h a l f b a k e r yWhat was the question again?
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,
|
|
|
| |
Are you forgetting about thrust, or are these prop driven planes? |
|
| |
<Inspector Clouseau voice> |
|
| |
'Good afternoon Madam, I am here to inspect your feul... |
|
| |
I hate it how people say "one could", because usually more than just one could. |
|
| |
Phillips' essay is kind of funny, esp. the way it assumes the Stirling becomes more powerful with increasing altitude. Sure the air is colder, which is good for a Stirling cycle, but there's less of it, so the heat transference remains about the same. I haven't run numbers on this, but it'd be interesting to actually do a little crunching and see whether ol' Darryl is actually on the ball. |
|
| |
I also like how he assumes the prop is unaffected by altitude. If air drag decreases due to there being LESS AIR, so must lift, which limits the plane's maximum altitude for a given load, and its airspeed at that altitude: the prop is a wing whirling in a circle, after all. You can't do more with less in this case. |
|
| |
All of that said, the Stirling is under constant development, including in the aviation field. I like how its negative torque pulses are very mild compared to the ICE. That makes for happier drivelines. |
|
| |