Fast helicopters

"John Roncallo" wrote in message
om...
George Vranek wrote:

Hallo John, hallo Brien,

thanks for your comparison of the diskrotor with the tiltrotor. But
despite
of nearly 50 years long development, the tiltrotor has two faults: It
has
not optimal rotors for hovering and not optimal props for cruising. It
means, that a tiltrotor lifts less load in hovering than a conventional
helicopter and cruise slower than a conventional turboprop airplane with
equal installed power.
The diskrotor is optimal for hovering because the big disk brings law
and
order in the aerodynamic of a helicopter rotor and the disk with
retracted
rotor blades is well suitable for a really fast cruising. Even
supersonic
speeds are feasible!!!

George

"brien" wrote in message
...



I said the concept has at least as much merit as a tilt rotor. I did not
say better or worse. I fully understand the tilt rotors limitations and
some of the disk rotors.

You are still yet to discover the how practical or impractical your
concept is, and who knows maybe it will just be the most practical
concept since the tail rotor. Maybe you will only need 30 years instead
of 50. If you got the funding go for it. Also if you get the funding let
me know.

John Roncallo

Hallo John,

You are right, the most impractical on the diskrotor concept is to get the
funding for it. I have made the first drawing of the diskrotor helicopter in
June 1993 and from that time I have contacted nearly all helicopter makers
(Agusta, Eurocopter, Piasecki, Sikorsky, Westland.........) without any
succes. But I am still optimistic, because the time is ripe for a fast
flying helicopter: There is a certain number of rich people , who are able
to pay 30 millions of US $ for a machine which brings them from New York to
Acapulco without waiting for a slot before take off and without waiting in a
holding pattern before landing. You know, the time is money. If there is a
demand, the suppliers will discover it soon.

George

"George Vranek" wrote in message
...

"John Roncallo" wrote in message
om...
George Vranek wrote:

Hallo John, hallo Brien,

thanks for your comparison of the diskrotor with the tiltrotor. But
despite
of nearly 50 years long development, the tiltrotor has two faults: It
has
not optimal rotors for hovering and not optimal props for cruising. It
means, that a tiltrotor lifts less load in hovering than a
conventional
helicopter and cruise slower than a conventional turboprop airplane
with
equal installed power.
The diskrotor is optimal for hovering because the big disk brings law
and
order in the aerodynamic of a helicopter rotor and the disk with
retracted
rotor blades is well suitable for a really fast cruising. Even
supersonic
speeds are feasible!!!

George

"brien" wrote in message
...



I said the concept has at least as much merit as a tilt rotor. I did not
say better or worse. I fully understand the tilt rotors limitations and
some of the disk rotors.

You are still yet to discover the how practical or impractical your
concept is, and who knows maybe it will just be the most practical
concept since the tail rotor. Maybe you will only need 30 years instead
of 50. If you got the funding go for it. Also if you get the funding let
me know.

John Roncallo

Hallo John,

You are right, the most impractical on the diskrotor concept is to get the
funding for it. I have made the first drawing of the diskrotor helicopter
in
June 1993 and from that time I have contacted nearly all helicopter makers
(Agusta, Eurocopter, Piasecki, Sikorsky, Westland.........) without any
succes. But I am still optimistic, because the time is ripe for a fast
flying helicopter: There is a certain number of rich people , who are able
to pay 30 millions of US $ for a machine which brings them from New York
to
Acapulco without waiting for a slot before take off and without waiting in
a
holding pattern before landing. You know, the time is money. If there is a
demand, the suppliers will discover it soon.

George



I hate to say it but now really isn't the time. The same people that buy
Biz-Jets would be the market ant that market is in the tank.

Also, NOONE would want a fast helicopter more than the military and if any
of the companies above thought the system was viable they would have bought
it or at least optioned it.

"Gig Giacona" wrote in message
...

I hate to say it but now really isn't the time. The same people that buy
Biz-Jets would be the market ant that market is in the tank.

Also, NOONE would want a fast helicopter more than the military and if any
of the companies above thought the system was viable they would have
bought
it or at least optioned it.

Hallo Gig,

The Biz-Jets market is in the tank due to the problems with getting
permition for take-of and landing on heavy crowded airports. Due to the high
population density in Europe are such problems here much worse than in your
country. You happy Americans! You have still enough place where to live and
even where to fly. The diskrotor helicopter is able to take off and land on
each heliport and cruise from point A to B with a speed limited only by
installed power. Also, EVERYBODY would want a fast helicopter.

George

George Vranek wrote:


You are right, the most impractical on the diskrotor concept is to get the
funding for it. I have made the first drawing of the diskrotor helicopter in
June 1993 and from that time I have contacted nearly all helicopter makers
(Agusta, Eurocopter, Piasecki, Sikorsky, Westland.........) without any
succes. But I am still optimistic, because the time is ripe for a fast
flying helicopter: There is a certain number of rich people , who are able
to pay 30 millions of US $ for a machine which brings them from New York to
Acapulco without waiting for a slot before take off and without waiting in a
holding pattern before landing. You know, the time is money. If there is a
demand, the suppliers will discover it soon.

George


It is not that it is a diskrotor concept or something new that makes
funding a challange. Funding is always a challenge, I'v seen much more
bizzare ideas get the funding.

All those companys wont be interested unless some government branch like
NASA or DARPA ask's them to research it and pays them to do so. I
suggest you submit the idea as an DOD or NASA SBIR. Visit
http://www.acq.osd.mil/sadbu/sbir/othersites/index.htm. I belive Carter
Copter got started from a NASA SBIR.

My opinions experessed here are my own and do not represent the company
I work for.

John Roncallo

"John Roncallo" wrote in message
om...

It is not that it is a diskrotor concept or something new that makes
funding a challange. Funding is always a challenge, I'v seen much more
bizzare ideas get the funding.

All those companys wont be interested unless some government branch like
NASA or DARPA ask's them to research it and pays them to do so. I
suggest you submit the idea as an DOD or NASA SBIR. Visit
http://www.acq.osd.mil/sadbu/sbir/othersites/index.htm. I belive Carter
Copter got started from a NASA SBIR.

My opinions experessed here are my own and do not represent the company
I work for.

John Roncallo

Hallo John,

Thanks for your info regarding NASA and DARPA. Tthey support preferably
companies, but I am a retired aeronautical engineer and hobby flyer.
Therefore I would prefer to work as a consultant for a company developing
the diskrotor helicopter with the NASA or DARPA support.
According to EAA e-HOT LINE, Vol.3, No.53, the Carter Company received now a
quarter-million Dollar DARPA contract. In January 1997 I have sent to Mr.
Jay Carter a sketch of his Gyrocopter equipped with a disk rotor, but I
receved no answer from him.

George

George Vranek wrote:

"John Roncallo" wrote in message
om...

It is not that it is a diskrotor concept or something new that makes
funding a challange. Funding is always a challenge, I'v seen much more
bizzare ideas get the funding.

All those companys wont be interested unless some government branch like
NASA or DARPA ask's them to research it and pays them to do so. I
suggest you submit the idea as an DOD or NASA SBIR. Visit
http://www.acq.osd.mil/sadbu/sbir/othersites/index.htm. I belive Carter
Copter got started from a NASA SBIR.

My opinions experessed here are my own and do not represent the company
I work for.

John Roncallo


Hallo John,

Thanks for your info regarding NASA and DARPA. Tthey support preferably
companies, but I am a retired aeronautical engineer and hobby flyer.
Therefore I would prefer to work as a consultant for a company developing
the diskrotor helicopter with the NASA or DARPA support.
According to EAA e-HOT LINE, Vol.3, No.53, the Carter Company received now a
quarter-million Dollar DARPA contract. In January 1997 I have sent to Mr.
Jay Carter a sketch of his Gyrocopter equipped with a disk rotor, but I
receved no answer from him.

George



The SBIR programs are very specifically for small businesses and
individuals. The initial phase SBIR program will give you seed money, I
belive up to $30,000 and one year, to help you research and develope
your ideas. If what you develope is promising you may get further awards
which if I recall are up to $600,000 to further develope the concept.
Somewhere along the line if the agency sponsoring the project likes the
idea they may ask a major helicopter company to get involved or just
fund you further. This is the way to start.

You say you want to work as a consultant. Unless you have already
developed a full scale disk rotor helicopter or a very significanr
model, no one will be likely to take you on as a consultant because at
this point you have what may be a reasonable concept but not
significantly more knowledge than others in the industry at applying the
concept.

At this point you have come up with a concept. Tell me just how far you
have gone with it.

1) Have you done weight trade studys, What will the disk weigh, What
will the retraction mechanism weigh. How much compromise will you accept
on hover performance due to these weight penalties.

2) How do you plan to motor the rotor in auto rotation with no blade in
what would normally be the motoring region of the blade.

3) You had made some negative comments on fixed wings for helicopters,
however have you considered them on your disk rotor. I think fixed wings
would only be an asset on this aircraft since the wings would be under
the no lift producing portion of the rotor.

There is nothing I see impossible here. Only significant reaserch is
needed to prove or disprove the concepts viability. Companies are
sometimes not too eager to spend money on these concepts because what at
first appears to be significant breakthroughs in technology often wither
and die or just come up short of expectations and end up usefull but not
cost effective.

I may start a flame war but I belive the V-22 is in this mode right now.
Yes it works, but it has H-53E power and H-60 payload and God knows what
for aquisition and maintenance costs. You have to ask was this worth it.
Your disk rotor will only have similare compromises, maybe not as bad,
maybe worse.

My opinions experessed here are my own and do not represent the company
I work for.

John Roncallo

George,

I don't know why you're bothering to blather on about the concept here.
Nobody is going to invest in the concept unless its proven viable. Make
a model and fly it. Thats what most of the chopper inventors did to
prove their ideas.

You also need to revise your ideas about how your example customer
travels. They dont generally need a slot because theyre not parking
their planes at high congestion Class B airports. Since your concept
will never fly at M.77+, it would never be competitive in the 2500nm
range class of aircraft.

Bart


Hallo John,

You are right, the most impractical on the diskrotor concept is to get the
funding for it. I have made the first drawing of the diskrotor helicopter in
June 1993 and from that time I have contacted nearly all helicopter makers
(Agusta, Eurocopter, Piasecki, Sikorsky, Westland.........) without any
succes. But I am still optimistic, because the time is ripe for a fast
flying helicopter: There is a certain number of rich people , who are able
to pay 30 millions of US $ for a machine which brings them from New York to
Acapulco without waiting for a slot before take off and without waiting in a
holding pattern before landing. You know, the time is money. If there is a
demand, the suppliers will discover it soon.

George