Author Topic: Aircraft design for Titan  (Read 2059 times)

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 457
Re: Aircraft design for Titan
« Reply #1 on: 02/18/2010 08:50 pm »
Since Titan's atmosphere is so dense I think an airship or blimp would be a better solution then an airplane.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Aircraft design for Titan
« Reply #2 on: 02/18/2010 09:25 pm »
From TFA:
Quote
An airplane would have a number of advantages over a balloon:

    * The plane can remain constantly on the sunlit side of the moon and thus in direct communication with the Earth.  (At the equator, the plane would have to average just 13-14 km per hour to remain on the sunlit hemisphere.)
    * While a balloon's flight would be at the whim of the winds, a plane could be directed to specific regions for study.
    * The plane's design and software could make use of the extensive heritage of design for unmanned aereial vehicles (UAVs) used by the military on Earth.  For a platform that will have to operate autonomously for much of the time because of the time delay for commands from Earth, this is a key heritage.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline khallow

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1954
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Aircraft design for Titan
« Reply #3 on: 02/18/2010 11:43 pm »
Thing is an airship could manage that velocity and it would still work even if the propulsion system failed. In other words, an airship would work like an airplane except that you have an backup mode as a balloon, if the propulsion system fails.

Also Venus looks to be another candidate for this sort of system. You should be able to run a solar powered version.
Karl Hallowell

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Aircraft design for Titan
« Reply #4 on: 02/19/2010 04:20 am »
Thing is an airship could manage that velocity and it would still work even if the propulsion system failed. In other words, an airship would work like an airplane except that you have an backup mode as a balloon, if the propulsion system fails.

Also Venus looks to be another candidate for this sort of system. You should be able to run a solar powered version.


How about split the middle? An inflatable aircraft that deploys an hydrogen bag to increase volume above neutral buoyancy in the event of power loss. With the atmosphere as dense as it is, I wouldn't be surprised if an inflatable aircraft itself is pretty close to neutral buoyancy anyways.

If you dont know what I mean by inflatable aircraft, there was a two man seaplane that Goodyear built for the Army, that outside of the engine and control cables, is entirely inflated...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodyear_Inflatoplane
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 457
Re: Aircraft design for Titan
« Reply #5 on: 02/19/2010 04:06 pm »
I was thinking a hybrid airship type design would be a good compromise.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_airship
http://www.dynalifter.com/Dynaliftercom/Concept.htm

The inflatable aircraft concept if it can be made to work at low temps would solve the deployment issue.
Heat from the RTG could be used to heat the gas to argument lift.


Offline indaco1

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 64
  • Likes Given: 37
Re: Aircraft design for Titan
« Reply #6 on: 02/22/2010 12:22 pm »
...

Also Venus looks to be another candidate for this sort of system. You should be able to run a solar powered version.


IMHO I agree Venus is much better for the first airborne mission for the following reasons:

- Much shorter travel time. Besides the other reasons, as it could take more than one mission to build the know-how for airborne probes it is unreasonable to attempt it with a target at a distance of 7 years.

- It's the twin of Earth, it deserves much more than the missions it had since now.

- At altitude of approximately 50 kilometers the pressure and temperature are very similar to Earth. Let place the probe there.

- CO2 atmosphere. Enough lift with many gases and relatively small ballons.

- As said in the quoted message, no RTG required. Lot of solar power for PV panels.  Much less costs and troubles.

- Strong winds (300km/h), no active propulsion required, altitude is stable and easy to control.  The reentry point could be chosen near an interesting feature. Airships and planes are good after you experienced with unpropelled baloons near to home.

A mission of this kind to Venus could be relatively cheap. Of course if you add frills it could be much more expensive. I suppose a relay satellite for communications could be very useful because the probe will be powered during day when possibly Earth is not in sight.
« Last Edit: 02/22/2010 12:26 pm by indaco1 »
Non-native English speaker and non-expert, be patient.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0