h a l f b a k e r yTastes richer, less filling.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
This blimp is large enough to lift a human and its own set of motors. The motors are partially controlled by the wings wielded by said human, who is strapped to the blimp. The motors are sufficiently powerful (and controlled by a sufficiently fast computer) to counteract any sluggishness created by drag
on the blimp, but it will not do more than that. So the human will effectively weigh nothing and be able to freely and nimbly fly about as he wishes.
The computer calculates an amount of lift and drag to simulate, and allows dips, dives, and other aerobatics based on those perimeters.
Exercise Is For The Birds
Exercise_20Is_20For_20The_20Birds
[Skewed, Jan 15 2020]
Helium Balloons Lift Calculator
https://www.omnical...ife/helium-balloons
[Voice, Jan 24 2020]
Calculating Lifting Capacity of Airships
https://medium.com/...rships-48df5cd7d147
[Voice, Jan 24 2020]
Exercise is for the birds III
Exercise_20is_20for_20the_20birds_20III
[Skewed, Jan 25 2020]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
But with added computer calculated & controlled
thrust to counter the
sluggishness (drag) caused by the original method of
countering the square cuby law type effects of the power
to
mass ratio physics thingumybob. I like it [+] |
|
| |
//based on those perimeters// |
|
| |
Only works within a predetermined geographic space then? |
|
| |
Yes, I'm afraid it will not work in a vacuum. |
|
| |
Why use a blimp ? Why not use rockets ? |
|
| |
//Why use a blimp ? Why not use rockets ?// |
|
| |
1. That might be sensible & this is the halfbakery. |
|
| |
2. Modern science (I use the word advisedly & in it's loosest
possible definition) assisted steampunk iterations are much
more fun than something that works. |
|
| |
3. It always makes more sense to add another layer of
complexity to fix a problem instead of going back &
reassessing things from scratch. |
|
| |
4. I don't like scorched heels. |
|
| |
And [Uncharacteristically (beyond the field of politics), 'in
all seriousness']. |
|
| |
5. Getting from a to b quickly was never the point. |
|
| |
Alright then, a hydrogen blimp plus rockets. What could possibly go wrong ? |
|
| |
They don't have to be solid fuel rockets. For safety reasons, it might be better to use a liquid fuelled system, perhaps methanol/HTP like the Me 163 ... |
|
| |
With an adequately aerodynamic rigid or semi-rigid blimp I'm
guessing a few relatively small electric fan air turbines
would
probably suffice. |
|
| |
[If we downgraded both the thrust & lift assist incrementally
over time as the 'athlete' trains how small might we eventually
get both] |
|
| |
[& what might the athlete's physique look like by then] |
|
| |
// a few relatively small electric fan air turbines would probably suffice. // |
|
| |
You're no fun any more, you know that ? |
|
| |
We can always add the strap-on from the original idea back in
if that would help ;D |
|
| |