At some point applying more and more cleverness has to start being
counterproductive right?
On 23/02/18 10:01, Carlo Vaccari wrote:
Their countermeasure for condensation was applying methanol with countercurrent exchange to minimize consumption.
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 3:54 PM, Norman Yarvin <yarvin@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:yarvin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Any numbers for civil airliners are, I figure, "bird strikes that
anyone noticed", or perhaps "bird strikes that caused damage", rather
than bird strikes pure and simple.
I'm also wondering about something even more basic: what are they
going to do about condensation freezing up on the heat exchanger?
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 10:18:23PM -0800, Doug Jones wrote:
>The Ez-Rocket had bird strikes on consecutive flights in July
2002, one at
>Mojave and one at Oshkosh. I know this because I had to clean up
the messes.
>
>Two dead birds, but no damage to the aircraft, in part because it
had no air
>inlets.
>
>On 2018-02-18 10:30 AM, Keith Henson wrote:
>> I asked REL about bird strikes and got this back
>>
>> > Yes, we have considered FOD but do not think it???s a
problem. A first generation space plane like Skylon will only be
designed for 200 flights or so, however bird strike occurs at
roughly 10^-5 for civil airliners (from memory) so the probability
of a strike over the vehicle life is quite small.
>>
>> > Nevertheless FOD and birds will pass axially along the intake
duct and strike the bypass burners rather than the precooler which
is tucked away inside. Since the bypass system is not running for
takeoff this will result in a mission abort rather than loss of
vehicle
>>
>> Keith
>>
>>
>