|
|
Post by Antigone68104 on Jul 28, 2015 15:25:49 GMT
Deadly Drones: I would have liked to see some explanation of the different results the guys got with the chicken test vs actual multirotors being flown into the fake neck.
I don't expect to see a lot of drone delivery -- if it happens at all, it'll be in the larger cities where not having to pay to park your delivery truck over a week's deliveries will pay for the drone. (And how is a drone supposed to get a signature for the package?) But it is a hot topic right now, and I think it was worth showing people that there are some safety concerns as well as technical and legal concerns.
Flying the U-2: I don't know if this really counts as a "test", it was more of a "let's see what they have to do". Those were some wonderful shots from 70,000 feet, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jul 28, 2015 19:36:05 GMT
I think the drone thing was well done and even though it wasn't explained in so many words, it was pretty apparent to me that the difference between the chicken test and the flying test was that the rotor for the chicken test was on a stick. It didn't bounce off when it hit, because Jamie could just hold the stick in place. Not so easy to keep going at the same spot when the drone is in the air and relying on that rotor to keep it in the air. As far as the U2 myth goes, no there wasn't much testing going on, but it was still a very good segment. I loved that Adam gave us a glimpse of the train if thought he has that gives him that profound respect and awe for builders of all kinds. That whole bit he did to camera about how much effort had gone into coming up with the basic ideas for the plane and the suits and everything else and how some people had literally given their lives to test and adjust these things to make sure they work. That bit shows exactly why Adam is the kind of person who can get excited over the design of a septic tank  And then there were the shots from the plane. I can't even begin to imagine how Adam must have felt sitting in that plane on the very edge of the Earth's atmosphere. Those shots were so beautiful! I can imagine that being a rather emotional and humbling experience. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 28, 2015 23:50:00 GMT
I would imagine there has to be some threshold to qualify for contention in the "most difficult to fly" category. considering there are some designs that were not flyable at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jul 29, 2015 0:25:57 GMT
I would imagine there has to be some threshold to qualify for contention in the "most difficult to fly" category. considering there are some designs that were not flyable at all. Of all the designs in the world that actually can fly, how many of them require a week's training just to be a passenger? That says a lot about the complexity of flying that plane. It's not just something you do on a commercial pilot's license. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 29, 2015 0:41:27 GMT
I would imagine there has to be some threshold to qualify for contention in the "most difficult to fly" category. considering there are some designs that were not flyable at all. Of all the designs in the world that actually can fly, how many of them require a week's training just to be a passenger? That says a lot about the complexity of flying that plane. It's not just something you do on a commercial pilot's license. absolutely so. I was just pointing out it is the most difficult plane to fly that is routinely flown. as contrasted to the myriad number of prototypes that were flown one or fewer times. and have never made a good landing, by the official definition (any landing you can walk away from is a good one) |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 29, 2015 0:45:52 GMT
deadly drones: in addition to the blades bending, the motors also stalled out very easily. - brought to mind the old days with Cox airplane motors that would not only give you a cut, but would get cox fuel in it.
however, I have to nitpick - the guy who did the CC entry spelled rotor "roter"
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jul 29, 2015 1:03:52 GMT
It would be a mass issue - the whole equal and opposite reaction thing.
Basically Jamie has several times the mass of a drone* and as such the force of the impact isn't going to shift Jamie but would send a drone flying off in the other direction on contact.
(*A drone masses what? 5 pounds or so? Jamie is around 180 pounds and hence has 36 times the mass)
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 29, 2015 1:16:47 GMT
It would be a mass issue - the whole equal and opposite reaction thing. Basically Jamie has several times the mass of a drone* and as such the force of the impact isn't going to shift Jamie but would send a drone flying off in the other direction on contact. (*A drone masses what? 5 pounds or so? Jamie is around 180 pounds and hence has 36 times the mass) plus adam could control the blade much more precisely to allow it to more effectively whittle away at the chicken. |
|
|
|
Post by breesfan on Jul 29, 2015 3:03:01 GMT
I thought it was a bit boring but I liked to see Adam so excited to doing the U-2 flight and the drone, I thought the blades were made of metal or something and that's why the cut would happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 29, 2015 3:18:21 GMT
I thought it was a bit boring but I liked to see Adam so excited to doing the U-2 flight and the drone, I thought the blades were made of metal or something and that's why the cut would happen. I've seen more than a few toy helicopters, and I knew that their blades were pretty flexible, but I hadn't thought of the drones being the same. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 29, 2015 3:23:24 GMT
I was impressed that they were confident enough in their camera platform to use it in the tests. hate to break something that expensive for a stunt (thinking of mowing down the cheap toy with it)
|
|
|
|
Post by tom1b on Jul 29, 2015 6:38:41 GMT
There was no "test" of anything for the U-2. 01 August 1955 was the first flight of the U-2 aircraft. Discovery wanted a vehicle to honor/commemorate the 60th anniversary of the flight. I didn't like Adam kept saying it was a rocket engine. It is a jet engine, turbofan. The same engine on the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber. 4 engines on the B-2, only 1 on U-2. And the narrator added "..the liquids in your body would boil away..." at that altitude and that is just plain wrong. Your blood doesn't boil. You don't instantly freeze. You don't explode. You are a water filled, sealed leather bag and the fluid in the sealed leather bag doesn't boil away. And they didn't even mention the SR-71, which flew higher & faster, and had the crew wearing the same flight suits. " It all began back in the mid 1950s when the United States Air Force and the CIA decided that it would be best to replace the U-2, an aircraft with something that would travel much faster and higher to avoid enemy defenses." www.sr-71.org/blackbird/sr-71/Smithsonian Air & Space magazine:Is This the Hardest of All Aircraft to Fly?It's the Apache helicopter. 18 months training to fly & fight in it. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jul 29, 2015 10:54:34 GMT
I was impressed that they were confident enough in their camera platform to use it in the tests. hate to break something that expensive for a stunt (thinking of mowing down the cheap toy with it) That wasn't the actual drone they use on the show, but it was the exact same model as the one they use. They had their cameraman fly the duplicate drone since he was used to them. Nope, nothing to do with Discovery. They said on the aftershow that they've been trying to get permission to do something with the U2 for a few years now, or rather the executive producers have been trying. I think they currently have eight producers on the show, which includes Jamie and Adam and two representatives from Discovery. The Discovery producers get changed every couple of years, and I think the last time this was done was early last year. So clearly Discovery wasn't the one doing the chasing/research or pushing the idea. The SR-71 has been retired from service for coming up for twenty years, while the U2 remains in service and will probably do so for decades to come. This is actually important in context. The US Military would have few problems revealing the flight performance of an aircraft they haven't used for two decades. However they would not want to reveal the full performance of an aircraft they are still using. Which is to say that I'd be very surprised if the U2's flight ceiling isn't higher than 70,000 feet, and might in fact be at least as high as if not higher than the SR-71's. After all if the bad guys think that your aircraft can only reach 70,000 feet they will be quite happy and content to get SAM's that can reach 80,000 feet. While you are quite happy and content at them doing that when you know that your aircraft is actually going to be cruising at 85,000 feet. The critical word there is 'fight'. The U2 is not a combat craft and is totally unarmed. Much of the training given to pilots of helicopter gunships revolves around being able to use the weapons systems and terrain effectively to take out targets while avoiding hostile fire and power lines. (Most helicopter accidents at low level are down to the pilot hitting power lines). So the training time given for an Apache is not just the time it takes to learn how to fly the helicopter. The training for U2 pilots is almost entirely about how to fly the aircraft. To put the difficulty between the difficulty of flying a U2 and Apache in context. There are more pilots in the RAF* qualified to fly the Apache right now than have been qualified to fly the U2 since 1955. (*It might be the British Army who operate the Apache not the RAF.) |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 29, 2015 14:33:20 GMT
1: I figured even if it was the same bird, they'd removed the camera hardware. still a testament to their faith in its durability.
Apache helicopter 18 months training - assuming 8 hours a day 5 days a week of flight time, that's 2800 hours, more or less.
our newest local air ambulance service requires a minimum of 2000 hours flight time for employment flying their air ambulance, and it is an only slightly modified Bell passenger helicopter.
if you want to get esoteric with your definition of hard to fly, try the Gossamer Albatross. you have to be able to fly it while riding a bicycle uphill in a headwind.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jul 29, 2015 16:09:29 GMT
I was impressed that they were confident enough in their camera platform to use it in the tests. hate to break something that expensive for a stunt (thinking of mowing down the cheap toy with it) That wasn't the actual drone they use on the show, but it was the exact same model as the one they use. They had their cameraman fly the duplicate drone since he was used to them. How did you come to that conclusion? We were told early on in the show that the camera drone they use is custom made, so they couldn't just have gotten "the exact same model" without building a new one. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jul 29, 2015 16:36:41 GMT
I watched the aftershow.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Jul 29, 2015 21:22:38 GMT
Is it just me or was that former UK Government Minister and now TV pundit Micheal Portillo in the Hypoxia training clip?
Edit it is now a rhetorical question, found this clip on YouTube.
Did the U.S. Show use this clip?
|
|
|
|
Post by Antigone68104 on Jul 30, 2015 14:51:54 GMT
"The uploader has not made this video available in your country."
But there was a clip of someone going through hypoxia testing/training.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jul 30, 2015 17:36:14 GMT
Well, THAT'S no excuse!  |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jul 30, 2015 18:08:58 GMT
Adam has mentioned the drone used on MB in his 'untitled' podcasts over on Tested.com. I *think* he mentioned (or implied) that the modifications made to the MB drone were in relation to the camera rig and mounting, not the actual drone in itself. This would make sense as they have on several occasions mentioned that MB's camera crew have constantly worked on new camera rigs and protective cases over the years.
I, again *think* that the modifications were to allow one person to fly the drone while another controls the camera, which would involve a second RC system fitted to the drone and depending on the nature of the basic mount probably motors to allow the camera to pan around.
Observation; In the aftershow they also noted that the reason Jamie was having trouble controlling the drones in the warehouse was because they use GPS systems to help stabilize them. But the GPS was being partly blocked by the thick walls and construction of the building, which was causing the drones to fly in an erratic and unpredictable way. This explains why they brought in a far more experienced pilot when using the most expensive drone.
This might also explain why they've never done a fly through of that building using their drone, and why they might not have wanted to use their own - which I think might actually be owned by the cameraman rather than the show.
|
|
