![]() |
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. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Well, polymers and reinforcement fiber technology are continuing to
improve. You can even buy carbon-fiber reinforced polymers these days, with superduper tensile strength. But I would imagine that kevlar, spectra, vectran would have enough strength to do the job for a small personal transportation vehicle. They would be able to handle the high pressures. To ease the load requirements, the rotor could be 4-vaned. Each pair of opposing vanes could have a commonly inflated structure -- that way if a single vane suffered a rupture, then it and its opposing partner could be deflated/depressurized, while the remaining pair of rotor vanes would take the load while you landed. Or why not even a 6-way rotor? Someone who responded to my posting suggested weighting the rotor tips for flywheel effect. The centrifugal force from the weighted tips would help to keep the rotors rigid and reduce the possibility of buckling. Flywheel energy could also help in the event of an unpowered landing due to engine failure. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
There was a design for an inflatable car years ago it was quit good.
"Ken Sandyeggo" wrote in message om... (sanman) wrote in message . com... I was reading about inflatable wings: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/plane...-wing-01a.html http://www.ilcdover.com/EngineeredInfl/inflatwing.pdf and I wondered why these couldn't be implemented as rotor configuration, for a "flying car" type of vehicle -- ie. a car that could instantly convert to helicopter flight. If you look back at those older Hiller helicopters, they had big, thick, rigid aluminum rotors: http://avia.russian.ee/vertigo/hiller_x-2-235-r.html http://avia.russian.ee/vertigo/hiller_xh-44-r.html An inflatable equivalent might be somewhat thicker and yet not be so rigid, and would not have the high mass penalty. So you'd be riding a sort of lightweight automotive vehicle along the road, and you could switch to helicopter mode, with inflatable rotors popping out on the top of your vehicle. Your engine would then power the rotors, and you'd fly away. Once you landed again, the deflated rotors would be tucked back into whatever compartment they'd popped out from. Cmon, there are all kinds of wierd-looking lightweight concept cars out there, so why not this? What would be the main difficulties with a concept like this? Getting anyone to stop laughing long enough to think about it. Are you related to Moller? KJSDCAUSA |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Christopher" wrote in message ...
There was a design for an inflatable car years ago it was quit good. If it was only "moderately good," the way we buy junk, it'd be on the market. "Quite good" would make it an overwhelming success. If it's not on the market at all, it was "quite" junk. Maybe had a couple good features, but not enough that people would buy it, or we'd see them all over the place. KJSDCAUSA "Ken Sandyeggo" wrote in message om... (sanman) wrote in message . com... I was reading about inflatable wings: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/plane...-wing-01a.html http://www.ilcdover.com/EngineeredInfl/inflatwing.pdf and I wondered why these couldn't be implemented as rotor configuration, for a "flying car" type of vehicle -- ie. a car that could instantly convert to helicopter flight. If you look back at those older Hiller helicopters, they had big, thick, rigid aluminum rotors: http://avia.russian.ee/vertigo/hiller_x-2-235-r.html http://avia.russian.ee/vertigo/hiller_xh-44-r.html An inflatable equivalent might be somewhat thicker and yet not be so rigid, and would not have the high mass penalty. So you'd be riding a sort of lightweight automotive vehicle along the road, and you could switch to helicopter mode, with inflatable rotors popping out on the top of your vehicle. Your engine would then power the rotors, and you'd fly away. Once you landed again, the deflated rotors would be tucked back into whatever compartment they'd popped out from. Cmon, there are all kinds of wierd-looking lightweight concept cars out there, so why not this? What would be the main difficulties with a concept like this? Getting anyone to stop laughing long enough to think about it. Are you related to Moller? KJSDCAUSA |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | April 1st 04 08:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | March 1st 04 07:27 AM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | Aerobatics | 0 | December 12th 03 12:00 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | October 1st 03 07:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | September 1st 03 07:27 AM |