Flying Machines: Lifting Bodies & Flying Saucers

  • Thread starter Thread starter wolram
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Flying Machines
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the aerodynamic properties and potential of lifting bodies and flying saucers, exploring their design, research history, and theoretical applications in aerodynamics and hypersonic flight. Participants examine the characteristics of these shapes in relation to flight dynamics and heat management.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that lifting bodies are a well-researched area in aerodynamics, citing the space shuttle and NASA's X series aircraft as examples.
  • Others express skepticism about the feasibility of flying saucers with current technology, noting that some programs have explored the concept.
  • It is proposed that lifting bodies can mitigate heat issues in hypersonic flight by creating an insulating cushion of air, allowing them to ride their own shock wave.
  • One participant mentions that the shock wave around a lifting body is less concentrated due to its curved shape, which may dissipate faster compared to angular aircraft.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that flying saucers could potentially minimize air resistance through aerodynamic design and rotary motion, although the participant admits to limited knowledge on the subject.
  • Questions arise regarding whether flying saucers could be classified as lifting bodies, with some participants referencing unconventional ideas about their design.
  • There is a discussion about the design evolution of lifting bodies, with some noting that recent models do not feature blunt noses, contrary to earlier designs.
  • Participants share images and references to historical lifting body designs, such as the X-24 and the Avro Car, prompting further exploration of their characteristics.
  • One participant mentions a technical report on Project Silverbug, indicating interest in declassified research related to flying machines.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the properties and feasibility of lifting bodies and flying saucers. While some points about lifting bodies are supported by multiple participants, the discussion about flying saucers remains more speculative and contested.

Contextual Notes

Some claims about the aerodynamic properties of lifting bodies and flying saucers depend on specific assumptions about design and operational conditions, which are not fully explored in the discussion. Additionally, the references to historical designs may not encompass all relevant factors influencing their classification and performance.

wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,411
Reaction score
551
Lifting bodies and flying saucers, are they aerodynamic or have properties
that are worth pursuing?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Lifting bodies are most definitely a highly researched area in aerodynamics. The space shuttle is the most widely known lifting body aircraft today. NASA did a lot of lifting body work in the X series aircraft back in the '60s. The latest concepts for the hypersonic transports and future aircraft are all lifting bodies as well.

I don't think the flying saucer has any hope in our current technology. A couple of programs did look into it though.
 
FredGarvin said:
The latest concepts for the hypersonic transports and future aircraft are all lifting bodies as well.
expansion: Hypersonic aircraft research is focusing on lifting bodies because of heat issues. On a plane with sharp edges, the shock wave is touching the aircraft and heat builds up there. Lifting bodies are blunt and create an insulating cushion of air between themselves and their shock wave. They literally ride their own shock wave (some have been called "waveriders").
 
russ_watters said:
expansion: Hypersonic aircraft research is focusing on lifting bodies because of heat issues. On a plane with sharp edges, the shock wave is touching the aircraft and heat builds up there. Lifting bodies are blunt and create an insulating cushion of air between themselves and their shock wave. They literally ride their own shock wave (some have been called "waveriders").

Either Buzz Aldrin or Gordon Cooper once commented that a saucer shaped craft wouldn't create a sonic boom. I have no idea is correct or not, but apparently it was thought to be true at one time.
 
The way I understand it, the shock wave around a lifting body is curved, not sharp like on an angular aircraft and that causes the shock wave to be less concentrated and dissipate faster. And I guess with no nose at all, a saucer would have an even more irregular shock wave.
 
It was observed that it was easier(actually the power required is lesser) to overcome gravitation by rotary motion when compared to thrust. The shape of flying saucers may have the reason of similar kind. If the top and bottom surfaces are designed aerodynamically and with rotary motion, the air resistance can be minimized.

Having said that, I confess I didn't make indepth study of the science. I often wonder them as the time machines of our future folks :-p
 
Would a flying saucer be a lifting body? i have seen some wacky ideas to
make them fly.
 
russ_watters said:
expansion: Hypersonic aircraft research is focusing on lifting bodies because of heat issues. On a plane with sharp edges, the shock wave is touching the aircraft and heat builds up there. Lifting bodies are blunt and create an insulating cushion of air between themselves and their shock wave. They literally ride their own shock wave (some have been called "waveriders").

Just a comment. The last models of X series I've seen were not blunt nosed. It seems that blunt nose design is not the current way of making it better... I don't know why.
 
The most roundest lifting body I can think of was the X-24:
http://users.dbscorp.net/jmustain/X-24a.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
FredGarvin said:
The most roundest lifting body I can think of was the X-24:
http://users.dbscorp.net/jmustain/X-24a.jpg

Now that was a strange looking bird, if its what i recall, twin engined prop almost circular body?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
wolram said:
Now that was a strange looking bird, if its what i recall, twin engined prop almost circular body?
Nope. She was a bath tub shaped lifting body that had a rocket. This, believe it or not, was the great great great great great grandfather of the space shuttle.
 
  • #12
FredGarvin said:
Nope. She was a bath tub shaped lifting body that had a rocket. This, believe it or not, was the great great great great great grandfather of the space shuttle.

she was the great great great great great grandfather of the space shuttle?
 
  • #13
Looks a lot like the X-38, IMO.

Lifting bodies will be used for any re-entry vehicle where you want or need to limit the g-loading on the passengers or cargo.
 
  • #14
Clausius2 said:
Just a comment. The last models of X series I've seen were not blunt nosed. It seems that blunt nose design is not the current way of making it better... I don't know why.

Assuming mach numbers of 10 and small deflection angles (angles of top or bottom surfaces witht the chord) like 20 degrees, the temperature rise is 4-5 times the ambient.
My book here says that providing best air compression to the scramjet is an essential consideration of the design.
Granted that the temperature 4-5 times the ambient would be quite high, given that these things operate at high altitudes where temperatures are low, I'll say temperature is not an overwhelming consideration.
 
  • #15
yourdadonapogostick said:
she was the great great great great great grandfather of the space shuttle?
Point taken! Good catch.
 
  • #16
FredGarvin said:
The most roundest lifting body I can think of was the X-24:
http://users.dbscorp.net/jmustain/X-24a.jpg
For shame, Fred! A fellow Avro fan failed to mention http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/mufonontario/avro/avrocar.html? :-p
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #18
Danger said:
For shame, Fred! A fellow Avro fan failed to mention http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/mufonontario/avro/avrocar.html? :-p
I never thought that the Avro Car was an actual lifting body. Was it supposed to be? I'm going to have to check in on that one!
 
  • #19
That's a cool link Ivan. How do you find that stuff?
 
  • #20
"Mainstream" UFO literature.

There are a few sites that are quite reliable.
 

Similar threads

Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Lift Body with Fans? An Exploration of Physics
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Are Stephen Coonts' Saucer Series Books Worth Reading?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
Help designing a Machine Shop Turntable- Flexure Rigidity questions
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Automotive How Will Future Flying Car Technology Overcome Turbulence?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
New drone design idea, pull air for lift
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
Disc lifted by pressurized air in a vertical tube
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
6K
Mechanical Advantage on Gym Machines
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
The Mystery of Hyperdimensional Discus: Why a 4D Discus Won't Fly
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Predicting the behaviour of a closed circular airfoil
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K