Vectored thrust

your flight time goes to hell though with the weight of batteries/the thrust to weight ratio of the motors

and, that's assuming you use the EXACT same method as the harrier, the method you are talking about is VERY different from that the harrier uses, yo make an analog with ducted fans you would put it near the front of your plane, and redirect the thrust tht would go out the exhaust nozzle, and instead through six (eight?) nozzzles under the anhedral wings, which just won't work

there is a difference between making it work, and making it work exactly as the actual plane does

your method is closer to the f-35

 

I'd rather have a jet pack.

 

I can't get an adequate representation of the thrust ports on an F-35, so I'm not sure. But I'm talking about exactly the way a Harrier is vectored. Rotating exhaust nozzles with louvered lateral trim. But you're correct, even with a tubular Ti frame and skin, the battery weight required to operate 4 servos for vectoring, two for elevators, one for rudder and one for throttle would screw the weight to thrust ratio. Sorry. Old tech doesn't work with modern thought... sometimes...

 

can't we talk about something interesting like boobs or makeup?

 

It's 2009, wheres my fucking jet pack.

 

You people are just threatened by the intelligence and flowing creativity of budding aerospace engineers.

Cretins.

 

now, if we had batteries with better mAh per oz, maybe we could do something like that with fans, but right now I think the options are rotors, or propellers, the problem with both is, they're just fucking ugly in a jet.

and, of course, big surface area

Alternatively, you could custom build a fan for REALLY high RPM, and then purpose build exhaust and things, but the math and fabrication would be stupid

also finding a super high RPM motor that won't light your plane on fire.




I should just build an RC ekranoplan.

 

You can't get enough focused thrust out of a propeller.

Yeah, you know ugly.

 

you'd have to use a prop and puffers, or redirect all of the props thrust through something louvered to focus it, the problem would be massive variations because the propeller would flex, and change the instantaneous thrust everywhere under it (among other abnormalities of props)

 

what about plasma accelerators on future rockets?

 

OK so a pair of ducted fans powered by a single, one-cylinder compression engine.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_thermal_rocket

too dangerous.

 

one cyl is really quite efficient in some ways.

and, chemical fuel can store enough energy

but, you wouldn't get to have an electric plane, but, you know, seems to be reason for that kind of sacrifice.

 

OK send me the drawings, I'll have it CAD'd, spec'd and parted and we'll get it built.

 

I need to learn to CAD myself, I can't draw for shit.