No, flying cars are not airplanes

[Bombastinator]

1 hour ago, ShrimpBrime said:

Well your argument holds some truth while when the helicopter was invented, the native term is wing.  

 

Just as long as we agree the earth is round, all is good lol.

Science works by testing.  All it can ever successfully say is either that something is untrue or that something has yet to be proven untrue. Things get perilously close to known though the more times it is tested.  An “as x approaches infinity” kind of thing.  The postulate that the earth was a sphere was made befor 1400 ad and has been tested on more or less a minute by minute basis ever since.  Every tall ship captain who got where he was trying to get to in the 16th century, every fisherman who is able to find his way home again by sail or later by engine.  In the 1960’s there were pictures.  Every time a satalite orbits, every time someone turned on a now antiquated Loran for naval navigation.  Every long haul airplane flight ever done.  Billions and billions of tests.  Billions of time a day even. All without error. It used to be long ago that the flat earth society was created not to prove the earth was flat, but to point out that this is how science works.  It got  taken over some years ago by people who actually believed the earth was flat though.  The people who founded the society didn’t even think that.  Merely statistically the chance that the earth is not round is likely in the trillionths. Or even perhaps much smaller. 10 to the whotheheckwvencares power.  Yeah I think the earth is round. I think a bunch of similar things based on multipoint testing. 

[WkdPaul]

10 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

*snip*

11 hours ago, ShrimpBrime said:

*snip*

 

Imma start a society called the-Earth-is-approximately-an-ellipsoid and I'll laugh at both flat-earthers and round-earthers! Plebs, all of them !

 

 

on-topic ; yeah, as @Bombastinator pointed out, it's all a question of vaguely defined terms, since VOTL are often referenced as 'aircrafts' even though they almost always have all the making of what is commonly called an airplane (lookup 'tailsitter' and 'tiltrotor', I get that helicopters are VTOL aircrafts, but here I'm specifically talking about those that have wings, a rudder, and tailplane).

[Letgomyleghoe]

On 2/10/2021 at 8:39 AM, wkdpaul said:

talking about those that have wings, a rudder, and tailplane).

a wing is enough to make a plane, the plane itself can literally be just a wing, as shown by the horten ho 229, B52-spirit, and northrop N1-m and similar designs. 

generally speaking a plane would be any object that was designed to move forwards in motion and create lift using bernoulli's principle. 

[Bombastinator]

1 minute ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

a wing is enough to make a plane, the plane itself can literally be just a wing, as shown by the horten ho 229, B52-spirit, and northrop N1-m and similar designs. 

generally speaking a plane would be any object that was designed to move forwards in motion and create lift using bernoulli's principle. 

Which is to say that in order to do a flying car rockets would be needed since they’re basically the only thing that doesn’t use it.  So the spaceX booster engines only I guess. 

[Letgomyleghoe]

4 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Which is to say that in order to do a flying car rockets would be needed since they’re basically the only thing that doesn’t use it.  So the spaceX booster engines only I guess. 

I mean the way I would imagine a flying car is pop out wings that could take off of open highways or roads. there's no current technology that could lift a whole car without wings. and wings that could create enough lift would have to be massive. 

I really don't see elon or anyone pulling this off for a long, long time. 

[Bombastinator]

1 hour ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

I mean the way I would imagine a flying car is pop out wings that could take off of open highways or roads. there's no current technology that could lift a whole car without wings. and wings that could create enough lift would have to be massive. 

I really don't see elon or anyone pulling this off for a long, long time. 

There was an attempt with stub wings.  The trick is to make the thing go really fast.  There was some bass shoe magnate that was backing one.  Used som system with multiple engines.  The problem wasn’t that different than the one with early ospreys.  The most fragile period happens as the Vehicle transitions fro vertical to horizontal flight.  They can fall out of the sky.  This happened and killed the guy.

[Letgomyleghoe]

4 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

There was an attempt with stub wings.  The trick is to make the thing go really fast.  There was some bass shoe magnate that was backing one.  Used som system with multiple engines.  The problem wasn’t that different than the one with early ospreys.  The most fragile period happens as the Vehicle transitions fro vertical to horizontal flight.  They can fall out of the sky.  This happened and killed the guy.

VTOL take off seems in so way wrong, like you said it's hard for the vehicles to transfer from vertical to horizontal flight, and carries a lot of risks. one simple mistake and you're in a flat stall.

[Bombastinator]

4 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

VTOL take off seems in so way wrong, like you said it's hard for the vehicles to transfer from vertical to horizontal flight, and carries a lot of risks. one simple mistake and you're in a flat stall.

The issue with vtol i  thought is it generally requires gigantic amounts of lift.  Wildly inefficient.  There was a Russian jump jet that actually carried an extra engine just to do it.

[Letgomyleghoe]

5 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

The issue with vtol i  thought is it generally requires gigantic amounts of lift.  Wildly inefficient.  There was a Russian jump jet that actually carried an extra engine just to do it.

yak 38 is the plane you're thinking of, harrier has the same if I'm not mistaken. 

never mind I was mistaken, the F35 has a lift fan, the harrier uses nozzles so that it is able to "vector" the thrust

[Bombastinator]

3 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

yak 38 is the plane you're thinking of, harrier has the same if I'm not mistaken. 

Harrier has a weird  system unlike basically every other jet.  It’s got a single engine with four outlets that all push through vectored trust vanes that look a bit like barn vents.  Doesnt even look like a regular jet engine.  
the f2(2?3?5?) is pretty weird too.  It  does vtol, but it’s got a single jet engine attached to a 90° propeller in the center of the plane between the wings behind a little door.  The thing sort of turns into a turboprop when hovering. 

[Letgomyleghoe]

6 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Harrier has a weird  system unlike basically every other jet.  It’s got a single engine with four outlets that all push through vectored trust vanes that look a bit like barn vents.  Doesnt even look like a regular jet engine.  
the f2(2?3?5?) is pretty weird too.  It  does vtol, but it’s got a single jet engine attached to a 90° propeller in the center of the plane between the wings behind a little door.  The thing sort of turns into a turboprop when hovering. 

yak 38 does the same with the split outlets, but it also has two jets for the soul purpose of VTOL.

F35 does the propeller thing and has a rolls royce "lift fan" the rear end of the jet also droops down and creates a 90 degree angle. 

[Bombastinator]

7 minutes ago, Letgomyleghoe said:

yak 38 does the same with the split outlets, but it also has two jets for the soul purpose of VTOL.

F35 does the propeller thing and has a rolls royce "lift fan" the rear end of the jet also droops down and creates a 90 degree angle. 

Ah.  35.  I can never keep those numbers straight.  The airframes are all supposed to be really similar. Not sure how true that is in practice though.   Yeah.  Actual thrust from the jet too so not really a turboprop, but only “sort of”.  center fan is a ducted fan too for extra weirdness.  I thought full vectored thrust  for the rear exaust.  They could point it in any direction with the design they have.  It’s done like a stove pipe with multiple circular oval joints. 

[SansVarnic]

On 2/9/2021 at 8:24 PM, Bombastinator said:

pache and cobra has wings to put the missiles on.

Just want to make a slight (insignificant) correction. These are referred to as wings but are in fact weapon struts, they do not actually form a surface that could perform like a wing.

Carry on.

[Bombastinator]

10 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

Just want to make a slight (insignificant) correction. These are referred to as wings but are in fact weapon struts, they do not actually form a surface that could perform like a wing.

Carry on.

Yeah.  Army is always careful with that one.  If they had a function airfoil they would run afoul of the “no fixed wing” requirement.