Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Future of aviation

  1. Jan 6, 2015 #1
    hello!

    I recently flew from Athens to London, with regular flight.

    I noticed that a significant part of the whole travel time is taken by the take off and landing.

    Why don't we develop a system, similar to helicopters, in order to achieve the fastest take off and landing?

    Also, I wonder why the plane couldn't just fly faster after taking off and before landing. Can't the human sustain such accelerations and velocities? We don't have the technology to fly that fast? What is the problem exactly?

    I strongly believe that with current technology it would be possible to diminish the flight duration to a fraction of its current amount.

    We already have airoplanes that drive much faster. Also, human body can sustain faster velocities and accelerations I believe. Current accelerations in a regular airoplane are not even noticeable!

    Any thoughts?

    Thanks!
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 6, 2015 #2

    Doug Huffman

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Nuisance abatement, costs and safety are preeminent considerations.
     
  4. Jan 6, 2015 #3
    I don't see how we cannot meet these with new systems, vertical landing and take off
    as for costs, they earn millions!
    I don't see why they cannot be safe, in fact, normal landing and take off seem more risky to me!
     
  5. Jan 6, 2015 #4

    Ryan_m_b

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I don't see why VTOL would make takeoff and landing any faster, after all you'll still have to get up to cruising speed. As for faster journeys you might want to take a look into Concorde, specifically how uncompetitive it was compared to regular business class, private jets and growing use of telecoms in business.
     
  6. Jan 6, 2015 #5
    The real problem is efficiency. Most planes are designed to cruise at a certain speed and going much faster/slower than that affects the performance of the aircraft. It's not a speed limitation; it's a fuel conservation thing.

    As far as VTOL, there's a lot of research in it, but it's not reliable yet.
     
  7. Jan 6, 2015 #6

    Borg

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    So in your world, people with heart conditions wouldn't be allowed to fly? o_O
     
  8. Jan 6, 2015 #7

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Most of the delays encountered at airports are due to the number of flights landing or taking off at any given time. It's not that the planes are that slow landing or taking off, but you've got a pretty complicated 3-D problem trying to manage the flights on the ground and in the air. There are only so many runways and so much airspace which can be safely occupied at any one time.
     
  9. Jan 6, 2015 #8
    in the world YOU are living, people with heart conditions aren't allowed to fly, too
     
  10. Jan 6, 2015 #9

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    I find that unlikely. Can you cite a solid reference for that information or is it just your opinion?
     
  11. Jan 6, 2015 #10
  12. Jan 6, 2015 #11

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    OK, thanks. I was aware of guidelines about not flying if you have had heart surgery or a heart attack within a few weeks but there seem to be even more restriction that I was not aware of.
     
  13. Jan 6, 2015 #12

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Those contraindications are generally because of the low O2sat levels involved in flying at altitude. I'm thinking that phinds was referring more to the g-levels that you were implying in shortening the duration of flights...
     
  14. Jan 6, 2015 #13

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    No, to be fair, I just wasn't aware of the restrictions. I was told after open heart surgery that I shouldn't fly for the next several weeks (and check w/ the cardiologist in any case) but I was not aware that airlines had regulations about it, so I really was wrong. I thought it was just medical guidelines. I guess the airlines don't want anyone dying on their planes :smile:
     
  15. Jan 6, 2015 #14

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

  16. Jan 6, 2015 #15
    yeah, I was imagining a combination of VTOL and horizontal movement
    to the point it becomes hardly noticeable (0.5g?)

    now, we get 1g during the take off and after that, we don't feel any acceleration
    why not the plane accelerate during the half of its travel? and deccelerating for the rest half
     
  17. Jan 6, 2015 #16

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Because as has been mentioned, it is more efficient to climb steeply and then level off to cruise most of the way. Saves on fuel, etc.

    There are lots of great books and learning resources on airplane design and jet engine design. Check out your local library or do some searching on the net. It's a fun subject to study. :-)
     
  18. Jan 6, 2015 #17

    Ryan_m_b

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    A plane can't accelerate for half the journey due to drag. The faster you go the worse drag becomes meaning you have to burn even more fuel.
     
  19. Jan 6, 2015 #18

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    So, ways around this problem:

    1. Build more airports. (expensive)
    2. Fly planes closer together. (dangerous)
    3. Fly larger planes. (possible!)
     
  20. Jan 6, 2015 #19

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    The problem with 3) is that the larger planes are more expensive to purchase and their size and the number of people which they carry can lead to 1) which can handle either the size of these planes, the number of passengers, or both. The size of these planes also means that 2) is not only dangerous, but may be lethal to smaller aircraft flying into or out of the same airports.

    The Airbus A380, which is currently the largest commercial passenger plane in production (and the one which can carry the largest number of passengers)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A380

    has been reported recently to be ending production due to a variety of reasons.
     
  21. Jan 7, 2015 #20

    Borg

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I was referring to the g-forces. The link to airline restrictions is nice but I've never been questioned about medical conditions like that. In general, people aren't dying from heart attacks during takeoff and landing and the airlines are pretty lax about questioning passengers about their health unless they show up in obvious distress. Increasing g-forces significantly would change that equation.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Future of aviation
  1. Future of NASA (Replies: 2)

  2. Future Career? (Replies: 3)

  3. The future of energy. (Replies: 12)

Loading...