Dual Spiral Wing

A concept from 2002 that was never completely analyzed due to control issues. This is similar to the single spiral duct, but with two ducts to assist in achieving roll control. The main difficulty of this concept is the difficulty of analysis due to the extreme coupling between the wing aerodynamics and propulsor - which invalidates simple aero methods.

Просмотров: 241846
Длительность: 0:42
Комментарии: 41

Тэги для этого Видео:

Найти больше видео в категории: "28"
Видео загрузил:
Показать больше видео, загруженных

Похожие видео:


Автор Валерий Момит ( назад)
тяга без крыльев должна быть неоправданно большой- опоры на воздух-то нету.
и хоть как пилота не укладывай на куцых рулях НЕ полет, а падение.

Автор okrajoe ( назад)
Laying down on the job so to speak.

Автор Psychotol ( назад)
wouldn't a computer assisted control system have sorted the control issues
or was this uncontrollable even with such a system?

Also I like you can operate it Minbari style.

Автор KOMRAD8 ( назад)
здесь мало места, чтобы лететь сидя? Пилот не сможет достаточно долго в
таком положении голову держать. Шансы выжить при аварии стремятся к нулю.

Автор FlugelHorn117 ( назад)
@NASAPAV, or anyone who knows the answer, what is the purpose of the
spiraled "wings" around the props?

Автор Clyde Craft ( назад)
i came because i saw somthing that looked like kerbal space program runway

Автор Holy-Terrorist Platinium ( назад)
Holy-Terrorist:>*=* Super!

Автор Ron Armstrong ( назад)
A new variant of the Heinkel Wespe.

Автор SaintJorge304 ( назад)
This seems like a huge neck strain after a few hours....

Автор tom jones ( назад)
actually this debatee has basically been put to rest a long time ago.
people are just not comfortable with either position for flying and the
human body just dose not orient itself very well spacially form either of
those positions for things like rolls inverted flight banking looping and
any of the meriad of positions that flying requires. dont feel right=dont
use it we can argue the scientific mumbo jumbo for ever but that is the
reason check the f16 seating and controls

Автор Ron Armstrong ( назад)
Can we say Heinkel Wespe?

Автор kyl64 ( назад)
And yes, I realize the video demonstrated that you could lay back instead.
It's just the FYI portion of prone vs. lying back is what's being debated.
(Since the pilot took off laying prone.)

Автор kyl64 ( назад)
He argues that the prone position (stomach down) limits physical
visibility. A human pilot might feel a bit uneasy not being able to see
with his own eyes. He suggested that pilots lie back instead. This still
maintains the advantage of higher G sustainability, yet the pilot still has
full peripherals. The glass cockpit is usually up, whereas prone would make
it behind them.

Автор skorpen2 ( назад)
I agree, and with a transparent belly you would be able to see down/behind
wich must be a great advantage in combat, for example in inverted loop. 

Автор NASAPAV ( назад)
I don't understand your point - this is not a fighter aircraft. Besides,
you agree that you can get to higher g (and I already have the Gloster
Meteor reports that substantiate this). That is a significant advantage.
Visibility is secondary if you can pull a higher g in combat due to heads
up displays, etc. So I disagree with your conclusion, based on the evidence
that is available.

Автор MrCOLTSR2 ( назад)
The uk military did the first major research using a converted Gloster
Meteor F8 "Prone Pilot" conversion..google it, its good for high G but
rubbish for any serious dogfighting as the pilot cannot turn his head to
look behind him or on his 4 or 8.......a major disadvantage in high g
dogfights!..one reason no prone fighters exist today..its a red
herring!..now pilots sit back in an inclined position..

Автор TheSweetPinkBerry ( назад)
i wil this Dual Spiral Wing. 

Автор NASAPAV (1351 год назад)
Actually, if you read the research papers on prone piloting, one of the key
advantages of prone is the ability to go to higher g's before blacking out.
The military did quite a few experiments on this back in the 1950's during
the Pogo days. But prone has other disadvantages...

Автор NASAPAV ( назад)
These are just general comments I am making - you can't design anything
from them. You need to actually read the reports and look at the data, and
perform the complete design. But the numbers I quoted are facts - which are
not necessarily extensible if the geometry is changed (which I have
certainly done in my designs). The reports do not conclusively show a
working solution - they show intriguing results, and unique problems that
need to be overcome - that's the engineering...

Автор NASAPAV ( назад)
Never heard of this. This design is one of our older ones (from 2002), so
maybe they saw it. Since it is govt work, there is no copyright to any of
the work and it is open for public use - so good on them if they did.

Автор homebuiltindoorplane ( назад)
@NASAPAV How trustworthy is that what you wrote about the channel wing? Do
you have a lot of data regarding that design? Because my studies follow
closely what you wrote and I have never heard anyone else say that. So
thanks in advance!

Автор RayTV100 ( назад)
@suprTOONCES Its funny cause it's called dual spiral wing XDXD

Автор Rex Holes ( назад)
@MrROTD oh and put some elestabilerons near the rear to give some control,
just little ones,maybe a canard on the nose too why not? your welcome.

Автор Rex Holes ( назад)
This looks more feasable than the single rotor one though I'm no scientist
I have built many unusual rc planes of my own design :D

Автор cedric199870 ( назад)
why wont they just build one and then test it and then sell it for lots of
thousands of €?

Автор ryan lemons ( назад)
@suprTOONCES need a parachute recovery system damn it all these designs are
nothing but flaws!!

Автор Niklas Potter ( назад)
Someone has been playing way to much escape velocity. This is a Krait!

Автор Shawn Raymond ( назад)
Is the Channel wing of little use? Rather, I think it is a great STOL.
Asymmeric prop load, I would guess is already solved by your design of a
duct. Lip stall, is simply a limitation to angle of attack verses air
speed, I'm guessing easily solved with computer fight controls. Poor
aerodynamic efficiency is only relative to what you are comparing it too,
Helicopter, sailplane? As a STOL the Channel 'seems' to be efficient
compared to any standard STOL with slots and flaps. Channel Bush!

Автор NASAPAV ( назад)
I have more Channel Wing data than anyone on the planet (except maybe Curly
Custer). There were many problems with the channel wing, such as asymmeric
prop loading, lip stall, poor aerodynamic efficiency, etc. Yes, wind tunnel
tests showed the channel section would not stall all the way out to about
45 degrees, where max lift was generated (with a Clmax ~ 26 demonstrated -
because power is going into the lift). 

Автор Shawn Raymond ( назад)
The Custer Channel wing flew very well. It's major problem is that it is
out of the norm in appearance. As a UAV, appearance is not an issue, rather
performance is. I think it has to has an angle of attack of 45% at take off
and landing for maximum payload lift.

Автор Sam King ( назад)
@octopusmagnificens So, not that different from a helicopter then. They
seem to be acceptable!

Автор notessimodude ( назад)
But will it blend?

Автор jester444 ( назад)
This is a modern custer channel wing, right? Which NASA did documented and
studied several configuations in the 50/60's and conclude was practical.
Perhaps, If for certain events cause by Igor S. and other parties, it may
have found application. I do see have control should not be difficult if
you understand all the true forces at play. You have conand effect and with
vortex rings inthe mix. Counter rotating props 170HP, Maybe 20mph stall

Автор narutolong97 ( назад)
when I looked at the design.I can see that there's no upward lift at all.
Maybe It's better to make the fans act like a gyroscope and upwards like a
double bladed chopper than a plane. 

Автор Gerald Molett ( назад)
I see One serious flaw when people are on their elbows to long they tend to
begin to faulter which can be a serious issue if there were a way to allow
people to lay on their back and use a video camera to see that would fix a
lot of problems and prevent possible injuries

Автор NASAPAV ( назад)
I am certainly not patronizing you, sorry if my response came across that
way. Since the 'wings' or ducts have propellers in them, it is by
definition powered-lift. Yes, there is control about all axes, with pitch,
roll and yaw effectors. Actually there are several stability and control
deficits in this particular model that do require attention.

Автор NASAPAV ( назад)
The duct act as non planar wings of relatively low span. Since it is
powered-lift at low speed, the need for large span to decrease induced span
during climb is not a concern. At cruise the ideal span would be about 14'
for this weight vehicle, so it is a bit sub-optimal. You are simply used to
seeing large span non-powered lift vehicles, and basing your opinion on a
simple extrapolation of existing concepts - which is not valid.

Автор skorpen2 ( назад)
brilliant design!

Вставка видео:


Поиск Видео

Top Видео

Top 100 >>>


Seo анализ сайта