NASA Tests Flying Airbag 118
Posted
by
samzenpus
from the drop-the-cloud-anchor dept.
from the drop-the-cloud-anchor dept.
coondoggie writes "NASA is looking to reduce the deadly impact of helicopter crashes on their pilots and passengers with what the agency calls a high-tech honeycomb airbag known as a deployable energy absorber. So in order to test out its technology NASA dropped a small helicopter from a height of 35 feet to see whether its deployable energy absorber, made up of an expandable honeycomb cushion, could handle the stress. The test crash hit the ground at about 54MPH at a 33 degree angle, what NASA called a relatively severe helicopter crash."
And? (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing hit the ground, and what happened? Worst. summary. ever. From nasa: "Engineers say the MD-500 survived relatively intact as a result of the honeycomb cushion. "
Re:This is a great development (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Demolition Man (Score:4, Insightful)
Here's my question, which I also found myself thinking after watching Iron Man. Sure enough, the foam or the super exoskeleton or whatever can protect the outside of your body and the bones from harm when undergoing a sudden deceleration, such as crashing or whatnot, but what about all of the soft things sloshing around inside your body, like your brain, your viscera, etc? Surely they are going to, well, *slosh* around violently upon a sudden stop like that. I think boxers have proved that point very well over the years.
Yes, they are fiction and I treat them accordingly, but such egregious fact-ignoring is a bit scary sometimes.
Re:Severe Crash? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:No fair! I thought of it first! (Score:5, Insightful)
Basic physics: the forces involved in a bouncy collision are *greater* than the forces involved in an identical "smooshy" collision. Why? Because the crash has to not just bring you to a stop, but throw you back away again.
What you want is a smooshy collision that takes place over a long time. Thus, airbags.
Re:No fair! I thought of it first! (Score:3, Insightful)
Basic physics: the forces involved in a bouncy collision are *greater* than the forces involved in an identical "smooshy" collision. Why? Because the crash has to not just bring you to a stop, but throw you back away again.
What you want is a smooshy collision that takes place over a long time. Thus, airbags.
Reminds me of Hollywood physics, where it's the "ground" that kills, not the "stop". The protagonist is always saved by a safety rope, even if it stops him instantly 1m from the ground after a 1000m fall.
Re:No fair! I thought of it first! (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, I'm sure climbers and bungee jumpers never thought of that.
A safety rope DOESN'T stop you instantly.
But in Hollywood they do. And don't just think ropes, think Spiderman plucking you from the air as you fall (thus not only causing an immediate upward acceleration to break your fall, but a sideways one so you swing away).
Even worse is when the rope instantly stops the person just before they hit the ground, but the rope isn't attached to a harness but around their ankle (so the near-hit is made even more dramatic by it being their *head* that is inches above the ground). With no ankle damage/amputation. And when someone falls off a tall object with a chain wrapped around their neck, they die of suffocation not a broken neck or decapitation (a short fall with a chain could result in suffocation, but I'm talking 30+ feet).
That's Hollywood physics.
A good safety rope is designed to stretch and absorb much of the energy of your fall, and stop your fall over a comparatively long period of time.
More to the point, to be a safety rope in situations where falling is possible, it has to be a dynamic line. Static lines are very dangerous even in short falls.
Re:This is a great development (Score:3, Insightful)
Big sky theory. This of course stops as soon as you fill the air with flying cars.