/sci/ - Science & Math

>PhD in mathematics
>any jon i want
>300k ono

Simple make a vtol that can float and then submerge with use of bladders

What use it would have?

The biggest obstacle would be finding something that is light enough to fly, and strong enough to be under multiple atmospheres of pressure.

IT DOESN'T WORK OP

I think you should drop the idea of jets altogether. Props could probably be adjusted to work as propellers underwater. You'll want some kind of electric motor to drive them, so you don't have to worry about getting air to the engine while submerged.

>>1489611
well it would be cool to fly and dive..

Let's just drain the oceans. Problem solved!

>>1489629
Make it unmanned, and we can use nuclear power

>>1489636
Oceans filter the air

>>1489637
Well then your removing the only use; "well.. it would be cool to fly and drive.."

>>1489641
But how, air always floats to the top, it can never mix. Jeez, don't you have a swimming pool?

>>1489654
70% av all oxygen comes from photo synthesis in the ocean

>>1489654
Well u see because the it is and the air is are at the bottom and because it if is were somehow down there and what not so the action of it and what can somehow make it filter.

>>1489612
>>1489629
They said it couldnt be done!

>>1489606
Shoo fag!!!

>>1489659
Then we put the photosynthesis in our pools. Problem solved once more.

tl;dr OP is dumb because something designed to be submerged and move would be far too heavy to also fly.

Have the engines turn off before submersing, this will also allow it to slow down before entering water.

>>1489673
an airplane's hull is so strong that it can be submerged far down in water

>>1489612
They make planes structured so they could handle the lower pressure at higher altitude, it would work underwater too.

Alright let's get this going.

The structure of the plane is fine for the water pressure.
>>1489677
Has a point, but not sure if it would cool down fast enough.

>>1489673
Space Shuttles would probably be able to withstand pressure at a very low depth. Use the same design.

>>1489679
That is completely the opposite of being underwater

>>1489678
No its not. After two atmospheres of pressure, a 747 would implode.

>>1489679
They designed for high pressure inside, low outside
Not vice verca

Ever notice how a deep sea fishes' eyes bulge out? yeah, they aren't designed for the opposite pressure.

>>1489688
Space shuttles are designed for 1-0 atmospheres of pressure. They fail underwater too

ITT: idiots who don't realize that if it cant fly, it cant fucking swim

>>1489689
Not really, in air the air is trying to rip the plane appart, underwater it's trying to crush it.

Planes structure is mainly oval minus the cockpit and the wings, it's one of the best shapes for flying and diving, i.e, sumbarines and aeroplanes.

>>1489695
The effective pressure of re-entry is equivalent to many atmospheres of pressure due to the sheer speed involved. The undercarriage would just implode if it wasn't design for it.

>>1489691
Then do the oposite underwater, increase the pressure slightly.

>>1489691
How are you so sure that the technolagy is not reversable (with a little science). Seems logical to me.

Also, as long as the fuselage is flooded pressure will not destroy the wings/rudder.

Alos, the underwater engine shouldnt need oxygen. So it could either be carbonnanotube battery or use some sort of compressed gass.

>>1489699
Shape doesn't fucking matter retard.

If you have a sheet of paper and sheet of steal in the same shape, they work differently.

Tripfaging incase people start taking this a bit seriously, it's pretty fun.

Make your own designs faggots, nothing currently exists to do this, thus those designs wont work.

>>1489707
Yes but you can't hold people underwater or in air in sheets of paper/steel.

And yes, shape matter a whole lot. With air/water resistance aswell as overall strength.

>>1489712
I doubt anyone here is taking this seriously to the point where we'll change air to sea travel..

/sci/ is pretentious, but not that pretentious.

>>1489699
No; in the air, the inside of the plane is pressurised to keep the passengers comfortable so the pressure inside is greater than the pressure outside. When in a submerged vehicle, the pressure outside of the vehicle is greater than the pressure inside.

>>1489714
Yeah but you were implying that because airplanes and subs were the same shape, they both work.

>>1489604

I suggest we make one that looks like a big penis, and put jets in the balls.

Then we can spooge around the ocean and blast whales with rocket spunk.

>>1489717
..That's what I said.

In air; low pressure (also the pressure inside the plane is decreased to help the plane not be torn appart)

In water; high pressure - The sumbarines are strong enough to not need help with manual pressure changes inside.

Also, alot of the plane will have to be able to be filled with water, so it can actually sink into water.

I recommend that it be small, 20ft long maximum

>>1489719
I'm saying they're similar for a reason, it's a good strong shape. While they might be built differently, the shape does matter.

>>1489729
What if it was only a 1 seater, it would be heavy enough to not need extra help from allowing water in.

What if we combined v-tol props/propellers with jets. That way the jet can be safely allowed to cool long before dive.

Picture this: pops/fans part of the jet intake. When jet slows down, they take over. They can tilt to allow jet to v-tol after safe temp is reached. The prop profile can be rotated to better emulate water propellors. Jet engine compressor can be expanded.

Similar to picture.

i think supplying a jet engine with oxygen would be a problem as well.

>>1489737
yeah that would probably work. If theres not alot of air, it wouldn't need a water thing or anything. A 1 person cockpit wouldn't be too much air

Guys, no fucking jets.

Turbofans is where its at.

>>1489744
Good point.

>>1489751
Indeed, jet engines can't work underwater, they're not propellers.

But this could work; >>1489744

>>1489744
Pressure is still a problem.
Nevermind the fact that subs need coffersdams, watertight compartments in case of accidents...
And then, we'd have to deal with balance, and torque... I have no idea how plane's engines work, but I'm sure they can't generate a lot of torque without many revs... there's a reason why most subs are diesel-electric.

>>1489775
Besides, how would you avoid the plane steering system (or whatever it's called) and the propeller-rudder messign up the hydro/aero-dynamics respectively-

>>1489775
Well we're talking about small crafts at the moment, 1 seaters. Little explorers the size of helicopters dive all the time, but it is unsafe for a human to be in it. Also adding water/jet engines to it would be quite a fuel drain, nevermind the engine setup to power both, and shift to other when needed.

>>1489789
The controls can be switched at a flick of a button, not hard.

>>1489795
flick of a switch*

make tons of money here=> http://www.imcrew.com/?r=196153

>>1489790

What the hell does it has to do with anything? The principles are the same. If anything, you're gonna need less watertight compartments because there are no lives at risk. So what, everything else, and many other things I haven's written are still valid.

This thread is bad, and you should feel bad.
zoidberg.jpg

>>1489801
Good job guys, but why'd we make it british?

>>1489758
We could possibly use this nasa design (pic) crossed between a turbo fan & open rotor engine.

However if the rotors can be folded away, the jet can be used in flight. Then when v-tol/cooldown is needed, they fold open and use the same get motors AND be used underwater.

I agree with this. I never liked this thread.

>>1489805
I was saying stop thinking subs, start thinking smaller, and take out jet engines from your mind when you're underwater, the pressure problem isn't important.

>>1489812
Because God save the queen.

Oaf.

>>1489795
Why don't you draw a sketch of the system, if it's so easy? Even if you did, it probably wouldn't be safe enough.
Also, you're addressing secondary problems. You first need a hull that can withstand both low pressure inside / high pressure outside (underwater) and high pressure inside / low pressure outside (flying). It also needs to be light. And, it should be able to submerge safely...
I might write more reasons why it's an stupid idea, if you want.

>>1489817
i like it!

>>1489801
is this X com?
also, am i gonna be the first one to admit we've all read the same new scientist article on planesubs

>>1489817
That seems like it needs air to work :|

>>1489834
We're trying to figure it out in the thread, relax.
It's for fun, we're not trying to revolutionize planes.

The pressure problem is a big deal, but that can be solved by limiting the diving depth. If you make a strong hull it will whitstand the water pressure, you can decrease the pressure in the rest of the plane greatly when flying, and only slightly in the cockpit when flying.

>>1489771
a jet engine would act like a propeller under water. but the oxygen would still be required to power a fuel engine. modern submarines get away with this by having nuclear reactors. theese are heavy. what do?

>>1489840
Yes. I consider it the closest anyone will get to a waterbreathing aeroplane.

The different specifications of the two elements are, I think, too far apart for it to be plausible.

Now, a submarine that can unfold an airship and fill it, that might be more plausible.

>>1489834
pic related

>>1489864
The air in the jet engine flows trough the whole engine, and it requires a lot of air to fuel indirectly from the fan. If you send water trough that it wouldn't work at all.

I vote we use these for thrust

Hows about making it supercavitating underwater?

>>1489887
Well at the moment we're thinking small, and slow.

But with a bigger plane-sub it might work.

>>1489878
we're still gonna need air whatever engine we need. unless we use rockets with oxygen in the mix.
but how long does it need to stay under water cause that would cut down on its range.
the question we need to ask is what is this vessel even for?

>>1489902
Seperate engines man.

Like this anon said, >>1489744

Jet engine is only for fast air travel, other is for hovering/water travel.

>>1489898
why big?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VA-111_Shkval

If you don't plan on making a high altitude- deep sea explorer, pressure oughtn't be a problem.

I can't see problems with pressure, if the plane would be esgined to be a low altitude flier and if it wouldn't submerge more than a meter or so.

>>1489911
Fair point, I don't know much about supercavitation.

Also, drop the fucking jets.

A twin propulsion system would weight far too much to be feasible at these scales.

are you retards serious?

>>1489887
Great idea, this would could work. However cooling the engine is still a big obsticle, but at least we know we can make it go fast!

>>1489921
No we're not, that would take the fun out of it.

>>1489910
yeah but all engines need oxygen. i think if we develop efficient electric engines we could build something big with a nuclear reactor on board.
also the size would make solving problems like pressure tolerance easier.
just need to make good electric engines!!

>>1489920
So we have to come up with a powerful engine capable for underwater aswell as air travel?

That's why I was thinking small and slow for now, well slow underwater.

>>1489926
Yes but some engines require less oxygen, significantly less than jet engines.

>>1489922
My reason to suggest supercavitation is that there is NO WAY IN HELL you can make a waterbreathing plane quiet. So instead make it really fucking fast. This way whatever you're trying to avoid will get stuck in your frothing wake.

I'm pretty sure someone already posted a NASA design SPECIFICITY for this type of purpose :/
>>1489817

IT DOES BOTH, FUCKERS.

>>1489934
so you gonna submerge with a big bag of air?
or fly around carrying compressed air?

>>1489940
Plus, if someone sees it, IT CAN BURST OUT OF THE WATER, TURN THE FUCKING TURBOFAN ON, AND BURST THE HELL OUT OF THERE.


/x/ WILL BE ALL "ZOMG! ITS A SPACE CRAFT" AND WE'LL BE ALL "HAHA /x/, U SO DUMB"

>>1489944
Compressed air would work with cooling aswell as air supply, but there must be another easier way, eletric engines are still too weak, and nuclear are pretty small but bulky for small crafs.

>>1489954
Could you imagine that? being on a boat, seeing a shadow pass underneath you, then jump out of the water like a dolphin, then fly off like a bird?

>>1489965
>fly off like a bird
ornithopters don't really work

>>1489958
i still thing nuke reactors are the best bet. they work well enough for normal subs.

I got it! A rocket engine will do the trick. Doesn't need to be supplied with air like a jet

Flying fish all up in this /sci/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAjzH0vWSIA

I'm convinced everyone here is retarded.

>>1490029
You must be pretty stupid to have just realized this.

/sci/ died a week after it was created.

we should design a submarine that can go into orbit

>>1490039

My first time reading this board. I was pretty stupid in thinking anything could be discussed intelligently on 4chan though, what the fuck was I thinking?

How are we going to lay out the different components. What type of wing shall we use, and how will it pivot to v-tol?

>>1489926

No. No nuclear reactors. All the shielding will make it far to fucking heavy to ever get off the ground.

>our genius
>tiem
>worlds

Nope, already failed.

>>1489632
> well it would be cool
that's not how engineering technology works. You start with purpose and go from there.

>>1489604
Give it a fly mode and a submersible mode. The thing cannot move in the water the same way it does as in the air, striking the water at those speeds would destroy it. So we are going to be slowing it down AND having it close up the jet intakes as it makes the water landing. Then it makes the dive.

>>1490343
Being cool IS a purpose.

interesting how many tripfags are in this shit

>>1490378
Oh you'll be seeing a lot of tripfags now. Some little kid came in here butthurt about it and asking us for help breaking tripcodes, BUNCH of trips got made just for him with no help given to him. So... yeah, here we go then.

>>1490378
oh get over your shit. Fucks sake, stop mentioning it

nobody cares. you 14 year old complainers are worse than they are.