That would look nice in my C5.DeltaV wrote:A Polywell Corvette motor! All I ask is 370KW (500 HP).
Maybe I'll photoshop it in.
But I'm already at 450hp iirc, and I hear the new super-Vette is something ungodly like 700hp.
First steps towards a Polywell fusion device prototype
My engine is nominally 81 bhp. No idea what it is at the wheels. Still, it does me nicely except for the fact that it does +60 mpg and is so efficient with that that it doesn't warm up in the car for the first 18 miles of 70mph driving. So I'd like unlimited power not to go fast, but just that it could keep my car permanently warm in winter.
What can you do with 900bhp at the back wheels, except wreck some expensive tyres? And even with all the power of that C5, it's still stands so short that you've got to take the roof off for one's head to fit, I notice.
ah... jealousy is a fine thing..... I guess you don't have the burden of multiple kids!
What can you do with 900bhp at the back wheels, except wreck some expensive tyres? And even with all the power of that C5, it's still stands so short that you've got to take the roof off for one's head to fit, I notice.
ah... jealousy is a fine thing..... I guess you don't have the burden of multiple kids!
-
alexjrgreen
- Posts: 815
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:03 pm
- Location: UK
[The joyous burden, or the burdens of joy. Burden is in there somewhere, I tell you!!]alexjrgreen wrote:Slip of the tongue: you meant joy, of course...chrismb wrote:I guess you don't have the burden of multiple kids!
I guess the most powerful transport I drove was a mere 3,200hp. (Ok. More like flew...!
) Gave that up, along with my 2 stroke race bike that, technically, was ~800bhp/tonne, due to the joyous burden of family life. Now I have my 81bhp diesel powered car to plod to work in everyday, 9-5. yipee! How can you beat that excitement!!100,000 HP (75MW)
198,500 HP (148MW)
And someone else paid for the gas!
Coolest Boat I drove for a bit was a Nightcat 27 with twin OceanPro 300's.
http://www.interceptboats.com/
And again, someone else paid for gas!
Two burdens of joy here...
198,500 HP (148MW)
And someone else paid for the gas!
Coolest Boat I drove for a bit was a Nightcat 27 with twin OceanPro 300's.
http://www.interceptboats.com/
And again, someone else paid for gas!
Two burdens of joy here...
-
MirariNefas
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:57 am
-
CaptainBeowulf
- Posts: 498
- Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 12:35 am
So, you want to not only levitate/motivate "reactionlessly", but also be able to make sharp 90 deg turns at high speed* without getting turned into a greasy smear. I can see the advantage of the latter, but I'd settle for the former, at least for starters.
*[Did anyone else see that NBC News video in the late 80s or early 90s showing similar behavior, at night, at Area 51?]
*[Did anyone else see that NBC News video in the late 80s or early 90s showing similar behavior, at night, at Area 51?]
On a side topic, much discussed elsewhere on this site (thread drift? me?), such a capability would make UAV/UCAV combat maneuverability a moot point, since manned vehicles could then match them turn-for-turn, zig-for-zig and zag-for-zag. Of course, the UCAV autopilot would be faster than neurons, so for a dogfight, a human pilot would have to let his computer handle the inner-loop flight control, while he makes higher-level tactics/strategy decisions. He could go back to full manual control once the UCAV was smoked. If the human had fast-slewing, high-power DEWs (likely to be available long before inertialess maneuvering, unless certain Area 51 videos are real...) he would just fly manually all the time and let the computer handle the nuisance "mosquitoes" in "fly-by shooting" mode, in which case inertialess maneuvering would be moot. Unless, of course, such maneuvering could exceed the maximum DEW slew rate...DeltaV wrote:...be able to make sharp 90 deg turns at high speed without getting turned into a greasy smear.