yeah Jack, I use "thrust power" once or twice a week
at home, occassional low amplitude shock waves to boot
still working on my "blown" aspirations right now though,
and redistributing mass for a better cg
Joe
Russel Mack wrote:
>Jack:
>don't assume I could never do it, just because I'm not very interested.
>
>As a Mechanical Engineering Consultant, I work on 100megawatt turbines just
>about every month, and I've done research projects on both turbines and pure
>jets (including the first EPA emissions tests on a jet engine-- summer,
>1971).
>
>I know the thermodynamics, and most of the (basic) metallurgy for all the
>common turbine cycles. It would be easier for me to operate and maintain
>such a powerplant for lsr than it is to do my dual-OHC bike engine. (More
>expensive, however.)
>
>As a young teen, I built very successful model rockets, and even won a
>science fair with my own rocket engine design back in Junior High. I built
>my first thrust-measurment engine dyno at age 14.
>
>But to me the thrust motors seem not very exciting anymore, compared to
>recips and rotaries (or even "shaft" turbines). I'm thinking maybe a lot of
>hot-rodders were more excited about the thrust vehicles when they were
>"new"-- back in the '60s-- than they are now. Or is it just me?
>
>What-- did I piss you off with the remark about "forced social program"--??
>Russ, #1226B
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-land-speed@autox.team.net
>[mailto:owner-land-speed@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Nt788@aol.com
>Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 11:16 AM
>To: rtmack@concentric.net; jdincau@qnet.com; land-speed@autox.team.net
>Subject: Re: Thrust
>
>
>In a message dated 10/9/2003 8:25:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>rtmack@concentric.net writes:
>
><< Jim put it a little bluntly-- but there really doesn't appear to be much
> interest in thrust cars in America anymore. Maybe it's a fad that just
> passed? >>
>Don't make fun of something you could never do! jack
|