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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Stu,
No doubt, you have more important things to do then that of discussing the pros and cons of twin main rotors, but I sincerely believe that the intermeshing configuration may be the salvation of recreational rotorcraft. The following four points support this belief. 1/ Duplicity of parts: The cost advantage has to do with production. For example, it may take 20 minutes to process the work order, set up the drill-press and the jig etc., to drill one hole in an angle. The drilling of the hole may take only 0.5 minutes. Therefore the time to drill one part will be 20.5 minutes, whereas, the time to drill 2 parts will be 21 minutes, which is 10.5 minutes per part. 2/ The pictures on the following web page show the compactness of an intermeshing assembly. This assembly includes the rotor-hubs, the flight-controls and the drive-train. http://www.germanvtol.com/fl282rotor...l282rotor.html 3/ Here is a proposal for a recreational helicopter, which could offer; reliability and partial homebuilt construction at a price far below $100,000.00. http://www.synchrolite.com/Dragonfly.html 4/ Here is a possible organizational structure for the proposed helicopter. http://www.unicopter.com/Dragonfly_Organization.html Dave J. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Jim: The magazine will go monthly if there is enough interest (subscribers)
and article sources. Keep an eye on it. Getting ads, while necessary to fund the production of the magazine is not our major thrust. We want a good magazine with lots of technical how-tos and good articles on builders successes. We will not have any ads from Ford or John Deere or other non-aviation oriented sources. Thanks for your response. Stu Fields Editor/Publisher Experimental Helicopter Magazine "Jim" wrote in message ... Stu, I will be interested in the magazine when it becomes monthly and thick (not with ads not related to helicopterst either). an opinion only mindya Jim "Kathryn & Stuart Fields" wrote in message ... "Dave Jackson" wrote in message news:jHK4d.83778$%S.11725@pd7tw2no... Hi Stu, |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Jackson" wrote in message news_76d.551896$gE.128675@pd7tw3no... Stu, No doubt, you have more important things to do then that of discussing the pros and cons of twin main rotors, but I sincerely believe that the intermeshing configuration may be the salvation of recreational rotorcraft. The following four points support this belief. Dave: Unfortunately, I will talk helicopters at the drop of a hat and have been known to go to great lengths to furnish the hat. 1/ Duplicity of parts: The cost advantage has to do with production. For example, it may take 20 minutes to process the work order, set up the drill-press and the jig etc., to drill one hole in an angle. The drilling of the hole may take only 0.5 minutes. Therefore the time to drill one part will be 20.5 minutes, whereas, the time to drill 2 parts will be 21 minutes, which is 10.5 minutes per part. This is a great very small wet thumb analysis of a complex production process. I doubt if it can be linearly extended to forecast actual costs of a production run. 2/ The pictures on the following web page show the compactness of an intermeshing assembly. This assembly includes the rotor-hubs, the flight-controls and the drive-train. http://www.germanvtol.com/fl282rotor...l282rotor.html My God Dave! this thing looks several orders of magnitude more complex than the trans, swash plate and rotor head than that which I'm flying. It appears to be heavy enough that when added to the engine weight and the rotor blades, 254# will be a memory. 3/ Here is a proposal for a recreational helicopter, which could offer; reliability and partial homebuilt construction at a price far below $100,000.00. http://www.synchrolite.com/Dragonfly.html Who do you propose is actually going to build one? I would certainly be very interested in a story about the construction and testing of such a ship. But a prototype is going to be necessary to prove the concept (not just the intermeshing config; that has been done but the producibility at the cost figures needed to produce a viable product) 4/ Here is a possible organizational structure for the proposed helicopter. http://www.unicopter.com/Dragonfly_Organization.html You've obviously put a lot of thought into this. Where do you go from here? Stu. Dave J. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Where do you go from here?
Back to struggling with a FART (Future Advanced Rotorcraft Technology) Its a long trip from the scratchpad to the helipad. Dave J. "Kathryn & Stuart Fields" wrote in message ... "Dave Jackson" wrote in message news_76d.551896$gE.128675@pd7tw3no... Stu, No doubt, you have more important things to do then that of discussing the pros and cons of twin main rotors, but I sincerely believe that the intermeshing configuration may be the salvation of recreational rotorcraft. The following four points support this belief. Dave: Unfortunately, I will talk helicopters at the drop of a hat and have been known to go to great lengths to furnish the hat. 1/ Duplicity of parts: The cost advantage has to do with production. For example, it may take 20 minutes to process the work order, set up the drill-press and the jig etc., to drill one hole in an angle. The drilling of the hole may take only 0.5 minutes. Therefore the time to drill one part will be 20.5 minutes, whereas, the time to drill 2 parts will be 21 minutes, which is 10.5 minutes per part. This is a great very small wet thumb analysis of a complex production process. I doubt if it can be linearly extended to forecast actual costs of a production run. 2/ The pictures on the following web page show the compactness of an intermeshing assembly. This assembly includes the rotor-hubs, the flight-controls and the drive-train. http://www.germanvtol.com/fl282rotor...l282rotor.html My God Dave! this thing looks several orders of magnitude more complex than the trans, swash plate and rotor head than that which I'm flying. It appears to be heavy enough that when added to the engine weight and the rotor blades, 254# will be a memory. 3/ Here is a proposal for a recreational helicopter, which could offer; reliability and partial homebuilt construction at a price far below $100,000.00. http://www.synchrolite.com/Dragonfly.html Who do you propose is actually going to build one? I would certainly be very interested in a story about the construction and testing of such a ship. But a prototype is going to be necessary to prove the concept (not just the intermeshing config; that has been done but the producibility at the cost figures needed to produce a viable product) 4/ Here is a possible organizational structure for the proposed helicopter. http://www.unicopter.com/Dragonfly_Organization.html You've obviously put a lot of thought into this. Where do you go from here? Stu. Dave J. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
It's even longer from the lathe to just 1foot above the helipad. I hope you
are under 21. Stu. "Dave Jackson" wrote in message news:Vvk6d.555691$gE.389595@pd7tw3no... Where do you go from here? Back to struggling with a FART (Future Advanced Rotorcraft Technology) Its a long trip from the scratchpad to the helipad. Dave J. "Kathryn & Stuart Fields" wrote in message ... "Dave Jackson" wrote in message news_76d.551896$gE.128675@pd7tw3no... Stu, No doubt, you have more important things to do then that of discussing the pros and cons of twin main rotors, but I sincerely believe that the intermeshing configuration may be the salvation of recreational rotorcraft. The following four points support this belief. Dave: Unfortunately, I will talk helicopters at the drop of a hat and have been known to go to great lengths to furnish the hat. 1/ Duplicity of parts: The cost advantage has to do with production. For example, it may take 20 minutes to process the work order, set up the drill-press and the jig etc., to drill one hole in an angle. The drilling of the hole may take only 0.5 minutes. Therefore the time to drill one part will be 20.5 minutes, whereas, the time to drill 2 parts will be 21 minutes, which is 10.5 minutes per part. This is a great very small wet thumb analysis of a complex production process. I doubt if it can be linearly extended to forecast actual costs of a production run. 2/ The pictures on the following web page show the compactness of an intermeshing assembly. This assembly includes the rotor-hubs, the flight-controls and the drive-train. http://www.germanvtol.com/fl282rotor...l282rotor.html My God Dave! this thing looks several orders of magnitude more complex than the trans, swash plate and rotor head than that which I'm flying. It appears to be heavy enough that when added to the engine weight and the rotor blades, 254# will be a memory. 3/ Here is a proposal for a recreational helicopter, which could offer; reliability and partial homebuilt construction at a price far below $100,000.00. http://www.synchrolite.com/Dragonfly.html Who do you propose is actually going to build one? I would certainly be very interested in a story about the construction and testing of such a ship. But a prototype is going to be necessary to prove the concept (not just the intermeshing config; that has been done but the producibility at the cost figures needed to produce a viable product) 4/ Here is a possible organizational structure for the proposed helicopter. http://www.unicopter.com/Dragonfly_Organization.html You've obviously put a lot of thought into this. Where do you go from here? Stu. Dave J. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dover short pilots since vaccine order | Roman Bystrianyk | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 29th 04 12:47 AM |
Bush Balked at Direct Order From Guard Commander | WalterM140 | Military Aviation | 8 | September 12th 04 06:36 PM |
Heroux-Devtek wins $10.9M military order for US Air Force engines | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | July 8th 04 12:19 AM |
7 more US troops killed for New World Order | Aerophotos | Military Aviation | 2 | April 5th 04 07:10 AM |
Canada to order replacement for the Sea King | Ed Majden | Military Aviation | 3 | December 18th 03 07:02 PM |