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
|
|||
|
|||
Moller's back...
"Monk" wrote in message ... On Jan 11, 11:44 am, Dana M. Hague wrote: On Sun, 11 Jan 2009 14:13:59 GMT, "vaughn" wrote: Did he ever go away? He never will, either. But he's got competition, now.... http://samsonmotorworks.com/ Good for a few chuckles on a slow day. The FAQ's are especially amusing... -- If the government doesn't trust us with our guns, why should we trust them with theirs? Samson's machine looks closer to reality than Moller's. For one thing, the wheels look like they could handle operating in the earthbound mode. Although Moller's FlyingCar is/was/has_always_been a farce, his SuperTrap mufflers was a successful design and his contribution to the improvement to the Wangle engine are notable. ___________new message______________ That looks like something related to Finagle's constant... or did you mean Wankle... Peter |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Moller's back...
Peter Dohm schreef:
"Monk" wrote in message his contribution to the improvement to the Wangle engine are notable. ___________new message______________ That looks like something related to Finagle's constant... or did you mean Wankle... After much scratching of my head, I decoded this to "Wankel" |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Moller's back...
Are the controls different for flying vs. driving?
We plan to provide both ‘pilot’ and ‘driver’ with comfortable and familiar controls. A control wheel is provided that functions like an aircraft ‘yoke’ in the air, and while on the ground acts as a motorcycle or 4-wheeler handlebar. A motorcycle twist grip throttle and brake are utilized to keep the feet free for the rudder petals. SINCE WHEN DID WE HAVE RUDDER PETALS ??? (LAST LINE) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Moller's back...
On Jan 12, 1:47*am, Avionics wrote:
Are the controls different for flying vs. driving? We plan to provide both ‘pilot’ and ‘driver’ with comfortable and familiar controls. A control wheel is provided that functions like an aircraft ‘yoke’ in the air, and while on the ground acts as a motorcycle or 4-wheeler handlebar. A motorcycle twist grip throttle and brake are utilized to keep the feet free for the rudder petals. SINCE WHEN DID WE HAVE RUDDER PETALS ??? * (LAST LINE) And what does the amount or type of controls have to do with the ability of the driver to actually 'fly' safely?? They seem to be oblivious that controlling a vehicle in 3 deminsions is jusst _wee bit_ different than in 2 dimensions. Harry K |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Moller's back...
"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message news In article , Harry K wrote: On Jan 11, 1:36 am, "Ron Webb" wrote: http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/p...he_skycar.html Seeing as how we can't keep the average driver from stacking his car up, how does he think the average driver will do dealing with 3 dimensions? Seeing the carnage on the roads now, if his sky car were workable and affordable the result would be a rapid decrease in population. Harry K If it were workable and affordable, it would already have flown in an extensive flight test program -- aftaer all, he has had more than 30 years to get it to work. As an engineer, I can list a number of "page one" flaws in both the design and concept: 1. Controllability. He wants to synchronize four to eight engines to provide both lift and thrust, where failure of either one engine or the control interlink would cause loss of control. There is no provision for power-off glide or control, so a BRS-type parachute is mandatory. 2. Aerodynamics. Just one look at the Volantor convinces me that the design is a drag machine, with interference and parasite drag sources everywhere. 3. Fuel consumption. The engines are supposed to be Wankel-type rotaries, which have a very high fuel consumption, although their power/weight ratio is good. 4. According to Moller himself, he is not a pilot, nor has he undertakn flying lessons. It shows. I'm reminded of a statement supposedly made by Igor Sikorsky that all designers should fly their designs. That way we would only have good designs. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Moller's back...
On Jan 12, 10:38*am, Harry K wrote:
On Jan 12, 1:47*am, Avionics wrote: Are the controls different for flying vs. driving? We plan to provide both ‘pilot’ and ‘driver’ with comfortable and familiar controls. A control wheel is provided that functions like an aircraft ‘yoke’ in the air, and while on the ground acts as a motorcycle or 4-wheeler handlebar. A motorcycle twist grip throttle and brake are utilized to keep the feet free for the rudder petals. SINCE WHEN DID WE HAVE RUDDER PETALS ??? * (LAST LINE) And what does the amount or type of controls have to do with the ability of the driver to actually 'fly' safely?? *They seem to be oblivious that controlling a vehicle in 3 deminsions is jusst _wee bit_ different than in 2 dimensions. Harry K Harry, that's a flame about spelling the foot thingies incorrectly. Everybody knows it's "peddles" ) |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Moller's back...
On Jan 12, 1:04*am, jan olieslagers
wrote: Peter Dohm schreef: "Monk" wrote in message his contribution to the improvement to the Wangle engine are notable. ___________new message______________ That looks like something related to Finagle's constant... or did you mean Wankle... After much scratching of my head, I decoded this to "Wankel" Yeah! That's the ticket! |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Moller's back...
On Jan 12, 10:08*am, cavedweller wrote:
On Jan 12, 10:38*am, Harry K wrote: On Jan 12, 1:47*am, Avionics wrote: Are the controls different for flying vs. driving? We plan to provide both ‘pilot’ and ‘driver’ with comfortable and familiar controls. A control wheel is provided that functions like an aircraft ‘yoke’ in the air, and while on the ground acts as a motorcycle or 4-wheeler handlebar. A motorcycle twist grip throttle and brake are utilized to keep the feet free for the rudder petals. SINCE WHEN DID WE HAVE RUDDER PETALS ??? * (LAST LINE) And what does the amount or type of controls have to do with the ability of the driver to actually 'fly' safely?? *They seem to be oblivious that controlling a vehicle in 3 deminsions is jusst _wee bit_ different than in 2 dimensions. Harry K Harry, that's a flame about spelling the foot thingies incorrectly. Everybody knows it's "peddles" )- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I missed that!!! Harry K |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Moller's back...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:46:21 -0800, "Stuart Fields"
wrote: "Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message news In article , Harry K wrote: On Jan 11, 1:36 am, "Ron Webb" wrote: http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/p...he_skycar.html Seeing as how we can't keep the average driver from stacking his car up, how does he think the average driver will do dealing with 3 dimensions? Seeing the carnage on the roads now, if his sky car were workable and affordable the result would be a rapid decrease in population. Harry K If it were workable and affordable, it would already have flown in an extensive flight test program -- aftaer all, he has had more than 30 years to get it to work. As an engineer, I can list a number of "page one" flaws in both the design and concept: 1. Controllability. He wants to synchronize four to eight engines to provide both lift and thrust, where failure of either one engine or the control interlink would cause loss of control. There is no provision for power-off glide or control, so a BRS-type parachute is mandatory. 2. Aerodynamics. Just one look at the Volantor convinces me that the design is a drag machine, with interference and parasite drag sources everywhere. 3. Fuel consumption. The engines are supposed to be Wankel-type rotaries, which have a very high fuel consumption, although their power/weight ratio is good. 4. According to Moller himself, he is not a pilot, nor has he undertakn flying lessons. It shows. I'm reminded of a statement supposedly made by Igor Sikorsky that all designers should fly their designs. That way we would only have good designs. Or no more than one example of each poor design be it whole or in parts. Roger (K8RI) ARRL Life Member N833R (World's oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Moller's back...
Ron Webb wrote:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/p...he_skycar.html Are you gullible? To find out send $10 to....... Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Blue Angels back in Pensacola - practice session - Diamond heading back to the hangar | Pensacola Beachcomber | Aviation Photos | 0 | March 23rd 08 04:28 PM |
Moller's too late! | Rich S.[_1_] | Home Built | 8 | November 11th 07 02:42 AM |
Hey, all I am back for a bit. | NW_Pilot | Piloting | 10 | December 11th 06 12:22 AM |
Buy Moller's old Junk! No, seriously! | wright1902glider | Home Built | 11 | November 24th 06 06:28 PM |
they took me back in time and the nsa or japan wired my head and now they know the idea came from me so if your back in time and wounder what happen they change tim liverance history for good. I work at rts wright industries and it a time travel trap | tim liverance | Military Aviation | 0 | August 18th 03 12:18 AM |