• Nuclear powered aircraft. Possible?
    119 replies, posted
Are you guys so stupid you didn't realise he was being sarcastic? He even said [i]math[/i] class. Honestly, it's quite obvious.
[QUOTE=DragonGenX;22209022]Are you guys so stupid you didn't realise he was being sarcastic? He even said [I]math[/I] class. Honestly, it's quite obvious.[/QUOTE] Yeah, I really can sense the subtext of sarcasm through text.
You have to be incredibly dense if you couldn't tell. I mean yeah it's text but jesus christ you people.
[QUOTE=Dr. Fishtastic;22206094][IMG]http://weburbanist.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/concept_cars_6b.jpg[/IMG] Say hello to the 1958 Ford Nucleon Powered by a miniature nuclear reactor. Sadly never got into production.[/QUOTE] Inspired the cars in FO:3. Hasn't anyone read all of the Vault Wikia?
[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;22209099]Yeah, I really can sense the subtext of sarcasm through text.[/QUOTE] 'Vaporizes [I]everything in the country[/I]' Is it really [I]that[/I] hard to tell?
[QUOTE=FunnyBunny;22209284]'Vaporizes [I]everything in the country[/I]' Is it really [I]that[/I] hard to tell?[/QUOTE] My journey through the interwebs has taught me, if it really looks that stupid, it probably is. On the upside, now you know how a implosion assembly nuclear weapon works.
With the current Fision reactors, no. With the future Fusion reactors, maybe. But another idea would be a remote supply of energy. A nuclear power plant on the ground sends a high-intensity beam to the plane, charging it up for a few days to come. Ofcourse, both the plane and the power plant would need to be modified, and the slightest mistake could blow up the plane...
Ahem. The FireFlash. [img]http://homepage.ntlworld.com/sfx_films/fireflashsmall.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.grahambleathman.co.uk/images/fireflashmed.jpg[/img] Mach 6.2, 250000 feet cruising altitude, almost twice the width of the A380 , London to New York in less than an hour, and powered by a single nuclear reactor located in the lower aft of the aircraft. It's perfect....
You could in theory make a water powerd plane. You just hae to perfect hydrogen fuel cells. From what I understand there is a lot of H20 in the clouds and upper atmosphere therefore you could soak them up, that would also stop England from being as rainy woooo :D
[QUOTE=pentium;22209380]Ahem. The FireFlash. [img]http://homepage.ntlworld.com/sfx_films/fireflashsmall.jpg[/img] [/QUOTE] Those top engines look really impractical and instable... Wonder if they would immediately sheer off upon takeoff or cause it to lose balance making it crash.
[QUOTE=Rombishead;22209485]You could in theory make a water powerd plane. You just hae to perfect hydrogen fuel cells. From what I understand there is a lot of H20 in the clouds and upper atmosphere therefore you could soak them up, that would also stop England from being as rainy woooo :D[/QUOTE] That would require too much energy to electrolyze the water. As the bonds between the hydrogen and oxygen need to be broken. And it will have to fly in the troposphere, where the weather is, which will not be good if you run into extreme turbulence.
[QUOTE=Useful Dave;22205774]I give you the Nuclear Turbojet powered blended-wing body airborne aircraft carrier design! [IMG]http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k12/Useful_Dave/CL-1201AAC.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] God damn that is too fucking awesome.
[quote=Rombishead]You could in theory make a water powerd plane. You just hae to perfect hydrogen fuel cells. From what I understand there is a lot of H20 in the clouds and upper atmosphere therefore you could soak them up, that would also stop England from being as rainy woooo :D [/quote] Fuel cells don't run on water. They burn hydrogen. If you wanted to electrolyze water to get hydrogen and then use it as a fuel in a jet or some combustion engine, you're basically going from around 80% efficiency of electric motors to around 20-30% of combustion engines. To get hydrogen you put energy into water (electrolysis), and a fuel cell simply does the backwards reaction: it burns hydrogen in such a way that it can capture most of the electricity produced. Water is not a fuel.
[QUOTE=Nikita;22209886]Fuel cells don't run on water. They burn hydrogen. If you wanted to electrolyze water to get hydrogen and then use it as a fuel in a jet or some combustion engine, you're basically going from around 80% efficiency of electric motors to around 20-30% of combustion engines. To get hydrogen you put energy into water (electrolysis), and a fuel cell simply does the backwards reaction: it burns hydrogen in such a way that it can capture most of the electricity produced. Water is not a fuel.[/QUOTE] Yeah, and the water needs to be collected for the hydrogen to be extracted, I never said anything of using water directly as a fuel, did you even read my post?
[QUOTE=uberdood15;22204765]I had a thought earlier today. [/QUOTE] :downsbravo:
If the plane crashes, then we have a major radiation problem.
It's not possible, there is no good cooling solution. Modern nuclear powers use large amounts of water to cool the reactors.
[QUOTE=flyboy95;22209275]Inspired the cars in FO:3. Hasn't anyone read all of the Vault Wikia?[/QUOTE] Why do you people keep saying "FO:3" these cars also littered the areas in 1 and 2.
[QUOTE=scout1;22205732]Because nuclear material explodes when sneezed at or hit with conventional explosive. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE] I think he's more concerned with the issue of massive contamination of the surrounding land. Which honestly would be a good thing for the attackers, meaning the defending nation wouldn't want to shoot it down so the plane could literally just make its way straight to the target and be relatively safe. Maybe.
[QUOTE=FunnyBunny;22205763]That would actually be good. You have a moral dilema when shooting down the bombers. Choice A. Let the bombers live, let them destroy their targets, ie. your artillery, tanks, etc. Choice B. Shoot them down, fuck up your own country with radiation doing potentially more damage than the bombs would have.[/QUOTE] So if you're getting invaded and you have the choice to lose or fuck up your country, and you're calling that good?
[QUOTE=Dysgalt;22209830]Those top engines look really impractical and instable... Wonder if they would immediately sheer off upon takeoff or cause it to lose balance making it crash.[/QUOTE]That, and the amount of lead needed to shield the passengers lest they glow in the dark afterwards would probably stop the thing from getting in the air in the first place.
they could create thrust by superheating air and help control thrust with variable exhaust pressure idea copyright me 2010 [editline]11:43PM[/editline] [URL=http://img408.imageshack.us/i/projectgypsietears.png/][IMG]http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/3419/projectgypsietears.png[/IMG][/URL]
[QUOTE=Fables;22212719]Why do you people keep saying "FO:3" these cars also littered the areas in 1 and 2.[/QUOTE] Because we could actually see the cars in a full view in FO3, rather then the piece of shit sprite form from FO1 or 2.
A nuclear powered aircraft [I]is theoretically possible[/I] but would be highly inefficient. Because the nuclear reactor would only be able to power: A) props B) ducted fans or C) all of the above, the aircraft would need to be enormous to support its equally enormous, super-efficient wings. The necessary shielding to protect the crew and passengers would not leave much room for cargo, or much of anything else. If such an aircraft could be constructed, it most likely could not operate out of most commercial airports due to runway restrictions and its sheer size.
Unsure of how relevent this is, but we're pretty close to achieving nuclear fusion. could that possibly generate enough energy for a plane to fly with?
but seriously, what kind of suicidal pilot would you have to be to fly one?
Nanotechnology.
[QUOTE=zydos;22207952]Never claimed it to be. Just honest.[/QUOTE] Actually, you can stand next to a nuclear fuel rod, they aren't even really radioactive. Once it's been used and spent, that's when even being in the same room for a few seconds is a death sentence.
Where do they dump old fuel rods?
afaik anything in the world can be nuclear powered.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.