turbine

Bob Cowell a =E9crit :

e:

yes see those people using h=E9lium to lift dirigeable.

Almost 20 years ago there was a guy who was working on an air car that had a turbine engine ducted to four jets. Each one had a louvered outlet that could be rotated to direct the jet anywhere from down to aft. The vehicle had short wings, and it would take off vertically and then gradually transition to forward flight.

I don't remember if it was just theoretical or if he had a working prototype.

tux snipped-for-privacy@nowhere.at-all.net a =E9crit :

there is no use to dancing, but it's looks pathetic sometimes.

PCPhill a écrit :

yes and this system of turbine combined to a complex computer can do something like this:

But now, how is it possible to make it compact and easy to use ?

$200,000,000. wow

Doug McLaren a =E9crit :

hahaha yeah sure, my faith is to entertain people of course... take your pills :)

this rc model is ugly but does work, so it is possible to fly with 2 turbines and a big wing.

Martin X. Moleski, SJ a =E9crit :

a troll ? what is a troll ? this is not a troll !!

Those aren't turbines, those are rotary IC engines driving ducted fans.

Hth,

Boo a =E9crit :

thanks for the info, and how much cost one of these engine ?

Dunno, maybe try emailing them ?

--=20 Boo

On 17 Dec 2006 21:41:45 -0800, "sowhat" wrote in :

I'm sure it can be done.

I'm not sure model engines are enough for vertical lift.

There is a very difficult interaction among the components of an airframe. It's kind of a vicious circle:

-- More power requires bigger engines.

-- Bigger engines require more fuel.

-- Bigger engines and fuel tanks require a larger airframe.

-- A larger airframe requires more power.

At some point, you have to stop the vicious circle, and make some decisions:

-- less power, smaller payload

-- less fuel, shorter flight time

-- smaller airframe, shorter life span

I've left money out of this picture, but it's part of the vicious circle, too. If you have enough time and money, you can probably make it fly.

Marty

you need to read-up on the moller "skycar". moller has invested several million dollars and several years in the project. He's been fined (more than once I believe) by the SEC for fraud, and the delivery date always moves out 1 year, every year.

btw: the skycar has never successfully flown off of it's tether, either.

Or you could try this lmfao

ARTF Harrier jet for just £20k $38.96400

"MK" wrote

In being accurate, you should point out that the contraption you cite has never flown without a tether, to hold it in the air, so if/when something fails, it does not hit the ground in a ball of flames.

So about it being possible, don't count on Moller being a pace setter.

------------------

The prototype model is/was supposed to be powered by Wankel engines. Turbines would have made more sense to me.

Now, if we could fit the fuselage with a lightweight turbine driven alternator and fit the thrust pods with electric motors, we might have a workable concept. But not at prices low enough to support it in the market, I'll bet.

Real Flight Version 3.5 has a similar type of aircraft that is a ball to fly.

Ed Cregger

ONLY $38.96400

hahaha :) that's so cheap lol

there is no jet engine and seat with it :-(

Check these out, a good overview of various "vertical takeoff personal flying devices"

Martin