule lvls of c. or superluminal speeds to even get somewhere with out dieing 1/100 of the way there. And yes it is very possible to optain those speeds.
TheNamaste2012 1 year ago
No, the future is nuclear atom propulsion. The energy that comes free when an atom is seperated, like with a nuke. ( Space travel )
barthoedemaker 2 years ago
@barthoedemaker
or possibly even anti-matter propulsion, once we find a practical way to manufacture it...
iiztehpwnagelol 2 years ago 3
@iiztehpwnagelol there it not enoughanit matter to fuel a jet.
and there only one partical accelrator in the world to produce it. which in switserland. google cern
thecreativeone31 2 years ago
we got antimater and anti electrons
But we just can't get enough of it
y512516 2 years ago
Nuclear propulsion has been abandoned as a realistic means of propulsion.
elevadon 2 years ago
@barthoedemaker good luck getting someone to try that, the radiatiion and x rays would fry your balls.
kjun13 1 year ago
scramjets are now outdated even before being declassified the real deal is magneticly charged plasma ion propulsion using a compressed argon mixture.
9Paradigm 2 years ago
They are 2 different things. Plasma propulsion is much less powerful and suited more for long distance interplanetary space travel rather than hypersonic, high altitude intercontinental travel (since ramjets require air).
deviance87 2 years ago
Modern day jet engines are the result of pithy jet engines of a few decades ago. Ion propulsion technology will improve and become more practicable for commercial use rather than simply propelling inter-planetary probes and maintaining orbits.
GenevaSuspension 1 year ago
@9Paradigm: which sucks in planetary atmospheres because you get more thrust from an extinguisher than from an ion engine.
Helge129 2 years ago 4
@Helge129 I remember a north american professor saying that ion engine have the thrust of a fart ;)
brunofporto 1 year ago
@brunofporto: Well, it has very little thrust, but provides it over a very long time.
A small impulse during a long time can have the same effect as a very fucking powerful impulse over a short time :P
Helge129 1 year ago
@brunofporto
well in space, the deceleration from friction is almost null or actually null itself, so any acceleration in space will be kept
like say, if u have that farting engine that gives 1m/s2 of acceleration, the spacecraft will continue to accelerate at that 1m/s2, comparing to IN earth atmosphere, there's gravity to take care of even moving up... and theres air resistance to take care of moving faster and faster, this is not for space as an object can continue to accelerate forever
shawnaw2 1 year ago
@9Paradigm like those tin-foil lifter things that use a shitload of electricity?
kjun13 1 year ago
@kjun13 The device you are talking about is a ion wind generator - like in a air purifier with no parts. Still J. hutchison is on to somethin..
I was talking about the theoretical 39 days to mars argon plasma assisted rocket mission with working prototypes to prove claims.
But the ions I was talking about originally, I meant to say sub atomic particles of some yet to be determined type which could be released @ 99% of the speed of light for a long period of time. Einstein may be disproven!?
9Paradigm 1 year ago
@9Paradigm
well, there are 2 totally different uses for those.
ramjet can only operate within the atmosphere, as it needs air. the VASIMR you talk about can only operate outside...
hobbiz 1 year ago
It would be sweet though
thejalderman 2 years ago
When these engines finally get perfected, we may yet see airliners that can cut the travel time across the Pacific from the current 12hrs down to maybe 2hrs.
boomshanka 2 years ago 3
I doubt it, these things drink fuel. The power required to overcome air friction is just not worth it.
thejordan01 2 years ago
Not when you take into account the fact that airliners with these engines fitted on will travel at three times the altitude height that current airliners fly at.
boomshanka 2 years ago 3
Exactly, that is why planes like the SR-71, Rumored aurora, etc are meant to travel at high altitudes, less air resistance and better thrust using the same or less energy. The only thing is I don't know how smooth of a ride it will be traveling so high at speeds of mach 4 and higher lol.
entrailsgalore 2 years ago
@boomshanka its gonna suck if you ov er shoot your destination by a 100 miles and if ur 3 times higher then ur decent ad ascent is goin to be extremely quick depending on the distance traveled.
HenronValdez 1 year ago
That's true, I didn't think of that
thejordan01 2 years ago
that wont happen bro. Its possible. But its just not worth it. The ends dont justify the means. If they did Concord would still be around despite the crash...RIP. The wealthiest of the wealthy that could justify the testing dont need to cross the pond in a hurry in mass anymore. As fast as we can fly we cant go faster than the internet.
thejalderman 2 years ago
nice hairdryer.
rainerfilm 2 years ago 2
hey i have a question.... humm if a human goes at that velocity is there a kind of danger talking about the gforces?
Kivencito 2 years ago
Well you have to potential to go 15 times the speed of sound so I'd say its pretty likely you'd get messed up.
Awesome vid.
Kustav 2 years ago
speed is not the problem only acceleration and deceleration (both are the same actualy only a matte rof reference frame) are dangerous ( the fall wont kill you , the impact does. to put it that way ^^)
sory for my bad english ( im not a native english speaker)
ston932 2 years ago 10
if you accelerate normally it will feel like a normal plane, if you try to do a loop at mach 15 then yeah the gforce will probably kill you
Takeital 2 years ago
@Kivencito g force is caused by rapid acceleration and deceleration. thats why if you travel at 100 miles per hour on the highway at a constant it feel the same as 20 miles per hour in a city.
HenronValdez 1 year ago
@Kivencito
try to google gforces. it is not affected by speed
hobbiz 1 year ago