jake_eraklidis
Hello everyone... I thought I'd post a VTOL concept that I was working on... Watch the pilots chair... How does it compare to other VTOLs?

It's best viewed in HD....
Quote 0 0
LukeWarm
A helicopter hovers well because the propulsion is above the CG. Balancing and lifting something that is horizontal is easier than balancing and lifting something that is vertical; put a one foot rod on you finger and try it both ways, you will see what I mean.

The planes we have that have thrust vectoring, can go into a hover during a high alpha for two reasons; The CG is very close to the propulsion, and the thrust vectoring control surfaces are big enough, and far enough away from the CG to give them good leverage. This also requires the use of a Rudder. From a vertical perspective; the closer the controls are to the CG, the better they must be.

Without some mechanical and reactionary advantages, a well control hover is difficult; if one is lacking, the other must make up the difference. The computer controls Squishy has showed us in some of his post, makes it much simpler to control a VTOL aircraft, than it would be with a traditional RC flight control system. It does this because it gives you a reactionary advantage, but this type of system also is limited in how much help it can provide.

If you maximize your mechanical advantages to the extent that the flight controls you choose are able to have enough leverage and be reactive enough, you will be successful. Good luck.
Quote 0 0
jake_eraklidis
I forgot to post this... It's a great resource to look at.
http://vstol.org/wheel.htm
Quote 0 0
whatmovesyou
Are you building one?
I like to design and fly unique planes.
Quote 0 0
jake_eraklidis
LukeWarm: I understand the cg concepts... This was my reasoning: When the plane points up on lift off theres very little drag (less surface area while looking down). Compare that with the Harrier or F-35 its like pushing up a brick. Also look at where the thrust is on all of those planes. They create awkward moments of inertia (benefit: high angular accel rates tradeoff: high torques) and they spend a lot of fuel just balancing. It's a basic torque problem... bigger radius = bigger force.... tradeoff: bigger force to counter/dampen with force on the opposite side. On small planes it doesn't really matter that much. In regards to control I plan on using this http://www.vectornav.com/products/vn200-rug?id=54 this far exceeds rc gyros and rc accelerometers... The control algo will be software based (there will be a CPU on board). But that's way beyond the focus. You are right though... with VTOL there are a ton of tradeoffs... My concept required tradeoffs as well... if it was easy everyone would have a VTOL car....

whatmovesyou: That's the plan I'm in no rush though. If you want to run with the concepts go right ahead... get some foam, some carbon spars, and have fun...
Quote 0 0
rodrigo
Beauty plane except for the landing gear and retraction movement.
About VTOL , this has been made but with the propeller up/front position... Rear is really difficult specially in a long fuselage like this... On real planes, exclusive VTOL planes are inefficient because lot of payload are used in takeoff fuel

Enviado desde mi GT-I9100 usando Tapatalk 2
good luck!

tx Futaba 9CAP & 8U
Quote 0 0
whatmovesyou
This sits on my computer desk as a reminder. It doesn't work.
edf gymbal 001.JPG 

I have tried single, dual setups with(out) gyros and it doesn't work. I can name many more ways, I attacked and lost.

As soon as you lift, torque will hit you and start you rotating. Not enough angular movement with TV to counteract. Need to solve that problem.
How do you handle ground turbulence caused by EDF's.
I see overweight with canard and fancy landing gear.
If the wind is blowing and VTOL lifts, how do you stop drift or tipping over?
Can you hover a plane?, you will need that skill even to try.
Might be able to make it if you use a micro board.
How are you handling transition? Canard might help.
Think about transition,(time sequence) how each control works/changes? It is harder(I believe) to resolve than going vertical. The only good so far is I have a STOL transport and a STOL edf.

I tried also using a transport with a swing wing and failure. Others, give you good tips, I prefer to base it on experience and tough problems to face.

I am giving it my last show before the Wii board come out.

My gismo is designed and I am just finishing fabricating it. Then I will start my build. I hope you still try. You learn a lot from failure.
I like to design and fly unique planes.
Quote 0 0
rotate1953
Quote:
A helicopter hovers well because the propulsion is above the CG. Balancing and lifting something that is horizontal is easier than balancing and lifting something that is vertical; put a one foot rod on you finger and try it both ways, you will see what I mean.

The planes we have that have thrust vectoring, can go into a hover during a high alpha for two reasons; The CG is very close to the propulsion, and the thrust vectoring control surfaces are big enough, and far enough away from the CG to give them good leverage. This also requires the use of a Rudder. From a vertical perspective; the closer the controls are to the CG, the better they must be.

Without some mechanical and reactionary advantages, a well control hover is difficult; if one is lacking, the other must make up the difference. The computer controls Squishy has showed us in some of his post, makes it much simpler to control a VTOL aircraft, than it would be with a traditional RC flight control system. It does this because it gives you a reactionary advantage, but this type of system also is limited in how much help it can provide.

If you maximize your mechanical advantages to the extent that the flight controls you choose are able to have enough leverage and be reactive enough, you will be successful. Good luck.

I have Developed an (Electric) self rotating (Wing) see 1st prototype at r/cuniverse or Twitter rotate1953 Charles Glazebrook.I think it will be the Preffered type of Rotarywing in the Near (Electric)Future.As a Unit a Smart Car could work as aCockpit and Power Supply?It's a Very good Lifter!
Quote 0 0
LukeWarm
Quote:
I have Developed an (Electric) self rotating (Wing) see 1st prototype at r/cuniverse or Twitter rotate1953 Charles Glazebrook.I think it will be the Preffered type of Rotarywing in the Near (Electric)Future.As a Unit a Smart Car could work as aCockpit and Power Supply?It's a Very good Lifter!

How does it work?
Quote 0 0
whatmovesyou
Quote:
I have Developed an (Electric) self rotating (Wing) see 1st prototype at r/cuniverse or Twitter rotate1953 Charles Glazebrook.I think it will be the Preffered type of Rotarywing in the Near (Electric)Future.As a Unit a Smart Car could work as aCockpit and Power Supply?It's a Very good Lifter!


How about a video of it?
I like to design and fly unique planes.
Quote 0 0
dtribby
Found this on his FB page:

Yes, I've known that I'm "different" for some time now...
Quote 0 0
jake_eraklidis
Eddie Weeks has the easiest foam built VTOL for RC....


Big lift... negates torque by counter rotation... large control surfaces... easy build.... main negatives: the huge down wash during landing... and the platform is too big...

If I had to make an army of UAVs I'd pick this platform>


old yes... but look everything is cheap (compared to a jet)

STOL, reduced drag, simple design... expendable... a lot of conventional concepts... looks like an easy carbon fiber single body design like the X-32... skip to 30:00


Jake
Quote 0 0