Best flying design I've ever seen. Compact and simple for low cost, and easy to fly since propellers are in the center making a fluid transition from vertical to horizontal flight. I want one!
Im always impressed when people share their hard work in the public domain - even though they know there will be skeptics, non- believers and those who could never produce an original idea themselves who will make super critical comments, trying in vain to sound intelligent hahahahaha. Well done - it’s so original and can’t wait to see how far you get with this project..!
the CFG file is one of the more important files that is with your model and it is vital that you have it, because it contains most of the information about your aircraft. My friend and I got together and built a couple models for Flight Simulator 2004 but we never completely finished them. It's a lot of fun though.
@crabtrap As for the Osprey, the Center of gravity is UNDER the propellors which keeps it stable. Just like when holding a bucket the bucket will always be level because the center of gravity is way beneath the handle and the bucket is "hanging". In this manner gravity becomes the stabilizer. That's why most planes have wings on the top and in a V shape. It's a lot more stable.
It does. The two props cancel out each other's torque and their 90 degree offset gyroscopic torque, but the whole assembly is still stabilized by the gyroscopic effect of both props.
Yeah man, I'm interested. I also have FS X. The "flugtag" is a glider competition, right? That would be pretty cool. I forgot to mention that Gmax is free but no longer supported by the company who created it. Blender is also free, and it's pretty good. The other two programs that I mentioned are payware. Gmax is probably the best option and it's widely used for flight simulator models. I also forgot one of the main files that flight simulator reads is the aircraft.cfg file.
to be converted into usually a DXT format or a DDS format. You can use a program called DXTBMP to convert your texture files. Then after you get all of your texture files, you can place all of the files you have made for your model into individual folders, usually folder names are like MODEL, PANEL, TEXTURE, EFFECTS, SOUND. All of those folders labeled with those names then go into another single folder with the name of your aircraft. Refer to Flight Simulator X file on your computer.
If you want to see what an aircraft file looks like the flight simulator reads, then go to your Program Files or wherever you installed FS X at, then when you open up the main Flight Simulator X file, the find the folder called SimObjects. Inside that folder will be other folders. Find the Airplanes folder. Inside the airplanes folder is all of the folders that belong to all of the models you have installed for FS X. These models are the ones you can fly inside the program. Hope this helps!
Sorry if I offended you... was not my intention. It looks nice. It's just missing something to balance it out during vertical takeoff. There is nothing to keep the horizontal plane of the plane horizontal. It my opinion it will bank to the side or front or whatever. I'm sure it would fly once it has achieved horizontal flight in which case the wings and the tail will keep it horizontal. It's just the hovering part that can't work.
TO RESIDENTS OF CANADA: A segment on the Verticopter will be airing on Discovery Channel's "Daily Planet" show. THE VERTICOPTER SEGMENT IS NOW CONFIRMED FOR THIS THURSDAY, NOV. 20, 2008 AT 7P AND 11P EST! You might see some of this footage in the show... but it'll probably mainly be covering the RC prototype, which was flown at the NASA AMES landing strip in California.
Helicopters and VTOLs have gear systems like these, or even more complex. This video depicts a schematic. It's simplified to explain the concept of the drivetrain.
The lower propeller is right where the undercarraige is so it could swipe the ground if you go too close and the whole thing will spin uncontrollably at -12gs
UAV is definitely a tier we're working on. Please look at the newer video, which is linked to the annotated text box in the video above. It describes stuff better.
I believe this would tip over to the side upon a small gust of wind. And the propeller would be long to be able to lift this but then you have to mount it high so the propeller would not hit the ground when you change for VTOL or maybe have an extra long landing gear.
Just to showcase the fact that the canopy can be opened in the sim, and I thought it looked kinda cool to have a take-off sequence where the canopy wasn't closed yet. Implies a take-off on the run.
I had to model this plane twice: once in X-plane's PlaneMaker and once in Blender 3D. The PlaneMaker shape determines the flight behavior in the sim, and the Blender overlay provides a more detailed and higher quality graphic.
You'd be surprised... it happens to BE something new. No patents have been filed for such a design, and Garrow Aircraft just got granted its patents for the Verticopter. There's been attempts at VTOL aircraft, some more successful than others... but this is definitely a new way of doing it. Look into it!
Have you flown this plane in X-Plane? It is far more stable than any helicopter at low speed. Version 1.5 of this plane has improved propellers. (These aren't rotors; they're props.)
At Velletri in Italy I saw fly the Aircraft, had the peculiarity of not having wings, but only four rudders placed at four ends of the airplane and several lighthouses.
i would consider forming a fused ring around the two propellers. line the inside with repulsive magnets and the propellers will go faster and direct wind more efficiently through the propellers. also, the propellers would work even with a down engine since the two propellers are connected.
If the counter rotating blades are at CG she must have a heavy tail. Always leave the green electric option open and remember that in the event of a crash the vehicle is made out of fully recyclable materials :)
Fuel consumption is projected to be less than a helicopter's. Besides, it'll cover distances much quicker than a heli. It is a prototype, virtual model, flown in X-Plane. X-Plane is the most accurate and realistic flight sim out there. It calculates performance (speed, lift, aerodynamics, etc.) based on design. This design is viable. An RC version of this plane has been successfully test-flown, and another, larger version is in the works.
I can see how this could be useful for combat applications, especially with it's landing capabilities even if there is an engine failure and it's light and strong design, but keeping the rotor exposed to the bottom, and consequentally to ground fire, seems like a dangerous idea. While there are automated missile interception systems(such as the TROPHY tank protection system) it cannot stop conventional ammo, while armored helicopters can absord the damage.
People generally use programs like Gmax, 3DStudio Max, Blender, or sometimes FSDesign Studio to design the actual 3D model. I have a little bit of experience with Gmax. After you create your model and build it how you want, you then export it. When you export it, it changes the file to usually an .MDL file because that's what flight simulator reads. After you get the .mdl file, you can create textures using Photoshop, Paintshop Pro or even Paint if nothing else. Then those textures have...
Not to mention the transition from vertical takoff to horizontal flight. Once the counter rotating propeller assembly starts to rotate from the vertical takeoff position to the horizontal flight position there is nothing to keep the rest of the plane from rotation in the opposite directon... bringing the nose of the plane up. Especially with the assembly right smack dab in the middle of the aircraft.
So I guess the problem I see is that the props are kinda right where you would put a fuselage in a normal plane or helicopter. It kinda makes its load carrying capacity restricted to the cockpit area.
Why not use rotary Wankel air motor for powering the counterrotating propellors? Use 10,000 psi carbon fiber composite air pressure tanks. This eliminates all the weight of the gasoline engines and replaces them with very low parts count air motor. Power to weight ratio is vastly superior. Range would be multiplied by 10 (guesstimate). If you doubt the capacity of this type of air motor, look at Cadillac's Aera concept car which won the Concept Car division of the 2010 Los Angeles Auto Show. Also at high altitude I believe the relative air pressure inside the air tanks would extend and help maintain range in reduced air density at high altitude.
Hey, I loved your desing. Did you made it? cause I need some tips with my own desings, and I would like to ask you haw you made the cokpit objets, I mean wich app and a couple more questions
What happens if the landing gear fails, or you come down too hard? The blades hit off the ground, and then you've got metal shrapnel 5 feet behind your head... not good.
what licence will be required?. Is it a plane, helicopter or both?. With it having 2 engines will you have to take several test's and if it is a turbo prop design how much is it likely to cost?.
Cool video, and if they ever produce one and get it approved by the FAA I'd love to give it a test-flight. But I visited the site, and not only are they still trolling for investors, but it appears their "prototypes" aren't even to scale (they're models). This early in the process, I wouldn't expect to see one for a few years...and that's only if they get the funding they need.
CGI is used as a tool here. Most of this video is rendered by X-Plane, which is a flight simulator that uses Blade Element Theory to predict a plane's behavior, based on its shape. It is within 3% accurate. We have so far constructed 4 prototypes, all of which are showing very good flight characteristics. We are working our way towards vertical flight, and the performance we're seeing in the RC prototypes comes very close to what's predicted in the sim. Please watch the new VC videos.
The main drive gearing looks like it would come apart at 1:06, vibration being the main factor leading to a complete scramble and ripping the body to shreds. Consider the main rotating blade outdrive breaking free from the main body, will this idea fall 20k feet and bounce like intended? I beg to differ, good concept though.
Investors. With people like Moller having robbed investors of their trust towards VTOL and flying car concepts, it's really hard these days to find people willing to bet their money on such a concept. Radio Control versions are in their test phase right now... and will hopefully be mass-produced within a short while. This should increase people's trust towards this design and concept.
With the whole middle of the craft taken up with the propulsion system, the only place to put the payload is in front. Fine for a couple of passengers, but what about useful cargo?
@Snipe4261 kinda... when the helicopter is falling the air is hitting the props and rotating it as it should when the engine is running thus giving the helicopter some lift to dampen the fall
Good Idea but the tail end should be less obstructive or open where end tail meet on upper stabilizing wing. C-shaped that way it can be capable to carry loads on both sides and more thrust.
Neat concept, I doubt it has the payload capacity of a large helicopter though. With only 2 seats its uses are limited. Perhaps the concept can be carried over to a larger design capable of heavy payload applications. GPH? What about noise levels?
This Garrow Aircraft's Verticopter VTOL concept sort of reminds me of the "Flying Flapjack" that was dropped due to the Air Force adapting jet planes. It seems too much of an excellent design and idea (although the propellers might need to be longer like rigid helicopter blades meaning a wider diameter center portion and w/ a third very small rotor engine/propellers electrically powered in the front or rear for added stability ... and more room behind the cockpit for carrying bulky/heavy things) for investors to consider be it private industries or the U.S. military. Good try, though.
the central hub could be done with electric motors instead of mechanical coupling. I'd like to see it fly and get a feel for how strained this design type is
This would happen to any turboprop plane in case of gear-up or hard landings. No need to single out this design. In fact, the Verticopter would fare better, since this plane's body is shaped in such a way that detaching propeller blades would shimmy off any surface, instead of penetrating it. Additionally, the props and the fuse are carbon fiber, which makes the blades light (less inertia) and the fuselage more difficult to penetrate.
Many concerns expressed about this plane are no different in other planes. A turboprop plane that makes too hard of a landing also risks "metal shrapnel" penetrating the cabin. Here we're talking about carbon fiber blades and a CF fuselage that is angled in such a way that the prop blades would "shimmy" off, in case they became projectiles. A penetration of the cabin area is highly unlikely.
I happen to be passionate about advancements in electric propulsion. I drive a hybrid, and the RC prototypes for this plane (in real life) have been electric. There IS a future in electric flight, and I believe in it. Try googling "Sonex Electric" to see what I mean. Also, check the new version videos. It'll have plenty of space for fuel. The wings are quite thick.
Hi,what I would like is,why still got foot pedals,the technowledgy is here already to get rid of them,along with EFIS,for the motors and other advanced tech. stuff,also can we get a 6/8 seat version,with full baggage loading without loosing a lot of fuel on the trip,compensating for load,old story,Hope to hear from you soonest,
@crabtrap It looks like the first part of my answer didn't go through. What I was saying is.. yes I believe it is balanced just not stable. There's no compensation. It's like trying to balance a broomstick with pointed ends on its end . The stick may be made perfectly balanced but the chances you can get it to stand up are slim to none. With the Verticopter the slightest gust of wind etc. will make it bank in one direction or another. It would need some sort of compensation at the extremities.
@Abhilekh123 "Whether 'Ejection seats' possible in Verticopters?" I see no reason why they wouldn't have them. The blads aren't over the piolts heads and the rockets in the seats will send them 200 feet away from the Verticopter.
There have been many case studies of the negative effects of Carbon Fiber on military and commercial helicopters in the aircraft's ability to generate its own static electricity or for lightning to be attracted to the Carbon aspect of the craft...I wonder how this will be different??
I have my doubts about this design actually taking off. I designed my own aircraft, but I'm not good at modeling so I haven't been able to create a 3D model for flight simulator tests yet.
This scenario would happen with any turboprop aircraft with landing gear failure or too hard of a landing. I don't see this as a legitimate concern for the Verticopter's design. The Verticopter is better equipped to handle prop failure, since every angle of the fuselage in relationship to the spinning props is very shallow, which means blade penetration into the fuselage is extremely unlikely. The blades and fuse both are made of carbon fiber, and the blades would simply shimmy off the fuse.
From your design, I don't see any specifics on how the power gets applied to the rotor. You have what looks like some amature design gears when what you need is an active Diff, but at the same time, have it reversible too. Unless using magic you can get your engine builder to have the engine turn an opposite direction.
I dont understand how the craft stays stable while in hover. With different pilot weights the center of gravity would vary meaning the center of thrust would have to change.
Best flying design I've ever seen. Compact and simple for low cost, and easy to fly since propellers are in the center making a fluid transition from vertical to horizontal flight. I want one!
@Eggtruck tht was the most brilliant come-back i've ever seen!! nice job
Im always impressed when people share their hard work in the public domain - even though they know there will be skeptics, non- believers and those who could never produce an original idea themselves who will make super critical comments, trying in vain to sound intelligent hahahahaha.
Well done - it’s so original and can’t wait to see how far you get with this project..!
the CFG file is one of the more important files that is with your model and it is vital that you have it, because it contains most of the information about your aircraft. My friend and I got together and built a couple models for Flight Simulator 2004 but we never completely finished them. It's a lot of fun though.
@crabtrap As for the Osprey, the Center of gravity is UNDER the propellors which keeps it stable. Just like when holding a bucket the bucket will always be level because the center of gravity is way beneath the handle and the bucket is "hanging". In this manner gravity becomes the stabilizer. That's why most planes have wings on the top and in a V shape. It's a lot more stable.
It does. The two props cancel out each other's torque and their 90 degree offset gyroscopic torque, but the whole assembly is still stabilized by the gyroscopic effect of both props.
Yeah man, I'm interested. I also have FS X. The "flugtag" is a glider competition, right? That would be pretty cool. I forgot to mention that Gmax is free but no longer supported by the company who created it. Blender is also free, and it's pretty good. The other two programs that I mentioned are payware. Gmax is probably the best option and it's widely used for flight simulator models. I also forgot one of the main files that flight simulator reads is the aircraft.cfg file.
to be converted into usually a DXT format or a DDS format. You can use a program called DXTBMP to convert your texture files. Then after you get all of your texture files, you can place all of the files you have made for your model into individual folders, usually folder names are like MODEL, PANEL, TEXTURE, EFFECTS, SOUND. All of those folders labeled with those names then go into another single folder with the name of your aircraft. Refer to Flight Simulator X file on your computer.
If you want to see what an aircraft file looks like the flight simulator reads, then go to your Program Files or wherever you installed FS X at, then when you open up the main Flight Simulator X file, the find the folder called SimObjects. Inside that folder will be other folders. Find the Airplanes folder. Inside the airplanes folder is all of the folders that belong to all of the models you have installed for FS X. These models are the ones you can fly inside the program. Hope this helps!
Sorry if I offended you... was not my intention. It looks nice. It's just missing something to balance it out during vertical takeoff. There is nothing to keep the horizontal plane of the plane horizontal. It my opinion it will bank to the side or front or whatever. I'm sure it would fly once it has achieved horizontal flight in which case the wings and the tail will keep it horizontal. It's just the hovering part that can't work.
The breeeeding of a winner is IN THE MAKING.
very cool, would love to see a flying prototype
TO RESIDENTS OF CANADA: A segment on the Verticopter will be airing on Discovery Channel's "Daily Planet" show.
THE VERTICOPTER SEGMENT IS NOW CONFIRMED FOR THIS THURSDAY, NOV. 20, 2008 AT 7P AND 11P EST! You might see some of this footage in the show... but it'll probably mainly be covering the RC prototype, which was flown at the NASA AMES landing strip in California.
840 HP for a two-seater are anything but revolutionary. Take your invention to the last century.
It,s a cool design. It already exists in R/C model form. I hope someday they will build a full size prototype to develop.
Great design, and thanks for posting. How does the aircraft maintain stability while hovering, without (apparently) a swash plate?
Helicopters and VTOLs have gear systems like these, or even more complex. This video depicts a schematic. It's simplified to explain the concept of the drivetrain.
What a great design. I want one.
The lower propeller is right where the undercarraige is so it could swipe the ground if you go too close and the whole thing will spin uncontrollably at -12gs
UAV is definitely a tier we're working on. Please look at the newer video, which is linked to the annotated text box in the video above. It describes stuff better.
I believe this would tip over to the side upon a small gust of wind. And the propeller would be long to be able to lift this but then you have to mount it high so the propeller would not hit the ground when you change for VTOL or maybe have an extra long landing gear.
Just to showcase the fact that the canopy can be opened in the sim, and I thought it looked kinda cool to have a take-off sequence where the canopy wasn't closed yet. Implies a take-off on the run.
Looks pretty cool. Can't wait to see a functioning testbed aircraft.
i like this one...id be glad to see it when its made...count me among well wishers!
I had to model this plane twice: once in X-plane's PlaneMaker and once in Blender 3D. The PlaneMaker shape determines the flight behavior in the sim, and the Blender overlay provides a more detailed and higher quality graphic.
looks like it would make a great toy for christmas.
You'd be surprised... it happens to BE something new. No patents have been filed for such a design, and Garrow Aircraft just got granted its patents for the Verticopter.
There's been attempts at VTOL aircraft, some more successful than others... but this is definitely a new way of doing it. Look into it!
Have you flown this plane in X-Plane? It is far more stable than any helicopter at low speed.
Version 1.5 of this plane has improved propellers. (These aren't rotors; they're props.)
At Velletri in Italy I saw fly the Aircraft, had the peculiarity of not having wings, but only four rudders placed at four ends of the airplane and several lighthouses.
looks like the future of personal flight. what do you use to design and test on the computer?
Not out of business. Called Elytron Aircraft now.
The pilot looks very happy
absolutly awsome!
Have any of these actually been constructed yet like the m-400 skycar?
the design is sweet, taking it from paper (i mean screen) to reality is always a difficult transtion
I am extremely impressed.When will it fly?
i would consider forming a fused ring around the two propellers. line the inside with repulsive magnets and the propellers will go faster and direct wind more efficiently through the propellers. also, the propellers would work even with a down engine since the two propellers are connected.
ok now i want that plane on MY flight sim, plus what about side to side adjustments
If the counter rotating blades are at CG she must have a heavy tail. Always leave the green electric option open and remember that in the event of a crash the vehicle is made out of fully recyclable materials :)
Fuel consumption is projected to be less than a helicopter's. Besides, it'll cover distances much quicker than a heli.
It is a prototype, virtual model, flown in X-Plane. X-Plane is the most accurate and realistic flight sim out there. It calculates performance (speed, lift, aerodynamics, etc.) based on design. This design is viable. An RC version of this plane has been successfully test-flown, and another, larger version is in the works.
I can see how this could be useful for combat applications, especially with it's landing capabilities even if there is an engine failure and it's light and strong design, but keeping the rotor exposed to the bottom, and consequentally to ground fire, seems like a dangerous idea. While there are automated missile interception systems(such as the TROPHY tank protection system) it cannot stop conventional ammo, while armored helicopters can absord the damage.
Im designing my own vtol aircraft, its only a one seater but it is alot smaller and has strafing capabilitys.
People generally use programs like Gmax, 3DStudio Max, Blender, or sometimes FSDesign Studio to design the actual 3D model. I have a little bit of experience with Gmax. After you create your model and build it how you want, you then export it. When you export it, it changes the file to usually an .MDL file because that's what flight simulator reads. After you get the .mdl file, you can create textures using Photoshop, Paintshop Pro or even Paint if nothing else. Then those textures have...
Not to mention the transition from vertical takoff to horizontal flight. Once the counter rotating propeller assembly starts to rotate from the vertical takeoff position to the horizontal flight position there is nothing to keep the rest of the plane from rotation in the opposite directon... bringing the nose of the plane up. Especially with the assembly right smack dab in the middle of the aircraft.
So I guess the problem I see is that the props are kinda right where you would put a fuselage in a normal plane or helicopter. It kinda makes its load carrying capacity restricted to the cockpit area.
Why not use rotary Wankel air motor for powering the counterrotating propellors? Use 10,000 psi carbon fiber composite air pressure tanks. This eliminates all the weight of the gasoline engines and replaces them with very low parts count air motor. Power to weight ratio is vastly superior. Range would be multiplied by 10 (guesstimate). If you doubt the capacity of this type of air motor, look at Cadillac's Aera concept car which won the Concept Car division of the 2010 Los Angeles Auto Show. Also at high altitude I believe the relative air pressure inside the air tanks would extend and help maintain range in reduced air density at high altitude.
Composites are great. Especially when building massive machines. The 787 is mostly carbon fibre. Its great stuff.
Hey, I loved your desing. Did you made it? cause I need some tips with my own desings, and I would like to ask you haw you made the cokpit objets, I mean wich app and a couple more questions
Thrust vectoring owns the sky! This thing can turn on a dime, Macross Zero- style!
@testermanish it was modeled in xplane so its a sound design its a matter of the guy getting funding
What happens if the landing gear fails, or you come down too hard? The blades hit off the ground, and then you've got metal shrapnel 5 feet behind your head...
not good.
Best response here. Nice and positive too....
what licence will be required?. Is it a plane, helicopter or both?. With it having 2 engines will you have to take several test's and if it is a turbo prop design how much is it likely to cost?.
Cool video, and if they ever produce one and get it approved by the FAA I'd love to give it a test-flight.
But I visited the site, and not only are they still trolling for investors, but it appears their "prototypes" aren't even to scale (they're models).
This early in the process, I wouldn't expect to see one for a few years...and that's only if they get the funding they need.
CGI is used as a tool here. Most of this video is rendered by X-Plane, which is a flight simulator that uses Blade Element Theory to predict a plane's behavior, based on its shape. It is within 3% accurate.
We have so far constructed 4 prototypes, all of which are showing very good flight characteristics. We are working our way towards vertical flight, and the performance we're seeing in the RC prototypes comes very close to what's predicted in the sim. Please watch the new VC videos.
why wasnt this built 16 years ago and didnt hit the market
Am I the only one to notice that while in hover mode, there doesn't seem to be any provisions on axis control on any of the three axis?
im getting one of those for sure.
someday
The main drive gearing looks like it would come apart at 1:06, vibration being the main factor leading to a complete scramble and ripping the body to shreds. Consider the main rotating blade outdrive breaking free from the main body, will this idea fall 20k feet and bounce like intended? I beg to differ, good concept though.
Investors. With people like Moller having robbed investors of their trust towards VTOL and flying car concepts, it's really hard these days to find people willing to bet their money on such a concept.
Radio Control versions are in their test phase right now... and will hopefully be mass-produced within a short while. This should increase people's trust towards this design and concept.
@Eggtruck LOL. That reply is what I call "Maximum Ownage" in the voice of the nano-suit in Crysis.
With the whole middle of the craft taken up with the propulsion system, the only place to put the payload is in front. Fine for a couple of passengers, but what about useful cargo?
@Snipe4261 kinda... when the helicopter is falling the air is hitting the props and rotating it as it should when the engine is running thus giving the helicopter some lift to dampen the fall
Good Idea but the tail end should be less obstructive or open where end tail meet on upper stabilizing wing. C-shaped that way it can be capable to carry loads on both sides and more thrust.
Neat concept, I doubt it has the payload capacity of a large helicopter though. With only 2 seats its uses are limited. Perhaps the concept can be carried over to a larger design capable of heavy payload applications. GPH? What about noise levels?
The whole thing is X-Plane 9 graphics. Only very few parts of this video use Ray-Tracing done in Blender. The rest is X-Plane 9.
820 HP - where do you put the fuel?
You're right: fucking awesome. I want one NOW.
When will this be released? Nothing about that on their website
This Garrow Aircraft's Verticopter VTOL concept sort of reminds me of the "Flying Flapjack" that was dropped due to the Air Force adapting jet planes. It seems too much of an excellent design and idea (although the propellers might need to be longer like rigid helicopter blades meaning a wider diameter center portion and w/ a third very small rotor engine/propellers electrically powered in the front or rear for added stability ... and more room behind the cockpit for carrying bulky/heavy things) for investors to consider be it private industries or the U.S. military. Good try, though.
the central hub could be done with electric motors instead of mechanical coupling.
I'd like to see it fly and get a feel for how strained this design type is
no cgi simmulations can impress me. atleast do an unmanned vertical takeoff and landing of the real thing.
yeah this si flight simulador this si truth
This would happen to any turboprop plane in case of gear-up or hard landings. No need to single out this design.
In fact, the Verticopter would fare better, since this plane's body is shaped in such a way that detaching propeller blades would shimmy off any surface, instead of penetrating it.
Additionally, the props and the fuse are carbon fiber, which makes the blades light (less inertia) and the fuselage more difficult to penetrate.
what would happen if both engines failed?
Many concerns expressed about this plane are no different in other planes. A turboprop plane that makes too hard of a landing also risks "metal shrapnel" penetrating the cabin.
Here we're talking about carbon fiber blades and a CF fuselage that is angled in such a way that the prop blades would "shimmy" off, in case they became projectiles. A penetration of the cabin area is highly unlikely.
Actually, this is a good idea. I could see it becoming fuel effient. It'd also ease up traffic.
I happen to be passionate about advancements in electric propulsion. I drive a hybrid, and the RC prototypes for this plane (in real life) have been electric. There IS a future in electric flight, and I believe in it. Try googling "Sonex Electric" to see what I mean.
Also, check the new version videos. It'll have plenty of space for fuel. The wings are quite thick.
Looks promising and innovative, hope to see it in the air with an electric engine or other eco clean engines! Well Done !
@ribenawrath thats fine but plastic in a flying machine? would you trust that?
Sooo.... When does this come out of the cartoon stage?
Would it be possible to make something like an osprey but with turbines/jet engine? If it could happen why has it not been made?
The V-22 Osprey uses gas turbine engines.
Hi,what I would like is,why still got foot pedals,the technowledgy is here already to get rid of them,along with EFIS,for the motors and other advanced tech. stuff,also can we get a 6/8 seat version,with full baggage loading without loosing a lot of fuel on the trip,compensating for load,old story,Hope to hear from you soonest,
looks cool
but it can only hold like one person?
plus looks kinda dangerous if something gets caught under propeller just saying.
@crabtrap It looks like the first part of my answer didn't go through. What I was saying is.. yes I believe it is balanced just not stable. There's no compensation. It's like trying to balance a broomstick with pointed ends on its end . The stick may be made perfectly balanced but the chances you can get it to stand up are slim to none. With the Verticopter the slightest gust of wind etc. will make it bank in one direction or another. It would need some sort of compensation at the extremities.
Who designed your Home Site? Your Image Verification isnt working?
@Abhilekh123 "Whether 'Ejection seats' possible in Verticopters?" I see no reason why they wouldn't have them. The blads aren't over the piolts heads and the rockets in the seats will send them 200 feet away from the Verticopter.
Does it go soisoisoisoisoisoisoisoisoi?
There have been many case studies of the negative effects of Carbon Fiber on military and commercial helicopters in the aircraft's ability to generate its own static electricity or for lightning to be attracted to the Carbon aspect of the craft...I wonder how this will be different??
so, why haven't they built it yet?
Looks like it would glide like a brick, regardless of the auto rotating props. Vertical engine out landings? I don't think so.
It reminds me of the Focke-Wulf flatriser from WWII. Same principle too.
I have my doubts about this design actually taking off. I designed my own aircraft, but I'm not good at modeling so I haven't been able to create a 3D model for flight simulator tests yet.
This scenario would happen with any turboprop aircraft with landing gear failure or too hard of a landing. I don't see this as a legitimate concern for the Verticopter's design.
The Verticopter is better equipped to handle prop failure, since every angle of the fuselage in relationship to the spinning props is very shallow, which means blade penetration into the fuselage is extremely unlikely. The blades and fuse both are made of carbon fiber, and the blades would simply shimmy off the fuse.
if it's a bit breezy, this thing will go wild like a bull being branded. it's waay too light, have you not seen how model aircraft do this?
all i could say is wow... very impressive... hope they'll make one lol
@jimbo80982 do you know what aeroplanes are made of?
What is the altitude ceiling?
From your design, I don't see any specifics on how the power gets applied to the rotor. You have what looks like some amature design gears when what you need is an active Diff, but at the same time, have it reversible too. Unless using magic you can get your engine builder to have the engine turn an opposite direction.
No prototype yet? Why the animation?
I dont understand how the craft stays stable while in hover. With different pilot weights the center of gravity would vary meaning the center of thrust would have to change.
A simulação parece que foi feita no Flight Simulator 2004 ou 2002 por aí!
I am wondering why nobody building centrifugal blades verticopter?? Is not that SMALLER and MORE efficient?