Fuel-Less Gravity Powered Airplane
Uploader Comments (upcycle)
Top Comments
-
A pity about Physics getting in the way of a neat idea.
All Comments (2,322)
-
they should just call it a blimp plane
instead of trying to be fancy and call it a gravity plane
-
this might work and be efficient but it is NOT fuelless. after each flight you would have to refill the compressed air tanks and recharge the batteries.
-
Its not fueless, you still need to input energy theres a thing call loss in any system
-
Amazing! When can I buy a ticket?:)
-
Are you saying the turbines that compress air on descent can release this energy at 100% effiency, climb to the same altitude and repeat this cycly indefinatly ?
I think you need to obey the laws of thermodynamics buddy.
-
@otakukj if physics can't explain it, it doesn't exist. physics, by definition, is the study of the physical. If something doesn't actually exist, like ghosts, then physics has no explanation for them.
-
Boohaha, whoever thought about this must have skipped physics 101 in school. You cant have free energy in the world. There is always a loss when you convert one type of energy into another. Otherwise perpetual machines would be possible. We know that is not the case with certainty. Even in the frictionless space satellites end up falling back to earth if not boosted by some sort of fuel.
-
@howroyd Someone here missed a somewhat relevant 'hypothesis" known as the first law of thermodynamics :/
Where is this thing's center of gravity by the way?..i mean since that it is as variable as (and even worse than) the CG of combustible fuel powered airplanes, jeoperdizing static and dynamic stability.
Personally i won`t appreciate a statically unstable bouyant glider :/
-
One could make a drinking game out of this where you take a drink everytime he says 'compressed'
-
I'll believe this when I see it. You can't break the laws of physics no matter how hard you try... and I see some apparent flaws that I'm not sure have been addressed before. Any cargo, whether it be a human or a spark plug, will add weight. This means you'll need more helium to offset that weight. I just can't see it being economically feasible. These things would have to be massive to hold any sort of weight, and then they wouldn't be able to generate enough power without fuel of some sort.
Wait, so... it uses *compressed air* to run *air compressors* at the peak of its ascent? Wouldn't it make sense to just release this compressed air directly into the tanks? Unless they're somehow generating more power from compressed air than it requires to compress that air, in which case they should just sell that system, because Yay Free Power!
jshands 3 months ago 11
@jshands there are two different types of gas that are being crompressed. One is the helium... and the other is the atmospheric air.. And they are kept separate..
upcycle 3 months ago
assuming that this works and can also hold a decent number of passengers, 100+ MPH is very slow for an aeroplane though it's faster than most land transportation options.
Slackenry 3 months ago
@Slackenry something like this may be most appropriately used for transporting cargo.. and it may be un-manned.. and/or controlled by ground base operators remotely. And this may be an alternative for transport, in place of cargo ships over seas or across terrain that does not have adequate rail to support the transport.. or for transport over terrain of extreme weather environments, above the clouds and poor weather climate conditions.
upcycle 3 months ago
@Slackenry also, because this has capacity to float.. It may be pulled by other aircraft.. kind of like a tow truck or a tug boat.
upcycle 3 months ago
and if faster speeds need to be achieved.. It may have a modular jet or other propulsion device attached for greater pushing force and higher speed capacity.. but still retains the flexibility to detach the engine module and operate on its default drive systems.
upcycle 3 months ago