EDAboard.com | EDAboard.de | EDAboard.co.uk | WTWH Media

Retro Button Would Further Automation On the Boeing Max & Ev

Ask a question - edaboard.com

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronic for beginners - Retro Button Would Further Automation On the Boeing Max & Ev

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Bret Cahill
Guest

Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:45 pm   



On Friday, March 15, 2019 at 2:49:00 PM UTC-7, Bret Cahill wrote:
Quote:
Put a retro or "my kingdom for a horse" switch on anything that seems unnecessarily over automated or when the additional sophistication is of a minor advantage.

If anything doesn't seem perfect, tap the retro switch and you are back to flying by the seat of your pants or at least something that is less complicated / more proven technology.

It may seem counter intuitive but this would actually _further_ automation and sophistication by taking some of the pressure off the designers trying to get every unanticipated situation right the first time.

It may also reduce some of the concerns about AI.

It's astounding this isn't SOP in every design engineering dept.


https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-fi-boeing-max-design-20190315-story.html

Recently the Chinese proved it's harder to reverse engineer than to start from scratch. Putin was gleeful they botched their copy of a Russian fighter.

The Tampa Electric power plant at Sutton Point under went so many modifications, had so much stuff packed in ad hoc after all the original designers were dead or retired I warned a Hillsborough County engineer someone needs to do something about it.

A few weeks later the hydrogen enclosure they were using to replace the bearings ignited killing 3 people. I slept through it but they said they could hear the explosion in Plant City. Cargill workers at the Ybor dock who know the company thought it was the Cargill fertilizer plant in Riverside.


Bret Cahill

Bonk
Guest

Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:45 am   



On 03/17/2019 02:05 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:

Quote:
I think Brett is designing LeDuc.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Leduc_0.16_Le_Bourget_2007.jpg

No engines on the wings but that's where the similarity ends.

The LeDuc engine is inside of the fuselage, same as many older jet
fighters which could never take off w/o a runway VTOL because of low
/ zero bypass ratio.

For radical increases in bypass ratio you need to do it the other way
around:

Put the fuselage inside of the engine, or at least inside the fan.


Any of these come close?

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_XFV>

<http://fly.historicwings.com/2012/10/the-flying-barrel/>

<https://www.thevintagenews.com/2016/04/02/caproni-stipaan-experimental-barrel-shaped-italian-airplane-designed-1930s-2/>

Bret Cahill
Guest

Mon Mar 18, 2019 6:45 pm   



Quote:
I think Brett is designing LeDuc.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Leduc_0.16_Le_Bourget_2007.jpg

No engines on the wings but that's where the similarity ends.

The LeDuc engine is inside of the fuselage, same as many older jet
fighters which could never take off w/o a runway VTOL because of low
/ zero bypass ratio.

For radical increases in bypass ratio you need to do it the other way
around:

Put the fuselage inside of the engine, or at least inside the fan.

Any of these come close?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_XFV


The engine and fan need to be behind the cockpit.

Same for airships. A tiny fan or prop engine hanging off the bottom of a blimp wastes over 90% of the energy in turbulence. If a blimp is 30 m in dia. then the blades need to be as big as the wings on some aircraft, but not nearly as strong or heavy. A blimp fan moves slow enough so the blades can run run on a track or belt mounted on the outside of the blimp. A massive reducer and massive drive shaft isn't necessary or desirable.

> <http://fly.historicwings.com/2012/10/the-flying-barrel/>

Another engine inside of the fuselage.

> <https://www.thevintagenews.com/2016/04/02/caproni-stipaan-experimental-barrel-shaped-italian-airplane-designed-1930s-2/>

Another engine inside of the fuselage.

The fuselage needs to be inside of the big fan for high bypass.


Bret Cahill

Bonk
Guest

Tue Mar 19, 2019 4:45 pm   



On 03/18/2019 09:52 AM, Bret Cahill wrote:
Quote:

Put the fuselage inside of the engine, or at least inside the
fan.

The engine and fan need to be behind the cockpit.

The fuselage needs to be inside of the big fan for high bypass.


I got it! There's an airplane called the Optica...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgley_Optica

Bret Cahill
Guest

Tue Mar 19, 2019 6:45 pm   



Quote:
Put the fuselage inside of the engine, or at least inside the
fan.

The engine and fan need to be behind the cockpit.

The fuselage needs to be inside of the big fan for high bypass.

I got it! There's an airplane called the Optica...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgley_Optica


That has fans behind the cockpit but where's the cabin area after the engine room?

For high passenger miles / unit fuel -- the number 1 number in the industry -- you need a lot passenger seats. You also need to reduce fuel consumption with high bypass [yuge run way dragging fans].

For and aft of this shouldn't look too different than a conventional airliner except midship where the fuselage is collared by a pair or 2 of 72 - 96 blade annular ductless fans with blades 2 m - 3.5 m long.

Instead of engines on the wings there's housing for 2.5 m - 4 m tall landing gear so the yuge fan clears the runway if anyone feels more comfortable taking off and landing horizontal.

Up close you should be able to see alignment surfaces and attachment points for the hydraulics of a dedicated launcher for roof top boardings and take offs.

They can do precision vertical and near vertical landings now. They just don't know it.


Bret Cahill

Bonk
Guest

Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:45 am   



On 03/19/2019 06:56 PM, Riley Angel wrote:
Quote:
On 2019-03-19 10:14, Bret Cahill wrote:

They can do precision vertical and near vertical landings now. They just don't know it.


Boeing might be looking for some new engineers shortly. You should let
them know about your insights.


I think the Stratosphere Tower in Las Vegas is the place for this. They
have some other thrill rides on the roof already.

https://www.stratospherehotel.com/ThrillRides

Riley Angel
Guest

Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:45 am   



On 2019-03-19 10:14, Bret Cahill wrote:
Quote:

They can do precision vertical and near vertical landings now. They just don't know it.


Boeing might be looking for some new engineers shortly. You should let
them know about your insights.

Riley Angel
Guest

Wed Mar 20, 2019 3:45 am   



On 2019-03-17 13:52, Bret Cahill wrote:
Quote:
4. Increased Safety. If a fan blade snaps off it can't impale any passengers or critical structures.

Shedding a fan blade leads to rapid destruction of turbines caused by
loss of balance anyway.

Much much less of an issue with larger ductless fans.


<snip exciting stuff about Newton's Second Law>

If you think that a turbine can continue to operate after it has shed a
blade, you have another thing coming, fan or gas-generator alike.
Containment is nice, but the unit is scrap very shortly afterwards
either way.

They're simply not designed to operate with any significant
out-of-balance forces present, and if the rest of the fan or turbine is
subjected to ingestion of the bit that fell off becasue it was
contained, it goes much wronger much quicker. These things self-destruct
after eating a decent amount of bird matter, let alone chunks of metal.

Bret Cahill
Guest

Wed Mar 20, 2019 6:45 am   



Quote:
4. Increased Safety. If a fan blade snaps off it can't impale any passengers or critical structures.

Shedding a fan blade leads to rapid destruction of turbines caused by
loss of balance anyway.

Much much less of an issue with larger ductless fans.


snip exciting stuff about Newton's Second Law

If you think that a turbine can continue to operate after it has shed a
blade,


You'd be surprised.

ยง 33.94. Based on a margin of safety (MS) analysis, the most critical compressor, turbine or fan blade at its maximum permissible rotating speed must be contained by the casings while the engine should operate continuously for at least 15 s.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S100093611200009X

And this isn't an enclosed compressor or turbine blade.

It's a blade on a 3X larger ductless fan where the imbalances forces from one blade getting tossed clear are at least an order of magnitude less than the low bypass ratio GE 90.

If passengers find the vibration annoying the pilot lands on an airstrip, gets his Allen wrench out, removes what's left of the broken blade and the blade opposite the broken blade.

Then he emails his airline to have a blade or 2 ready at the next roof top.

He may need to borrow a ladder from the locals to reach the Allen bolts but that's still safer than dragging turbo fans down the runway.


Bret Cahill

Bonk
Guest

Wed Mar 20, 2019 10:45 am   



On 03/19/2019 10:24 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:
Quote:
4. Increased Safety. If a fan blade snaps off it can't
impale any passengers or critical structures.


Bret Cahill


5. When the power fails in VTOL mode it won't autorotate, and it won't
glide.

Bret Cahill
Guest

Wed Mar 20, 2019 6:45 pm   



Quote:
4. Increased Safety. If a fan blade snaps off it can't
impale any passengers or critical structures.


Bret Cahill

5. When the power fails in VTOL mode it won't autorotate, and it won't
glide.


With large fans one engine will be enough for take off or landing.

Bret Cahill
Guest

Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:45 pm   



Quote:
4. Increased Safety. If a fan blade snaps off it can't
impale any passengers or critical structures.

5. When the power fails in VTOL mode it won't autorotate, and it won't
glide.


For a quick pre take off check the pilot first runs the engines at max locked in the launcher. The plane is only released at a somewhat lower safer RPM still well above take off thrust. Maximum power is only used for this test and is not necessary or desirable for the rest of a fuel efficient flight.

The props on an Osprey would hit the runway if they aren't tilted back a little. The fans are fixed here so, if you don't want 1 story high landing gear, it's the same situation as an Osprey that somehow got rotors stuck in horizontal flight.

Fans always need to be strong enough to chop up birds, but, without landing gear, they need to disintegrate like tempered glass when they first contact the runway in emergency landings so large shards don't impale passengers in the aft cabin.


Bret Cahill

Bonk
Guest

Wed Mar 20, 2019 9:45 pm   



On 03/20/2019 11:57 AM, Bret Cahill wrote:
Quote:
4. Increased Safety. If a fan blade snaps off it can't
impale any passengers or critical structures.

5. When the power fails in VTOL mode it won't autorotate, and it
won't glide.

For a quick pre take off check the pilot first runs the engines at
max locked in the launcher. The plane is only released at a somewhat
lower safer RPM still well above take off thrust. Maximum power is
only used for this test and is not necessary or desirable for the
rest of a fuel efficient flight.

The props on an Osprey would hit the runway if they aren't tilted
back a little. The fans are fixed here so, if you don't want 1 story
high landing gear, it's the same situation as an Osprey that somehow
got rotors stuck in horizontal flight.

Fans always need to be strong enough to chop up birds, but, without
landing gear, they need to disintegrate like tempered glass when they
first contact the runway in emergency landings so large shards don't
impale passengers in the aft cabin.


I read that Osprey blades disintegrate into broomstraws.

You lose far more than half the performance if you lose one of your two
engines. The second engine just brings you to the crash site, as they say.

You'll want at least collective pitch control on your 100 fan blades.
Probably cyclic control too. Lose a single blade, and you may lose
control of all the rest.

A helicopter rotor disk is mostly empty space, and your fan disks are
mostly solid. This isn't going to autorotate. Won't glide either unless
you can stop the fans and feather all those blades.

But I don't want to discourage you.

Bret Cahill
Guest

Thu Mar 21, 2019 5:45 am   



Quote:
4. Increased Safety. If a fan blade snaps off it can't
impale any passengers or critical structures.

5. When the power fails in VTOL mode it won't autorotate, and it
won't glide.

For a quick pre take off check the pilot first runs the engines at
max locked in the launcher. The plane is only released at a somewhat
lower safer RPM still well above take off thrust. Maximum power is
only used for this test and is not necessary or desirable for the
rest of a fuel efficient flight.

The props on an Osprey would hit the runway if they aren't tilted
back a little. The fans are fixed here so, if you don't want 1 story
high landing gear, it's the same situation as an Osprey that somehow
got rotors stuck in horizontal flight.

Fans always need to be strong enough to chop up birds, but, without
landing gear, they need to disintegrate like tempered glass when they
first contact the runway in emergency landings so large shards don't
impale passengers in the aft cabin.

I read that Osprey blades disintegrate into broomstraws.


Military hardware is supposed to be dangerous. It's considered "romantic" when poor troops get needlessly killed.

Quote:
You lose far more than half the performance if you lose one of your two
engines. The second engine just brings you to the crash site, as they say.


At least as safe the standard 2 conventional wing mounted ducted fans where a lot of rudder is required to fly on one engine.

No rudder is necessary here.

> You'll want at least collective pitch control on your 100 fan blades.

Why?

Quote:
Probably cyclic control too. Lose a single blade, and you may lose
control of all the rest.


Any imbalance forces from the loss of a blade are well over an order of magnitude less than a smaller low bypass fan like the GE 90.

Quote:
A helicopter rotor disk is mostly empty space, and your fan disks are
mostly solid. This isn't going to autorotate.


Why would there be much of a need to auto rotate? It only spends a few seconds near vertical.

> Won't glide either

Passenger airliners spend a lot of time gliding?

Quote:
unless
you can stop the fans and feather all those blades.

But I don't want to discourage you.


That's obvious as you haven't provided any argument on why this isn't at least as safe as conventional wing mounted ducted fans.


Bret Cahill

Bonk
Guest

Thu Mar 21, 2019 6:45 am   



On 03/20/2019 09:05 PM, Bret Cahill wrote:
Quote:

4. Increased Safety. If a fan blade snaps off it
can't impale any passengers or critical structures.

5. When the power fails in VTOL mode it won't autorotate, and
it won't glide.

For a quick pre take off check the pilot first runs the engines
at max locked in the launcher. The plane is only released at a
somewhat lower safer RPM still well above take off thrust.
Maximum power is only used for this test and is not necessary or
desirable for the rest of a fuel efficient flight.

The props on an Osprey would hit the runway if they aren't
tilted back a little. The fans are fixed here so, if you don't
want 1 story high landing gear, it's the same situation as an
Osprey that somehow got rotors stuck in horizontal flight.

Fans always need to be strong enough to chop up birds, but,
without landing gear, they need to disintegrate like tempered
glass when they first contact the runway in emergency landings so
large shards don't impale passengers in the aft cabin.

I read that Osprey blades disintegrate into broomstraws.

Military hardware is supposed to be dangerous. It's considered
"romantic" when poor troops get needlessly killed.


The broomstrawed blades flail around, and remain attached.

Quote:
You lose far more than half the performance if you lose one of your
two engines. The second engine just brings you to the crash site,
as they say.

At least as safe the standard 2 conventional wing mounted ducted fans
where a lot of rudder is required to fly on one engine.

No rudder is necessary here.


No climb performance with one. Might maintain altitude. At least it will
descend at a lower rate enroute to the crash site.

Quote:
You'll want at least collective pitch control on your 100 fan
blades.

Why?


For instant response while taking off and touching down. The fans, and
these are big ones, aren't going to spin up or down quickly. But they'll
be good flywheels and hold RPM while changing blade pitch gives
precision control.

Quote:
Probably cyclic control too. Lose a single blade, and you may lose
control of all the rest.

Any imbalance forces from the loss of a blade are well over an order
of magnitude less than a smaller low bypass fan like the GE 90.


The mess of pitch linkages between blades might not let one go cleanly
without jamming up the whole works.

Quote:
A helicopter rotor disk is mostly empty space, and your fan disks
are mostly solid. This isn't going to autorotate.

Why would there be much of a need to auto rotate? It only spends a
few seconds near vertical.


That's when the power fails! Near the ground, with no forward speed.
Even if you could knock it over to horizontal in a split second... what now?

Quote:
Won't glide either

Passenger airliners spend a lot of time gliding?


When they have to. They have a pretty good range too.
But this craft, with huge drag rings encircling it, is doomed.

Quote:
unless you can stop the fans and feather all those blades.

But I don't want to discourage you.

That's obvious as you haven't provided any argument on why this isn't
at least as safe as conventional wing mounted ducted fans.


I want blimps to come back.

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

elektroda.net NewsGroups Forum Index - Electronic for beginners - Retro Button Would Further Automation On the Boeing Max & Ev

Ask a question - edaboard.com

Arabic version Bulgarian version Catalan version Czech version Danish version German version Greek version English version Spanish version Finnish version French version Hindi version Croatian version Indonesian version Italian version Hebrew version Japanese version Korean version Lithuanian version Latvian version Dutch version Norwegian version Polish version Portuguese version Romanian version Russian version Slovak version Slovenian version Serbian version Swedish version Tagalog version Ukrainian version Vietnamese version Chinese version Turkish version
EDAboard.com map