A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Move Over Moller



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #8  
Old March 7th 05, 08:19 PM
Montblack
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

("Colin W Kingsbury" wrote)
snips clipped
It seems to me that vectored-thrust aircraft face a couple of fundamental
challenges that will not be easily overcome.

First, you have the poor efficiency of turbines at low speed. The ducted
fan
approach will improve this somewhat but if you look at the V-22, it has
HUGE
propellers, more like mini chopper blades. The V-22 may be intended to
spend
more time in hover than a Mollermobile, but I'll side with the machine
that's being flown seriously over the eternal prototype.

Again, the V-22 is the best precedent we have to go on here, and the
evidence is pretty bad. Twenty-some billion spent as I recall and the
things
are still nowhere close to deployment.



The V-22 Osprey project drives me nuts. V-22 Billion!!
(Semper Fi Congressional Industrial Complex)

The 1950's Fairey Rotodyne worked. They even had orders.

It was flying around Europe, hauling people and freight, in the late 50's
and early 60's. This thing was designed over 50 years ago. Can you imagine
new engines, new composites, new engineering concepts, new rotors, new
electronics, etc?

I don't know exactly what the design/mission specs are (were) for the V-22,
but I suspect the Rotodyne came close to meeting some of them, while
outdoing others.

The Rotodyne was successfully flying. Tweak it, and you've got something.
Start fresh and you have $22 BBBBillion worth of nothing. What a sad joke.

Apparently, because of the way the jets on the rotor tips work, there is no
need for a tail rotor. Also, the rotor goes into autogyro mode when the
plane reaches a certain forward speed. The rotor-tip jets kick in for
take-off and landing only. Jet thrust is provided by bleed air from the
turboprop engines, located on the Rotodyne's stubby wings.

Reason I've read for its demise was fear of noise pollution (Right, like a
1st generation 707 wasn't loud? And what about those 2 Harrier jump-jet at
OSH last year?). Another reason I've read for the project's cancellation was
British Govt. inside politics - with Fairey being outside.

http://www.hofstra.edu/CampusL/Cultu...iro_movies.cfm
Fairey Rotodyne movie on bottom of page

http://www.dunnbypaul.net/aircraft/rotodyne/
Rotodyne info

http://avia.russian.ee/vertigo/fairey_rotodyne-r.html
Rotodyne page

http://www.hofstra.edu/CampusL/Cultu...llery20_22.cfm
X-game simulations are fun


Montblack

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Standard Cirrus Web Site Move Jim Hendrix Soaring 0 December 11th 04 03:11 PM
most facile way to move heavy toolcase up/down stairs? Alan Horowitz Home Built 28 May 30th 04 09:39 AM
Moller skycar still kicking Harry K Home Built 16 May 26th 04 05:16 PM
Progress on Flying Car Steve Dufour General Aviation 5 December 19th 03 03:48 PM
Airbus to move further into military AC inc Heavy Bombers phil hunt Military Aviation 28 November 24th 03 09:15 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.