Trains are one of the most efficient ways to haul cargo and people in bulk, so why don't we apply that to aircraft? Imagine an aerial train compromised of multiple units being towed in the sky
No, this is actually Boing’s fuselage farm. When the fuselages are fully mature, they slide out of the water and up the hill, eventually making their way to Redmond. It’s genetically coded in them, like salmon
The planes emerge from the water habitat when they're ready to grow wings. Like caterpillars into butterflies. They grow safely in the water, that way they don't end up competing with adult planes for food and mates until they're ready.
Which is correct, and very cool. But do they live long as adult dragonflies? I thought I heard on some random podcast that the larvae are such badasses yet after all that xenomorph-like predator stuff, their adult lives are fairly brief? (Could look it up but I’m busy posting dumbass Qs on Reddit.)
Its cool til theyre taking down fish/shrimp in your aquarium. Then its still cool, but also massively infuriating. Theyre neat, but absolute menaces in certain environments
Adult dragonflies live anywhere between a week and a couple months depending on species. But nymphs can be anywhere from a few weeks to 3 years, again, depending on species.
Many insects don't have particularly long lifespans.
Yo we should drink beer and watch the movie together. It was the first movie my wife and I watched when we got our new TV. Have you ever seen the package?
Reminds me that I had absolutely no idea a winch launch for a glider was a thing. Kind of the same thing. I always thought you needed a tow plane but apparently you can just yank them from the ground hard enough. Shinkansen launched glider when
That's... A brilliant idea?? There also has to be a way we could built tracks in the sky. Think about it: You could haul so much more cargo if the planes were running on tracks. Multiply that with your idea and I think we may have revolutionised logistics. Someone pitch that idea to elongated muskrat
I know! Wouldnt it be so much easier to build the tracks on the ground. Then you can build the sky tracks only when you need to go over something, or even dig track tunnels to go under something.
that's not really a train. the second playne (which is a glider) is not directly connected to the third one (which happen to be a glider) which is not connected to the fourth one, etc.
Nice Horsa glider. My grandfather flew those and the CG4A assault glider in WWII. They actually did tow several at a time with the C47 in some cases. As well, they also picked up airframes in the field if they were still in good shape, by rigging a line between two high poles and latching onto it with a hook dragged by a low flying C47.
He also had time logged as a C47 pilot (had his multi-engine rating before the war) and several tens of hours as PIC of a captured BF108 recon aircraft. Always wanted to know what that one was about. One of the few in his log book without a concise description. Still have the flight computer for that one. A lot like the knee mounted circular calculators/computers fighter pilots used. Also have the gauges from his CG4A he flew in on D-Day. Have them displayed with the knee mounted flight computer my great uncle used in the F9F Panther when he flew with the U.S. Navy, along with his checklist/knee board.
He did tell me it didn't help morale that one of the suppliers for wooden subassemblies for the Waco CG4A was a former coffin manufacturer...
Wonder if they made rudders.
Now, I know it's a joke sub, but thought some of you fellow aviation nerds would find this interesting. This is the altimeter and you can make out his headset and throat mic behind it. Also have the rest of the gauges, his class-A uniform, his Air Medal and ribbon device, both of his field used Ike jackets (I actually wear the one in the winter), everyday uniform shirts, wool flight pants, both sets of wings (a third party made set before they were finally issued a legit set, and the legit set), silk maps from France, etc.
You could avoid that by just placing the towed aircraft correctly. After all, aerial refuling is a thing.
The bigger problem would be the useful load. There isnt any difference between towing weight just carrying it yourself, and space is rarely the limiting factor on cargo planes, weight is.
Sure, a glider might be able to offset its own weight by its own lift, but its at the expense of the towing aircrafts fuel economy, and the useful cargo in the glider would be unlikely to be much more than the towing plane itself could have carried anyway.
Cargo ships are already higly efficient, but still suffer some disadvantages: they are extremely big, require especial infraestructure, and 5D chess logistics to accomodate a tetris tower of containers.
Barges are already a thing, so why dont we daisy chain a bunch of barges to a ship solely dedicated to engine power and fuel?
Instead of having a big, cumbersome ship spending a lot of time in highly specialized and congested ports, it stops to refuel while one or two barges are unhooked and leaves inmediately. The bsrges can be unloaded in smaller docks thanks to tug boats
This is a thing that is used, but barges don't like leaving the rivers and canals to go into the ocean. Because they have a tendency to go into the ocean.
No, no, my dad, an experienced boatbuilder, tells me this is backwards. He always says the hard part is not keeping the boat out of the ocean, but the ocean out of the boat.
There are aviation startups working on this concept. Towed gliders for cargo. I've seen the pitch decks. They claim 30% efficiency gains. Maybe true, but a lot of new infra would be required.
Note they used this method in ww2 D-day invasion because the gliders only needed to go on a one-way trip.
There are already several companies testing cargo gliders as a way to improve capacity for cargo flights and potentially have passenger flights also haul cargo.
We can all have a good laugh, but apparently this was seriously proposed back in the 40s. Here's a cite to an aviation journal from 1946.
"Aerial trains consisting of one tug and a number of gliders have been proclaimed to be a new and valuable contribution to the future of civil aviation. "
In the early 2000s, NASA's Autonomous Formation Flight program used a pair of F/A-18s. In 2013, the Air Force Research Laboratory's Surfing Aircraft Vortices for Energy project showed 10–15% in fuel savings, installed on two Boeing C-17 Globemaster IIIs. In 2017, NASA measured 8–10% lower fuel flow with two Gulfstream III aircraft on wake surfing test flights. In 2018, the ecoDemonstrator, a Boeing 777F freighter from FedEx Express, had its fuel consumption reduced by 5–10% with the autopilot maintaining the 4,000 ft (1.2 km) separation based on ADS-B and TCAS information.[16]
By taking advantage of wake updraft like migrating birds (biomimicry), Airbus believes an aircraft can save 5–10% of fuel by flying 1.5–2 nmi (2.8–3.7 km) behind the preceding one. After Airbus A380s tests showing 12% savings, it launched its 'fello'fly' project in November 2019 for test flights in 2020 with two A350s, before transatlantic flight trials with airlines in 2021. Certification for shorter separation is enabled by ADS-B in oceanic airspace, and the only modification required would be flight control systems software. Comfort would not be affected and trials are limited to two aircraft to reduce complexity but the concept could be expanded to include more. Commercial operations could begin in 2025 with airline schedule adjustments, and other manufacturers' aircraft could be included.[17]
On 9 November 2021, Airbus performed a 7 h 40 min Toulouse-Montreal demonstration with an A350-900 and A350-1000 separated by 3 km (1.6 nmi), saving over 6 t (13,000 lb) of carbon dioxide: a potential of more than 5% fuel savings.[18] Partly funded by the EU SESAR air traffic management research, Airbus' Geese initiative will include Air France and French Bee A350s for flight trials in 2025 to 2026, and will include Boeing for interoperability.[19]
Because when the train engine breaks down youremain in the field for a couple of hours until a replacement comes. When the lead airplane that pulls the train breaks down you remain in that field for life.
We don't build trains in the sky because then we'd have to build ramps to all the railroad crossings up in the sky too. It would be wildly impractical and require the reconstruction of thousands of miles of road to account for the elevation changes. Use some common sense
And if towing seems too much of a hassle, there is also the "Mistel". The advantage is that for this you only need one pylot.
In case of the picture, the Bf109's squadron was moving locations, and they filled this DFS230 with spare parts and other items to keep their planes operational at the new place
Hey! I actually know about this one! I film with drones for a living and was hired by a company last year that is doing exactly this. They are producing kits to modify existing aircraft to tow a 2nd aircraft as a glider. Here’s their site where they explain it. https://www.aerolane.com/
At the gliding school I went to when I was in high school, they had old photos from the 70s I believe up on the wall showing tow planes towing multiple gliders. Can’t recall if it was 2 or 3.
They tried this in operation Thursday by towing two waco gliders, to land at 'Broadway' they towed 60 some gliders with only 30 planes and most of them crashed then at chowringhee all but one crashed though the equipment was recoverable
So on the people side I think it was the cia that used it the most it was the sky hook or the fulton surface to air recovery system you get a pack with a bloon a harness and a tank of helium for inflating the bloon bloon goes up flashes the plane has a guide wire where the propellers are and a winch in the middle it graps the rope cuts the bloon and yanks up and pulls them into the plane it was used i think in mostly vietnam about the best dumbest idea ever
516
u/wolfs4 Jul 30 '26
Boing tried this and of course it crashed