Ion drive for aircraft imminent.

Nanotechnology makes possible an "ion drive" for air vehicles analogous to the famous ion drive of NASA's deep space probes:

Carbon nanotubes for "Ionic Wind" Craft or "Ionocraft". Clark R* Department of Mathematics, Widener University, USA Review Article Volume 1 Issue 2 / Received Date: September 26, 2016 / Published Date: October 20, 2016 Abstract Peter Thiel of the Founders Fund once famously said, "We wanted flying cars, and we got 140 characters."But nanotechnology now does make possible the long desired flying cars. It's a different propulsion method though than propellers or jets however. It's propulsion by electric fields known as electrohydrodynamic propulsion (EHD). It works by ionizing air then using electric fields to propel the charged air molecules rearward, thus producing thrust. It's quite analogous to the famous space ion drive of NASA. EHD has been known at least since the sixties. Its problem is, as with ion drive, the thrust is so low. So far the EHD craft have not been able to lift both themselves and their power supplies. The ones made so far leave the power supply on the ground and connect to the craft through power cables. But the equations of EHD suggest the thrust for the power required gets larger for thinner ionizing wires. In fact if the wires are at the nanoscale then this important thrust-to-power ratio can be a hundred times higher than for the craft constructed so far. This would be enough to lift the craft and the power supply. This research is to prove what the mathematics suggests. Note that if it works then all propeller and rotor driven craft become obsolete. Also, intermediate range automobile travel would be taken over by the EHD craft, so a large proportion of carbon-emissions would be eliminated, replaced by this zero-emission travel method. In regards to space propulsion, since EHD is so similar to ion drive, using components at the nanoscale may also work to improve the thrust of ion drive. This would be important to shortening the flight times of spacecraft using such drives. This is important not just for robotic spacecraft but also satellites that use such ion drives to reach their final GEO destinations. As it is now, the ion drives used have such low thrust it takes months for such satellites to reach GEO, resulting in millions of dollars of lost revenue to the satellite companies. Being able to increase the thrust of these drives would reduce the flight time, and therefore reduce this lost revenue. Keywords: Electrohydrodynamic propulsion; Carbon nanotubes; Nanowires; Ionic wind; Ionocraft; Plasma drive

formatting link

Bob Clark

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize

21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital launchers, to 'flying cars'. This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it:

Nanotech: from air to space.

formatting link

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to
Robert Clark
Loading thread data ...

Post again when Chevy dealerships are selling flying cars.

Carbon nanotubes are the idiotic craze of the day, and are pretty much useless so far. As electron or ion emitters, they quickly destroy themselves.

And they still don't violate conservation of energy. Where is all the zero-pollution power going to come from?

That's hilarious, tying tiny nanotubes together with fancy knots.

The nanotech bubble popped roughly 10 years ago. I was involved with academics and inventors and slimy VCs all hoping to cash in on the upside of the Next Big Thing.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
Reply to
John Larkin

Do they work when it's raining / in humid environments?

Michael

Reply to
mrdarrett

No. And under even ideal conditions, they don't work for long.

Why do people invent (and press release) crazy sci-fi dreams that ignore basic physics? There is a reason why helicopters have gas turbine engines and giant fan blades... and horrendous fuel consumption rates. Why don't they just use their jet engines to lift the vehicle?

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Reply to
John Larkin

Another sink for technology-ignorant sucker investors. ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson                                 |    mens     | 
| Analog Innovations                               |     et      | 
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    | 
| STV, Queen Creek, AZ 85142    Skype: skypeanalog |             | 
| Voice:(480)460-2350  Fax: Available upon request |  Brass Rat  | 
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com |    1962     | 

             I'm looking for work... see my website.
Reply to
Jim Thompson

Yeah, sure, nanotubes are going to revolutionize the world any day now, just like fusion, a cure for the common cold, and peace in the Middle East.

BTW, the lack of commercial success for flying cars has nothing to do with propulsion methods.

--
Jim Pennino
Reply to
jimp

Oh I dunno, I thought this 18-rotor electric copter-thingie was kind of cute.

formatting link

Michael

Reply to
mrdarrett

There will be several plug-in prime movers available, initially you'll have your choice of H2O hydrogen booster, Hendershot generator, or zero-point reactor at product launch.

Reply to
bitrex

But propulsion does matter, in the sense that there is no affordable way to make a flying car. Helicopters get terrible gas mileage.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Reply to
John Larkin

"Robert Clark" wrote in news:nvab5b$is1$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:

The reason we don't have flying cars has nothing to do with the method of propulsion. We've *had* flying cars for decades. And this will do nothing to make them a) cheaper, b) easier to fly, or c) safer when there are tens of millions of them in the air at once.

Just like all propeller and rotor drive craft became obsolete when jet engeins were invented. Sure.

Effectively, jet powered cars? Because it sounds like there will be a high speed exhaust of _some_ kind behind the vehicle. Which makes it . . . unlikely.

Plus, two orders of magnitude increase in thrust to weight from current ion engines isn't even close to what a car needs.

The electricity has to come from _somewhere_.

As is usual, nearly universal, with all announcement of revolutionary new technologies, this reads more like a prospectus for investors than anything else. Which is to say, he wants to invest a whole lof of other people's money into finding out if it works.

If he really believed it would work, he'd invest his own money, and keep _all_ the profits himself.

--
Terry Austin 

Vacation photos from Iceland:  
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB 

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole." 
    -- David Bilek 

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Reply to
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

Yikes. You won't catch me in one of those things. There's no way that's ever going to autorotate--if the power fails, it's Wile E. Coyote time.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Reply to
Phil Hobbs

Den tirsdag den 1. november 2016 kl. 22.41.27 UTC+1 skrev Phil Hobbs:

formatting link
formatting link

Reply to
Lasse Langwadt Christensen

Very ni... oh, that landing... those blades could chop him to pieces! :o

Michael

Reply to
mrdarrett

As long as you stay no more than 5 ft above the ground or tree line, you should be OK :)

Michael

Reply to
mrdarrett

You do know helicopters spend a fair amount of time not traveling, don't you, but that has nothing to do with flying cars.

The cost of the engine is a tiny fraction of the cost of developing, certifying, manufacturing and marketing a flying car, or a flying anything for that matter.

--
Jim Pennino
Reply to
jimp

he is an idiot. flying cars are sub optimal airplanes, and he saw it in a James Bond Movie,

the 140 character field on all cellphone calls, was set by the telcom companies about 40 years ago

Reply to
Yuri Kreaton

how many pounds of thrust does it take to keep 4000 pounds up in the air, stationary, and then gliding ?

Reply to
Yuri Kreaton

They would look great in my garage.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Reply to
John Larkin

Until a propeller shatters and a piece chops your legs off.

Clifford Heath

Reply to
Clifford Heath

I've been waiting for someone to start selling nano-technology Hendershot generators. Sounds like a good business.

Reply to
krw

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.