WesWorld

I mentioned it a bit in the news thread with the new Canadian Airship, and I expect just about as much confusion and disapproval, if not more.



Depending on what people's comments are, it might just be a crazy design concept that goes nowhere, or a limited production prototype.

I'm thinking of it as something along the lines of a powered AutoGyro, with hopes that the lower take off and landing speeds would make it a viable carrier-based patrol aircraft, or if possible to launch from a catapult, a cruiser scout.

I know the fuselage is exteremly small and no one thinks you can fit the machinery and fuel in it, but ignore that for now. A version I produce would have a larger fuselage, and the picture right now is just for the general layout concept.

Where are the engine(s) and how are the props driven?

For that, I think the Engine is in the fuselage, and there's shafts connecting to the props under the wing, hence the 'guard rails' under the wing.

Also, here's the crazy japanese specifications for it;

***Tiny-Bronco***
Length: 12.74 meters (rotor not included)
Width: 12.48 meters (rotor not included)
Height: 3.57 meters (rotor not included)
Weight: 2,280 kilograms
Load capacity: 3,850 kilograms
Maximum speed: 235 knots (at sea-level)
Cruising speed: 173 knots
Ascending time: Unknown
Ceiling [/maximum altitude]: 9,400 meters
Range: 1,140 nautical miles (estimate)
Engine: Oil-cooling RG24 type horizontal-facing 24 cylinder engine
Ascending output: 3,800 horsepower
Rotor: 4.7 meters in diameter; 2-speed electrical; pitch of 20~70 degrees
Crew capacity: 1


Taken with a grain of salt, just like the original crazy japanese specs for the Airship. :x

Long drivelines are going to be a problem, especially if they have to make 90 degree turns.

Also, given that the state-of-the-art for normal use engines at this point in time is about 1,000 hp, powering it would be problematic.

You could, I suppose, go for a jump-gyro, though.

Give it a decent engine or two, and centreline props for forwards thrust, and you've got a decent ESTOL machine for the time.

I'd think something like:

Engine 1 powers front propeller

Engine 2 drives lift props for takeoff and aft propeller, with lift props disengaged via a clutch and allowed to autorotate above a safe flying speed.

But it does look rather complex...

I'm thinking of producing a prototype / concept demonstrator that would have two engines, one for each prop-rotor. It wouldn't have much range, or speed, but it'd be a proof-of-concept validator before moving on to a larger and more complex vehicle like Roger's suggesting. Plus I'd have at least one neat thing to dazzle the crowds at Spithead. :o

Would there be any advantages/drawbacks to using a pusher-prop in that configuration?

Driveshafts shouldn't be any more complex than the historical Focke-Achgelis choppers, methinx.

Pusher prop would be cool.

Two engines for the rotors would not (can you say asymetric thrust? o_O ).

I know next to nothing about aircraft design, so you'll have to explain that one to me. <<

If you have two rotors, and one engine for each rotor, imagine what would happen if, say, the right engine failed. Left side up, right side down, and in one whale of a hurry too; Definitly Not Of The Good. Cross-connection would be virtually impossible - look at how long V-22 development has taken. >:-(

So one engine for the pair of rotors, please...

That sums it up bout right I think.

The Osprey seems like a luxury when you have the next generation VTOL aircraft and helicopters doing just nicely.

What you are actually proposing is a helicopter with two rotors. More or less like a Chinook/Belvedere turned through 90°. The wings will give some extra lift when moving forwards.

A helicopter has continuous drive to the rotors, even when moving forwards/backwards. As such there is massive strain being placed on the engine. A 3800hp engine that is light enough just isn't possible currently. Early helicopters were notoriously unreliable and maintenance hogs - and still are today. It'll be having far more maintenance hours than flying hours. Its not until we get turboshafts that there is a powerplant for a helicopter that is powerful, lightweight and reliable.

Currently in 1931/32 the altitude record for helicopters is _17.5m_ and the distance about 1000m.

An autogyro is different. It uses a normal engine and prop for forwards movement. The rotor spins freely and creates the lift. There are no torque effects on the aircraft so no need for a tail rotor. An autogyro cannot hover, but the stall speed is about 20knts. It is possible to land vertically in a controlled descent. As the aircraft falls, the rotor still autorotates giving lift and some control. Early autogyros couldn't take off vertically - but an extremely short run was needed. In 1930ish you start getting clutches in them which connect the main engine to the rotor. As such you could take off almost vertically.

The largest autogyro currently is the Westland Cierva C.29


Rotor diameter: 15.24m/50ft 0ins
Length: 11.58m/38ft 0ins
Max weight: 2,268 kg/5000lb
Max speed: (estimated): 139knots/257km/h
Power: One 600shp/447kW
Armstrong Siddeley Panther II
Accommodation:
No Built: One prototype only

Five seat gyroplane produced for Cierva, a single prototype was built but never progressed beyond the ground running phase due to ground resonance for which no remedy could be found.

I used this as a baseline for the Fiat-Cierva C.29, a mainly Iberian developed aircraft.



I added some stub wings for extra lift and different powerplant. A liquid cooled engine would be better for the slow periods of flight. The resonance problem with the real C.29 could probably be cured with a different engine and rotor rpm - so different engine and more blades would alleviate this problem.

Basically - autogyros are possible, helicopters aren't [or won't be any good]

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
In 1930ish you start getting clutches in them which connect the main engine to the rotor. As such you could take off almost vertically.

I believe that's what Roger was suggesting.

My general idea is for a one off prototype (maybe) of the version pictured, which would be a helicopter. I won't have great performance, it will have high maintainance, but it's a national pride project and technology demonstrator. A 'production version' will be more along the lines of a powered autogyro, with a pusher prop. Probably a limited production, depending on how well it fares.

Since I'm going to be scarce for a week or so, here's some other possible projects to chew on;


reminds me of the gigant powered glider. Think this one's amphibious. Might be useful for long range resupply of arctic expeditions, and general hauling.


not sure what exactly it'll turn into, but i'm thinking maybe a scout fighter (wheeled version), and ship scout (with the floats pictured)

Quoted

My general idea is for a one off prototype (maybe) of the version pictured, which would be a helicopter. I won't have great performance, it will have high maintainance, but it's a national pride project and technology demonstrator.

Did I mention the current helicopter altitude record of 17.5m and distance of 1087m?

Quoted

not sure what exactly it'll turn into, but i'm thinking maybe a scout fighter (wheeled version), and ship scout (with the floats pictured)

Racing planes make bad everyday aircraft. Like using an F1 engine to drive a tank.

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc

Where did you find this one????

Are there any more pics, because it seems to be the most probable for the time frame of WW

Final Fantasy VII of course... like the Bronco and the High Wind. Pretty hard to find pics of the Gelnika using the 'Images' option of Google.

Quoted

***SHINRA Transportation unit GELNIKA***
Length: Unknown
Width: Unknown
Height: Unknown
Weight: Unknown
Load capacity: Unknown
Maximum speed: Unknown
Cruising speed: Unknown
Ascending time: Unknown
Ceiling [/maximum altitude]: Unknown
Range: Unknown
Engine: Oil-cooling RG24-f type horizontal-facing 24 cylinder engine x4
Ascending output: 8,240 horsepower

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc

Having now seen the rest of it...........[SIZE=4]WHAT WAS I THINKING?????[/SIZE] ....... It's got the finely sculpted aerodynamic characteristics of a Grand Piano!!!!!

Just take off the bottom and you might have something there.

Makes the PBY Catalina look like an angel from heaven with those looks....

The Cats weren't ugly!!