Update On The Race To Build A Quiet Supersonic Jet 9
RevJim writes: "Popular Science is running this story on the race to build a supersonic jet that reduces or eliminates the 'sonic boom' associated with exceeding the sound barrier. From the article: 'Gulfstream plans to start manufacturing the plane -- its so-called quiet supersonic jet, or QSJ -- by 2006.' Supersonic for the masses closer than we think? Probably not, at $80 million for a 14-passenger jet, but still cool."
Just a thought that's been nagging me for a while (Score:1)
I know what the little dimples on golf balls are for. They make it fly further by reducing turbulance behind the ball.
Would the same thing help jets fly faster/quieter? The way I see it is that if the jet moves through the air easier, less kinetic energy is wasted making a sonic boom.
And now, for your viewing pleasure... some [igen.ubc.ca] really [nasa.gov] cool [aeropages.co.za] images! [nasa.gov] (that last one's a big + slow, but worth it)
Ali
Golf ball dimples (Score:4, Informative)
No, actually, the dimples increase the turbulence. This is good thing because it means turbulent airflow remains attached to the surface longer. With a smooth ball, the flow lends to remain laminar (smooth), but it detaches from the surface of ball. A detached flow creates more drag than turbulent flow would.
Some airplane wings have vortex generators on the upper surface to cause turbulent flow, reducing the likelihood of a flow detachment.
A more techinal explanation is available here [virginia.edu].
Re:Just a thought that's been nagging me for a whi (Score:2)
Destructive interference? (Score:1)
Re:Destructive interference? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Destructive interference? (Score:1)
Oh, Popular Science (Score:3, Interesting)
Like the B-58 Hustler. [b-58hustler.com] Worked fine. Intended for delivery of nuclear weapons to USSR. Obsoleted by ICBMs. High operating costs, small bomb load.
Who said supersonic jets are expensive? (Score:1)
I'll take two of that please.