Is there any reason why these engines couldn't be tested on planes rather than cars?
says TheCensoredBrit on Oct 2nd 17 (#815156)
The article says the engine was designed for a plane, but that's not goal of the project. The project is to make a super fast car to break the land speed record. Testing on an aircraft seems like it would add cost unnecessarily.
says Budwick on Oct 2nd 17 (#2666127)
Boys and their toys...
says Carla on Oct 2nd 17 (#2666137)
Wouldn't catch me in that...
says TheCensoredBrit on Oct 2nd 17 (#2666139)
What would be the purpose of a 1,000 mph car when I doubt there is any highway on any road in any country that could safely allow that kind of speed?
says Linnster on Oct 2nd 17 (#2666141)
They're trying to break a land speed record; not design a new street legal car.
says Budwick on Oct 2nd 17 (#2666145)
Better just put a missile horizontally and put a few steering wheels under it
says Sunny_the_skeptic on Oct 2nd 17 (#2666195)
I believe it was tested on a fighter aircraft. Why they want to make a car go 1000 mph is beyond me. :)
says Will_Janitor on Oct 2nd 17 (#2666215)
I still prefer helicopters. Much easier to crash than cars powered by... Oh... Wait... What.
says ZonkeyBalls on Oct 2nd 17 (#2666218)
I can see the rationale behind testing the engine on a car. A ground based frame is cheaper than a custom air-frame, the engine can be tested as slower speeds first, if there is a mechanical problem, the vehicle can roll to a stop instead of nose diving into a lake bed and.... there will probably be people sponsoring the development just to see the land record broken.
says JustJimColo on Oct 2nd 17 (#2666453)