4 ms·

Neat - but not interesting from a technological stand point.

by j245 5y ago

OJFord 5y ago
Is it not? I don't imagine such sustained flight, continuous operation of all the equipment and engine for so long, would've been a design consideration. Presumably there's a number, I just doubt it's tens of days, so isn't it interesting that it was achieved?
- j245 5y ago
  This record was set ~3 months after someone else did it for 50 days. From an engineering stand point, performance of components or materials are always assumed to be much worse than actual and the forces / conditions they are subject to overestimated, with further factors of safety applied on top. This is how it should be. It also means properly designed things will carry on working better than you expect (on average). It’s not interesting (to me) from a technological stand point compared to the solar UAV because flying up and down the same road with a truck refuelling you is not useful, and if others (e.g. Military, NASA) could be bothered to do it - they would probably do a better job relatively easily. To me - It’s the same as building the worlds longest domino trail. You could beat the previous record by 1 million dominos which is neat but.. what have you proven, and why does it matter ?
  - OJFord 5y ago
    > This record was set ~3 months after someone else did it for 50 days. Fair enough, I didn't know about that, I'd have been as interested to hear about either of them first, and like you not so much the other second. (And I doubt the commenter that shared it meant it as 'wow look 64 compared to 50' either.)
andrepew 5y ago
Over 1500 hours of continuous operation is quite a feat. Components like magnetos have service schedules much shorter than that. This also ignores all the unexpected issues that pop up in aviation. My only experience with Cessna 172s are rentals which are treated like crap - those planes need something looked at like every 50 hours.

Neat - but not interesting from a technological stand point.

by j245 5y ago

Neat - but not interesting from a technological stand point.

Is it not? I don't imagine such sustained flight, continuous operation of all the equipment and engine for so long, would've been a design consideration. Presumably there's a number, I just doubt it's tens of days, so isn't it interesting that it was achieved?

j245 5y ago
This record was set ~3 months after someone else did it for 50 days. From an engineering stand point, performance of components or materials are always assumed to be much worse than actual and the forces / conditions they are subject to overestimated, with further factors of safety applied on top. This is how it should be. It also means properly designed things will carry on working better than you expect (on average). It’s not interesting (to me) from a technological stand point compared to the solar UAV because flying up and down the same road with a truck refuelling you is not useful, and if others (e.g. Military, NASA) could be bothered to do it - they would probably do a better job relatively easily. To me - It’s the same as building the worlds longest domino trail. You could beat the previous record by 1 million dominos which is neat but.. what have you proven, and why does it matter ?
- OJFord 5y ago
  > This record was set ~3 months after someone else did it for 50 days. Fair enough, I didn't know about that, I'd have been as interested to hear about either of them first, and like you not so much the other second. (And I doubt the commenter that shared it meant it as 'wow look 64 compared to 50' either.)

andrepew 5y ago

Over 1500 hours of continuous operation is quite a feat. Components like magnetos have service schedules much shorter than that. This also ignores all the unexpected issues that pop up in aviation. My only experience with Cessna 172s are rentals which are treated like crap - those planes need something looked at like every 50 hours.