Slashdot Mirror

There are at least two hoverbike projects in progress, they seem quite a bit more mature and practical than this thing but to each their own I suppose.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://www.hover-bike.com/MA/
http://aerofex.com/

I like the Aerofex or Chris Malloy's Hoverbike designs a lot better, the "flying motorcycle" in this article seems a quite inefficient for the task of flying. While I can definitely see the advantages of a dual role vehicle (hover bike for long distance, motorcycle for in town). Something more aircraft with the motorcycle parts added on would seem preferable, not the other way around.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akA-B64RACU
http://www.hover-bike.com/

They are working on a very similar concept in Australia.
http://www.hover-bike.com/index.html
I love the concept, but I agree. the stability problem needs to to be fixed with computers and gyros, not human balance. And when someone does finally nail it, it's going to be one hell of a toy!

Would they consider a Hoverbike, perhaps? http://www.hover-bike.com/index.html

They're aware. And personally I consider this a bit more realistic than "backyard bullshit".

"Helicopters and ducted fan designs have upper limits to their airspeed imposed in part due to the physical dynamics of the airflow over the forward edge of the duct or fan resulting in a increase in lift on the front causing the aircraft nose to rise and therefore slow the forward airspeed. The hoverbike is not immune from this effect, however the basic design is such that it should reach 150knts. Given the thrust to weight ratio (remember its all about the thrust to weight), the hover ceiling is greater than 10,000ft. In theory you could go higher, but you need oxygen to do so - also there is not much point, as the hoverbike is designed for safe low level aerial work"

From: http://www.hover-bike.com/faq.html

Apparently you're right, hoverbike is complete vaporware, there's not one video or photo of this thing more than 3 feet off the ground yet it's "able to reach an estimated height of more than 10,000 feet and reach an indicated airspeed of 150 knots (278 km/h or 173 mph)"

Only video they have is from February of smoke through the rotors, so they know how to upload videos they just don't have any videos of this thing off the ground.

Videos coming soon:
"We did hope to film the last test flight un-tethered, but unfortunately we needed to rebuild the propeller gearboxes due to unforeseen localized stress on a section of the mounting points"
READ It crashed

Come on gizmag, I'd expect better than this, I can attach giant propellers to a seat too, would you do a whole story on it?

In comparison, with the Hoverbike, "Contrary to popular belief, having greater mass above the centre of pressure does not mean an unstable craft (yes it is less inherently stable than below)."

Or, in the immortal words, "one of these things is not like the other."

I expect that the Hoverbike is has about the same static lateral stability as a real bike: not very much. I suppose you could market it as "relaxed aerodynamic stability", although without fly-by-wire and computer stabilization, it doesn't sound like it'd be much fun to ride.

From the FAQ:

Having previous experience in a helicopter or plane would be a great help. That said, this is a new way to fly and one would need to learn to ride the hoverbike in much the same manner as a helicopter or riding a motorcycle. If you live in the USA or your country has similar civil aviation regulations, then the hoverbike will be classed as a 'ultralite' which means you do not need a pilots license to fly the hoverbike.

From the summary of vehicle regulations for ultralight aircraft at http://www.ultralightflying.com/ultralight-vehicle-regulations/ultralight-vehicle-regulations.html:

FAA describes a powered ultralight vehicle as a vehicle that:

* Is used or intended to be used for manned operation in the air by a single occupant (through exemptions, FAA allows 2-place ultralights to be used for instruction only - see below);

* Is used or intended to be used for recreation or sport purposes only;

* Does not have any U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate; and:

Single-Place

* Weighs less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety devices which are intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic situation;

* Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U.S. gallons;

* Is not capable of more than 55 knots (63 mph) calibrated airspeed at full power in level flight; and

* Has a power-off stall speed which does not exceed 24 knots (28 mph) calibrated airspeed.

The two items I've emphasized above in bold conflict with current specifications of the prototype: A 30 litre fuel tank and a 150 knots indicated airspeed max. And, the dry weight (105kg) is skirting perilously close to the maximum permissible dry weight of an FAA ultralight, too. They can't afford to add 10kg to the weight of the prototype before going production, or it busts that standard too, and if they're going to a more robust prop design or a bigger engine, it could happen.

And, btw, anyone care to speculate what the power-off stall speed of a direct-lift non-autorotating rotary wing aircraft might be?

So, no, if nothing else changes, the FAA will not accept the Hoverbike as an ultralight.

I was thinking; "Surely, he must have some kind of computer between the stick and the engines."

http://www.hover-bike.com/faq.html

Not a fucking word.

Unless someone can make this thing stabilize on its own in mid-air, its not worth a dime.