Concord to be replaced... By a hydrogen burning aircraft???

[SUBMAN1]

Now this is the type of progress I love! Aerospace is on the right track for once! I hope you suceed in your endeavor Mr. European space Agency! America should look at you for inspiration.

-S

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/10/23/218658/eu-to-fund-hypersonic-civil-transport-research.html


http://regmedia.co.uk/2007/10/24/a2_hyperliner.jpg

[VipertheSniper]

the wing design looks like a copy from the Myasishchyev M-50 "Bounder"

And I have to wonder if it's really of that size compared to the A380, the wings looks a bit small and somewhat too much at the back of the plane... well, I'm no expert on aerodynamics, but it really doesn't look like it'd fly well...

[JSLTIGER]

Based on the wing structure, I'd imagine that they're looking at this like an F-104.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/24/Lockheed_XF-104.jpg
Built for speed between places rather than maneuverability.

[Letum]

Very early stages.

[VipertheSniper]

The Starfighter also crossed my mind when seeing the CG pic

[SUBMAN1]

Very early stages.Yep. I have little faith in the Europeans to put it together, but I hope they do. The world needs projects like this.

-S

[Mike@UK]

I suppose it's not a good sign that the design for that plane reminds me of the ol' "Fireflash" passenger jet of doom, from Thunderbirds. :lol:

http://davidszondy.com/future/Thunderbirds/cap029.jpg

[Rhodes]

I suppose it's not a good sign that the design for that plane reminds me of the ol' "Fireflash" passenger jet of doom, from Thunderbirds. :lol:

http://davidszondy.com/future/Thunderbirds/cap029.jpg

Damn, too late, I was going to mention that the concept plane look like the ones use on the thunderbirds episodes...:D Great one:up: Mike@UK

[Letum]

Whats the point of super-sonic aircraft?

I would rather have a more comftable, but slow plane than a faster one.
Something you could walk around it with a bar would be nice. Perhaps a viewing platform as well and a cafe.

Bring back the zeppalin.

[JSLTIGER]

Whats the point of super-sonic aircraft?

I would rather have a more comftable, but slow plane than a faster one.
Something you could walk around it with a bar would be nice. Perhaps a viewing platform as well and a cafe.

Bring back the zeppalin.
Zeppelins are more than just slow...they're too expensive to operate in the modern world. Keep in mind it's not just the cost of the lifting gas, ballast, and fuel, but there's also the lack of pilots, the multi-million cost of building them in the first place, and the very expensive ground-crew costs and the MASSIVE hangars required to house the zeppelins in storms.

Zeppelin hangars at Moffett Field along the runways (former home to the USS Akron and USS Macon, US Navy Zeppelins):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/Aerial_View_of_Moffett_Field.jpg

What can happen when an airship is not placed in a hangar:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Zr3nearvertical.jpg

[Letum]

Zeppelins are more than just slow...they're too expensive to operate in the modern world.
Oh, sure, I don't doubt it. They where always expensive.
Likewise, so are super sonic jets; if only to cover the development costs.

But I imagine you could make a comfortable large jet if you halved the number of
passengers and dubbed the price per ticket.

Better than halving the transit time and doubling the ticket prices IMHO.

I suspect I might be in a minority tho, so it wont make financial sense.

*edit* What is that HUGE whie door at the bottom of your photo?

[Skybird]

What can happen when an airship is not placed in a hangar:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Zr3nearvertical.jpg
At least it is no "hydrogen burning aircraft". :smug:

[Oberon]

What can happen when an airship is not placed in a hangar:

At least it is no "hydrogen burning aircraft". :smug:

No...no...that would be this...
http://www.failuremag.com/images/hindenburg.jpg

Still would love to travel on one though...I mean, it's like a flying ocean liner, no cattle class.
Tickets would be bloody expensive though... :damn:

[Tchocky]

The M-50 also sprang to mind

http://www.aviation.ru/Mya/M-50.jpg

Although I can't decide which I'd prefer to see flying today, the M-50 or the Thunderbirds airliner :D

[JSLTIGER]

What can happen when an airship is not placed in a hangar:
At least it is no "hydrogen burning aircraft". :smug:
No...no...that would be this...
http://www.failuremag.com/images/hindenburg.jpg

Still would love to travel on one though...I mean, it's like a flying ocean liner, no cattle class.
Tickets would be bloody expensive though... :damn:

Well keep in mind that in that photo is not only the hydrogen burning but the outer skin, which was composed of some of the ingredients of rocket fuel and thermite.

[Letum]

What can happen when an airship is not placed in a hangar:
At least it is no "hydrogen burning aircraft". :smug:
No...no...that would be this...
http://www.failuremag.com/images/hindenburg.jpg

Still would love to travel on one though...I mean, it's like a flying ocean liner, no cattle class.
Tickets would be bloody expensive though... :damn:
Well keep in mind that in that photo is not only the hydrogen burning but the outer skin, which was composed of some of the ingredients of rocket fuel and thermite.

Yes and no.

That great big fire ball is hydrogen burning, The outer skin could burn, but not violently. The comparison to rocket fuel and thermite does not make much sense.

The question is:
A) did it propagate the fire faster than the burning hydrogen?
B) did it's flammability cause the fire somehow?

It's totally academic, because once a fire has started in a hydrogen tank as flimsy
as that, then it will burn away very quickly; what ever the skin is made of.

The Hindenburg was no big disaster compared to contemporary air disasters with jet
aircraft. In fact, many people inside the ship survived the fire. The safety record of
the zeppelins was good, but public confidence was shattered.

Hydrogen is not much more flammable than any other kind of aviation fuel, alto,
granted; there is a lot more of it. The problem with the old airships was not the
hydrogen, but structure of the hydrogen cells.
There was a almost total lack of cell isolation, self-sealing and other leak/fire
prevention mechanisms.

[JSLTIGER]

I didn't state that the skin caused the fire or that it burned more quickly than the hydrogen, however, there is some evidence that the skin played a role in contributing to the spread of the fire, although the hydrogen certainly was the primary factor.

[Officerpuppy]

I didn't state that the skin caused the fire or that it burned more quickly than the hydrogen, however, there is some evidence that the skin played a role in contributing to the spread of the fire, although the hydrogen certainly was the primary factor.

I agree :know: There is a show that dealt with this issue.

http://www.shoppbs.org/product/index.jsp?productId=1404094&cp=1378003.2722837&sr=1&origkw=secrets+of+the+dead&parentPage=family

[Biggles]

Let's hope it won't be as expensive as the Concorde. The doom of the Concorde was not the crash in Paris (although it certainly wasn't good commercial for 'em), but the hilariously high cost to produce and fly the bugger. They never earned money on the flights, since there was so few that wanted to fly so expensive, and even if they found someone who wanted to pay the cost of a ticket, it wouldn't pay for the total cost of keeping the plane in air.

[DeepIron]

BTW, concerning the Hindenburg tragedy, few people know that out of 97 passengers and crew, only 36 were killed... including 1 handler on the ground.

Imagine an Airbus or 747...