|Jun17-09, 11:05 PM||#1|
Bird strike / jet impact solution concept plausibility question:
Would a bird strike impact with an in-flight jet propulsion intake have a significantly less probability of avoiding critical damage if the jet intake was fully idle or non-active at the point of impact?
Would the air-flow pattern of an abruptly idled engine perhaps even help by greatly increasing the likelihood that the bird might be forced harmlessly around the engine instead of inexorably through it as one would obviously expect when such an engine is active?
Assuming that the computer based sensor and control technologies existed today that could detect an imminent small object impact within a second or at least a fraction of a second warning, are there basic jet propulsion system limitations that make fully starting or stopping such an engine in-flight in such a manner impossible?
Im no rocket scientist and Ive not studied physics. Even beginning to assess or calculate the factors involved in any of these sorts of questions are well beyond me, but hopefully this is a welcome and appropriate forum for such questions (otherwise, please forgive me as Ive just newly stumbled upon this forum).
|Jun18-09, 06:50 AM||#2|
Overall, turbine engines can not accelerate at those kinds of rates. There is a finite spool up and spool down rate because of the rotating mass.
As far as the airflow question, it would be negligible because the relative velocity between the aircraft and the bird are so high.
|Similar Threads for: Bird strike / jet impact solution concept plausibility question:|
|bird strike||General Physics||12|
|Linear algebra (impact of solution of theory of linear equations)||Calculus & Beyond Homework||2|
|Bird song question||Biology||9|
|Bird sitting on a branch (vibrations and waves question)||Introductory Physics Homework||3|