After some further converstions at two space flight site I have this for you;
I’ll do some math for you.
L=½pv^2ACl = > ½x0.0000009kg/m3x38098384x1290x3 = 66348 N ….witch means an object with cl3 flying at 140 km can weigh 6635 kilos ( with 1290 m2 wing area )…now check the centrifugal force in 140km….
12 700 kg (weight with empty fuel in Solar Eagle at 140 km) x a ( a= v^2/r ) = 12700×5.7 = 72843 N …..that means that the plane is forced into orbit with force of 72843 N ie 7284 kg can be reduced from the weight of 12700…so Solar Eagle with Star Eagle are still cimbing at 140 km !
The Solar Eagle can theoretically fly really near the LEO at 160 km altitude…making the space flite very economical since carrying a space ship capable to moon landing at 1/240th of the fuel used in APOLLO 11.
I redrew the mother ship with 130 m spanning and 50 000 mtow to carry a tad bigger space ship into orbit.
BTW: Which Star Wars caracter are you ?
I was Obi-Wan.
http://www.zimbio.com/quiz/Ukldm8Pi5Ub/Star+Wars+Character/result/2nWJJiPNR1D
Let’s reverse the question.
What would it take for you to believe there is a God ?
If we made a manned journey to Alfa Centauri and found out that Corusant actually exists there.
Would that please you and make you say…Moses was right…there is a ( judeo-christian ) God ?
Ah so se are still in the realms of fiction!!:)
Yes they are fiction…but so was Jules Verne about the moon voyage !
Intriguing. But the question is verging on the metaphysical. Why? might be a better question.
Nothing I suppose is the answer. Corusant??
Coruscant; http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Coruscant
Measures corrected !
SPECS INDICATED…AND 2 PASSENGERS.
Measures corrected !
Here are the basics in one man sized plane..quite a lot of punch for the weight still ?
It is a pusher prop with 2 x 10 kw engines….and uses 30-50% efficient solar panels ( top notch ).
What is ponzi anyway ?
My response to these calculations appearing in a GD forum is – if it’s that easy, why hasn’t somebody done it ?
This kinda talks starts right before I am banned ? What if no one ever tought about it…I came up with idea to use mother ship fuel via parasite booster in 2003. This has 7 inventions in a new lay out to make it happen.
…..and what is a GD forum anyway ?
No, it needs a source of air to continually pressurize the cabin. Conventional aircraft usually bleed it off the engines. 25km is spacesuit territory. Lying down…..
So space crafts never happened…and man never went to moon ?
I know..it would need to have detachable nose made of carbon to get it pressurized and a man in.
Perlan II has pressirization up to 90 000 ft and it is a glider.
I have no desire to prick anyone’s bubble but some of your figures don’t really work.
A sea level top speed of of 50km/h is only 27kts. What sort of wing section would stay unstalled at that speed. If 50km/h is the max speed presumably it takes off at less than that. A stiff breeze would see it exceed VMO ….on the ground!
36km is 118000ft! It will need a major (and heavy) pressurization system to ensure that the crew can exist at all. Any problem with the ECS would kill the crew in seconds if they have no space suits.
A propeller simply isn’t going to work at that height. There is not enough air.
Your original question
The answer is not yet…if ever.
Here is the foil.
Prop has to be specially designed for the job. 8.5 m dia 5 blader is on the 180 seater. Numbers show excellent thrust !
Not to 65,000 – 120,000 feet and 50 – 500 km/h they don’t!
With sixteen horsepower? Which one?
When you say ‘research aircraft’ what sort of research; research into whether it can be done or research that needs to be carried-out above 65,000 feet?
No HPAs fly at 280 watts…endlessly if the pedaller could.
No aircraft has flown over altitude of 17500 m with prop ever..that is the point here.
My apologies for not looking at all your concepts before asking my questions; to an extent you have answered some of them already in your concepts.
One of your concepts states 12.5kW from 24m² of ~50% efficient solar-panels which sounds a little high to me. (I always remember the figure of 1kW per m² under ideal conditions, ideal conditions!) So there I think is your first problem (and the reason that there are no solar-powered cars)!
To put this in context, last year Volkswagen launched an experimental all-electric Golf (e-Golf); it was powered by a single 85kW (114 horsepower!) electric motor. To power this with 50% efficient solar-panels under ideal conditions would require a solar-panel area 4 metres wide by over 40 metres long; how do you fit that on a VW Golf? And this 85kW e-Golf does not have to fly.
So are you saying that the total area of your aircraft can be covered in ~50% efficient solar panels given that it must also be extremely efficient aerodynamically and function as an aircraft?
Your total ideal power, even at ~50% efficiency, is only just sufficient to run one of your two 10kW motors (even assuming a 100% efficient motor) so you have been forced to add (heavy) auxiliary batteries.
Another problem I foresee are the propellers; a propeller that will be even remotely efficient at zero altitude and also at 20,000 metres will surely be highly compromised at most altitudes and speeds (especially if it is fixed pitch). That will waste much of your solar-power; solar-power that you just do not have to start with.
Can you find me any aircraft that has ever flown with only sixteen horsepower; what were its performance figures like? Could it get three crew to 65,000 feet?
Nobody can stop you dreaming but people only invest in reality; good luck! 🙂
I think only one can fly to 65-120 000 ft.
Below are the options with more span.
Human powered aeropanes fly at 0.28 kW constantly. Ten times less power / kg.