does any one has big pic of this laser powered plane...?

Were you planning to embed this laser plane, and if so where?

Found this with Google News search:

it is a poor designed thing.

intended to draw attention and attract private or public funding.

Rene

As with all flying scale model planes, sooner or later it WILL be embedded. ;-)

michael

I'm sure NASA would welcome your suggestions.

-- Al Balmer Balmer Consulting snipped-for-privacy@att.net

Who? Mylinux?

It's best to read the article before commenting. The intention was to learn something, since the project is already publicly funded.

-- Al Balmer Balmer Consulting snipped-for-privacy@att.net

Well, it's not like they can't use the help these days. ;-) As to the design of the plane, since weight is the number one priority, I don't see how it could have been much lighter. However, it does still appear to be fairly sturdy to me. I wonder if they used COTS materials or if they paid millions to develop and build the prototype.

Since they had already flown the plane powered by ordinary visible light, and have been doing things like this for some time now, I don't understand all the hoopla about it be powered by LASER. Especially given the size of the LASER they appear to be using. I mean, did someone think that it wouldn't work? I'd like to know how many watts of input power to the LASER (power supply). I'd also like to see it's outdoor performance. ;-)

michael

The visible light experiment didn't track the plane, and I'm sure the laser uses less power than the spotlight they used for preliminary testing. I would think the point of using the laser was concentration of the power and the ability to provide tracking. The ability to efficiently generate useful amounts of power at non-visible wavelengths is another reason to use lasers.

" have been doing things like this for some time now,"

Not sure what you mean by this. The article described it as an "aviation first" and mentioned no other experiments except the Japanese steam-powered paper airplane.

What size was it? I haven't seen any numbers.

Maybe, maybe not, but the time eventually comes when you have to reduce theory to practice and actually *try* it.

I thought you knew the size ? (see above.)

Outdoor performance will obviously be more affected by atmospheric conditions, but the principles are the same.

-- Al Balmer Balmer Consulting snipped-for-privacy@att.net

the

appear

if

Tracking was probably not that difficult for them given NASA's experience at doing that. ;-) I suppose that the LASER will be usefull for being able to power it from a good distance, and not shining a visible light on it will be a benefit in military applications. I guess the goal is to be able to fly solar powered aircraft at night, though it seems more useful to the military than anything.

AIR, the article declared it a "first" as far as LASER powered flight, but it's far from being a first in being powered by light. There have been very large solar powered aircraft flying for some time now. They seem far more practical for hauling around sky based equipment.

I don't know, I was making my comment from the size of the "turret" that was being used.

I suppose, but I hope they didn't spend millions proving their theory in this case. I don't usually make comments like this about high-tech stuff, but I really question the overall usefulness of this technology, outside the military and perhaps law enforcement that is.

I don't think wind was part of the design spec for this one. ;-)

michael

Even as non-US taxpayer I'm not impressed. Learn what ? That the photovoltaics at IR is not that great ? That visible lasers are also not that great ? That the restriction of strictly requiring line of sight may be too limiting ? That the tracking of the airplane becomes complicated when thermal influences plus wind are added outdoors ?

There are electric powered model airplanes that work great. For longer ranges, there are fossile powered model airplanes. One even was able to cross the atlantic ocean recently.

Rene

As a US taxpayer, I'm afraid that I have to agree. What with the current state of autonomous control, nano technology etc, this technology seems a bit aged even if it is "new".

I strongly agree on the line of site issue, but I suppose that their argument is that it's a communications platform and needs line of site anyway. As for their claims of cell-phone repeating, cable tv and and internet provision, I really doubt it will do anything like that any time soon. I mean I understand the benefits of not having to carry battery packs, but with That the tracking of the airplane becomes complicated when

I agree.

michael

It actually looks somewhat like a commercial model, except for the large photovoltaic cells hanging underneath the model. The wings are lightweight, with a probable carbon spar and leading edge on the main wing, carbon spar on the horizontal stabiliser, and may have CF within the fuselage, although it's unlikely, as the structure should have sufficient strength for the job. The wings also have a large camber, which with such a slow speed aircraft, woud generate sufficient lift.

If you want an impressive "model" aircraft aircraft, have a look at the NASA "Helios".