Hi,
I doubt it would be from the USA. We tend to keep our secret craft in the Nevada deserts and on the cover of Aviation Leaky.
I'm going to have to throw #3 out. Our present understanding of gravity is such that we have no way of manipulating it. While there may be classified work in the field that is advanced compared to what is available to civilians, to bridge that huge a gap would require an effort that makes the Manhattan Project look like a high school science fair. We're just nowhere near that, yet.
#1 is totally possible and totally boring. If by 'robotic' you mean totally self controlling, then the free-flight model airplanes of the '50s had the ability to transition between different flight modes using a clockwork timer and mechanical actuators. What can be done with modern materials and electronics would be hugely more impressive. And, if you're talking about 'robotic' as in 'radio controlled' then the possibilities are even greater. I know a guy who likes to play around with weird concepts (a flying lawn mower model) who has made an RC aircraft from a disk of hard foam. The thing will hang from its propeller, fly 'backward' if there's a wind, and climb straight up until it runs out of fuel or out of radio range. And, except for the price tag, (which terrified me), I haven't even paid any real attention to RC helicopters. Built light enough, with enough power, they probably can accomplish what is being described.
#2 is the interesting one. In considering that method for enduring long term g-forces or long term periods of forced bed rest, RAH 'invented' the modern water bed (although there were others long before) but never built one nor patented it. In a simple form, a water bed would help with reasonable acceleration. As the acceleration gets higher, it would reach a limit of utility since the differential pressure across, say, the chest cavity would crush your rib cage. To be able to endure even greater pressures, a total immersion process would be necessary. Theoretically, I know of no limit to how much acceleration could be taken under ideal total (internal and external) immersion. However, the application and removal of the acceleration (what engineers call 'the jerk') would be similar to descending and ascending in diving. It must be done slowly enough for the pressures to equalize.
--Pete
Hi,
Of course. But it does bring up the question of how we could endure large accelerations.
--Pete
(02-08-2011, 05:55 PM)MEAT Wrote: In any event, I want to talk about how one could survive the G-Force of that flight upward in the videos. ... I see only three possibilities:
1) Unmanned Robotic Device
2) Some form of gel-type substance in the cabin that absorbs the physical pressure of the G-forces.
3) A internal gravity stabilizer of some sort.
I'm not even talking about aliens here; the craft could have been American for all we know; ...
I doubt it would be from the USA. We tend to keep our secret craft in the Nevada deserts and on the cover of Aviation Leaky.
I'm going to have to throw #3 out. Our present understanding of gravity is such that we have no way of manipulating it. While there may be classified work in the field that is advanced compared to what is available to civilians, to bridge that huge a gap would require an effort that makes the Manhattan Project look like a high school science fair. We're just nowhere near that, yet.
#1 is totally possible and totally boring. If by 'robotic' you mean totally self controlling, then the free-flight model airplanes of the '50s had the ability to transition between different flight modes using a clockwork timer and mechanical actuators. What can be done with modern materials and electronics would be hugely more impressive. And, if you're talking about 'robotic' as in 'radio controlled' then the possibilities are even greater. I know a guy who likes to play around with weird concepts (a flying lawn mower model) who has made an RC aircraft from a disk of hard foam. The thing will hang from its propeller, fly 'backward' if there's a wind, and climb straight up until it runs out of fuel or out of radio range. And, except for the price tag, (which terrified me), I haven't even paid any real attention to RC helicopters. Built light enough, with enough power, they probably can accomplish what is being described.
#2 is the interesting one. In considering that method for enduring long term g-forces or long term periods of forced bed rest, RAH 'invented' the modern water bed (although there were others long before) but never built one nor patented it. In a simple form, a water bed would help with reasonable acceleration. As the acceleration gets higher, it would reach a limit of utility since the differential pressure across, say, the chest cavity would crush your rib cage. To be able to endure even greater pressures, a total immersion process would be necessary. Theoretically, I know of no limit to how much acceleration could be taken under ideal total (internal and external) immersion. However, the application and removal of the acceleration (what engineers call 'the jerk') would be similar to descending and ascending in diving. It must be done slowly enough for the pressures to equalize.
--Pete
Hi,
(02-08-2011, 07:27 PM)kandrathe Wrote: Hoax.
Of course. But it does bring up the question of how we could endure large accelerations.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?