Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28

Thread: Building of a manned copter with a gasoline engine.

  1. #1

    Building of a manned copter with a gasoline engine.

    We are building a manned copter with a gasoline engine and propellers with variable pitch.

    Name:  001 2018-01-20_175746 800.jpg
Views: 1371
Size:  42.2 KB


    In order not to repeat itself - very detailed information is available on our website - https://flying-bike2018.com/home/

    A small video report - on this video!



    Before asking questions or commenting - a big request - read the description of the project on the site. I tried VERY MORE to describe my arguments.

    As the construction of the Copter progresses, I will publish new information.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    I was wondering why nobody has gone for four ducted fans, which would give greater thrust and be just as controllable.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  3. #3
    DaleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    KMLE
    Posts
    654
    Measure twice, cut once...
    scratch head, shrug, shim to fit.

    Flying an RV-12. I am building a Fisher Celebrity, slowly.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    Um, no.

    Something that actually works!

    In the design of this thread, a LOT of complexity could be removed by simply using ducted fans instead of four sets of variable pitched props.

    I also wonder why he doesn't keep the electric motors and simply have the gas engine run a generator, if he's going off the shelf as much as possible.

    But HUGE kudoes for not calling it a "manned drone." I really, really hate that.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Giger View Post
    Um, no.

    Something that actually works!

    In the design of this thread, a LOT of complexity could be removed by simply using ducted fans instead of four sets of variable pitched props.

    I also wonder why he doesn't keep the electric motors and simply have the gas engine run a generator, if he's going off the shelf as much as possible.

    But HUGE kudoes for not calling it a "manned drone." I really, really hate that.

    As I recall, numerous experiments in wind tunnels have shown that propellers in annular nozzles have a higher efficiency only in the case of very precise manufacturing, with a minimum annular gap.
    But the increase in thrust efficiency is "eaten up" by the greater weight of the ring nozzle and the increased air resistance.
    Therefore, despite the seemingly high efficiency, in practice no one applies.
    And besides, the mechanism of turning the propeller with a ring nozzle is of great weight and complexity.
    The design of the variable pitch propeller, which has been used for many decades in hundreds of thousands of aircraft and helicopters - is simpler and more efficient.

    As for the gasoline engine with the generator - look at the weight of the generator. The power of at least 100 kW.
    And the efficiency of the "bundle" gasoline engine - generator - electric motor - is also low.
    It's good for ships. It was tried during World War II by Porsche on the "Tiger" - Panzerkampfwagen VI "Tiger P" VK4501 (P).
    But for airplanes - it is still difficult and uneconomical.

  6. #6
    DaleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    KMLE
    Posts
    654
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Giger View Post
    Um, no.

    Something that actually works!
    That was kind of my point. So far I don't think anyone has made it work.
    Measure twice, cut once...
    scratch head, shrug, shim to fit.

    Flying an RV-12. I am building a Fisher Celebrity, slowly.

  7. #7
    FlyingRon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    NC26 (Catawba, NC)
    Posts
    2,627
    Well it worked for Moller, he managed to entice a lot of people to give him money for something that never got out of ground effect (and even not overly stable there).

  8. #8
    If you look at the designs of Moller from the point of view of a normal aviation engineer - he could not do anything!

    Name:  0000b5.jpg
Views: 944
Size:  99.8 KB

    In 200x - a design with 8 motors, stabilization which is done by changing the engine speed - complete nonsense! The inertia of the gasoline engine is too big. A person's reaction is too slow for such a small device.

    In the M200M - the control of shutter-blinds ... Complete nonsense. This scheme operates on an hovercraft. But not on an aircraft.

    The rest of his designs are beautiful, like toys. But from the point of view of the fact that they must fly - complete nonsense!
    There is no practical sense.

  9. #9
    DaleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    KMLE
    Posts
    654
    I never have figured out whether Moller would be more at home having dinner with Dunning & Krueger, or Ponzi.

    That said -- the effort described in this thread could work, or might not. Time will tell. Please keep us posted, Thor.
    Measure twice, cut once...
    scratch head, shrug, shim to fit.

    Flying an RV-12. I am building a Fisher Celebrity, slowly.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    His idea certainly has a lot of merit and promise.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •