Slashdot Mirror
NASA's Flying Wing Breaks 2 Records
ELBnet writes "CNN reports in this story that NASA's Helios flying wing broke the altitude records for both a propeller and jet aircraft with an altitude of 85,100 feet... and they were still climbing shooting for 100,000."
has NASA's PR department just gotten too used to blurting that out
People are not interested in seeing tax money used in science unless they feel they could benefit from it. So, saying something like this to people who don't have a clue on science is
Why would you want to conduct experiments at 100,000 ft at 20 MPH?
A few things come to mind.
Chemical analysis of rocket exhausts might be possible, if you put this in the right position. The solid-fuel stages might leave some dust particles that give hints to what kind of fuels are used. This would help in estimating the ICBM payload capacity.
Low-orbit satellites have orbital velocities of several miles per second, so if you want to have a better look at that Chinese ICBM base, Helios could be a choice.
Atmospheric research would benefit from this. You could send up a whole armada of weather stations in the upper atmosphere instead of a single weather satellite.
Studies of the Earth's magnetic field and it's connection to the solar wind could use measurements right under the auroral oval, where solar wind hits the upper atmosphere. Combining these with radar-scattering experiments would be extremely interesting to geophysicists.
As this thing runs on solar, and is well above clouds, it only need to stay on the sunny side of Earth to run forever. Perhaps a medium-sized battery and some smart remote pilot could keep this up during nighttime, goin only halfway down and climbing back up every morning?
While this post isn't insightful in any way, I tought I'd share in an attempt to humor some of you. I was actually in Kauai last week with some of my friends, and we were driving around the southern end of the island doing touristy things. We decided to check out a secluded beach we had heard about on the west side of the island, so we began driving. Eventually we got to a dirt road that supposedly led to this beach. After driving a couple of miles, we saw a guard house down the road and some signs that, in no uncertain terms, told us we shouldn't be there. Apparently, this was the military base where this thing is housed and flies out of. Needless to say, I couldn't check it out in person because once we were about 100 yards from the gate, three machine-gun toting guards came running out of their shack to see who we were. We promptly turned around and headed back. We did manage to find the beach, which was quite beautiful, by the way.
Lets face it, even with a small payload, like 600 lbs, that's two reasonably effective gravity bombs from an aircraft that is not even made of metal, so practically invisible to radar.
Bob-
The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
Gas jets, and yes, they only last for a short amount of time (on the order of a few years) versus well over a decade for normal satellites, which generally break down. They are also in lower orbits, which translates to drag that means they have to use fuel just to stay stable.
I remember hearing somewhere (CNN maybe?) that NASA plans to use such craft to fly into space. One thing that confuses me is, wouldn't it need to be in a gaseous environment to be able to propel itself?
All the plans I've seen based off of similar concepts involve using such a aircraft as a launching platform. Similar to the launch concept (that is probably primarily used to knock out enemy satellites, despite what the PR says) of using a modified F-15 (or was it F-14?) to climb up to the very limit of its flight ceiling at its highest velocity, and launch a rocket from the jet to enter orbit, or at the very least, the area of space that objects in orbit tend to be (since entering orbit requires particular speeds, but knocking out something in orbit just requires being near what you're trying to destroy).
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
The real usefulness of such a craft, as the article briefly mentions, is to be a communications platform.
Ever call a friend in a far-away land? Or use the internet via one of the satellite providers? Communications to a geosync satellite, some 25000 miles away in geosync orbit, causes almost 2 seconds of delay. Plus, once a satellite is up there, it can't be brought back. (for those of you who don't know, no, the shuttle only goes some 150 miles up and costs a $zillion per flight).
Such a solar-powered, high-alititude plane can be flown high above the weather, stay aloft indefiniately, and can be used as a handy communications platform for a city. It's a lot cheaper than sending a satellite into geosync, AND it can be brought back down for upgrades of maintenence. Plus there is added protection from solar radition. Yahoo! Add a fuel cell for night time, and you've got a great, cheap alternative to a communications satellite.
So although it seems like a silly idea, or only Mars-centric, it is getting a lot of interest from communication providers like BT and AT&T.
Say goodbye to geosync satellites? Perhaps!