h a l f b a k e r y
This ain't rocket surgery.
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
Login
Create account.
|
|
|
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.
| |
Might work once. The second time someone will have a shoulder fired missile to stop that foolishness. (-) |
|
| |
Also hard to aim. You are going to get your guys nearby as well. And everything down range and up range. |
|
| |
There are more precise ways to break windows. |
|
| |
Shock wave damage is actually the means utilized by fuel air bombs. |
|
| |
//Shock wave damage is actually the means utilized by fuel air bombs.//So, fly slower and use the fuel you save to make more fuel-air bombs. |
|
| |
Are you suggesting fuel air bombs be used as propellant? |
|
| |
A jet engine is basically a controlled fuel/air bomb. Well, actually any liquid fueled internal combustion engine is, actually. |
|
| |
//Are you suggesting fuel air bombs be used as propellant//
I understand the concept beind Project Orion was tested with conventional explosives, so yes, why not? |
|
| |
That's a pretty broad interpretation of the mode of damage of an FAE. |
|
| |
Shockwave = overpressure wave. eh. kinda. |
|
| |
I wasn't offering a technical description there just trying to make a general comparison. Both utilize a pressure wave as the destructive force. |
|
| |
What do you expect from a UCF student? (just kidding, UCF is at least marginally better than MIT) |
|
| |
"Fearless Leader, the infidels have destroyed our plate glass windows and bone china again!" |
|
| |
"Curse You, George Bush!!!" |
|
| |
Fly closer to the AAA batteries = bone. |
|
| |
How about clapping really loudly, that can be quite annoying. |
|
| |
Yeah, we shouldn't be using AAA batteries when we could be using solar cells instead. (sorry, that may be a bit UK-centric: AAA is a small size of electric battery for toys, flashlights or whatever) |
|
| |
Never once have I seen James Bond bowled over by a near miss bullet going at supersonic speed, saying 'Dash it all Moneypenny, I was felled by the shockwave. And by the way where's my laserbeam watch?' |
|
| |
//"Curse You, George Bush!!!"// |
|
| |
Now now, we must remember how we are percieved by other nations. It would be more like, "Curse you, Mickey Mouse!" |
|
| |
(I read an American WW2 vet's personal account of the war, and he was in a foxhole not far from a similarly-protected Japanese soldier he was fighting against. They both were trying to get the other to break cover, so he yelled out a few choice insults about the Emporer Hirohito. Upon hearing this, the Japanese soldier yelled out something equally vicious-sounding about Mickey Mouse) |
|
| |
Based on [ling]s video up there I would say we have pretty well shown that this would not work as all those navy guys seem to be holding up pretty well from their shock wave experience. |
|
| |
Why not get a computerized drone to do that? Oh well, close enough. [+] |
|
| |
//Why not get a computerized drone to do that?//
(que nasally voice) 'I'm on my lunchbreak m'kay'. |
|
| |
[jhom] - the image of the F-18 does not actually show a shock wave, as the jet is not flying supersonic. It's just a pressure ridge. In the low pressure behind it, the humidity in the air momentarily condenses, causing the cloud. |
|
| |
Quick sanity check: a shock-wave propagates outward from the source at the speed of sound - no surprise there. If the aircraft were travelling at the same speed forward that the shockwave moves outward, the angle of the leading edge of the wave would be 45 deg. back from perpendicular to the flight path. (1 to 1 ratio of plane motion to sound propagation.) You can continue on and show that angle to be equal to asin(1/n) where n is the Mach number. (In reality, compression effects create a different result, but this is a good rule-of-thumb approximation.) The angle of the compression wave in the video is quite clearly less than 45°. |
|
| |
And - by the way - that's not an F-18. It's an F-14 Tomcat. |
|
| |
lurch, are you sure the jet's not flying supersonic and the video isn't playing at a slower-than-life- speed so you can see it more clearly? Because there's a photo on Wiki of an identical plane with an identical cloud around it, and the caption is //A United States Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornet in transonic flight.// |
|
| |
I have a large poster on my wall of the same thing, again stating the cause of the phenomenon as breaking the sound barrier. |
|
| |
Get out your protractor and do the math. It's making about 300 - 350 kts. |
|
| |
Um, lurch, watch the video again. It clearly goes to slow-motion just as the plane passes the spectators. Just as it makes it's approach, it is clearly going much faster. |
|
| |
And I don't know what you think a protractor is going to do, you don't have a definitive size for anything in the video, therefore you have no frame of reference for measuring anything. |
|
| |
You can also see the water ahead of the plane being agitated by its passing. |
|
| |
I'll be back in a bit with a link to a picture of a Fed-Ex DC-10 doing the same thing. With the gear down. <edit> Ok, the one I thought I remembered didn't show it very well, as it was in clouds. This triple-7 does pretty good, though.</edit> |
|
| |
[21Q] - protractor measures angle, not size. Works just fine, as long as you have a good side view. It won't work on the Wiki link you posted, I admit, because we don't have a broadside view of the plane. |
|
| |
//You can also see the water ahead of the plane being agitated by its passing.// Quite right. If he were supersonic, what would be reaching out front to create the disturbance, eh? |
|
| |
lurch, take a look at the very fast bug in the link. |
|
| |
[lurch] that's a great picture, but it's not relevant to the (sidetracked) discussion. That shows the lower pressure above a wing causing vapor to condense out of nearly-saturated air--the plane is just above a cloud/fog, so conditions are just right, and the plane is flying slow (I like the vortices off the flap ends). |
|
| |
The video shows the reduced pressure behind a shockwave's high pressure, causing vapor to condense out of nearly-saturated air. The "disturbance ahead of the plane" is not ahead of the plane, it's below and behind, but the camera angle is bad. But it and other vapor areas are below the plane, which would ordinarily be an area of increased pressure. |
|
| |
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't one of the key items to control of airplanes during transition through the sound barrier the design of the tail section such that the control surfaces are designed such that they are able to bridge the Shock wave front as it passes down the length of the jets body? In essence this says that the shock wave actually trails the plane and as such the pressure wave visible in the video could not be from a sonic wave in origin? |
|
| |
[lurch] my earlier comment was aimed more at the fact that though uncomfortable the sonic shock wave from an airplane is far less destructive than the author believes. |
|
| |
A shockwave can damage glass and other fragile objects (and has). But, as was implied above, it won't have much power--it can't cause any more damage in one second than could be caused by one second's worth of jet fuel used as a fuel-air bomb. |
|
| |
There are many shock waves coming off a plane, with the biggest off the front. See
Schlieren link. |
|
| |
[jhom] I'm saying you are wrong, but not taking time to correct you. Sorry. |
|
| |
Again, the shockwave makes pressure in the air, but the air bounces back from that compression/pressure, creating an underpressure area (it's a wave). That underpressure/expansion causes water vapor in the air to condense, if conditions are right (humid, cool, almost foggy). The cone of vapor is not in the shockwave, it is behind it in the recovery/reaction/bounceback zone. |
|
| |
HEY! It just occurs to me that it may be possible to make this idea work better. |
|
| |
If the plane flew in a supersonic circle around the target, a lot of shockwaves would hit it. If the plane flew in an ever-tightening spiral, all the shockwaves could arrive nearly at once, which ought to make more of an impact. The math shouldn't be too hard to program into an autopilot. |
|
| |
//A shockwave can damage glass and other fragile objects // |
|
| |
Yep. So can a simple-to-produce high-pitched tone. What breaks glass does not necessarily break bodies. |
|
| |
Quite true, and what I meant. Thanks for clarifying. |
|
| |
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. If you are rupturing enemy spleens at 90m with force x, you are going to need a initial force that radially dissipates in three dimensions, i.e dissipates under the inverse cube law. Fasten your rivet guns, we are building one hella plane! |
|
| |
I think you would probably be better off with a giant Airzooka. |
|
| |
The tightening circle is a great idea! |
|
| |