edit: Do U know if it's a possible way to save on gas?...

[Guest]

Combustion engines are going the way of the dinosaur soon so why bother?

[Canidae]

The sky car uses rotary engines...

[Guest]

Yeah I bet that's cheap on gas...

[Guest]

I thought of an idea the other day for a jet powered engine.

The idea is that instead of pistons that move because of an explosion the pistons actualy move because it's actualy a minijet that shoots off when it's supposed to in short bursts. I just wonder what's more powerful, an explosion or the force of a small jet in a confined area?

I would like you to expand/explain a bit more your idea.
In the meantime that reminded me of another idea I have.

Physicians and aeronautics welcome on this one.


Imagine a jet flying at 600Miles/hour with a type of turbines with generators that would accumulate the air intake as an ‘’eolien ‘’ you know… the big pole with kind of palms on it that generate electricity from wind stream.
Could it be feasible that after a certain time of accumulating the wind ‘’energy’’ for the generators and at a certain speed, you can turned off the engine and that the jet on it’s sole propulsion and energy accumulated in the generators, it could fly only from the propelled air intake into its generators/’’eolien’’ even if it would be at a lower speed but still fly.
I'll understand if you don't understand.
An innovation is already hard to explain and in frenchglish like mine...Good luck.
Man, I so wish that Einstein would be here

[andyman]

You guys are gonna be rich!!

[AmIdYfReAk]

rotary engine...

I can't understand why they don't use this technology more often. You'd think Mazda would use it in all their cars. Surely it can't cost that much more to build and if it is becomes more common it wont cost much to repair either.

the Rotor based motor that mazda makes ( known to some as the wankle ) does infact cost about the same if not a hair more then a regular internal combustion engine, its power is relied soaly on Rev's and this is disconcerning for most new commers to it ( it was to me also )

also, they still have a few issues to be worked out,
One: APEX SEALS!!! jesus! this needs to be fixed, but because of how the engine is layed out, its a VER hard thing to do.

Two: they are HARD to work on if you are not experanced on rotor based engins ( I.e. Some plane engines )

Three: Cost!!! they are fuckin expensive for parts as well as manufacturing, this will come down with the popularity of the motor.

Four: Take note of Number one


anyway, its still amazing that they where able to make the motor, and the amount of hp it makes for only 1.3L of displacement.

[nsaP]

The whole process that powers a gas engine is that the gas expands when it ignites, thereby causing the engine to turn over. If you expand the gasoline before you inject it, less will enter the cylinder, which will lead to less power to turn the engine over.

But even beyond that, gas isn't directly injected into the cylinders to begin with. It is mixed with air first, so it is already a thin mist when it reaches the cylinder. AFAIK, you can't really expand it much more than it already is by the time it gets to the combustion chamber/cylinder.

That's true with the common engine but what if we build one that only need the vapors of gas almost without the air mixture, since gas vapor are more volatile than the liquid gas itself?

Because oxygen is required for anything to burn? and the air we breathe is mostly other stuff, like nitrogen?

[Guest]

You guys are gonna be rich!!

May be but that's not my priority at this moment and that's why I am posting my ideas freely on the internet without a patent for them as I wish that someone who have more contacts than me and more powerfull influence in the right arena so they can realise them.
I am more concern about the planet sake and all of our children.
We are already seeing the side effects of the global warming so I want to help/collaborate in my way to save it.
I am a BIG dreamer ever since I was 14YO.

[Guest]

Did you know that the cruise liner, Queen Elizabeth II, moves only six inches for each gallon of diesel that it burns?

[glossy]

I thought...

quit it before you make more of a fool of yourself.

[Guest]

Unbelievable... The Saturn V moon rocket consumed 15 tons of fuel per second. I have to check that out.

[Guest]

Unbelievable... The Saturn V moon rocket consumed 15 tons of fuel per second. I have to check that out.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/sys ... turn-v.htm
What do you think?

[Guest]

Unbelievable... The Saturn V moon rocket consumed 15 tons of fuel per second. I have to check that out.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/sys ... turn-v.htm
What do you think?

And do you believe it was this computer that was on it's mission?

Well, if any of you would like to build one or just
look at the specs of that piece of equipment that
helped men landing on the moon in 1964.

Apollo Guidance Computer (AGC)
How to build one in your basement
John Pultorak
December, 2004
Original AGC:
Designed by M.I.T. in 1964
World's first microchip computer
Prototype computer for Apollo moon landing
Memory: 12K fixed (ROM), 1K eraseable (RAM)
Clock: 1.024 MHz
Computing: 11 instructions, 16 bit word
Logic: ~5000 ICs (3-input NOR gates, RTL logic)
My AGC:
Built from original M.I.T. design documents
Started November 2000, completed October 2004
~15K hand-wrapped wire connections; ~3500 feet of wire
Cost (parts only): $2,980.
Labor: ~2500 hours
Logic: ~500 ICs (LSTTL logic)
Runs flight software (1969 program name: COLOSSUS 249)
http://starfish.osfn.org/AGCreplica

Can you believe this computer was the "summum"of its kind.
They actually landed on the moon with less than what you can
actually have in your dishwasher today.