Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: W7LPNRICK on August 26, 2010, 10:31:02 PM
-
pretty cool prototype developement
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJc6TX7Reoo&feature=player_embedded
-
So if both engines fails, oh lets say 15,000 ft., it can still land safely?
-
So if both engines fails, oh lets say 15,000 ft., it can still land safely?
So they say, works on paper, and in pretty animations.
-
So they say, works on paper, and in pretty animations.
lol
-
So if both engines fails, oh lets say 15,000 ft., it can still land safely?
yep from 15000ft it will take you all you all way to the scene of the crash
-
Ugliest thing I've ever seen. However, a good concept for those that want to commute to work and land in the lot. :aok
This reminds me of the flying car concept that has never been in production.
-
That thing makes me want to move farther away from the airport.
-
So if both engines fails, oh lets say 15,000 ft., it can still land safely?
well it does have some little wings, but if any of us learned anything from this game AH or flight school. it is that planes do not just fall once an engine dies, it simply turns into a glider :D
-
well it does have some little wings, but if any of us learned anything from this game AH or flight school. it is that planes do not just fall once an engine dies, it simply turns into a glider :D
True, but they showed that "gliding in" nearly vertical.
-
So if both engines fails, oh lets say 15,000 ft., it can still land safely?
Is it capable of autorotation?
-
just did some reading up on auto rotation, I had never heard of the concept before. I suppose that the rotors with the lift from the aircraft frame could make it possible, it just doesn't seem like it would work.
I haven't looked at the company but it seems like this concept design is at the very least, in it's early stages.what company releases it's concept design on x plane before they even have a good model?
-
just did some reading up on auto rotation, I had never heard of the concept before. I suppose that the rotors with the lift from the aircraft frame could make it possible, it just doesn't seem like it would work.
I haven't looked at the company but it seems like this concept design is at the very least, in it's early stages.what company releases it's concept design on x plane before they even have a good model?
So we should see the first flight in 10 years.
-
So we should see the first flight in 10 years.
I somehow doubt their finances allow a 10 year plan.
-
just did some reading up on auto rotation, I had never heard of the concept before. I suppose that the rotors with the lift from the aircraft frame could make it possible, it just doesn't seem like it would work.
I haven't looked at the company but it seems like this concept design is at the very least, in it's early stages.what company releases it's concept design on x plane before they even have a good model?
I have been in UH-1N's (twin engine Air Rescue/Navy version of the Huey), during auto rotation. They actually can surprise you and land fairly soft if engine failure occurs high enough or at a high enough forward speed. If loping along slowly, it must dive to increase propeller speed and flair out just before the skids hit with still some forward motion, and a high nose attitude. Much like combat landing to touch-n-go for troop drops. They say the Verti-copter has very good flight surface controls/characteristics Auto-rotation may be a nil point, if it can land safely as a glider, but where it may have taken off in limited clear land or engines die a distance from a field auto-rotation becomes a must. I would believe it's ultra light weight carbon fiber construction would aide in a soft landing in auto-rotation. :salute
-
"verticopter" or "divecopter"?
:rofl
-
The prop design will most likely have to be raised 3-4 feet. Leaving the props were they are will most likely cause significant air velocity changes at high speeds on the blades rotation. Unless they have a solution to overcome this, I'm thinking this design was created by some noobs who haven't watched much of The History, Discovery, or Military Channels.
-
I'm thinking this design was created by some noobs who haven't watched much of The History, Discovery, or Military Channels.
Yes, because that's where all good engineers get their information. :huh
-
I'm thinking that to depend on the center of gravity never changing might not be so good. The real issue is going to be the electronic controls, as doing this type of aircraft manually will likely result in crashing every aircraft built. Of course, doing the electronics wrong will also result in crashing every aircraft built. Having a propeller that gets partly blocked by the wing can cause issues also, depending on the construction, but I don't think that will be their biggest issue.
-
The title should have (mod for fsx) in it. :lol
-
I'm thinking that to depend on the center of gravity never changing might not be so good. The real issue is going to be the electronic controls, as doing this type of aircraft manually will likely result in crashing every aircraft built. Of course, doing the electronics wrong will also result in crashing every aircraft built. Having a propeller that gets partly blocked by the wing can cause issues also, depending on the construction, but I don't think that will be their biggest issue.
I believe, not being an engineer, that this design would be far more successful, and safe, during early prototype development, than the Bell V-22 Osprey was. And the army marines swear by it now. :airplane:
-
I too have experienced auto rotation several times both in damaged air frames and un-damaged air frames and I have only had 1 truly soft landing, several in the damaged aircraft were so hard it actually broke the blades off, I don't think I would want to auto rotate in this myself.
We had a medivac pilot in viet nam that was the greatest at this though I have ever seen, his call sign was Maddog1, he was extreamly good in a UH1B.
SALUTE
ab8aac/dmdchief