Slashdot Mirror


Fanwing Planes?

waimate writes "Up until now, there's been fixed wing, or there's been rotating wing, and that's it. But now thanks to Patrick Peebles, there's an entirely new principle of flight called the Fanwing. Initially developed in secrecy and flown only at night, as reported in this Bulletin article this machine combines the many of the attributes of helicopters and conventional aircraft, but not by combining the worst aspects of both like the V-22 Osprey. The FanWing is a whole new way of getting off the ground, particularly suited to inner city applications. It's only downfall (he he) is that it lacks any ability to glide in the event of an engine outage. Includes videos of the prototype in action."

12 of 384 comments (clear)

  1. Anton Flettner buys a lawn mower! by richie2000 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Flettner's brief brush with fame came back in the twenties when he figured out how to get lift from a rotating cylinder. He also built a ship which used rotating cylinders to provide thrust.

    Now, the scary part is that I wrote a report on this maniac/genius back in high school and I remembered his name so I could google for it...

    --
    Money for nothing, pix for free
  2. Re:Lacks any ability to glide by richie2000 · · Score: 5, Informative

    How does it work? The FanWing has a cross-flow fan at the leading edge. The fan pulls the air in at the front and accelerates it over the trailing edge of the wing. By transferring the work of the engine to the rotor, which spans the whole wing, the FanWing accelerates a large volume of air and achieves a high lift-efficiency.

    We have clear evidence of the success of the design. Video clips of flights are available on this site and successful wind tunnel tests have been conducted at both the University of Rome and at Imperial College, London.

    The wind-tunnel tests have shown that we have an unusually efficient wing. Documented efficiencies for the first prototypes were found to be in the order of 20 grams of lift per watt of input power. This means that with this original concept, even before any real research and development, we were already looking at a lift of 1 -1 ½ tons of weight in the air with 100 hp. And since those early stages there have been demonstrated in the most recent wind tunnel experiments some marked improvements in efficiency, flight speed and autorotation. (emphasis karma whore's)

    The flying prototypes show many actual and predicted strengths:
    • Short take-off and landing capability with clearly predictable vertical-take-off possibilities
    • Reduced sound emission
    • Reduced fuel consumption
    • Simple, inexpensive construction with no high-tech requirements for basic manufacture
    • High manoeuverability
    • Stability in flight - because it's not sensitive to the angle of the incoming air
    • No stall
    • Simple control system

    </KARMA>

    --
    Money for nothing, pix for free
  3. Re:The site sure isn't by sporktoast · · Score: 5, Informative

    Google's caching of the primary pages wasn't very helpful. Too many frames and redirects to go through to get to a page that had any real information.

    Try Google's Images to get at least an idea of what we're talking about.

    --
    In a related story, the IRS has recently ruled that the cost of Windows upgrades can NOT be deducted as a gambling loss.
  4. Mirror with picture by infolib · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
  5. Strictly speaking not a new principle by Beautyon · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is not an entirely new principle, its more like a linear ducted fan. or a Stretched turbine

    A new principle would exclude fanning, flapping or any kind of turning of wheels (circular motion) to create thrust. This is a beautiful project, but it is really a derivative of Leonardos helicopter, which was an Archimedes screw for air.

    When there is propulsion generated without circular motion (props, turbines, ducted fans), or without shooting something out of a tube like rocketry, then we will be talking about something that is really new.

    --
    ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
  6. HP/lift: fanwing vs. cessna by smagoun · · Score: 5, Informative
    For comparison, the current model of the Cessna 172 (single piston engine 4-place general aviation aircraft) has a 160HP engine with a max takeoff weight of 2450lbs. The max useful load (which includes fuel, I think) is 837lbs. Cruise speed is 122kts, which is about 230kph.

    Does the 2 tons that the fanwing can lift include the weight of the craft, fuel, etc. or is that 2 tons of cargo? The site is down...

  7. How It Works by SEWilco · · Score: 5, Informative
    The Slashdot article provides no hint of how it works, and now it's hard to reach the swarmed fanwing.com site.

    It's a squirrel-cage fan along the leading edge of a wing.

    The fan throws air over the top of the wing, rather than the air passively flowing over the leading edge. This produces much more lift at slow speeds.

    Apparently it operates at slow speeds (100 kph, about 60 mph, is mentioned). I expect that at high speeds, when the forward motion exceeds the speed of the fan rotation, the fanwing behaves like a wing with ridges along the leading edge -- but air can leak through these ridges. A fanwing which starts moving too fast probably begins to lose lift from the leading edge, although it might gain some lift from the rest of the wing. But if a fanwing does not have thrust engines and only gets its forward motion from the fanwing, it can't move faster than the fanwing can push it.

  8. Glide ratio comparisons by smagoun · · Score: 5, Informative
    For comparison, a Cessna 172 has a glide ratio of about 9:1, which means you can cover 9 miles of ground for every mile of altitude. Mooney - whose aircraft are legendary for not wanting to come out of the sky - builds planes with a glide ratio of 10:1 to about 15:1. Sailplanes can have about a 50:1 ratio. Believe it or not, the Boeing 747 has about a 15:1 ratio. The space shuttle has about a 1:1 ratio.

    In sum, with a glide ratio of 2:1 or 3:1, you don't want to lose power in a fanwing. Let's hope they're successful in increasing it.

  9. Re:autoratation by GMontag · · Score: 5, Informative

    Very good description. And the way we "de clutch" the engine (in the UH-1Hs that I flew) was a "sprag clutch" that would allow the engine power to go to the transmission system but would disengage if it was not driving the rotor, thus not dragging down the trans/rotor/etc.

    Sorry that I missed answering part of Ender Ryan's question. Yes, I have autorotated meny times, it is something we practiced in flight school and throughout the time I was flying. Since I began flying helicopters and then learned to fly airplanes much later, autorotation seems "normal" to me and gliding an airplane seems "boring". Just a perspective thing.

  10. Build one of your own RIGHT NOW! by Etrigan_696 · · Score: 5, Informative

    ****Warning****
    I am not responsible for any severed arteries, eyes gouged out, or for you getting fired for doing this at work. It's all you baby!

    1) Get the materials.
    Go get one of those plastic Bic ball point pens. The kind with the white tube. Then get a pair of scissors, a pocket knife, or a pair of needle nose pliers.

    2) Remove cap from pen. Remove the black plastic cone from the "writing" end of the pen. This also pulls out the ink tube.

    3) You now have a white plastic tube with a little black cap in the end. Get that cap out. Use the pocket knife, scissors, or the pliers to get the thing out. If you destroy the end of the white plastic tube, just cut it off clean again.

    4)Now you have just a white plastic tube. Wee! This is your fanwing plane. You're about to make it fly using the same principle.

    5) Clean off a table so there's nothing on top. Face one side of it. Put the pen tube near and parallel to the edge. Lock your thumbs under the edge of the table and place all 8 fingertips on the white tube.

    6) Pressing down as hard as you can, roll your fingers back towards you.

    7) If all goes well, the tube will spin very fast and fly through the air, doing loops and such.

    I've actually got the things to fly twenty yards. And the do all kinds of twists and loops.

    The principle that keeps the fanwing plane in the article in the air works here too - only with no control or stability.

    Enjoy, and don't get in trouble.

  11. Re:Flying Cars by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 5, Informative
    Unlikely. However there's always cartercopters which has demonstrated speeds of 180 mph and should have a top speed of about 450 mph, lands on a dime and can easily autorotate down if the power goes out (unlike a helicopter, where it is a major incident). Significantly it looks much safer than a helicopter, and outperforms helicopters (except a CarterCopter basically lacks hover, since it has an unpowered rotor, but for transportation, who cares?).

    That's the nearest thing to a flying car I know of right now- unlike the other systems, this one seems to have fewer drawbacks.

    --

    -WolfWithoutAClause

    "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
  12. Re:autoratation by PetiePooo · · Score: 5, Informative

    I went through military flight training in the late 80's. We would autorotate to the ground, not only in UH-1H (Hueys), but the little TH-55's as well (military name for a Hughes/Schweitzer 300).

    There's two basic flavors of autorotation; from a hover and from forward flight. There's a whole range of the flight envelope that is unrecoverable, basically anything low and slow. Autorotation from a hover is simple. You let the thing settle towards the ground and just pull up before you collide with it. From forward flight is when you have to declutch and "glide" down with a flare at the end.

    The TH-55's were light enough that we could pretty much stop our forward momentum before touching down, but the Hueys, being a bit heavier, would land with a fair amount of forward momentum left. They strapped these inch-thick steel bars to the bottoms of the skids for us students to grind off on the landing strips. Hours of fun!