[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 731 KB, 1800x1086, 687184main_EC01-0129-17.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6631347 No.6631347 [Reply] [Original]

Why is aviation technology not advancing ? We got bullet trains and Tesla's electric cars, which did not exist in the 1960s, but we are still using 747s that were made in 1969?

>> No.6631350

>>6631347
Incredibly poor management.
No surplus to spend on improving aviation, just the user experience.

>> No.6631352

concord flopped

>> No.6631353

>aviation technology not advancing
You're silly. E.g. the CO and NOx emission production has been reduced by ridiculous amounts.

>> No.6631357
File: 3.39 MB, 3000x2033, 677705main_ED06-0201-01.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6631357

It is advancing, just in a very boring direction. Right now the big thing in aviation is being greener. There are many approaches taken to this. Pic is a blended wing body NASA and Boeing are working on that supposed to be really aerodynamic and shit.

There is continuous work being done on improving engine efficiencies and creating lighter, stronger materials. Again, boring shit.

>we are still using 747s that were made in 1969
Don't fix what ain't broke. Replacing an entire fleet will cost millions. MRO is orders of magnitude cheaper than buying a new 747, let alone a 787.

Also, it takes at least 10 years for a newly launched commercial aircraft to see use in airports. "Security" reasons, but really it's just a bunch of bureaucrats trying to look important and talk big about public safety and reliability.

>> No.6631356

>>6631353
per flight*

>> No.6631385

>>6631357
>just a bunch of bureaucrats trying to look important and talk big about public safety and reliability.

yeah, who cares if planes crash lol

>> No.6631387

>>6631385
Right, because bureaucrats know a lot more about safety than the engineers who designed, developed and tested the damn thing.

>> No.6631396
File: 1.30 MB, 3555x2879, challenge disapears.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6631396

>>6631387
ofc they do

>> No.6631399 [DELETED] 

>>6631387
no cos enginers r feggurz
huehuehuehuehuehue
heeheuheu
huhuhueheh
hueheu

>> No.6631419

>>6631352

gas guzzling to the max

>> No.6631424

>>6631396
on point.

>> No.6631432
File: 105 KB, 800x1200, CRS3 Falcon 9 soot splashback.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6631432

>>6631396
Fucking this!

regarding OPs post advancements are happening the brittish are working on a SSTO spaceplane called skylon. Nasa is doing some stuff, but most of their budget is currently going to the manned spaceflight effort with SLS and robotic missions. As for aircraft, there is a resurgence in the Idea of Airships, since they can transport heavy goods without the need for a massive runway.
And then as always there is the private sector Spacex Is gonna try to get to mars and they are doing some insane sci-fi shit that works. I would check them out if I were you.

>> No.6631433

>>6631347
haha looks like the planes are having sex

>tfw planes get more action than me

>> No.6631434
File: 38 KB, 500x500, propagandhi-failed-states[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6631434

>>6631396
Was this pic posted with knowledge of this album's existence, and hence with intended irony?

>> No.6631439

>>6631434
No the intended irony was about Feynman vs the Bureaucrats.

>> No.6631452

>>6631439
Ah, it's just that that band are leftie commie tossers too.

>> No.6631614

>>6631347
There were electric cars in the 60s:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henney_Kilowatt

There were bullet trains in the 60s:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinkansen#History

They use those planes for the same reason, people still use HP power supplies for example. It's a close to perfect solution and unless some breakthrough occurs, like e.g. the Me262 was, there is really no reason to ditch things. Not everything advances as rapidly as information technology.

>> No.6631635
File: 260 KB, 1000x1464, concorde1000.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6631635

>>6631347

Because " we " don't want.

I am french.

We had the Concorde, a turbojet-powered supersonic passenger airliner.

There had ONE accident that killed several people. And our president has decided to stop the Concorde.

And now, there are no supersonic passenger airliner over the world.

>> No.6631637

>asserting it's not advancing
just because it's not advancing in places immediately visible to you doesn't mean it stopped advancing

there's only so many ways to build a plane body, all the neat advances are happening in the guts, behind the scenes

>> No.6631644

>>6631635
So...

The supersonic jet slipped on a banana peel?

>> No.6631706

Here's the thing: we've already got the fastest speeds (orbital rockets) and good reliability with very close to the best possible energy efficiency (airliners).

Until the energy cost comes down, there's very little progress to be made (except with the rockets, which need to be made efficiently reusable like airliners).

When energy cost does come down, then it will be exciting again, since all sorts of different things could become useful with cheap energy.

>> No.6631837
File: 62 KB, 1280x720, puella_magi_madoka_magica-12-kyubey-happy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6631837