too flimsy looking, propeller wise. (wikipedia russian flying tank btw. lol) i like the main carriage though, it feels.... tanky in a WW1 or WW2 kinda way. the propellers arnt really time effective though, even if we ignore lift to weight ratios. they didnt have any helicopters in WWII did they? i cant recall....
I don't know, it doesnt look too flimsy propeller wise. Its hard to say because nobody has done a duoprop helo. Moeller did a few working models with six single props for his "george jetson" commuter and it isn't that different in size... Blades to OA size. A duo prop would give better efficiency of lift, but exactly how much... ?!?
Yes, though they were rudimentary at best. They were termed gyros back then. They either looked like an ultralight helicopter or like a plane with a helicopter blade on top. Sikorsky made a design that developed the helicopter into what it is today, but the Germans had the most development in helicopters. [link] This [link] had two helos propellers on either wing and is closest to the above design
Most helicopters used back then were for recon if they were used at all during the war
Well, the half rings that hold the shroud for the fan looks a little blunted. I think they should be more rounded. As far as the fan blades, the more blades there are, the stronger the effort to push (fewer means the fan propels the vehicle faster or quicker). That said, it seems you are going with a 12 blade duo-prop (meaning 24 counter-rotating blades). Duo-props (used for the last 20+ years in the marine industry) are another method of attaining strength to push (against air, water, meat-byproduct, whatever). I think it looks a little too busy. I think you could probably attain a similar look with few blades. Also, ...how is the propeller suspended in the ring???
I think the fuselage and tail section are a spot on match for a WWII vehicle, even the color is almost a spot on match for color schemes of the day, though I imagine this was just a temporary coloring for a WIP
Hey there and thanks for the huge feedback! Fewer blades sound good and the I just plainly forgot to add the suspension of them propellers...Was all made in a rush, so thanks for reminding. Now I need to chew through the rest of the comments! Thanks again!
Well, if you look at some of my comments here, you'll see that I had a similar work. I also posted a link to a reference picture that inspired my first work. In the end, I decided to go in a different tangent way.
Not saying you should as well, I just felt that initial way wasn't better. After all, it is just doing a model and nobody ever said it has to be logical nor functional. I just like a very logical stance in mine and that is my stance for giving criticisms. Just say your model uses an experimental technology that was never revealed at the end of WWII and that will end all discussion.
Yeah, saw your works. A logical and plausible stance is very important, don't wanna go to far into the super tech direction, but for a absolutely real technical solution my skills are just missing. Thanks again for all the input. It sure helps a lot to carve the concpte out.
it looks like the propeller is locked within the housing itself. for example, the propeller set could have a ring piece locking the propeller wings in place around the center (like spokes on a wheel.). this would also cover a few aspects of how the "engine" could attain the speed necessary for lift. the "ring" that support's the propeller wings could have an outer lining, like a, a type of Gear. a hollowed out gear piece. this would allow-and i am just tossing this out here-another belt/gear system inside the strut that holds the housing to the craft, to attach to the gear/propeller set inside the housing to accelerate to speeds unheard of from the standard belt-to-propeller method. if your not understanding how i picture the inside of the housing that holds it altogether, i am pretty sure most engineers would.you see, a rubber-mixture lining the belt can twist almost to 90 degrees opposite that of its straighter set. meaning it can fit through the points that the propeller housing is "hinged" to. furthermore, the propeller housing's would work as a type of gyro in themselves. Greater weight on the bottom to keep the foremost housings facing in the same direction(down) and lighter material for the rear-most housings so they can be used to push or slow the craft while in hovering. a craft of this type was and still is highly possible. and a lot of these parts can me scrounged from most junkyards. if given the chance, i might be able to draw out some idea drawing on how the housing-engine interior would be made for it to work.
(if you do not understand what i am saying, don't try to. if you need a more in-depth explanation, msg me.)
As it could be helpful to the modeler, I'd like top keep it here if it's all the same to you...
Okay, let's use your spoked wheel analogy. What I was saying is: It doesn't look like there is a frame to hold the spokes and gears in place. There is a frame to hold the ring in place, okay, but the spokes are free-floating inside the ring without something to hold it in place. I did something kind of similar here [link] with this [link] as an early concept piece (which was inspired by this [link] ).
I understand the concept of a a hollowed out tube with a drive gear inside spinning the propeller, I'm just saying I don't see it, I see the propeller, the ring (or shroud) but nothing to hold the the propeller in place. ...unless it is the same color as the propellers???
ok what i gave was a bad example, so think of it this way. imagine you have a bike wheel ok and the spokes are the propeller blades. the wheel itself on the outside where the tire would be is instead fitted with an outer lining like that of a gear. now you know how a bicycle is given forward momentum, by way of a chain? well what if that chain is suspended through that half-ring that holds the propeller outer-housing in place? it is fitted inside and through the 2 points that connect the half-ring to the propeller housing interior. the chain only rests on half of the gear structure inside of the housing itself and the rest i am pretty sure you can see. the only problem would be keeping the gear structure inside the propeller housing from bouncing around or grinding out the interior. if that problem can be solved, the rest is up to whoever builds the craft. the points where the inner-housing is suspended by the outer-housing has a space large enough inside for the belt-chain to fit through. now that that part is covered, another system similar to the link-up in the propeller-housing structure allows propulsion to take place. another gear-to-belt-chain system would work from the engine to the outer-housing through the junction points that connect said outer-housing to the overall craft. think on that before sending a response. the design, in general, is a bit flawed. However, it is still possible if the previously stated problem can be addressed properly without changing the overall structure of the craft.
Hmm. apologies, you said to "consider what (you) said before responding" but I tend to jump on things quickly. I just dummied up what I believe you are trying to say with a picture. [link] (ignoring scale and fit, I believe this is what you are saying) Pictures work sooo much better than words... I tend to think you are making a potential Rube Goldberg scenario, but lets roll with it.
I tend to think you still have to have some framework to stabilize it and keep it in place, but the chain concept is, at best, a little "iffy". True, a chain was used for the Harrier to change the direction of it's jetwash, but chains have a nasty habit of "jumping" at high speed, or at the very least allow for a weakness by having too many moving parts ("A chain is only as strong as its weakest link"). Especially if you have that chain twisting and binding to change direction.
You probably meant this only by example though, as planetary gears would be more stable, and with a universal link, allow for any twisting action. However, you still have to have a framework to keep it in place at some part and a single connection to support and change direction is again, weak. Gyroscopic action would tend to keep it spinning in one plane, thus to change that plane would require a large amount of torque. I, one time, had a bicycle wheel off it's frame and on a lark, turned on my dad's bench grinder and lightly set the tire to touch the spinning grinder. The tire started to spin rapidly and I had to hold it extremely strongly. However, once spinning, I could let go with one hand and it would continue spinning while held by the other. I was young. My point is, to change direction required LOTS of strength AND both hands, otherwise gyroscopic action would tend to want to keep it spinning in the same plane. Likewise, I feel you can't have just one connection point to support this.
Cool, last time I also was thinking about multy-copter war machine!
My opinion: it is not really need to give this screw so many degrees of freedom. Do you know about the Ar.drone parrot? it is a quadrocopter, ant it flyes well without changing planes of screws. Also i doubt about tail too, because direction of flight can be achived just by changibg speed of screws in special way.
Thank you very much! Helps a lot! Agree with the simpler versions of the rotors, as this seems pretty complex and fragile, and the tail is not really needed for sure. Kept it for the plane like feeling, but cropping it seems like a good idea. Gonna explore the concept some more, where i#ll keep your comments in my mind! Thanks!
Thanks, Rob. But I am a programmer, so my team just will modify ar.drone what we already have (by adding some kind of GPS and couple of ultralight sensors), but soft will be really mine, because drone should be absolutely authonomos.
It is good news, I will check it where it will be up to date
It's not a crime. It's an issue, where the audience cannot see what it really is. Just constructive criticism. Please don't protect your favoured artists like that. Criticism helps to improve. By behaving like that, you make an artist feel like he doesn't have need/room for improvement, which ends up making him either become an ass, decrease in style, or just stop designing.