Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

a raher large extension of those banked corner analyses


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,811 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 28 March 2017 - 16:22

Most vehicle dynamics books have page on the forces acting on a car in a banked corner - " hands off" line etc.

 

You may have seen this but a Dutch government aircraft researcher is proposing circular runways ( yes)

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...gazine-39284294

 

Like many oddball ideas there is a logic to it in terms of noise spread etc.

 

However I do think the parabolic curvature will have to be quite large to cater for a 200 mph landing to zero mph without putting a lot of side load into a 30 ton A380 sized plane!

 

 



Advertisement

#2 Charlieman

Charlieman
  • Member

  • 1,728 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 28 March 2017 - 21:00

Yes, that might work after we have scrapped all existing planes capable of landing.

---

Spread the noise? The economic imperative (lower rent, lower purchase price) to live below Heathrow airport might diminish. I'm not convinced that spreading the noise would be welcome.



#3 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 12,505 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 28 March 2017 - 22:38

I liked the idea that it allows any angle of attack for landing to eliminate cross wind being a big problem. I just can't help think landing in a curve won't be as easy as landing in a straight line. But if computers are doing it I suppose it's irrelevant.



#4 RacingGreen

RacingGreen
  • Member

  • 2,505 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 29 March 2017 - 06:52

Yes, that might work after we have scrapped all existing planes capable of landing.

---

Spread the noise? The economic imperative (lower rent, lower purchase price) to live below Heathrow airport might diminish. I'm not convinced that spreading the noise would be welcome.

 

I went back to the UK over Christmas after I've been living in Australia for over 20 years. My Australian born wife and I were taken by my brother and his wife to Windsor Castle. My wife was horrified that the Queen lives so close to the flight path until my brother pointed out it was probably because it was easier to get planning permission.


Edited by RacingGreen, 29 March 2017 - 06:53.


#5 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 1,459 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 29 March 2017 - 10:29


Strangely enough - during the war they were contemplating launching fighters by having them tethered to a central point, taking off in a circle (like a "control-line" model plane) - and then dropping the tether and flying off. Not successful apparently.

#6 danmills

danmills
  • Member

  • 1,234 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 29 March 2017 - 12:14

30 ton? Might want to multiply that by 20!



#7 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 9,892 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 01 April 2017 - 02:18

30 ton? Might want to multiply that by 20!

Then divide it by two!



#8 GreenMachine

GreenMachine
  • Member

  • 1,521 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 01 April 2017 - 04:21

or just add a zero ... :cool:



#9 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,772 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 10 April 2017 - 01:13

As a tot, I was fascinated with a story in one of the workbench magazines about a pilot in the Canadian wilderness. For takeoffs in his small clearing with a Piper J-3, he would attach a rope to a stake in the ground and then circle around like a lunatic until he reached takeoff speed, then release the rope. 



#10 GreenMachine

GreenMachine
  • Member

  • 1,521 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 10 April 2017 - 02:32

And did it say how he got the Cub in there in the first place?

 

WB Magoo, I haven't seen you for a while ... :wave:



#11 Magoo

Magoo
  • Member

  • 2,772 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 14 April 2017 - 04:05

And did it say how he got the Cub in there in the first place?

 

WB Magoo, I haven't seen you for a while ... :wave:

 

Scribbling on my own little blog and so forth. I'll try to check in more often. 



#12 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,811 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 21 April 2017 - 17:05

"Circular runway guy" now has EU fundin to cary on and has done a Q+A session.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...gazine-39643292

 

Still not sure on the parabolic bit, or specifically, how each pilot plots his curve down the banking to minimise side G forces.

 

Of course Bill Milliken's vehicle dynamics and tyre work started with side loads on military aircraft undercarraiges so the answers probably exist.



#13 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 16,975 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 21 April 2017 - 17:41

"Circular runway guy" now has EU fundin to cary on and has done a Q+A session.

And there, boys and girls, is why we need to get out of the EU as soon as possible!

 

Or does April Fool's last all month in the Netherlands?

 

I find it incredible that anyone would consider this a serious idea for more than a miilisecond.



#14 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,730 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 21 April 2017 - 20:43

Surely making a banked mega corner is more expensive than just flattening a pile of gravel and tarmacking it.



#15 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 6,733 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 25 April 2017 - 00:09

I find it incredible that anyone would consider this a serious idea for more than a miilisecond.

 

If someone one hundred years ago would have said that we would be transporting as many passengers in aircraft as we would in trains, people may have thought , "a steam engine would never fit in an aircraft made of wood and ropes".



#16 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,811 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 25 April 2017 - 12:14

by their nature engineers have ideas which may have fatal social/emotive flaws.

 

Long ago pre-AV's etc one suggestion to reduce  airport overcrowding was to link two planes electronically so they could be vectored in and landed as "one" plane for Air Traffic Contol purposes under the control of the front plane's crew. They could fly in from different places and go to different gates but one landing.

 

The commercial people had to point out the obvious flaw - the seat prices in the second "slave" plane would have to be discounted.

 

My own "silly" idea is linear accelerator ramps under freeway entry roads. A sensor calculates the oncoming traffic speed and gap,s and drives the entering car rapidly to the full lane speed as the gap arrives. It greatly increases freeway capacity as entry speed differentials are major cause  of traffic jams.

 

My family politely tell me that not every driver want to pull 2 g forward aceleration onto a busy  70 mph freeway so..........


Edited by mariner, 25 April 2017 - 12:23.


#17 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 16,975 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 25 April 2017 - 19:36

If someone one hundred years ago would have said that we would be transporting as many passengers in aircraft as we would in trains, people may have thought , "a steam engine would never fit in an aircraft made of wood and ropes".

Not really the same thing though, is it?

 

Fifty years ago, they were telling us that we would all have flying cars by now.  And we haven't.  Not that this is the same thing either.



#18 munks

munks
  • Member

  • 428 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 27 April 2017 - 14:39

The commercial people had to point out the obvious flaw - the seat prices in the second "slave" plane would have to be discounted.

 

I'm not quite following - why?



#19 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 1,459 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 28 April 2017 - 04:59

by their nature engineers have ideas which may have fatal social/emotive flaws.
 
Long ago pre-AV's etc one suggestion to reduce  airport overcrowding was to link two planes electronically so they could be vectored in and landed as "one" plane for Air Traffic Contol purposes under the control of the front plane's crew. They could fly in from different places and go to different gates but one landing.
 
The commercial people had to point out the obvious flaw - the seat prices in the second "slave" plane would have to be discounted.
 
My own "silly" idea is linear accelerator ramps under freeway entry roads. A sensor calculates the oncoming traffic speed and gap,s and drives the entering car rapidly to the full lane speed as the gap arrives. It greatly increases freeway capacity as entry speed differentials are major cause  of traffic jams.
 
My family politely tell me that not every driver want to pull 2 g forward aceleration onto a busy  70 mph freeway so..........


Referring to linear accelerators etc. for joining freeways - this is a similar idea to having really advanced self-driving cars' computers communicating with each other and "arranging" a gap in the freeway traffic to allow merging traffic etc. Also talking to each other to prevent bunching on highways and collisions at intersections and maybe even finding parking spaces etc.? - plus finding their own way about. Might be quite a few years before it happens though.