JP Aerospace ATO Drag Reduction

For those curious as to what might possibly make JP Aerospace's
Airship To Orbit vehicle possess the L/D ratio required (in the
ionosphere where, amazingly enough, there are a lot of ions) might
want to take a look at this article, originally published in "New
Scientist". While it probably would have to go well beyond the small
reductions in drag reported in the 1970s, there has been a lot of time
to refine these MHD technologies to not only further reduce drag, but
possibly to even recapture momentum normally lost to drag on the
trailing edges of the craft.

The policy question this raises is of course obvious:

If there is a technology that is known by all the major superpowers
which can provide profound benefit -- such as making Earth orbit
orders of magnitude cheaper to attain -- at what point is it a crime
against humanity to withold the technology from the public?

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/future-00o.html

Will Plasma Revolutionize Aircraft Design

by Justin Mullins
London - Oct. 28, 2000
They can reduce drag, repel shock waves and make jet fighters vanish.
Will plasmas start an aerospace revolution, or are they just another
mirage?

To look at, the test vehicle suspended in the hypersonic wind tunnel
is little more than a cone. But inside is a small device that could
revolutionise the way aircraft fly, saving fuel and heralding a new
age of travel.

It's a generator that sends a beam of microwaves upstream into the
Mach 6 flow, ripping apart the gas ahead of the model so that it is
flying through a plasma--a boiling mix of positive ions and
electrons--rather than ordinary gas.

The experiment, at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton,
Virginia, tests a ground-breaking idea developed by Russian
researchers during the Cold War. They discovered that injecting a few
ions into the flow around a high-speed craft can dramatically reduce
the drag it experiences.

With less drag, supersonic airliners might become economically viable,
while hypersonic missiles and aircraft flying at more than five times
the speed of sound could travel farther on a single tank of fuel. And
future generations of space shuttles might rely on plasmas to help
them fly during re-entry, which is why NASA is interested.
....

The story begins in the late 1970s, when Anatoly Klimov embarked on an
unremarkable series of experiments at the Moscow Radio-Technological
Institute, one of the Soviet Union's most secretive laboratories. His
goal was to understand how shock waves behave in ionised gases, a
topic of real interest to plasma physicists, for whom the phenomenon
seemed rich in possibilities.

Hot and loud

But shock waves are also of interest to the aerodynamicists who design
re-entry vehicles and hypersonic aircraft, for whom they are
troublesome obstacles in the quest for speed. Shock waves slow
vehicles down, cause terrific heating and create sonic booms. For
these researchers, any suggestion that they can be reduced or modified
is manna from heaven. Which is why the work of Klimov and colleagues
at the Ioffe Institute in St Petersburg was so interesting.

One experiment by the Ioffe group involved firing a steel sphere the
size of a walnut at 1 kilometre per second through a tube filled with
argon gas at low pressure. Gas in a section of the tube was ionised to
create a plasma, and the group filmed the shock wave around the sphere
before and after it entered the plasma. To their surprise, they found
that the difference was huge. Something--call it plasma magic--was
forcing the shock wave to stand twice as far from the sphere as it
would in an ordinary gas.

For plasma physicists this was intriguing, but what sent aeronautical
engineers reaching for their slide rules was that the sphere somehow
experienced less drag when it entered the plasma. The group found that
this was not some minor effect: they measured a whopping 30 per cent
reduction in drag. Aeronautical engineers usually struggle to shave
fractions of a per cent off drag, so the results set their pulses
racing.
....

Yet while Russian researchers continue to publish data measured at
subsonic speeds, BAe, DERA, NASA and the US Air Force Research
Laboratory only admit to having repeated the experiments for
supersonic and hypersonic craft. If this is true, it's a remarkable
oversight. More likely, work on plasmas at subsonic speeds continues
in secret. Simon Scott, a researcher at BAe's Sowerby Research Centre,
admits to at least one plasma-based project but says that it is still
at the pre-patenting stage, which prevents him from revealing more.

More significantly, the Arnold Engineering Development Center at the
Arnold Air Force Base in Tennessee has a number of ballistic ranges
and wind tunnels that are being modified to put plasma-assisted models
through their paces. "We're charged with anticipating future testing
capabilities, and a number of organisations have shown interest," says
Tom Best, who heads the applied technology directorate at the centre.
Exactly who these organisations are and what they plan to test is not
something Best is willing or able to reveal.

We may not have to wait long to find out. The new test facilities will
be up and running within the next 12 months. Either the new labs are a
huge waste of time and money, or the American military knows something
we don't.

James Bowery wrote:
If there is a technology that is known by all the major superpowers
which can provide profound benefit -- such as making Earth orbit
orders of magnitude cheaper to attain -- at what point is it a crime
against humanity to withold the technology from the public?

Let's have a little perspective here. First, it's not
a good idea to pile supposition on supposition and then
get all indignant (even hypothetically so) about the
revelations from your pile of supposition, that just is
not smart. Second, I implore you not to water down the
term "crime against humanity", it's been abused too much
as it is.

"James Bowery" wrote in message
om...
For those curious as to what might possibly make JP Aerospace's
Airship To Orbit vehicle possess the L/D ratio required (in the
ionosphere where, amazingly enough, there are a lot of ions) might
want to take a look at this article, originally published in "New
Scientist". While it probably would have to go well beyond the small
reductions in drag reported in the 1970s, there has been a lot of time
to refine these MHD technologies to not only further reduce drag, but
possibly to even recapture momentum normally lost to drag on the
trailing edges of the craft.
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/future-00o.html

Hmmm. Interesting. When you think about it, the definition of
hypersonic for ordinary air has to do with the rms speed of the
molecules. A shock cannot be communicated ahead of the hypersonic
craft because the air molecules "communicate" only by moving
from place to place and colliding. But ions in a plasma can
"communicate" without actually physically traveling anywhere.

Also interesting is the fact that the ascender will be flying in
gradually widening circles (spiraling out) around the pole as it
accelerates. However, they didn't say which pole - geographic or
magnetic.

Finally, ask what happens to a plasma in the vicinity of the
diverging magnetic lines of force near the magnetic pole. It
tends to rise. Perhaps the ascender can be thought of as
something like a glider - it rides the (self created?) updraft.

"Christopher M. Jones" wrote in message ...
James Bowery wrote:
If there is a technology that is known by all the major superpowers
which can provide profound benefit -- such as making Earth orbit
orders of magnitude cheaper to attain -- at what point is it a crime
against humanity to withold the technology from the public?

Let's have a little perspective here.

I agree. Let's look at the actual impact in terms of human lives,
suffering and planetary degradation of not having access to space:

Humanity is trapped in a pressure-cooker where wars over scarce
resources are known to break out continually throughout history --
economic trade-offs are made daily against the survival of individuals
and those numbers are far greater than any genocide.

Yes, by all means, let's have a little perspective here.

James Bowery wrote:
"Christopher M. Jones" wrote in message ...
Let's have a little perspective here.

I agree. Let's look at the actual impact in terms of human lives,
suffering and planetary degradation of not having access to space:

Humanity is trapped in a pressure-cooker where wars over scarce
resources are known to break out continually throughout history --
economic trade-offs are made daily against the survival of individuals
and those numbers are far greater than any genocide.

Yes, by all means, let's have a little perspective here.

Lack of perspective and firm, or loose, grasp on
reality noted.

(James Bowery) wrote:

I agree. Let's look at the actual impact in terms of human lives,
suffering and planetary degradation of not having access to space:

Yes lets;

Ok. Done.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

"Christopher M. Jones" wrote in message ...
James Bowery wrote:
"Christopher M. Jones" wrote in message ...
Let's have a little perspective here.

I agree. Let's look at the actual impact in terms of human lives,
suffering and planetary degradation of not having access to space:

Humanity is trapped in a pressure-cooker where wars over scarce
resources are known to break out continually throughout history --
economic trade-offs are made daily against the survival of individuals
and those numbers are far greater than any genocide.

Yes, by all means, let's have a little perspective here.

Lack of perspective and firm, or loose, grasp on
reality noted.

I'll admit to a studious lack of awareness of your inability to even
begin to have any real perspective -- it was a rhetorical device which
I should have more clearly called out in my dripping sarcasm. My bad.

"Perplexed in Peoria"
Hmmm. Interesting. When you think about it, the definition of
hypersonic for ordinary air has to do with the rms speed of the
molecules.

Well the relevant thing is not whether the vehicle is in a
"hypersonic" regime so much as whether the MHD (or EHD) technology can
recapture the momentum transferred from the vehicle to the surrounding
atoms.

Finally, ask what happens to a plasma in the vicinity of the
diverging magnetic lines of force near the magnetic pole. It
tends to rise. Perhaps the ascender can be thought of as
something like a glider - it rides the (self created?) updraft.

That's an interesting thought but mere altitude doesn't get one to low
earth orbit. For that you need to overcome a lot of drag and not even
a sun-synchronous orbit with polymer solar cells can give you enough
power without momentum recovery or other profound reduction in
momentum loss.

In any case, there is good reason to believe either this is going to
work with something that is classified (and classified for a not very
good reason, especially given the benefits being sacrificed by the
secrecy) -- the whole idea is wrong.

(James Bowery) wrote in message . com...
"Perplexed in Peoria"
Hmmm. Interesting. When you think about it, the definition of
hypersonic for ordinary air has to do with the rms speed of the
molecules.

Well the relevant thing is not whether the vehicle is in a
"hypersonic" regime so much as whether the MHD (or EHD) technology can
recapture the momentum transferred from the vehicle to the surrounding
atoms.

Nevermind the morality play -- is this approach technically feasible?


My understanding was that with MHD,EHD the ionization coupling effect
is poor, resulting in energy wastage. But would the use of a large
contact area (eg. blimp) be a superior alternative?

Dug up this article via Google:

http://66.102.11.104/search?q=cache:...hl=en&ie=UTF-8


So Ion America is trying to develop a regenerative solid oxide fuel
cell.

But SOFCs run at high temps, which means waste heat. They mention that
one of the ideas is to use it to heat a blimp. Could a craft like
Ascender be more ideal, since it'll be up where the air is thin and
less likely to ignite a lifting gas like hydrogen?