Yeah, that's one way to do it, but on the initial prototype the rear motor doesn't need to be that big.
Would it not make more sense to just use linkages to rotate the four electric motors some angle < 90 degrees for the transition to forward flight?
Range problems are solved by using hybrid technology and smaller batteries, so I can see the point in attaching a prop to the rear IC engine, but a smaller (lighter) engine could be used if the four electric motors could be able to rotate forward some. The hardware system to rotate the motors is not complex nor heavy.
I've crunched the numbers, and it would require between $10k an $20k to convert a conventional hang glider (probably be best to start with a tandem wing) to a computer stabilized VTOL unit using commercially available components. It would actually be possible for a person off the street to be safely flying one of those after a 1 day training session. The complete unit (including batteries) would weigh less than 254 lb., so the resulting vehicle would fit within the USA's Part 103 rules.
Staying within the ultralight category would come at a price of limited range, because it's purely electric. Adding an IC engine pushes it over the weight limit.
If a person wanted to use that type of vehicle for personal travel or commutes, it would probably be best to move it over into the experimental category and then fly enough hours where the FAA might eventually allow it to be used like a helicopter. Once out of the ultralight category, scaling up could continue, along with tapping into the range and performance benefits of the hybrid powerplant.
HG dwindling, why let the eVTOL people have all growth
-
- Posts: 188
- Joined: Mon, Jan 23 2006, 04:05:02 pm
- Location: Australia
Yes, absolutely agree. There's a few different detail configurations which will work, what we need is one (or more) of the HG and/or trike companies to take on the vision to make HG relevant and big on the scene for future air mobility. Doesn't need to be too far in the future either since we are already personal air mobility specialists whereas most of the new entrants do not have a place in the ecosystem yet.
-
- Posts: 188
- Joined: Mon, Jan 23 2006, 04:05:02 pm
- Location: Australia
-
- Posts: 1881
- Joined: Sun, Mar 09 2003, 08:35:41 pm
- Location: North Carolina
I agree that glideability should be retained, as much as possible. Fan shrouds are draggy, so they might have to go. It would maybe be wise to sell the design with shrouds, then if owners wish to remove them they will do so at their own risk.
There is a case for using parallel hybrid technology instead of serial, resulting in benefits of redundancy, lifting power, duration, and range. https://sbir.nasa.gov/SBIR/abstracts/19 ... -2500.html
Here's a VTOL flying wing just begging to be scaled-up: https://youtu.be/4RrWX1gUTlo
There is a case for using parallel hybrid technology instead of serial, resulting in benefits of redundancy, lifting power, duration, and range. https://sbir.nasa.gov/SBIR/abstracts/19 ... -2500.html
Here's a VTOL flying wing just begging to be scaled-up: https://youtu.be/4RrWX1gUTlo
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- Posts: 188
- Joined: Mon, Jan 23 2006, 04:05:02 pm
- Location: Australia
-
- Posts: 1881
- Joined: Sun, Mar 09 2003, 08:35:41 pm
- Location: North Carolina
-
- Posts: 1881
- Joined: Sun, Mar 09 2003, 08:35:41 pm
- Location: North Carolina
I like what Textron has been able to demonstrate with their X5-55 (vectored thrust flying wing) and Aerosonde Hybrid Quad (VTOL add-on kit) programs. These technologies are applicable to our scale, and there's no reason they should not perform well on small manned craft like hang gliders and ultralights.
https://youtu.be/YAvaWxRq4yY
https://youtu.be/XTLmZQIA1pU
https://youtu.be/YAvaWxRq4yY
https://youtu.be/XTLmZQIA1pU