Transpacific Tunnel.

Suggestions for improving the timeline at futuretimeline.net

Re: Transpacific Tunnel.

Postby Italian Ufo on Tue Jan 04, 2011 12:14 am

Azevo wrote:
Italian Ufo wrote:Still someone has to explain me what they are the advantages of this tunnel.

after 2050 all planes will be macht 3 and they can fly back and foward 1000 times a day, trasporting goods and passangers.

It would take decades to complete it, safety might be an issue too and most of all it would have a bad impact on the enviroment. Costs will be oltrageous as well.

What are the benefits of it?


So all these Mach 3 planes will go off without any problems?


Well cant know for sure :lol: I dont have a crystal ball, but it is likely to happen in the 50s or 60s. They will start in the 30s but they will be used like the Concord
Italian Ufo
User avatar
 
Posts: 1004
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:18 pm

Re: Transpacific Tunnel.

Postby truthiness on Sat Jan 08, 2011 12:10 am

As a person who regularly operates aircraft at around .8 Mach, I can tell you that there are some fundamental problems with operating large passenger airliners that exceed Mach 1, much less Mach 3. First, you must overcome the sound barrier, which is simpler than it sounds. Wings (or fuselages) with rounded edges don't do well in supersonic flight, because they create a thin compressed section of air in front of the wing that they must push which (to avoid a really long-winded explanation) effectively destroys the lift-producing ability of that wing - so they must be angular. This is why the Concorde looked like a paper airplane. Unfortunately, angular wings are pretty inefficient for flight at subsonic speeds, and they have a hard time holding large reserves of fuel. The only way to build an aircraft that can exceed Mach 3 and carry around 150-200 people would be to either build giant, very long, very thin goliaths, or to build some kind of hypersonic ultra-high altitude ramjet. Either way, the fuel economy would be horrible, and ticket prices would soar - so the planes wouldn't.

Now, it may be possible one day to use some kind of nanotech metamaterials to construct wings that can change shape and engines that derive some power purely from the kinetic energy around them, or using some kind of exotic atomic engines that don't need to worry about breathing air. That day is going to be farther off than a couple decades though, unless the military has some very big things up their sleeve over in the Nevada desert, and I think all that they might have out there these days might be some kind of stealth AI drone prototype - not a supersonic troop transport.

It sounds good, and every couple of years Popular Science comes out with a cover graced with the latest sketch of a Mach 5 airliner. It was a pipe dream in 1961, and it still is in 2011. Its so difficult to maintain Mach 3 that I would venture to guess that it'd be about as easy to transport people from one continent to another via a suborbital ballistic rocket-plane. At least with a spacecraft, you only have to worry about overcoming drag with thrust during the first few minutes of the flight.
truthiness
User avatar
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 11:52 pm
Location: Less often than not, Kalamazoo, MI

Re: Transpacific Tunnel.

Postby Italian Ufo on Sun Jan 09, 2011 2:02 am

[quote="truthiness"]

Thank you for your information truthiness.

Yes i think first similar air veicheles will be used for military scopes then they will be employed for passangers
Italian Ufo
User avatar
 
Posts: 1004
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:18 pm
---------

Previous

Return to Brainstorm

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron