Old Tech thread

30-people-who-celebrated-a-just-little-prematurely-4.jpg
 
I'm interested in the reason for the "overhead flasher"? Given that it is aerial, would underside flashing lights not be more visible, as they have on aircraft. It is a hovercraft really, but without the curtain, and unless those fans were really, really powerful, it wouldn't get much further off the ground than a hovercraft does. I like hovercraft. I don't know why the commerical hovercraft services seem to be disappearing over time, because they work well over short distances between two beaches.
 
"...the U.S. Army judged them to be impractical as combat vehicles as they were small, limited in speed and only barely flew out of the ground cushion effect."

Not to mention making the pilot an absolute sitting duck...
 
Astro Pen said:
Soyuz mechanical navigation computer. In use until 2002 !
Click to expand...
I seem to remember seeing one of those in a Soyuz either at the Science Museum or the Nation Space Centre in Leicester. It seems so basic but, on the other hand, basic is maybe what has made Soyuz so successful - keep it simple.
 
Pyan said:
"...the U.S. Army judged them to be impractical as combat vehicles as they were small, limited in speed and only barely flew out of the ground cushion effect."

Not to mention making the pilot an absolute sitting duck...
Click to expand...
I think that they might have some use behind the front. As messenger vehicles, but there the speed and the low altitude would have been big problems. The article gave the top speed as 16 mph. which is far slower than a land vehicle and not that much faster than a good cross country runner. Plus, the pilot and gear had to weigh less than 200 lbs. so not very practical and a likely unnecessary expense. I think the only really good place to use it would be for short hops over water.
 
There is always this thing (although certainly not old tech):

www.jetsonaero.com

Home | Jetson - Personal Electric Aerial Vehicle

Your personal aircraft in aluminium and carbon fibre, powered with eight powerful electric motors.
www.jetsonaero.com www.jetsonaero.com

I think modern automation helps keep something like this stable and level. Microprocessor-based motor control ensures it doesn't tip over, and the pilot simply indicates desired direction rather than controlling individual props. Software does the rest. I'm not sure how the Hiller flying car would have achieved this stability. Looks like a death trap to me. Hiller probably never intended that as a serious design; just another marketing ploy to get some free media coverage. We still see this kind of thing today (eg Musk talking about going to Mars, like he has any idea what is involved).
 
Wayne Mack said:
To me, the big question is how much energy should be expended just to offset gravity when tires can do it for free? I doubt the velocities would even allow a minor contribution due to lift.
Click to expand...
Also, I think the range is so limited with that electric thing that you could only use it over a flat, open area. Once the battery gets low it is going to do a controlled descent, no matter what is below you. So, in other words, its a toy. Not viable for commuting.
 
Wayne Mack said:
To me, the big question is how much energy should be expended just to offset gravity when tires can do it for free? I doubt the velocities would even allow a minor contribution due to lift.
Click to expand...
I think the difference is the levels of friction that have to be overcome. As I understand, it once at cruising altitude and speed, aircraft have to use very little energy/fuel to maintain both. I don't know about elsewhere but in the UK for anything other than short hops aircraft seem to manage far cheaper travel than trains or lorries. Sure there are other factors such as fuel/energy cost, tax etc. but certainly for me I can travel the length of the UK significantly more cheaply in aircraft than on trains and regardless of any reasons for this, such as fuel cost, the fact that such a comparison can be made at all indicates that aircraft are still, today, surprisingly economical. It should also be added that, whilst aircraft do produce pollution, so do all other forms of transport and energy generation for transport so I do not think the issue is quite as cut and dried as it might first appear. For example; cars/lorries must keep on going up and down hills and accelerating and decelerating, all of which create inefficiencies.

[just playing devil's advocate there!]
 
Vertigo said:
I think the difference is the levels of friction that have to be overcome. As I understand, it once at cruising altitude and speed, aircraft have to use very little energy/fuel to maintain both. I don't know about elsewhere but in the UK for anything other than short hops aircraft seem to manage far cheaper travel than trains or lorries. Sure there are other factors such as fuel/energy cost, tax etc. but certainly for me I can travel the length of the UK significantly more cheaply in aircraft than on trains and regardless of any reasons for this, such as fuel cost, the fact that such a comparison can be made at all indicates that aircraft are still, today, surprisingly economical. It should also be added that, whilst aircraft do produce pollution, so do all other forms of transport and energy generation for transport so I do not think the issue is quite as cut and dried as it might first appear. For example; cars/lorries must keep on going up and down hills and accelerating and decelerating, all of which create inefficiencies.

[just playing devil's advocate there!]
Click to expand...
This is an interesting point. I can fly from the UK to Rome or Barcelona for much less (off-peak) than it costs to take a train from Swansea to London. This is annoying. It must reflect distorted markets at least as much as fuel costs. Of course there are other operational costs as well, but continental train travel is generally far less expensive than the UK.
 
I had to use Google lens to figure out what that was. Answer? A harp guitar. I'll bet it can make some beautiful music.
Went back and tried to answer my own question. Indeed, it is just a lovely sound.

Harp guitar multiple players
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Robert Zwilling Past Technologies - Tungsten discovered in Tycho Brahe’s alchemy workshop Technology 0
Astro Pen Could a technological society develop without language? Technology 111
Astro Pen 1918 Toy tank remade. Amazing tech Technology 0
Astro Pen Enlarging and shrinking your visible screen area (tech tip) Technology 3
B Looking for- older book, earth is a penal colony and a boy visits medieval Normandy, uses his tech to help the Norman's in battle Book Search 0

Similar threads


Back
Top