 |
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1.JaVA_Platypus
|
 |
Luckily, the landing was better then the camerawork 
I always thought that pulsejet technology was like a poor man's jet engine. They where the type of engine's used on the oneway ride V1's in WWII. I am absolutly not 'into' jet engines but it seems logical to me to have the simplest and cheapest (jet)engine for this kind of weapon. IIRC, the pulsejet does not have any moving parts. Being really cheap, it probably means that there are some serious drawbacks to the design. |
I'm no expert on rocket science however what i do know about pulse jet engines is that they consume large amounts of fuel making them very inefficient for use in larger aircraft. Also, pulse engine's perform combustion in pulses which generates a lot of vibrations which is not certainly suitable for larger aircraft as it can damage the structure of the surrounding airframe for models, the smaller pulse jets have a little effect.
