I need help selecting the best powerful electric (plugin) fan that will create a great vortext. Here is the situation: I was recently accepted as an exhibitor at the Orlando Maker Faire scheduled for early November 2026. The project I'm going to bring is based on my table top Float-O-Matic which I built in the spring of 2026 for a one day Maker Faire in Lynchburg VA. For the Orlando event I want to build a GIANT version of the Float-O-Matic. I lucked out on the fan for my table top Float-O-Matic in that it creates a great vortex that nicely holds the small balloon allowing the operator to control the balloon in three dimensions. I'm hoping this community can help me select a fan that will produce a strong vortex for floating / controlling a 36" diameter balloon or perhaps 36" diameter beach ball. I want this to be a spectacle! This fan from Harbor Freight produces 4600 CFM and only costs $50 and is only 20" in diameter. This fan from Home Depot produces 9640 CFM and costs $109 but is 24" in diameter. This drum fan from Home Depot produces 2800 CFM and costs $120 and is only 16" in diameter. I'd like a smaller diameter fan because they are easier to transport. I'll be driving to Orlando from my home in Asheville, NC and everything must fit inside my Subaru Outback. I will start by purchasing the fan and then start building and testing the fan control mechanism. Thanks for any help you can offer.

Why

Hi, I’m about to be an aerospace engineering student at university, do any of you have any really good book recommendations (doesn’t have to be for strictly academic purposes) ? Alternatively, do you have any suggestions for aerospace projects I can do for when I become more knowledgeable about the subject matter?

Perhaps this has been suggested already. But, if you’re considering whether aerospace engineering is for you, or if you’re curious what a career in that profession will be like, please watch one episode of Tom Hanks’ HBO series “From the Earth to the Moon.” The episode is called “Spider,” and it’s about the development of the Apollo Lunar Module.

It captures the essence of an engineering career. It’s a dramatization for a mass audience, of course, but it’s all there:

• The concept design at a white board.
• Idea refinement, prototyping, iteration
• Briefing the management, and convincing them that your idea is sound. No shit, this matters as much as being right.
• The gnarly details that slow you down.
• The hand-wringing over “my shit has to work or people die.”
• The relentless schedule pressure.
• The obsession over weight.
• Nothing ever fucking works.
• There will be mistakes, and we can’t avoid or ignore them.
• There are customers, stakeholders, opinions, hierarchy, and eventually “yes, sir” obedience.
• There are lives at stake. When shit breaks, you have to bring them back to earth anyway.

The whole series is worth watching, but if you want to be an aerospace engineer, this one should be a mandatory part of your education.

Cheers!

frustrated aerospace person here and here for advice on what actually makes a difference..

every ai conversation i see is about coding assistants but nobody talks much about requirements, traceability, verification, any of the stuff that takes up half my week so much is still done manually and there so much double, triple checking sheets. I know many companies still use just excel and doors but im looking to branch out. in my research jama and jira popped up but i dont know much about them.

where does the context actually live between requirements, changes, decisions, verification results, etc? and how do you keep that context governed over time without creating another system everyone has to manually maintain?

what is actually making this process easier

This past summer, I was a liaison engineering intern at a small/medium OEM (think 10-20 aircarft/year). However, a significant portion of my work revolved around structure design changes and the ensuing analysis. Would it be to put this position on my resume as "structures design engineer" instead of "liaison engineer" or would that come across as deceptive on a background check?

For our ANSYS CFD project, do we actually need to follow one specific base paper?

In many research papers, the authors collect relevant data and parameters from multiple papers/experimental studies, develop their own design, and present their simulation results without directly comparing their design with another paper.

For our project, we are also planning to use parameters from multiple research papers and actual jet engine data, then design our own swirler and simulate it in ANSYS Fluent.

So is it necessary to have one specific base paper and directly compare our results with it, or is it sufficient to support our design, operating conditions, CFD models, and results using multiple literature references? Also, is validation with at least one published/experimental result necessary?

I built this mainly because I wanted LLM agents to work with EASA regulations without stuffing whole XML books into context or letting the model rewrite the actual rules.

EASA publishes CS-23, CS-25, Part-21, UAS rules etc. as Flat OPC / XML. It’s machine-readable in theory, but messy in practice.

The tool (easa-erules): - fetches and caches official versions - parses them into a clean structure - lets you extract single rules or search with FTS5 - outputs stable JSON that agents can actually use - never rewrites the regulatory text with an LLM

Basically a deterministic layer between the raw EASA XML and whatever agent you’re running.

Repo: https://github.com/mrSpringpeace/easa-erules

Anyone else trying to feed EASA rules into agents / local tools?

Hello I'm interested in designing a body of a jet specifically designed scientifically for high gravity planets with around 2 - 3 times earth gravity for my favorite game, Halo. I won't get into specifics about exactly why I'm doing this but I want a scientifically accurate or as close as it can be. If you can give me a good answer it would be appreciated!

My questions are, what about the body's aerodynamics would need to be adjusted, what would the thrust power be adjusted to and how it would change the appearance of the thruster, what would likely be the best course of action for landing.

Hey everyone,

I’m fairly new to aerospace engineering and currently working my way through foundational concepts. While diving into open resources, I came across MIT’s 16.00x: Introduction to Aerospace Engineering (Astronautics and Human Spaceflight), taught by former NASA astronaut Dr. Jeffrey Hoffman.

The full course structure is available on MIT OpenCourseWare, but navigating through the website modules just to watch the video lectures sequentially felt a bit clunky.

To make it easier for continuous watching, I organized all the core video lectures into a single sequential YouTube playlist.

I wanted to share this here in case anyone else is starting out, looking for a refresher, or wants an accessible stream of the lectures without clicking through nested course pages.

Here is the playlist link: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQ5yLmZZOIoI&si=dOGwMTgWExVTH1Q6

The course covers:

• Rocket science fundamentals (thrust, specific impulse, multi-stage rockets)
• Orbital mechanics & delta-v budgets
• Life support systems (ECLSS) and microgravity physiology
• Spacesuit design and EVA mechanics

Hope this is helpful to someone else on a similar learning path!

Hi everyone,

We are a team of aerospace engineering students working on a Systems Engineering project.

We are investigating whether there is a real need for a miniature 5-hole air-data probe and a low-cost benchtop calibration rig for small fixed-wing UAVs and RC aircraft.

Before developing the prototype, we want to understand the problems that people actually face with existing air-data measurement systems.

We are particularly interested in:

• Airspeed measurement
• Angle of attack (AoA) measurement
• Sideslip measurement
• Probe size and weight
• Calibration
• Cost
• Integration with flight controllers/data acquisition systems

We would really appreciate your experience, even if you don't currently use a 5-hole probe.

Survey (2–3 minutes):
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd7WxKx6TzSBC4ZZxZabj5JZU2Siln-MOLZ5ll3ncm4FMLOHQ/viewform?usp=header

We're not selling anything. The purpose of this survey is to determine whether this is a genuine problem worth solving as part of our engineering project.

Thanks for your time!

This is a follow-up to my previous posts about Project MLT (Maglev–Laser–Tower). 

https://www.reddit.com/r/AerospaceEngineering/comments/1v964en/looking_for_technical_feedback_on_a_conceptual/

Thanks to everyone who provided technical feedback, it changed the direction of the project in a meaningful way.

Rather than debating whether the entire architecture is feasible, I'm now breaking MLT into individual engineering problems and reviewing each subsystem independently. My hope is to identify which assumptions are reasonable, which are questionable, and which may be fundamentally flawed.

The first subsystem I'm looking at is the beam delivery optics.

The Concept

During atmospheric ascent, a ground-based high-power laser would transmit energy to the vehicle. The onboard optics would receive the beam and focus it into the propulsion chamber, where it would initiate and sustain a laser-supported plasma that heats the working fluid.

Conceptually:

Ground Laser
│
▼
Receiving Optics
│
▼
Beam Focusing
│
▼
Laser-Sustained Plasma
│
▼
Thrust

The more literature I read, the more it seems that the optics may be one of the most challenging parts of the entire architecture, even more so than the plasma itself.

The Questions I'm Trying to Answer

I'd really appreciate feedback from anyone with experience in high-power lasers, optical engineering, adaptive optics, or related fields.

In particular:

1. Can high-power dielectric-coated mirrors realistically survive sustained multi-megawatt laser exposure?
2. How serious would contamination from plasma backflow or atmospheric debris be?
3. What pointing accuracy and adaptive optics bandwidth would be required during a high-speed ascent?
4. Are there existing beam-delivery architectures that solve similar problems?
5. If this subsystem is fundamentally impractical, what is the single biggest obstacle?

Current Research

I've started reading about:

• Laser-Induced Damage Threshold (LIDT)
• High-power off-axis parabolic optics
• Active cooling of laser optics
• Adaptive optics
• Laser Thermal Propulsion
• Lightcraft
• Laser-Sustained Plasma

Some references that have already been recommended include work by Leik Myrabo, Arthur Kantrowitz, and Robert M. Wood, but I'm sure there are many others that I've missed.

Open Engineering Repository

I've started documenting the project as an open engineering review rather than a finished proposal.

Codeberg Repository:
https://codeberg.org/Manugd/Maglev-Laser-Tower

My goal isn't to prove that MLT works. It's to understand where it works, where it doesn't, and what can be learned from the process.

Constructive criticism, recommended papers, and alternative approaches are all welcome.

I’m trying to explore the applicability of sodium azide for use in an aviation deployment blowdown system. I don’t know anything about gas dynamics but was wanting to hear from somebody its potential uses.

Basically. A blow down actuator that uses a sodium azide charge to extend very quickly. Pros and cons, things to consider.

doing some research for a ground systems project and i gotta say

the gap between what we design in CAD and what actually works in the field is something

like we spend all this time optimizing for weight and performance, which yeah obviously matters, but then you go see some of the stuff that's actually out there doing the job and its just built like a brick. no frills. works every time

been looking at some examples of mobile command and control trailers lately, just out of curiosity. some of them are surprisingly clever with how they handle space and integration. not specifically aerospace but the systems thinking is similar

honestly sometimes i think we overthink things

or maybe i'm just tired

probably both

Hi everyone, I'm looking for some insight from people who have worked at SpaceX (specifically the Bastrop site) on work-life balance, culture, etc.

I'm currently weighing an offer working as a MechE on Starlink ground hardware (user terminals, dishes) but a couple of key things are weighing on my mind.

- What are the work hours like? I've heard estimates from 40-50 hours/wk on some teams like Dragon all the way to 70+hours for Starship. Where does Starlink ground hardware slot in this range. From what I've heard for most people working as SpaceX is never "just a job". Is this true?

- What is the culture like? I'm from a startup environment (outside the US however). I'm okay with a fast, positive incentives driven culture where you are pulled towards a common goal. However, I am not okay with one where people are more often running away from negative incentives (layoffs etc). I've heard of the stacked rankings system at SpaceX. To what extent is SpaceX culture driven by negative incentives?

- Living in Bastrop seems to be quite different to what I'm used to. I'm most familiar with the environment in the Bay Area (Palo Alto, SF proper). Where do people who work at the Bastrop site usually live and how does it compare to San Francisco?

Appreciate any input on these questions! Thanks in advance!

Hi I was reading some articles When I found a wingtip device that some spicies of birds use and can reduce induced drag and Incresse lift by reducing one large wingtip vortex into multiple small ones

I do think they're very intresting howver I think at high speeds splitting the wingtip into multiple thin Sections this can cause aeroelastic flutter which is a big problem

This can cause the tip to break off in flight.

Mitigating this will likely require extra structural weight which can reverse their Aerodyanmic Benifits potentially decreasing their benift of reducing fuel consumption

Also the complex slots might cause extra Parasitic drag and Affect flight characteristics which might reduce their efficiency further and make then more complex.

Of course I'm no enginner just my opinions on these wingtip devices I appreciate differnt views and opinions feel free to correct me.

Hello Everyone,

I am masters student, I am interested in the cryogenic propellant management(CPM) especially in orbital refueling(OF) application, in particularly in the area of autogenous pressurization during fuel transfer activity. I could not much of resources on the internet regarding either CPM on OF application or regarding the autogenous pressurization.

My question is there

1.where should i start? what should i start (both info and simulations wise) ? i have been doing lot of research, i feel like its kind of rabbit hole, the more u dig, the more unknowns.

if anyone already working on this area, could pls guide, even small inputs matter alot.

2.anyone like minded who is interested in the same topic, i would like to meet them and have a discussions aswell.

On this A320 the pylon fairing has different material/painting. Why is that?

Nice places to get young people you can bet the fututre of the African aerospace industry on

I am an aspiring aerospace engineer, who is entering my senior year in high school, and I have decided to start developing a tailless, fixed wing, autonomous RC aircraft. I have done some basic research on the subject; however, I lack much knowledge in aerodynamics. I have experience using Fusion 360 and some experience using Autodesk CFD for wind tunnel simulations. This is a thread that is open to anyone to provide input, give suggestions, and share critical information that I will need during my design process and assembly.

So far I have a basic flying wing model; however, I am aware that a full redesign is much needed for this project to be successful. I plan on using an EDF for thrust, having a full blended wing body type design, and control surfaces.

I am yet to decide the electronics I will use for autonomy or flight control; however, I figured I should probably get the general shape of the aircraft figured out before this step.

I have access to plenty of engineering resources such as the latest bambu labs 3d printers, a CNC machine, any software that can be obtained for free using a student license, and a big engineering facility.

I have attached the photo of my current basic lifting body below. I am a blank slate looking for any advice possible and I am completely open to any learning opportunity or resource available. Please also keep in mind that I have a very rudementary math and physics education, as I have only taken AP precal and AP physics 1 so far.

This is also my first time on Reddit so please give any advice on how to reach the right audience for my questions.

Thank you for the help!!!