RE: Bloodhound SSC project enters administration
Discussion
I might be naive, but why does it take another £10m to get from 800mph to 1000mph?
Surely the car is designed and built from the outset to achieve 1000mph?
Big Jet engine? Check
F1 engine to act as fuel pump? Check.
Wheels all straight? Check
So all the bits are there. You just need to open the throttle to 11.
Yes, I know it's more than that, but another £10m? For what? Just seams a lot of money, as once you're there for the run, you're there.
Maybe the wage bill and Christmas Bonuses are the factor?
Surely the car is designed and built from the outset to achieve 1000mph?
Big Jet engine? Check
F1 engine to act as fuel pump? Check.
Wheels all straight? Check
So all the bits are there. You just need to open the throttle to 11.
Yes, I know it's more than that, but another £10m? For what? Just seams a lot of money, as once you're there for the run, you're there.
Maybe the wage bill and Christmas Bonuses are the factor?
Whilst I don't doubt the passion of those involved, I do think that when this type of event occurs then there is often a natural defensiveness from some people and this causes problems for new funding. In order to move forward people need to admit that things haven't been well run, not simply say we just need another slug of cash and we'll keep doing things as we did previously.
It's not unlike some charity mismanagement - people are often defensive around working for a good cause and then it transpires many of them have been claiming business class flights/travel (when if they really cared about the cause they would fly economy and leave the 5k in the pot to help the cause), overtime, cabbing it around town, holding large celebratory dinners etc.
It's not unlike some charity mismanagement - people are often defensive around working for a good cause and then it transpires many of them have been claiming business class flights/travel (when if they really cared about the cause they would fly economy and leave the 5k in the pot to help the cause), overtime, cabbing it around town, holding large celebratory dinners etc.
wab172uk said:
I might be naive, but why does it take another £10m to get from 800mph to 1000mph?
Surely the car is designed and built from the outset to achieve 1000mph?
Big Jet engine? Check
F1 engine to act as fuel pump? Check.
Wheels all straight? Check
So all the bits are there. You just need to open the throttle to 11.
Yes, I know it's more than that, but another £10m? For what? Just seams a lot of money, as once you're there for the run, you're there.
Maybe the wage bill and Christmas Bonuses are the factor?
Totally different rocket system to develop, plus any mods that are required post 800mph running.Surely the car is designed and built from the outset to achieve 1000mph?
Big Jet engine? Check
F1 engine to act as fuel pump? Check.
Wheels all straight? Check
So all the bits are there. You just need to open the throttle to 11.
Yes, I know it's more than that, but another £10m? For what? Just seams a lot of money, as once you're there for the run, you're there.
Maybe the wage bill and Christmas Bonuses are the factor?
Scottie - NW said:
I normally enjoy engineering programs and challenges, but I just don't get excited about this project. Essentially it's a jet engine with wheels that you have to keep straight and on the ground, it's not car based really.
Good luck to those who enjoy it, perhaps you are seeing something i am not.
I was beginning to think I was the only one with this opinion. I too enjoy feats of engineering - I am an engineer. But I can't help thinking that the challenge of going 1000mph on land is not particularly relevant to modern life. Once / if this was achieved then what? What are you going to do with all this information and data? Good luck to those who enjoy it, perhaps you are seeing something i am not.
I could understand if the propulsion technology was new, but as someone else has mentioned its a second hand jet engine with wheels. Yes I know its a challenge and there's a lot to make it work but i can't help thinking it's old hat. Space rocket / technology is way ahead of this so what are you proving and why.
I just don't get it. Sorry.
Mark-C said:
ChocolateFrog said:
Scottie - NW said:
I normally enjoy engineering programs and challenges, but I just don't get excited about this project. Essentially it's a jet engine with wheels that you have to keep straight and on the ground, it's not car based really.
Good luck to those who enjoy it, perhaps you are seeing something i am not.
It's easy to simplify anything down to it's component parts and mock. Football is just 22 blokes kicking a bag of wind around a field but it doesn't stop more than a billion people getting excited about it every 4 years. Good luck to those who enjoy it, perhaps you are seeing something i am not.
If rockets, jets and a V8 strapped to wheels doesn't get your inner 10 year old excited then nothing I say is going to change that.
It’s not a car - I’d be more excited if they were chasing 500MPH in a driven wheel vehicle than 100MPH in this.
IN51GHT said:
wab172uk said:
I might be naive, but why does it take another £10m to get from 800mph to 1000mph?
Surely the car is designed and built from the outset to achieve 1000mph?
Big Jet engine? Check
F1 engine to act as fuel pump? Check.
Wheels all straight? Check
So all the bits are there. You just need to open the throttle to 11.
Yes, I know it's more than that, but another £10m? For what? Just seams a lot of money, as once you're there for the run, you're there.
Maybe the wage bill and Christmas Bonuses are the factor?
Totally different rocket system to develop, plus any mods that are required post 800mph running.Surely the car is designed and built from the outset to achieve 1000mph?
Big Jet engine? Check
F1 engine to act as fuel pump? Check.
Wheels all straight? Check
So all the bits are there. You just need to open the throttle to 11.
Yes, I know it's more than that, but another £10m? For what? Just seams a lot of money, as once you're there for the run, you're there.
Maybe the wage bill and Christmas Bonuses are the factor?
So, we don't need another engine. So where does £10m go on additional design?
I do wish them luck in succeeding, but as said above. What is the point? And what will be achieved, other than it being recorded as a world record in a book.
wab172uk said:
Why do they need a totally different Rocket system? They have a Jet engine that they have installed, and been calculated to be enough for 1000mph. If the engine is only capable of hitting 800mph, then what was the point (expense) of designing / building a car around it?
So, we don't need another engine. So where does £10m go on additional design?
I do wish them luck in succeeding, but as said above. What is the point? And what will be achieved, other than it being recorded as a world record in a book.
Because the single mono rocket has insufficient power. The jet will only take the car to 600ish mph. The single rocket to 800ish, the triple rocket to So, we don't need another engine. So where does £10m go on additional design?
I do wish them luck in succeeding, but as said above. What is the point? And what will be achieved, other than it being recorded as a world record in a book.
wab172uk said:
IN51GHT said:
wab172uk said:
I might be naive, but why does it take another £10m to get from 800mph to 1000mph?
Surely the car is designed and built from the outset to achieve 1000mph?
Big Jet engine? Check
F1 engine to act as fuel pump? Check.
Wheels all straight? Check
So all the bits are there. You just need to open the throttle to 11.
Yes, I know it's more than that, but another £10m? For what? Just seams a lot of money, as once you're there for the run, you're there.
Maybe the wage bill and Christmas Bonuses are the factor?
Totally different rocket system to develop, plus any mods that are required post 800mph running.Surely the car is designed and built from the outset to achieve 1000mph?
Big Jet engine? Check
F1 engine to act as fuel pump? Check.
Wheels all straight? Check
So all the bits are there. You just need to open the throttle to 11.
Yes, I know it's more than that, but another £10m? For what? Just seams a lot of money, as once you're there for the run, you're there.
Maybe the wage bill and Christmas Bonuses are the factor?
So, we don't need another engine. So where does £10m go on additional design?
I do wish them luck in succeeding, but as said above. What is the point? And what will be achieved, other than it being recorded as a world record in a book.
wab172uk said:
IN51GHT said:
wab172uk said:
I might be naive, but why does it take another £10m to get from 800mph to 1000mph?
Surely the car is designed and built from the outset to achieve 1000mph?
Big Jet engine? Check
F1 engine to act as fuel pump? Check.
Wheels all straight? Check
So all the bits are there. You just need to open the throttle to 11.
Yes, I know it's more than that, but another £10m? For what? Just seams a lot of money, as once you're there for the run, you're there.
Maybe the wage bill and Christmas Bonuses are the factor?
Totally different rocket system to develop, plus any mods that are required post 800mph running.Surely the car is designed and built from the outset to achieve 1000mph?
Big Jet engine? Check
F1 engine to act as fuel pump? Check.
Wheels all straight? Check
So all the bits are there. You just need to open the throttle to 11.
Yes, I know it's more than that, but another £10m? For what? Just seams a lot of money, as once you're there for the run, you're there.
Maybe the wage bill and Christmas Bonuses are the factor?
So, we don't need another engine. So where does £10m go on additional design?
I do wish them luck in succeeding, but as said above. What is the point? And what will be achieved, other than it being recorded as a world record in a book.
Look, I appreciate you know absolutely zero about the subject matter and that's absolutely fine. I know nothing about open heart surgery, but I wouldn't wander onto a public forum and make some statement about how easy open heart surgery probably is.
There is a guy commenting in this thread who worked on the project for several years. He knows more than any of the rest of us, so maybe ask him a serious question and let him answer you. Then don't argue afterwards.
It's been a while since I last visited the Avonmouth workshop - 2015 I think, after I got my 1k membership. The project is quite staggering, and a different kettle of fish to all that has been before it. It's a pity to see it at this stage where finances are holding it back. Unfortunately the attitudes of some onlookers who've read about the financial issues, make me sometimes wonder how man decided to venture beyond the cave all those years ago.
I've built a few race cars that have gone moderately quickly, and the principle is a close relative to LSR style cars, so I have an appreciation of what's involved - so when those who've frankly no clue about any of it, pipe up and proclaim to have a better idea, it's probably frustrating for the team to be civil about it.
It's a difficult thing to achieve, and critics will attempt to discredit the project, or similar ones, because of an apparent lack of purpose to the whole thing. I thought Siemens had benefited a great deal from the project (just one example), which fed into R&D of products and systems in things like medical equipment and processes. The scale of the project is such that it's not simply about building a fast car, but some will try and dumb it down to that level of simplicity in order to discredit the achievement.
Regarding the respective challenges involved and mention above on going 500mph in a wheel driven car being more difficult / impressive - the two are very different things and there are merits in both. When you ask those that have gone 400mph+ in a streamliner, they often get 'experts on the internet' tell them they're stupid for using push rod V8's still with old school power adders.
It's the same in drag racing, but when you ask one of these experts (who's just discredited your work) how they'd extract 10,000bhp from a cam-in-block internal combustion engine and have it power the rear wheels with no traction control, and go 0-335mph in 3.8 seconds, suddenly the "you only drive in a straight line, that's easy" statement becomes less vocal. Ignorance is bliss, I suppose.
I dearly hope the extra funding can be secured, it's too important a venture to fall apart when it's closer to completion than it is the start.
I've built a few race cars that have gone moderately quickly, and the principle is a close relative to LSR style cars, so I have an appreciation of what's involved - so when those who've frankly no clue about any of it, pipe up and proclaim to have a better idea, it's probably frustrating for the team to be civil about it.
It's a difficult thing to achieve, and critics will attempt to discredit the project, or similar ones, because of an apparent lack of purpose to the whole thing. I thought Siemens had benefited a great deal from the project (just one example), which fed into R&D of products and systems in things like medical equipment and processes. The scale of the project is such that it's not simply about building a fast car, but some will try and dumb it down to that level of simplicity in order to discredit the achievement.
Regarding the respective challenges involved and mention above on going 500mph in a wheel driven car being more difficult / impressive - the two are very different things and there are merits in both. When you ask those that have gone 400mph+ in a streamliner, they often get 'experts on the internet' tell them they're stupid for using push rod V8's still with old school power adders.
It's the same in drag racing, but when you ask one of these experts (who's just discredited your work) how they'd extract 10,000bhp from a cam-in-block internal combustion engine and have it power the rear wheels with no traction control, and go 0-335mph in 3.8 seconds, suddenly the "you only drive in a straight line, that's easy" statement becomes less vocal. Ignorance is bliss, I suppose.
I dearly hope the extra funding can be secured, it's too important a venture to fall apart when it's closer to completion than it is the start.
t400ble said:
Why did they not have suitable funding for the project in the first place?
Owed 40k? No thanks. I'd have walked long long long before that
Because you have to make a start on things and hope that the momentum will build as it progresses. This is perfectly logical. If they'd waited until that had every last penny, as you suggest, then there would have been zero work carried out. Building a land vehicle to do 1000mph is also relatively uncharted territory so it's probably reasonably tricky to project the final costs...Owed 40k? No thanks. I'd have walked long long long before that
As for your second point, there are loads of us in motorsport who've ended up being owed many thousands at times - especially the self-employed ones. Sometimes you just want to stick with it until the cash comes through. I've always been paid (eventually, at times) but I know a good few people from A1GP who lost thousands in pay after countless promises - the problem for many is they know that if they walk away they stand zero chance of seeing the money, but if you stick around you might be okay.
CaptainRAVE said:
A real shame, but a lot of money for something that will be obsolete and beaten before too long.
I can see you have a great knowledge of the history of the LSR and we are privileged to have you here on PH. Do you class "before too long" as less than 21 years or more than 21 years?CaptainRAVE said:
A real shame, but a lot of money for something that will be obsolete and beaten before too long.
The current Land Speed Record is 763.035mph, and has been held since 1997, and broke the previous record of 633.47mph which was set in 1983.Bloodhound SSC is aiming for 1000mph, so if you think that record is going to be a flash in the pan then you're insane.
Blown2CV said:
I met Richard Norton at a conference 18 months or so ago. He is a thoroughly engaging man, and I imagine in no small part was he responsible for getting it funded thus far.
Graham Norton or Richard Noble? 
The project does seem to have lost momentum ('scuse the pun) in public perception and without any real further outings, the existing sponsors must be getting itchy to see more progress. I can understand where IN51GHT is coming from as his family obviously has a lot invested in the project including, long hours without prospect of pay (been there).
The best fit I can think of for this is Richard Branson or Jim Ratcliffe. James Dyson would want it to be electric and have a ball at the front....
So what happens to all the bits and the people if it doesn't secure the much needed wedge in time?
cookie1600 said:
Blown2CV said:
I met Richard Norton at a conference 18 months or so ago. He is a thoroughly engaging man, and I imagine in no small part was he responsible for getting it funded thus far.
Graham Norton or Richard Noble? The project does seem to have lost momentum ('scuse the pun) in public perception and without any real further outings, the existing sponsors must be getting itchy to see more progress. I can understand where IN51GHT is coming from as his family obviously has a lot invested in the project including, long hours without prospect of pay (been there).
The best fit I can think of for this is Richard Branson or Jim Ratcliffe. James Dyson would want it to be electric and have a ball at the front....
So what happens to all the bits and the people if it doesn't secure the much needed wedge in time?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff