Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bloodhound's 1,000 MPH Car Project Needs Money (theguardian.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the car-payments dept.

AmiMoJo quotes the Guardian: Plans to build a British jet-powered car to speed at more than 1,000mph through the desert have hit quicksand, after the company behind the Bloodhound project entered administration. The dream of an ultra-fast car to break the land speed record led to the creation of Bloodhound Programme Ltd in 2007, with the idea of also engaging schools and students in engineering. Bloodhound has already built and tested a viable racing car to speeds of 200mph, but the project is in debt and needs to find £25m or face being wound up... Bloodhound said its programme had been a catalyst for research and development, as well as helping interest schoolchildren worldwide in science and engineering, with an associated educational campaign reaching more than 2 million children...

The planned car is a combination of jet, F1 car and spaceship that would cover the length of four and a half football pitches in a second.

72 comments

  1. Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, it doesn't.

    I'm trying to figure out how to burn money less efficiently, aside from straight up burning it.

    1. Re:Nope. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, this seems like a silly way to burn money. The best way of "engaging schools and students in engineering" is to involve them in solving real world problems that will benefit many people. This isn't doing that.

    2. Re:Nope. by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      The best way of "engaging schools and students in engineering" is to involve them in solving real world problems that will benefit many people. This isn't doing that.

      Sure it is. With a fleet of these cars I can finally open up a home delivery taco business. Without this car, the taco shells always get soggy by the time they arrive.

    3. Re: Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So get a taco truck and make them to order upon arrival. Way better than soggy tacos.

    4. Re:Nope. by dk20 · · Score: 1

      Exactly.. What is the point of this? to go faster, so someone can try to go faster yet?

      How about they try solving some real-world problems instead?

      25 million pounds could go a long way addressing some of the real-world issues brits face (if they have a hard time figuring out what to do instead, just send it to the N.H.S.. i'm sure they can do somethign better then burn it up on a runway).

  2. impressive by fattmatt · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Bloodhound has already built and tested a viable racing car to speeds of 200mph"

    I think a couple rich guys in my neighborhood bought cars capable speeds of 200mph, with factory warranties.

    1. Re:impressive by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 0

      Yeah, this is silly. Cars like the Green Monster and Spirit of America reached more than 600mph back in the 1960s.

      This Bloodhound group might be better served visiting the old folks home and talking to the guys who worked on those cars.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:impressive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You are aware that the lead designer and project manager are the same people that worked on ThrustSSC and currently hold the land-speed record. I think they have some knowledge in this field.

    3. Re:impressive by fattmatt · · Score: 1

      Wow.

    4. Re:impressive by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      No, actually I wasn’t aware of that - thank you. Adding that particular bit of information might’ve made for a more useful summary than stating that they had a functional car which could exceed 200 mph... which does not exactly put them in an exclusive club.

      Now that I’ve read the article*, though, I’m somewhat surprised that the passing of 50+ years has not resulted in more impressive speed gains (the now-21-year-old record is 763mph). I guess it does point out the engineering difficulty of this.

      * I’ll turn in my geek card later

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re: impressive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is what the Hyperloop is needed for! 763 is the limit without Hyperloop! Gotta get that pesky air outta the way.

    6. Re:impressive by VonSkippy · · Score: 1

      " I think they have some knowledge in this field."

      Apparently they don't have any knowledge on how to fund their own project (or how you fund first, research later), something most PHD students learn right at the beginning of their studies.

    7. Re:impressive by BoogieChile · · Score: 1

      Yes, but were they jet powered?

  3. Not from me please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the kind of project we waste our money when we could invest to improve the world. It is useless to travel so fast on land. We have hyperloop and autonomous cars. Ive been doing research on buzzfeed about these emerging market. Thanks for the post

    1. Re: Not from me please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Thunderf00t, hyperloopTT is bunk... they only have 30m of track and an empty carbon-fiber shell. It needs a fan in the front, a means of propulsion, bulkhead doors, seats, an interior and basically everything. Even still, it won't work because of the enormous atmospheric pressure on a full long-distance track, thermal expansion of said long track while maintaining a vacuum, inability to capture enough sunlight to generate power and the longer than airport time it will take to be screened, board and so on for a 10-30 minute ride.

    2. Re: Not from me please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You must be one of those people who think money disappears when it gets spent.
      That if it gets spent on something like this, it can never be spent on something different.

      Here's a clue: that money goes to engineers and other staff to design and build the thing. They are then capable of spending that money themselves on anything they want, less the amount that goes back to the government as taxes.

    3. Re:Not from me please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was with you till you get to the autonomous cars nonsense.

    4. Re: Not from me please by mschuyler · · Score: 0

      That's fine, but it begs the question. We need a car that goes 1000 mph why, again?

      --
      How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
    5. Re: Not from me please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To better kill pedestrians with, of course! (They should really ask Uber for sponsorship.)

    6. Re: Not from me please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's fine, but it begs the question. We need a car that goes 1000 mph why, again?

      If you don't already understand the inherent human need to go further and faster, I expect it is beyond my ability to explain.
      Maybe it's a generational thing.

      Fatalistic me suspects it is a sign that the human spirit is dying.

    7. Re: Not from me please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody cares for a faster horse anymore. And getting a car over 300mph is already gay.

      So, we might get excited to pull our wallets if you build a fusion reactor or something you know... cool. Not something that was cool in the '60s.

  4. A horizontal rocket? by thebes · · Score: 1

    How is the goal anything different than an existing rocket with wheels on its side?

    1. Re:A horizontal rocket? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How is the goal anything different than an existing rocket with wheels on its side?

      It stays on the ground. That is the hard part. It is easy to make a rocket go fast. It is hard to control it.

      At 1000 mph, even a small amount of airflow under the car body will lift it off the ground, and in a fraction of a second you are completely airborne. Energy goes up as the square of velocity, so at 1000 mph, you have a hundred times as much energy as at 100 mph. The result is some spectacular crashes.

    2. Re: A horizontal rocket? by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      Still, rockets on wheels are a done deal, over 500 MPH decades ago, so why bother going to 1000? It's a useless means of land transport

    3. Re:A horizontal rocket? by Spy+Handler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed. I like motorsports and I like speed records, but I could never get excited about those things... it's just a rocket with wheels. Not a car.

      SR-70 Blackbird has wheels, it can roll on the ground very well, but I wouldn't call it a car. A car is propelled by drive wheels. If your vehicle is jet propelled and the wheels don't do anything except get dragged along, it's not a car.

    4. Re:A horizontal rocket? by KixWooder · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Have you seen a picture of the thing? It's an F15 without wings.

      --
      I hate fat people.
    5. Re:A horizontal rocket? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A big part of the problem is keeping the wheels on the ground when shock waves are working between the chassis and the ground to lift the vehicle, let alone stressing it beyond the breaking point.

    6. Re:A horizontal rocket? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A car is propelled by drive wheels. If your vehicle is jet propelled and the wheels don't do anything except get dragged along, it's not a car.

      What about flying car?

  5. JetF1Spaceship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's half jet, half F1 car, and half spaceship.

    How is it part "spaceship?"

    1. Re:JetF1Spaceship by NEDHead · · Score: 1

      High probability of crashing?

    2. Re:JetF1Spaceship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it hits a bump then it's going into space...

  6. 4 and a half football pitches per second by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    What does that translate to in either m/s, f/s or NFL fields per second.

    The summary is confusing with multiple different numeric systems. MPH, Football Pitches, Pounds...

    1. Re:4 and a half football pitches per second by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      What does that translate to in either m/s, f/s or NFL fields per second.

      . . . and instead of football pitches, I'd like to see it baseball pitches . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:4 and a half football pitches per second by isj · · Score: 1

      Your comment is confusing. Could you please rephrase it in terms of libraries of congress per furlong?

    3. Re:4 and a half football pitches per second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think in currently used units of speed we miss on custom units of time. I would suggest to introduce furlongs / terms of US senate for instance. Or NFL stadium / time needed to brew a beer.

    4. Re:4 and a half football pitches per second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many football pitches are in a kessel run?

    5. Re:4 and a half football pitches per second by bobstreo · · Score: 1

      Your comment is confusing. Could you please rephrase it in terms of libraries of congress per furlong?

      A Beowolf Cluster of Hot Grits of course.

    6. Re: 4 and a half football pitches per second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should be cricket fields, not baseball. You were probably already confused by the football pitch part of it.

    7. Re: 4 and a half football pitches per second by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      1,000MPH, like it says in big, black letters at the top of the fucking page.

    8. Re: 4 and a half football pitches per second by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      Whooosh!

    9. Re:4 and a half football pitches per second by pslytely+psycho · · Score: 1

      Hot grits without Natalie Portman? Blasphemy!

      --
      Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
  7. Aren't we past this silly non-sense? by Qbertino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's a huge jet turbine with wheels attached. Big fat hairy deal.
    I'm sure that was cool sometime in the early sixties or something, but come on, seriously?

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Aren't we past this silly non-sense? by Phillip2 · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's a jet and a rocket. The jet isn't fast enough.

    2. Re: Aren't we past this silly non-sense? by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      This is a study of boundary layers, nothing more.

  8. Meh by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

    If it's not driven by the wheels it's just a low flying aeroplane.

    P.S. A story about a financially infeasible car - where's Rei?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re: Meh by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Probably out pulling wild lateral G's and laying strips in his "financially-unfeasible" car.

    2. Re: Meh by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Why the scare quotes, you prick?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  9. I’m having trouble parsing this story by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Funny

    Could someone rephrase it in terms of a car analogy?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re: I’m having trouble parsing this story by iggymanz · · Score: 2

      It's like a car, but without purpose or good fuel economy. Instead of having an engine with pistons in cylinders, the whole vehicle is like a piston without a cylinder being pushed from the underside.

    2. Re:I’m having trouble parsing this story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple. It's like driving a car you didn't pay for, didn't design but using parts your friends set the prices on.. all infront of the people who did while getting all the credit.

      It's basically your typical politician claming they "implemented" some technology they had no actual involvment in.

    3. Re:I’m having trouble parsing this story by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Could someone rephrase it in terms of a car analogy?

      Elon Musk is taking preorders on the next generation Tesla Roadster, with a peak speed of at least 1000mph.

      He promises delivery next summer.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    4. Re: I’m having trouble parsing this story by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      So... not a physics major?

    5. Re: I’m having trouble parsing this story by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      yes I did major in physics and worked in the field for years.

      my description of this pointless project is accurate. there is zero need for a mach 1.5 rocket on wheels on this planet. there is need for advances in rocket propulsion in aerodynamic and ballistic flight, however. money should be spent on that, not this farce. good thing it's getting shut down.

  10. Stop! Hide this from Elon. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    This is a dastardly trick by the short sellter to provoke a reaction from Elon!

    Anytime now he is going to tween Tesla Model FU that will go 2000 mph and it will cost 20,000 $ and it will ship in 2020, reservation 2000$ starts tomorrow. "This is the next level of digital, not 1s and 0s, but 2s and 0s, because we are twice as good. 2000 mph, 20,000$ price, 2020 shipping, 2000 for preorder... See ? All 2s and 0s!"

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  11. An British Rocket Car in London by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only 1000 MPH? wots it like 2200 KPH? how many stone does the car wieght

    Does I need a Rocket Licence from the ministry of Licensing? or wot den

  12. Thanks, Bill, FOR EXPLAINING BASIC SHIT AGAIN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "See, rocket science is hard, and fast is fast... now, by the pythagorean theorem.." Bill, honestly. Go start Shanghai Bill academy - and make it opt-in instead of opt-out, please. For the love of basic shit being pedantically explained at length..

  13. Supersonic by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    1000 mph is supersonic speed, which means they will have some extra engineering to tackle

    1. Re: Supersonic by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      But only because those 'extra MPH' are supersonic, right??

    2. Re: Supersonic by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      Well, it really adds extra engineering problems

  14. If it can't steer with wheels or follow a road, by Snufu · · Score: 1

    than it is not a car. It is a broken jet plane that can't takeoff.

  15. Before I send money their way: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF is that 1 OOOMPH?

  16. The solution is literally under your ass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just eat bean & cheese burritos and stick your ass out of the back. You will have enough propulsion to break the sound barrier.

  17. Or Do Something Practical? by BrendaEM · · Score: 1

    There is so much room for improvement in the daily automobile. I doubt that a 1,000mph would add anything to our world.

    Not only would they building a car with limited usefulness, it's calibrated in US-CU and not Metric.
    It's all about being infatuated with an idea, a number.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
    1. Re: Or Do Something Practical? by Type44Q · · Score: 1
      I've heard about "daily bowel movements" but I'm unfamiliar with "daily automobiles."

      Sounds painful... are they full-scale??

  18. railgun by bigtreeman · · Score: 1

    base it on a railgun
    good for 5000 mile an hour
    why stop at 1000

    --
    Go well
    1. Re: railgun by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      "Haiku for retards?"

  19. Re:First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no!

  20. Wait, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Britain has a desert?

  21. Re: If it can't steer with wheels or follow a road by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    They're just trying to develop extremely-high stall speeds, so as to take advantage of the longest runways.