# First ever plane with no moving parts takes flight



## Ursa major (Nov 22, 2018)

First ever plane with no moving parts takes flight



> The first ever “solid state” plane, with no moving parts in its propulsion system, has successfully flown for a distance of 60 metres, proving that heavier-than-air flight is possible without jets or propellers.


----------



## Venusian Broon (Nov 22, 2018)

Title is slightly off, I think, cause I've made loads of excellent paper darts with no moving parts decades ago ;-)

But thankfully Ursa you clarify a little more precisely what it should be!


----------



## Ursa major (Nov 22, 2018)

I suppose it depends on one's definitions of "takes off" and "without any moving parts", particularly when combined with each other.

Paper darts and gliders (not to mention paragliders and wingsuits) require external forces (some of them with moving parts) to get them into the air (not always _up_ into the air), such as human arms, catapults, planes (and other means of proving a tow), the wind and gravity.

The plane that's the subject of this thread requires no external aid in order to get off the ground.


----------



## Venusian Broon (Nov 22, 2018)

Ursa major said:


> I suppose it depends on one's definitions of "takes off" and "without any moving parts", particularly when combined with each other.
> 
> Paper darts and gliders (not to mention paragliders and wingsuits) require external forces (some of them with moving parts) to get them into the air (not always _up_ into the air), such as human arms, catapults, planes (and other means of proving a tow), the wind and gravity.
> 
> The plane that's the subject of this thread requires no external aid in order to get off the ground.


Yes, i found the title a tad ambiguous.

But, in a good pedantic sense wrong. All areoplanes require external aid to fly and get off the ground - including this one. Good luck trying to make it fly in a vacuum.


----------



## TheEndIsNigh (Nov 22, 2018)

I assume it could only manage 60 meters due to the batteries not being able to sustain 20,000 volts for very long.

Not sure the energy equations add up.

But it's an interesting article as I assume this is similar to how an ion drive works and I've always been curious ablout those.

That said, if it's the same principle then why has it taken so long?


----------



## Ursa major (Nov 22, 2018)

> All areoplanes require external aid to fly and get off the ground


That third sentence of mine was a little sloppy...

...but my first sentence mentioned external _force_, so I still think that this aircraft does one better than previous "unpowered" flying machines.


----------



## Dave (Nov 22, 2018)

Cynical me says: That's all very well until they discover that "charged nitrogen ions" are the cause of skin cancer, or nut allergies, or that they stop bees from navigating, or interfere with mobile phone reception. Then it will be just another invention like radium pocket watch dials and asbestos tiles.

Optimistic me says: This shows that we have not yet reached the pinnacle of human knowledge, that there could be engineering solutions to global warming, and that long space journeys might be possible.


----------



## Anthoney (Nov 22, 2018)

It's where the technology with be in say 20 years that's exciting.


----------



## Daysman (Nov 22, 2018)

Self contained _lifter_... excellent! 

Maybe they can neutralise the exhaust?


----------



## Robert Zwilling (Nov 22, 2018)

If the the majority of negative ions get neutralized by the positive charge they are flowing to across the wing, I would think there is little ionized radiation escaping. 

Lightning probably produces a fair amount of ionized particles and even blowing sand and water can produce ionized particles. We are swimming in a sea of it which usually stays outside of the atmosphere but that happens because of the fixed polarity of our natural defense system. The sun can spit out solar belches that are physically aligned upside down to the structure of the solar radiation streams that normally come at us. When we get an upside down spitball from the sun, our natural defenses are useless and a really big one could be like an EMP attack. The last major one was like a hundred fifty years ago. 

Compared to jet exhaust running 24/7-365 I think it's an improvement. Its got the same problem most alternatives to combustion power which is being able to concentrate enough energy in a small enough space to make it practical.

In it's current configuration it won't work in a vacuum which eliminates high elevation flights. It might even stall out if a good gust of wind blows the charged particles off the wing. If the building was longer it could have gone farther. I don't know what the power consumption is but it could be a very low power system that drives it making the batteries last longer if the work being done by the wing lift isn't directly related to the amount of energy going into powering the ion flow across the wing.

It could be good for research drones in remote places that aren't carrying much. Computer aided design and modern materials make a big difference in what can be flown in the air. However ultra light frames are probably not likely to survive a bout with good wind speed bursts that don't add directly to the the vehicles forward motion. It's a catapult launch so relaunching when it comes down looks like it can't relaunch by itself.


----------



## REBerg (Nov 23, 2018)

On the positive side, I got a real charge from this achievement. On the negative side, I found it a little revolting.


----------



## Ursa major (Nov 23, 2018)

Is your apparent resistance due solely to the current state of the technology, or do you have the capacity to recharge your enthusiasm should there be a sufficient accumulation of potential differences in future versions?


----------



## REBerg (Nov 23, 2018)

Watt? I mean , What?


----------

