Slashdot Mirror
China's DIY Aviators Take Flight
ScuttleMonkey writes "China’s emerging aviator class is spreading its wings with a plethora of approaches, from the ramshackle to the sophisticated to the potentially revolutionary. They’re using everything imaginable, from old motorcycle engines to electric motors to even their own legs, like Mao Yiqing and his human-powered airplane. You could easily plot these adventurous innovators on a graph, with the X axis showing their skill and the Y axis their financial means."
The problem with Chinese experimental homebuilt aircraft is, a half hour after you test fly it, you....
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
How is this news? People make homebrew/budget planes and what-not all the time. Remember those idiots with their weather balloon? Does X-Prize mean anything to you?
Coming up next - man grows his OWN food!!1!
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
With two measurable qualities, couldn't you graph anything on? # of cabbages sold per day, number of kills I get playing Team Fortress 2 per day. Other than what day it is, they're not related.
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. You can graph any two variables you say? Sounds like witchcraft to me. burn the demon!
Karma: Excellent. 15 moderator points expire sometime.
Time airborn I assume...
how long until
That's a rheatorical question
A question about the daughter of Uranus and Gaia to which you don't expect an answer? Or just about flightless birds?
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
You can't prove that all variables can be graphed unless you graph them all. Since that would take an infinite amount of time, you can never prove it. However, we could make a graph with the number of variables successfully graphed on the X axis, and the amount of time taken on the Y axis. That might be interesting, like this related obligatory graph.
But the technical sophistication of the effort and the wealth of the experimenter certainly *are* related.
The idea of a amateur homebrew helicopter is truly frightening, but *anybody* can dream, especially if he doesn't realize how incompetent he really is.
The minimum successful example is the guy with the autogyro. For that you need the kind of practical skills a farmer who maintained his own equipment would have. The most sophisticated component he'd need is the rotor, which *could* be manufactured from glued wood.
The next step up is the human powered guy. He needs a long carbon fiber boom as the main longitudinal structural component, and probably another one to carry the lift generated along the wings to the main boom. That's pretty expensive. Once he has that, then the drivetrain is bicycle technology.
The rest of the wings and pilot's nacelle are fairly sophisticated, but within the capability of a weekend tinkerer to construct. The key is the sophisticated materials you can buy. You make a basketwork out of lightweight wood and Kevlar tape, then heat shrink polyester sheeting on it to create a skin. Weekend boatmakers have been constructing ultralight boats this way for *years*. You can make a 17 foot canoe that weights under ten pounds this way, or a full sized rowboat that weights maybe fifteen pounds.
The guy who is working on a certifiable electric aircraft needs to have the most money. He needs a real machinist and sophisticated fabrication techniques. Batteries aren't really good enough for practical aviation yet, so for his demo he needs the best batteries and motor money can buy.
Each of these guys is designing the most practical aircraft possible within his financial means. Give the homebrew helicopter guy a million dollars, and he'll *probably* end up killing himself, but it would no doubt be in a more impressive aircraft.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
TFS is a direct quote from TFA. Maybe not the best, but TFA and the videos are actually pretty cool. With our own government becoming more and more oppressive we could probably learn a lot from the Chinese.
Caveat Utilitor
Some people will do just about ANYTHING to escape a communist dictatorship.
Had I not already replied to this Slashstory, I would have modded you up... well done
Karma: Excellent. 15 moderator points expire sometime.
When W was busy claiming that the west would move to an economy of IP, rather than actual manufacturing, he missed that the 2 work hand in hand. Basically, you need to be able to see how things are done to do the derivative work. Basically, America MUST bring back manufacturing to be able to grow again. America is becoming more and more like Russia; a has-been. Both because they have moved to depending on few incomes.
In the mean time, good luck to these ppl. Hopefully, one day, they will be free to actually enjoy their labor.
You ever see a grown man naked?
Tell us moa `bout it.
Cessna is now outsourcing manufacturing of the new SkyCatcher 162 to China. I wonder how long until a lot of the design is copied by the Chinese into the homebuilt market. We all know how they rapidly produce knockoff products of just about everything. Cessna is reportedly saving about $77,000 USD by manufacturing in China yet the SkyCatcher still costs >$100,000 USD to buy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STvpqWeZ158
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbwV-GWIZz8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRo9UvzgJYM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqa5nyk6hCk
Actually I suggest you pick up a copy of Homebuilt Aircraft at your local book store, got to EAA.org, and then make a trip to Sun n Fun or or Oshkosh, Hundreds, maybe thousands of people have built their own helicopters around the world. Tens of thousands of homebuilt aircraft are flying in the US. Homebuilts in the US run the range from ultralights to jets. What is amazing is not that this is being done but that the Chinese government is allowing it.
BTW Burt Rutan the man that built SpaceShip One realy built his reputation selling plans for Homebuilt aricraft. His VariEze and LongEZ are to this day considered classics.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
"You could easily plot these adventurous innovators on a graph, with the X axis showing their skill and the Y axis their financial means."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't you "easily plot" any 2D set of related numbers on an XY graph?
Exactly. The poster tells us what the x- and y- axes are, but not what the graph looks like. Is it linear? What are the scales?
I got the point, but come on, this is /. You should know better than to make half a math reference.
You say that as if you need no facts to back it up. Looking around, the best estimates I could find were 3 to 5 percent of the cost of a plane are litigation and litigation-prevention costs. There's also a fairly significant amount for insurance, some of which goes to paying for litigation, but all totaled it still seems to be less than either of the two largest costs, parts and labor.
So, please stop pulling numbers out of your ass.
I wonder how long it'll be before some bureaucracy sees an opportunity to regulate them out of existence. Seems likely that do-it-yourself anything would be scary to the authorities unless you provide the appropriate bribes which demonstrate the safety of your activity.
Exactly, Burt Rutan was the brains behind Voyager, the first non-stop, no-refueling, round the world flight. Voyager was built over a 5 year period by Volunteers, using fiberglass, carbon-fiber, and Kevlar, financed by donations.
And as for heading to Oshkosh or Sun N Fun to see all the crazy fliers, check out the Ultralight section at Oshkosh, since there's very little regulation of Ultralights, and there are ballistic parachutes available for the entire aircraft, there is a lot more experimentation going on. One guy we call 'the farmer' comes up every year, usually with a different aircraft each time.
DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
Shakespeare invents 'your mom'
Rumack: Can you fly this plane, and land it?
Ted Striker: Surely you can't be serious.
Rumack: I am serious... and don't call me Shirley.
If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
I have the privilege of being able to inspect a lot of cessnas (couple dozen or so) from fully complete up to date and functional to a hangar fulla parts, and every stage in between, including one crashed one where the bonehead decided to fly his groceries with him instead of buying them where he was going, and didn't estimate his weight correctly and didn't make it. He lived through it, but the plane is chunky style now spread out and he needed a lot of re-constructive surgery from what I hear. (old airport where I live, besides being a big farm, I maintain the grounds and fences and do the mowing, etc)
There has GOT to be a better way to build affordable airplanes. What that might be I don't know, but this old traditional way needs some serious rethinking. Those things are *ridiculous*, and absolutely no wonder why they are expensive and need a lot of reliability insurance, etc. They are made of one zillion tiny pieces of aluminum held together with 100 zillion rivets. Even the ones in good shape aren't capable of keeping their own doors shut if they aren't keylocked, I have to go around and reclose them all the time. I can't see how they keep from getting recalled, rube goldberg doesn't come close to what they are. It's no wonder they need massive inspections and certifications and insurance, etc. and cost so much.
I have no idea on the quality of other brands and makes, but if one were given to me I'd sell it pronto and look around some more.
A huge trend in the near future (0-20 years) will be home and distributed engineering (inventing) and manufacturing. People will trade information on technologies, how-to information, plans, and parts to make sophisticated products in their home or workshop.
This is not to say we're all going to get replicators or nanotech manufacturing like in "The Diamond Age" but the level of sophistication of home built products is going to go way, way up. From small appliances to tools to vehicles to weapons, it'll be possible to make a large number of items in places other than traditional factories, in small quantity and high quality.
To see this sort of thing emerging, look at efforts like Reprap to make a self replicating 3d prototyping machine (which probably won't be 100% self replicating for a long time, but which is a great starting point for at-home applications of the technology) or home CNC machines like router tables and small CNC machine tools. You can buy a CNC milling machine capable of producing small parts eg. for firearms and small engines for less than $3000 with computer. Once these become widespread part libraries for them will be as available as clip-art. Want a new part for your bicycle? Download the pattern, place the raw material in the machine, and walk away.
As quality items become harder to find in mass produced outlets, items made at home will take their place. Any item with a niche market will probably be made in these mini manufactoria... there won't be a profit any more in making small quantity items since there'll be tremendous competition from small manufacturers.
No need to keep an inventory of obscure auto parts on hand (or to pay for storage space or sunk costs in the inventory). Just keep the pattern available and churn out parts as needed. Need a part you don't have a pattern for? Ask someone on the internet to measure their part and make a pattern from it, using the same CNC mill to automate the measurements.
I like the trend myself... but can you imagine the fit the government will throw when it figures out it can no longer regulate eg. firearms because anyone with a CNC mill can turn one out in a day or two? I can see them at first trying to ban home manufacturing, trying to ban precursor items and materials, then trying to create an overarching government agency to police the whole thing.
It'll be similar to recording companies figuring out they're no longer needed since anyone can distribute or purchase music on-line without their involvement.
Likewise I can see large corporate manufacturers of some items begging for a government bail-out because no one wants to buy their mass produced crap any more. Why pay $100 for a cheap wal-mart bike when the CNC machine shop in the next town can produce one with 3x the quality for the same price? Why pay a computer store $35 for a plastic keyboard when you can get a solid brass one with better components made at home?
Erik PS: For those of you that know what this means... we'll be able to evolve an STC pattern for common items :)
Let all variables be arranged in set V y=V(0) - base case
y=V(n+1) - Inductive step
Knowledge = Power
P= W/t
t=Money
Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
The idea of a amateur homebrew helicopter is truly frightening...
There are several flying examples in the U.S. of amateur-built helicopters. Granted, most of them are built from professionally manufactured kits (i.e., the manufacturer builds a prefab kit, and the "builder" assembles the parts), some of which are relatively sophisticated. Google Rotorway and Mini-500 (I think the Mini-500 is defunct now, but there were several built back in the '90s).
...but *anybody* can dream, especially if he doesn't realize how incompetent he really is.
I would argue that often times, those who don't realize how incompetent they really are are, in fact, the ones who make the biggest advancements. They don't know it's impossible before they try, therefore they are the ones who go ahead and do it anyway. "The Ark was built by amateurs; the Titanic was built by professionals." ;)
The next step up is the human powered guy. He needs a long carbon fiber boom as the main longitudinal structural component, and probably another one to carry the lift generated along the wings to the main boom. That's pretty expensive. Once he has that, then the drivetrain is bicycle technology.
Human powered flight is about as difficult as aviation gets, at least for right now. The problem is that it takes more energy than most people realize to lift a human body; we simply don't have the strength or endurance to generate that much power for very long. I believe the current record is 199km -- not too shabby, and much better than I thought before I looked it up just now. FWIW, building the carbon fiber boom isn't difficult (although the carbon fiber is relatively expensive -- but less so than most power plants for experimental aviation). I did the calculations for a carbon fiber wing spar about a decade ago, and estimated a ~1500 pound airplane stressed for a max G-loading of +6/-4 (plus reserve) would cost around $1000 - $2000. It isn't cheap, but it's certainly within the realm of possibility for someone of reasonable means. There was also a guy in Arizona about ten years ago who built a foot-launched sailplane called the Carbon Dragon, that would probably be worth studying if you were interested in trying to build a DIY human powered airplane. He sold plans for the airplane, but I believe he died a few years ago, so they might be a little hard to find now.
The rest of the wings and pilot's nacelle are fairly sophisticated, but within the capability of a weekend tinkerer to construct. The key is the sophisticated materials you can buy. You make a basketwork out of lightweight wood and Kevlar tape, then heat shrink polyester sheeting on it to create a skin.
That's not a bad way to do it. I remember reading magazines dating from the late '60s (I read them in the '90s, though) about people who had build entire airplanes with this method. My experimental airplane uses a slightly different method, that also might work. The wing spar is an aluminum tube with foam ribs glued to it. The leading edge is 2024T3 aluminum wrapped over the ribs to make a stiff skin over the first 1/4 of the wing, then the entire wing is covered a material made by 3M for building greenhouses called Tedlar (as the story goes, 3M freaked and pulled Tedlar from the market after hearing people were building airplanes out of it; I haven't verified the story). It looks like a full-scale model airplane wing covered in clear Monokote ;) For human powered flight, I would probably replace the aluminum spar with carbon fiber, like you mentioned earlier, but the principle is the same.
The guy who is working on a certifiable electric aircraft needs to have the most money. He needs a real mach
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
It takes more than 4 Chinese to build an aircraft, because two Wongs don't make a Wright.
We have so much regulation in this country we just can't experiment with new kinds of airplanes or invent a new way of air travel. Imagine all the red tape you will have to go through just to put the damn plane together.
The FAA has frozen innovation in the airplane industry: we still base our airplane designs in the same basic principles invented 100 years ago because trying something new would require years of research and testing just to comply with their safety requirements.
I predict these chinese inventors will propel a new way of air travel while the US will be left way behind.
HTML is obsolete. It's time for a new, simpler and richer markup language.
Wow man, I'm sure you have a future career as a publicist. I think you've just discovered quantum bullshitting.
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Well, I'm glad you two figured out what I was doing, even if one of the mods didn't.
I am officially gone from
It's more of a scatterplot, used so that they can talk about the skills and financial means of different pilots by referring to their theoretical "graph".
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
I thought it was quite obvious. Mods need a sense of humour implant.
Controller: I know but this guy has no flying experience at all. He's a menace to himself and everything else in the air... yes, birds too.
Note: Humour spelled correctly in houour of the Great Leslie Nielsen.
If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
But if you burn him, who will send you the newsletter? ^^
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Hundreds, maybe thousands of people have built their own helicopters around the world.
I don't doubt that for a moment. That doesn't mean the idea isn't *scary*. If an engineer from Sikorsky invites me for a ride in the latest model, I'll accept his assertion that it's perfectly safe. If Joe Experimenter invites me for a ride in his home built and designed helicopter, assuring me it's just as safe, I don't doubt that it's *physically possible* for that to be true, but I'd pass, thank you.
I'd also have no problems getting into an aircraft designed and built under Burt Rutan's supervision, or designed by Rutan and assembled without engineering improvisation by a competent mechanic. But Rutan is not an amateur. He has a degree in aeronautical engineering and worked in the field for years before selling his designs to other people. That's a hell of a lot different from some guy with no experience who decides he's going to design a helicopter from first principles.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I did, and I'm not surprised that the autogyro was successful. If I had to build an aircraft that my life depended on with more or less the skills I have now, it'd probably be an autogyro.
There's an apples-and-oranges element to the comparisons of course; each of these guys has a different dream he's pursuing. But my point is that each of these guys is also building the most sophisticated aircraft he can. Money is a limiting factor. The farmer needs ingenuity to make something like the autogyro. The wealthy businessman does not.
The farmer could probably build his autogyro for something like 20,000 Yuan (under 3 grand US $). If he had a billion Yuan to play with, maybe he'd still build an autogyro. Or maybe he'd build a suborbital spacecraft. But if 20K is all he has, an autogyro it is. An electric airplane is out of the question.
Now if the guy who is building the electric airplane built an autogyro instead, we wouldn't be as impressed as when the farmer does it, because we'd *assume* he used his money to overcome any problems he hit. Can't get a rotor that works? Buy one. Not enough lift? Buy a more powerful motor and build the frame out of titanium. What we really admire is ingenuity yoked with ambition.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
"designed by Rutan and assembled without engineering improvisation by a competent mechanic."
Um they tend to be built by common Joes and most homebuilts have some "improvements" in each one.
It maybe a little extra work on a fillet or a better gap seal.
Lots of homebuilts aircraft have been designed and built by people without degrees. Some fly really well but most are a little heavier and stronger than needed.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
You insist on conflating design and assembly, as if they took identical skills. I think they are different.
Rutan is *not* an amateur designer. Period. He is a professional engineer with a proven track record.
There are people I know whom I'd trust to assemble an aircraft of proven design. I wouldn't hesitate to get in such an aircraft assembled by them, but I would hesitate to get in an aircraft *designed* by them, because they don't have a track record or demonstrable skills in aircraft design, mechanically competent as they may be. After the planes they designed had a few thousand hours of successful flights, maybe.
There also are people I know who might choose to buy and build a proven kit aircraft, but I wouldn't get in that aircraft for any amount of money. They aren't bad people; they're just bad mechanics.
I suppose it's even possible for there to be some brilliant engineer to be able to design sound aircraft but to have ten thumbs. In that case I'd get in their planes, so long as somebody else built them.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
No what I am saying is that yes Rutan was a trained engineer not every homebuilt is designed by a trained engineer.
Some great examples are the Pietenpol Air Camper
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pietenpol_Air_Camper
The Wittman Tailwind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wittman_Tailwind
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/kitspages/wittail.php
John Monnett has desgined several homebuilt aircraft over the years and has his own company
http://www.pilotmix.com/index.php?pgid=11&lang=en&maxInfo=833 is one of his early planes. His son does have a degree and works with him now at Sonex.
The Dyke Delta is another amateur designed aircraft. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyke_Delta
And this one was designed by a mechanic http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepDavisDA2.html
As you can see normal people can and have been building and designing homebuilt aircraft for a while.
Actually designing an airplane really isn't that hard. Even designing a safe well handling airplane isn't that hard. Not that easy mind you but not all that difficult. What takes a lot of effort and talent is to optimize the design. Even Steve Wittman did a great job at that. His Tailwind is very fast for the HP.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
It's 1920's-30's tech, sheet aluminum and rivets, a thousand pieces all needing to be meticulously fabbed and machined and drilled, then assembled. It was fantastic when first developed. I mean it works obviously..my Grumman canoe is built exactly the same way and it works pretty well, but it is still bleeding edge 1930s..and these sort of planes costs a mint to make today and two mints to keep working, and a fourth mint for inspections and insurance. that's 4 mints. I think it is time to drop that down to just 1 mint cost.
I think we can go beyond that now, enter the 21st century, maybe something like rutan's models. In fact exactly like rutan's ideas. Likely this is what will happen, composite construction once more manufacturers do it and the engineering and costs drop down and we have a better handle on "carbon nanotubes" and so on, graphene construction. I think that has a lot more potential to both improve quality and robustness and drop costs in the medium and long run today, rather than just keep slapping out sheet aluminum and rivets.