View Full Version : Interleaving Helicopter
12-25-2006, 04:08 PM
Would anyone be willing to suggest why this helicopter concept (in 1 seat or 2) would not be nearly as economical to build as any other recreational helicopter and be much safer to fly than ALL other helicopters?
OTHER: Helicopter - Interleaving - Simple Very-Light Rotorcraft (http://www.unicopter.com/1447.html)
12-26-2006, 10:58 AM
the most obvious rival is the SynchroLite
this arrangement seems to me to be heavier and mechanically less elegant
my main critisism of the synchrolite is the availability of a suitable transmission
which i believe Andre figured out a nice way to work it
12-27-2006, 11:52 AM
Yes, every configuration has its pros and cons. I just keep regurgitating previous ones trying to find a combination of attributes that will make it stand head and shoulders above the crowd.
Both rotors have horizontal planes. If their precone was increased to 5 or 6-degrees the rotors could have their stagger distance reduced. This would make the craft very much like an intermeshing configuration without the disadvantages of angled rotors.
Can you give the thread and post number of your proposed drive? It is interesting to see and consider new ideas. In return
here is simple intermeshing drive for your consideration. (http://www.unicopter.com/1539.html)
12-27-2006, 12:06 PM
post #56 Dave
12-27-2006, 12:22 PM
More blades & 2 main rotor heads will cost more, compared to a single 2 bladed rotor + tail rotor - more complex drivetrains & controls are more expensive too.
12-27-2006, 12:28 PM
transmissions maybe not
trans is there in a conventional but configured differently
if the object is an ease of use, and the bi-line is safety and where
15% of helo accidents involve tail rotors
it is potentially 15% safer straight off
take that off the hull insurance and things equate more
also, andres trans can be scuttled from local supplies
12-27-2006, 01:30 PM
Thanks for the link to Andre's transmission. His and mine are very similar, however his posting is a week before mine. Perhaps I stole his idea; subconsciously of course. :eek:
Even the rotors may not be much more expensive. The TOTAL amount of material in the blades, pitch arms and pitch links etc. should be quite similiar for many small blades or a few large blades. The total labor to manufacture may be slightly more, however, the greatest reduction of labor comes from quantity production runs and there are more small blades.
In addition, 3-blade 'absolutely' rigid rotors (http://www.unicopter.com/B329.html#ARR) will be a lot safer than teetering or flapping rotors. It will be a lot easier to make small blades 'absolutly' rigid then large blades.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.