Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

keep_left

(1,864 posts)
10. The real problem is the energy expenditure. For sure, materials and engines...
Fri Aug 25, 2023, 03:06 PM
Aug 2023

...are so much better than even a couple decades ago; the new jet engines seem like reverse-engineered UFO tech compared with what we had in the '80s. But physics plays some cruel tricks on engineers, especially when we want to pack a couple hundred people into an aircraft that can travel at that kind of speed. Physics is already playing cruel tricks on emissions and fuel consumption right now. Making jet engines and aircraft more fuel-efficient with lower emissions is a major engineering challenge even at Mach 0.85, let alone Mach 4.

It makes one wonder whether we will eventually end up with nuclear-powered planes. However, that didn't work out so well the last time we tried it (both the US and USSR).

They've been "studying" this for decades Sympthsical Aug 2023 #1
Materials and methods have come a long way in that time. A HERETIC I AM Aug 2023 #2
Of course Sympthsical Aug 2023 #5
Tech is not quite here yet. Big problem is the engines. Angleae Aug 2023 #8
What they might do... jmowreader Aug 2023 #24
You know what they say about fusion... harumph Aug 2023 #3
The real problem is the energy expenditure. For sure, materials and engines... keep_left Aug 2023 #10
That would be great Takket Aug 2023 #4
Not what we need LiberaBlueDem Aug 2023 #6
Not going to be a problem Red Mountain Aug 2023 #7
So, everyone should stay at home? brooklynite Aug 2023 #9
Take a walk, ride in your EV LiberaBlueDem Aug 2023 #11
America doesn't "subsidize planes"... brooklynite Aug 2023 #15
Airports, etc LiberaBlueDem Aug 2023 #18
We subsidize the fuel the planes consume NickB79 Aug 2023 #25
Thanks. That's a great example of a "hasty generalization" Model35mech Aug 2023 #20
I'm booked on a steam ship from NY to Southampton BannonsLiver Aug 2023 #23
International travel is impractical without aviation brooklynite Aug 2023 #27
Well it sounds as if you make choices Model35mech Aug 2023 #28
Pretty much, yes NickB79 Aug 2023 #26
That's the DU spirit! BannonsLiver Aug 2023 #21
Missed the Boat - Concorde - w/Video NowISeetheLight Aug 2023 #12
I study the aviation market and knew it was going to shut down. brooklynite Aug 2023 #16
Moving closer to something we had decades ago. Crunchy Frog Aug 2023 #13
There was a documentary made about the SST program of the late '60s to early '70s. keep_left Aug 2023 #14
It was never intended to carry the same passenger loads as the 747... brooklynite Aug 2023 #17
One of the planes was. It was covered in the documentary I saw (I think on PBS). keep_left Aug 2023 #19
We had that. Now, we do not. MineralMan Aug 2023 #22
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»NASA moves a step closer ...»Reply #10