UFO-Inspired Future Spacecraft: Faster Than Mach 4?

[Mackay1011]

Hi don't know if I am in the right area but i have a random question about future spacecraft and the speed they travel.

the rumor of ufo's are known the be a flat sphere shape, why don't the people who design the future jets try designing the shape a little bit like a ufo instead of make the shape almost the same everytime? the ufo type shape may be more aerodynamic and should try using a new type of fuel and engine system? cos let's face if if you could travel faster then mach4 using the normall fuel ect they would of already of done it by now

**EDIT**

Like anti gravity thingy i just read about

 

[cepheid]

Hi don't know if I am in the right area but i have a random question about future spacecraft and the speed they travel.

the rumor of ufo's are known the be a flat sphere shape, why don't the people who design the future jets try designing the shape a little bit like a ufo instead of make the shape almost the same everytime?

What is a flat sphere? Do you mean a flat disc? Secondly, UFOs are conjecture. I don't think there is any solid proof that they exist. But let's leave that discussion for another thread.

the ufo type shape may be more aerodynamic and should try using a new type of fuel and engine system?

First of all, do you REALLY think that a flying saucer would be more aerodynamic than the rockets we currently have? There's a reason why rockets and airplanes have the shapes that they do. Think about the flow of air around the object. Secondly, if NASA had a new type of engine and fuel, then obviously they would test it. But until they do, what good would come of simply changing the shape of the spacecraft ? In fact, how are the two ideas even related?

cos let's face if if you could travel faster then mach4 using the normall fuel ect they would of already of done it by now

Ummm...I'm pretty sure the space shuttle reaches somewhere between Mach 20 and Mach 30 on launch or reentry.

**EDIT**

Like anti gravity thingy i just read about

What anti gravity thing you just read about? And what does anything you've said so far have to do with antigravity? Sorry, but your post is rather confusing and not very coherent.

 

[Mackay1011]

I don't really no much about space and stuff i just read a few things on the net and got me thinking.

the reason i said like a saucer type shape in the when you through a smooth flat stone it goes really quick and fastand glides nicely

and this is what i ment by anti gravity

[crackpot link deleted]

 

[ank_gl]

hehe, you seem to be a hollywood space adventure buff.. do you really believe that a disc shape "UFO" saucer can fly? coz let's face it, it cant!
n antigravity stuff, where do they use it, to load up the stuff in a truck? or in HALO(for those who don't know HALO, its the most awesome game microsoft has released till date, atleast for me) to send the chief n marines to the alien ship!

 

[ank_gl]

oh i didnt read that link the first time(havnt read it completely still), that thing seems to be a levitation machine.
antigravity- that's what NASA do to launch the rockets, propel them against gravity

 

[Mackay1011]

It has been proven to be plausable that anti-gravity propolsion could work, I am not to sure but iv'e read on many websites that a beam of light shines infront of the jet/craft and shifts gravity out og the way and sucks the jet/craft into the beam of light and can propel the jet/craft 47% speed of light. search for abit if you can be botherd, you might be supprised what you read

 

[russ_watters]

the rumor of ufo's are known the be a flat sphere shape, why don't the people who design the future jets try designing the shape a little bit like a ufo instead of make the shape almost the same everytime? the ufo type shape may be more aerodynamic and should try using a new type of fuel and engine system? cos let's face if if you could travel faster then mach4 using the normall fuel ect they would of already of done it by now

The term "flying saucer" comes from a misquote of Kenneth Arnold in 1947, in the story that started the "flying saucer" craze. So besides not being any good evidence of their existence, they weren't even saucer-shaped (providing good evidence for selective seeing).

In any case, aerodynamicists are good at their jobs and saucer-shaped craft are not flyable unless you can spin them.

And this isn't astro-physics, it is conspiracy theory and crackpottery. There is no such thing as "anti-gravity" like you describe - just crackpots and hoaxes. We don't entertain discussion of such things at PF. This is a serious science forum. Locked.