3 ms·

The Taxibot system, where a small tug vehicle positions itself under the plane's front wheels, would be very promising if it could be self-driving and fully aut

by nealabq 13y ago

The Taxibot system, where a small tug vehicle positions itself under the plane's front wheels, would be very promising if it could be self-driving and fully automated. And think of the cost saving when we get rid of the pilot and cockpit. And heck, let's get rid of the landing gear too, and have the plane drop into a cradle running along underneath the plane on a track to catch the plane. The cradle would also provide a lot of the acceleration of liftoff, and the cradle's liftoff track could climb a few hundred feet like a roller coaster, so maybe the plane's engines could be smaller.

thedrbrian 13y ago
We could get rid of those pesky complaining meat sacks too. I never quite understood the fiscal arguements for pilotless passenger aircraft. It's not like a single seat fighter jet where you can ditch the pressurisation gear, you've got to still keep the cargo alive no matter how much noise that they make.
- shpxnvz 13y ago
  > It's not like a single seat fighter jet where you can ditch the pressurisation gear, you've got to still keep the cargo alive no matter how much noise that they make. Furthermore, my understanding is that modern fighter aircraft are generally limited in performance to operational envelope of the human driving it, i.e. most modern fighter airframes are capable of performance that could literally kill a human pilot. Getting rid of the pilot opens up the possibility of gaining significant manoeuvrability.
carleverett 13y ago
Is this a serious response?
WalterBright 13y ago
The German rocket fighter Me-163 dropped its landing gear after takeoff, and landed on a skid. Of course, the Me-163 had other problems like blowing up on the ascent, or worse, dissolving the pilot if it developed a fuel leak.
- lostlogin 13y ago
  At the tail end of the war, those Luftwaffe pilots were flying some pretty damn advanced planes, with some pretty awful inherent problems. But the follow on designs (Mig-15 et al) were in service for quite some time after the war. The rate of advance of German industry despite massive aerial assault and savage ground wars is fascinating. I recommend reading Gitta Sereny's biography of Albert Speer. Among other rather less impressive acts (extent debated, but likely involvement in genocide, definitely involved in slave labour organisation etc) he rearranged German industry such the production increases were occurring right up until the very final stages of the war. The major industrial output declined started about early '45 or late '44 from memory, which given the volume of allied bombs dropped speaks to German organisation, allied bomb accuracy, or both!
  - WalterBright 13y ago
    The two big problems the Luftwaffe had were their pilots got killed off and could not be replaced, and they could not get fuel. The Allied bombing of the fuel supply was very effective. The Allied bomber forces suffered terrible losses, but there were plenty of replacements and fuel.
    - lostlogin 13y ago
      Was the fuel shortage due to bombing or Russians taking the oil fields? I had thought it was nearly entirely due to Russian advance, but the below article makes it seem otherwise. It quotes Speer saying how effective allies bombings were, but it is dated May 1944, which is quite late in the piece given that the tide turned, although this may have been less clear as it was still pre Normandy (just). Interesting fact from that article - the treaty with Russia gained Germany 4m barrels a year, and the subsequent invasion only gained them about the same. Are the numbers misleading? Did Germany still need to process the oil it imported, making relatively small domestic production less relevant and the processing facilities critical? http://vanrcook.tripod.com/Germanfuelshortage.htm http://vanrcook.tripod.com/Germanfuelshortage.htm
rdl 13y ago
It would be cool if it had batteries or APU on the cart to power the plane, too (AC, IFE, etc)

by nealabq 13y ago

thedrbrian 13y ago

We could get rid of those pesky complaining meat sacks too. I never quite understood the fiscal arguements for pilotless passenger aircraft. It's not like a single seat fighter jet where you can ditch the pressurisation gear, you've got to still keep the cargo alive no matter how much noise that they make.

shpxnvz 13y ago
> It's not like a single seat fighter jet where you can ditch the pressurisation gear, you've got to still keep the cargo alive no matter how much noise that they make. Furthermore, my understanding is that modern fighter aircraft are generally limited in performance to operational envelope of the human driving it, i.e. most modern fighter airframes are capable of performance that could literally kill a human pilot. Getting rid of the pilot opens up the possibility of gaining significant manoeuvrability.

carleverett 13y ago

Is this a serious response?

WalterBright 13y ago

The German rocket fighter Me-163 dropped its landing gear after takeoff, and landed on a skid. Of course, the Me-163 had other problems like blowing up on the ascent, or worse, dissolving the pilot if it developed a fuel leak.

lostlogin 13y ago
At the tail end of the war, those Luftwaffe pilots were flying some pretty damn advanced planes, with some pretty awful inherent problems. But the follow on designs (Mig-15 et al) were in service for quite some time after the war. The rate of advance of German industry despite massive aerial assault and savage ground wars is fascinating. I recommend reading Gitta Sereny's biography of Albert Speer. Among other rather less impressive acts (extent debated, but likely involvement in genocide, definitely involved in slave labour organisation etc) he rearranged German industry such the production increases were occurring right up until the very final stages of the war. The major industrial output declined started about early '45 or late '44 from memory, which given the volume of allied bombs dropped speaks to German organisation, allied bomb accuracy, or both!
- WalterBright 13y ago
  The two big problems the Luftwaffe had were their pilots got killed off and could not be replaced, and they could not get fuel. The Allied bombing of the fuel supply was very effective. The Allied bomber forces suffered terrible losses, but there were plenty of replacements and fuel.
  - lostlogin 13y ago
    Was the fuel shortage due to bombing or Russians taking the oil fields? I had thought it was nearly entirely due to Russian advance, but the below article makes it seem otherwise. It quotes Speer saying how effective allies bombings were, but it is dated May 1944, which is quite late in the piece given that the tide turned, although this may have been less clear as it was still pre Normandy (just). Interesting fact from that article - the treaty with Russia gained Germany 4m barrels a year, and the subsequent invasion only gained them about the same. Are the numbers misleading? Did Germany still need to process the oil it imported, making relatively small domestic production less relevant and the processing facilities critical? http://vanrcook.tripod.com/Germanfuelshortage.htm http://vanrcook.tripod.com/Germanfuelshortage.htm

rdl 13y ago

It would be cool if it had batteries or APU on the cart to power the plane, too (AC, IFE, etc)