How large would a bird need to be to carry us aloft?

lesliedellow · Apr 25, 2017

However big it was, it seems unlikely that evolution would have equipped it with wing muscles powerful enough to carry us aloft, along with its own weight - unless carrying us represented only a marginal increase in the amount of mass it needed to carry skyward. In that case, I suppose it would need to be at least the size of a horse, or an elephant.

Ken Rank · Apr 25, 2017

Radrook said:
According to the article at the link I poste, it had a wingspan of 20 to 24 feet (6.1 to 7.3 meters)
If indeed the above estimate is accurate, would it then be able? Wouldn't that body proportion be comparable to the creatures shown in the film Lord of Rings and in the film, Avatar?

If really that big I would say yes. 20' is long and to give perspective, that is basically "about" 2/3rds as wide a wing span as a typical private plane.

~Anastasia~ · Apr 25, 2017

U

lesliedellow said:
However big it was, it seems unlikely that evolution would have equipped it with wing muscles powerful enough to carry us aloft, along with its own weight - unless carrying us represented only a marginal increase in the amount of mass it needed to carry skyward. In that case, I suppose it would need to be at least the size of a horse, or an elephant.

hmmmmm.

Given the hollow bones, etc. I suspect a bird "as big as an elephant" would have a wingspan greater than a football field, maybe". Maybe a bird only as big as a horse would be that wide.

Tangible · Apr 25, 2017

Radrook said:
Do the birds shown in that Lord of Rings video meet that size requirement?

Probably, but remember that they are in fact Maiar, and so are probably not limited by the laws of physics, real or fictional.

Non sequitur · Apr 25, 2017

Here's some information I found. They used 6 to get averages.

Rock dove:
Wingspan: 26in
Weight: 17.6oz
Weight/BSA: 0.86

Non sequitur · Apr 25, 2017

~Anastasia~ said:
U

hmmmmm.

Given the hollow bones, etc. I suspect a bird "as big as an elephant" would have a wingspan greater than a football field, maybe". Maybe a bird only as big as a horse would be that wide.

When I did the questionable math I got:
Weight: 413.4 lbs
Pecs and supra (minimum to left): 137.8 lbs
Wingspan: 216 ft
SA: 10,6665 ft^2

~Anastasia~ · Apr 25, 2017

Non sequitur said:
When I did the questionable math I got:
Weight: 413.4 lbs
Pecs and supra (minimum to left): 137.8 lbs
Wingspan: 216 ft
SA: 10,6665 ft^2

So ... a bird as big as a horse would be MUCH BIGGER than a football field? Cool. An elephant-sized bird might not have enough atmosphere to fly in?

Looks like Radrook isn't going to get his eagle-ride anytime soon. Pity. It WOULD be really cool.

Radrook · Apr 25, 2017

such as the condor

~Anastasia~ said:
So ... a bird as big as a horse would be MUCH BIGGER than a football field? Cool. An elephant-sized bird might not have enough atmosphere to fly in?

Looks like Radrook isn't going to get his eagle-ride anytime soon. Pity. It WOULD be really cool.

Maybe via genetic engineering they might be able to gradually get an eagle or even vulture such as the condor to the required size? Doesn't matter which as long as you can saddle up and soar!

~Anastasia~ · Apr 25, 2017

Radrook said:
such as the condor
Maybe via genetic engineering they might be able to gradually get an eagle or even vulture such as the condor to the required size? Doesn't matter which as long as you can saddle up and soar!

Well, I wouldn't hold my breath. But I found the technology behind the idea of Avatar pretty cool, as well as much about their world.

I grew up reading a dragon rider series. Except that they do have a connotation of being demonic, I always thought they were cool. They had a telepathic link with their riders too.

Radrook · Apr 25, 2017

~Anastasia~ said:
Well, I wouldn't hold my breath. But I found the technology behind the idea of Avatar pretty cool, as well as much about their world.

I grew up reading a dragon rider series. Except that they do have a connotation of being demonic, I always thought they were cool. They had a telepathic link with their riders too.

Very true! For us who have a biblical background and come from a Western culture the dragon does have very negative connotations involving the Satanic. So when faced with the choice of training in White Dragon kung Fu I hesitated. I finally did so with the understanding that the white Dragon is a noble benevolent creature in the Chinese culture.

Unfortunately, when I stopped training and received my certificate, my bad luck intensified. I asked my son whether the then current streak of bad luck could be because of that certificate which I had on my wall which had a white dragon on it. He, being totally immersed in the JW religion at the time, advised me to destroy the document. Whereupon I rapidly did.

However, after I destroying it the bad luck got worse. The only difference was that it was then happening without the presence of my certificate.

BTW
Didn't know that the idea that the rider and the flying creature having mental communication isn't an Avatar film novelty! I also found the technology cool. Especially how they could grow avatars and transfer human consciousness in that way.

~Anastasia~ · Apr 25, 2017

Radrook said:
Very true! For us who have a biblical background and come from a Western culture the dragon does have very negative connotations involving the Satanic. So when faced with the choice of training in White Dragon kung Fu I hesitated. I finally did so with the understanding that the white Dragon is a noble benevolent creature in the Chinese culture.

Unfortunately, when I stopped training and received my certificate, my bad luck intensified. I asked my son whether the then current streak of bad luck could be because of that certificate which I had on my wall which had a white dragon on it. He, being totally immersed in the JW religion at the time, advised me to destroy the document. Whereupon I rapidly did.

However, after I destroying it the bad luck got worse. The only difference was that it was then happening without the presence of my certificate.

BTW
Didn't know that the idea that the rider and the flying creature having mental communication isn't an Avatar film novelty! I also found the technology cool. Especially how they could grow avatars and transfer human consciousness in that way.

Sci-if and fantasy is a lot of fun.

Anne McCaffrey did a whole series on the dragons (and miniature dragons called fire lizards) having a telepathic link to their persons.

Radrook · Apr 25, 2017

~Anastasia~ said:
Sci-if and fantasy is a lot of fun.

Anne McCaffrey did a whole series on the dragons (and miniature dragons called fire lizards) having a telepathic link to their persons.

As long as it doesn't delve into what Christians call witchcraft, fantasy is OK for me. The sci fi I mostly enjoy is one where mankind explores other worlds but doesn't involve a space opera type of setting although I wrote one myself. I am not too keen on the extrapolation of present science into the future unless the writer is extremely adept at maintaining suspense.

BTW
Why do you find the increase of the size of certain birds until they can carry a human aloft impossible?

~Anastasia~ · Apr 25, 2017

Radrook said:
As long as it doesn't delve into what Christians call witchcraft, fantasy is OK for me. The sci fi I mostly enjoy is one where mankind explores other worlds but doesn't involve a space opera type of setting although I wrote one myself. I am not too keen on the extrapolation of present science into the future unless the writer is extremely adept at maintaining suspense.

BTW
Why do you find the increase of the size of certain birds until they can carry a human aloft impossible?

The fantasy I have interested myself in is pure fantasy, not relating to any actual occult or witchcraft or what have you. That and fictional space exploration pretty much brushes aside any need to respect actual physics or other scientific limitations.

As far as the bird carrying man, the whole reason a bird is able to fly has to do with its lighter weight (lack of bulk) relative to strength, wingspan, etc. Even large birds can be relatively light in weight, and it doesn't take much weight to render a bird flightless.

If it were to work, it would need to be an absolutely monstrous bird, for 200 pounds not to make a difference. I really don't know the physics and such involved - the ones who posted earlier seem to know what they're talking about. But a bird large enough to be able to fly despite an added 200 pounds might be so unimaginably big that just the mechanics of flight and the available atmosphere and the place it would be to take off might be a problem - I just don't see it as likely to be possible.

I think you'd have more chance of shrinking becoming a reality to be able to ride a bird, than a bird being able to exist large enough to carry a person. And we are still in sci-fi there.

But I'm not having a truly serious discussion. I think there's a way to mathematically work it out, but I don't think it's possible to exist. Incidentally, the lungs of such a bird would probably create a whole other set of problems. As I imagine several of its bodily processes might.

Tangible · Apr 25, 2017

~Anastasia~ said:
Sci-if and fantasy is a lot of fun.

Anne McCaffrey did a whole series on the dragons (and miniature dragons called fire lizards) having a telepathic link to their persons.

I enjoyed several of these books many years ago.

~Anastasia~ · Apr 25, 2017

Tangible said:
I enjoyed several of these books many years ago.

I first got interested in the Harper Hall series, but of course that led to dragons ...

I still remember being saddened by Brekke's (?) dragon dying.

That was a LONG time ago, lol.

yeshuaslavejeff · Apr 26, 2017

Radrook said:
Unfortunately, when I stopped training and received my certificate, my bad luck intensified. I asked my son whether the then current streak of bad luck could be because of that certificate which I had on my wall which had a white dragon on it. He, being totally immersed in the JW religion at the time, advised me to destroy the document. Whereupon I rapidly did.

However, after I destroying it the bad luck got worse. The only difference was that it was then happening without the presence of my certificate.

He was wise for his age;
If you can find a wise experienced Christian leader,
he might be allowed to tell you
more about why bad things happened and
why that increased (it has nothing at all to do with 'luck')
....

Radrook · Apr 26, 2017

yeshuaslavejeff said:
He was wise for his age;
If you can find a wise experienced Christian leader,
he might be allowed to tell you
more about why bad things happened and
why that increased (it has nothing at all to do with 'luck')
....

Yes, I am aware of all the reasons why bad things happen to both good people and to bad people and that very often it has nothing to do with luck. However, to say that luck never has anything to do with it I can't agree. For example, does being born deformed physically or blind or mentally handicapped have to do with anything that the person has done? Is it his doing that he was born to abusive parents while another was born to caring loving parents? It a person's fault that he is born into a family who is starving to death while another is born into family that has money to burn? True, such things have their causes and some are traceable to character flaws of ancestors or family members, but to deny that a person born in one blessed situation wasn't lucky while the other who was born into an accursed one wasn't unlucky is a rather quaint concept.

BTW
What is your opinion on the oped question concerning the ability of that bird to carry us aloft and how large a bird has to be to do it?

yeshuaslavejeff · Apr 26, 2017

yeshuaslavejeff said:
(it has nothing at all to do with 'luck')

Somewhere in God's Word
God shows He hates it if people call on luck or trust it -
it
is comparible thus to idolatry or witchcraft that people call on or trust or attribute some power to -
yet
it has no more power than a golden calf.
To which God says : I warned you in time, so when the time comes that you need help, call on the golden calf to save you; or on judgment day, call on the idol you served to save you....
(something like that; paraphrased of course) ...

Radrook · Apr 26, 2017

yeshuaslavejeff said:
Somewhere in God's Word
God shows He hates it if people call on luck or trust it -
it
is comparible thus to idolatry or witchcraft that people call on or trust or attribute some power to -
yet
it has no more power than a golden calf.
To which God says : I warned you in time, so when the time comes that you need help, call on the golden calf to save you; or on judgment day, call on the idol you served to save you....
(something like that; paraphrased of course) ...

I agree. The concept of luck can be indeed turned into a sort of false god or idol. In fact, "lady luck" is a term that accurately describes such a concept. I personally don't believe in a "lady Luck" deity. So when I use the term lucky I mean fortunate. Or is there something to criticize about that word as well? If indeed there is, then we will have to meticulously delete both words from our vocabulary lest we be deemed idolaters.

Here is my view as expressed in the Bible:

Ecclesiastes 9:11

Again I saw that under the sun the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor riches to the intelligent, nor favor to those with knowledge, but time and chance happen to them all.

Of course there are many more nuances that can be added from a biblically-based theological standpoint. But that would be irrelevant to the thread theme.

BTW

I once belonged to a denomination that nitpicked in that meticulous fashion and I followed their example to the letter. Unfortunately, I gradually became aware that many were straining the gnat but gulping down the camel in other far more important things such as showing empathy towards the suffering or needy. In those areas they seemed uncaringly very lax to the point of being totally unconcerned.

However, blessing someone who sneezed wasn't allowed because the custom was derived from the idea that the person was sneezing out an evil spirit.

Tossing rice on the bride and groom at weddings was prohibited because it was derived from the notion of increased fertility.

Saying "Happy New year!" to others was a sin because the celebration was of pagan origin as well as was Christmas because it could be traced top the pagan celebration of Saturnalia.

Birthday celebrations were avoided like the plague because you were imitating Herod and the only examples of birthdays in the Bible involved pagans.

If you wrote something religious you needed to refrain from claiming authorship because that would mean self aggrandizement.

You couldn't celebrate Father's or Mother's day because it was supposedly tantamount to creature worship.

They also condemned the belief in luck. One sister always made sure to say that the person had been either "fortunate" or "unfortunate" but never lucky. To me they seemed the same but to her it made a world of a difference.

BTW
What is your view of the oped question concerning a bird that can lift us into the sky on its back?

Radrook · Apr 26, 2017

lesliedellow said:
However big it was, it seems unlikely that evolution would have equipped it with wing muscles powerful enough to carry us aloft, along with its own weight - unless carrying us represented only a marginal increase in the amount of mass it needed to carry skyward. In that case, I suppose it would need to be at least the size of a horse, or an elephant.

Yep! It does seem that flying creatures aren't built to carry any human on their back. I was thinking about the pteradons and pterodactyls but they also seem to lack the necessary size and brawn. Heaviest one I found weighs a mere 550 pounds at most.

How large would a bird need to be to carry us aloft?

Member

Well-Known Member

† Handmaid of God †

Decision Theology = Ex Opere Operato

Wokest Bae Of The Forum

Wokest Bae Of The Forum

† Handmaid of God †

Well-Known Member

† Handmaid of God †

Well-Known Member

† Handmaid of God †

Well-Known Member

† Handmaid of God †

Decision Theology = Ex Opere Operato

† Handmaid of God †

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Well-Known Member

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency