Subject:
|
Re: Making Lego airborne
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 24 Mar 2000 16:16:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1673 times
|
| |
|
|
Matthew Teets wrote:
> I think your best bet might be to supplement the lift by possibly making a
> dirigible. I agree with the statement that Lego's are heavy and motors are
> weak, so this would seem to be the best suggestion. You could still have it
> RCX controlled, but that would free the motors to supply directional movement
> rather than compensating for lift as well, probably easing the programming
> factor.
Here comes a stupid question: What is a dirigible???
Ram
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Making Lego airborne
|
| (...) A balloon-based airship having propulsion and steering systems. A LEGO example is set #5956 Air Zeppelin: (URL) examples are the Hindenburg, the Good Year Blimp, and the airship that Drs. Henry & Indiana Jones escaped from via biplane in the (...) (24 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: Making Lego airborne
|
| Hi. (...) A blimp is a cigar shaped lighter than air vehicle with a non-rigid (all rigidity is produced by air pressure alone) air sack. A dirigible has a rigid envelope. The Hindenberg had a rigid structure of girders inside of the envelope which (...) (24 years ago, 28-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Making Lego airborne
|
| (...) I think your best bet might be to supplement the lift by possibly making a dirigible. I agree with the statement that Lego's are heavy and motors are weak, so this would seem to be the best suggestion. You could still have it RCX controlled, (...) (24 years ago, 24-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
