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."

24 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. Got nuthin by paiute · · Score: 3, Funny

    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
  2. News? by Gothmolly · · Score: 2

    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.
  3. Re:Gotta say it... by thomasdz · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.
  4. And in the Z axis by JamesP · · Score: 4, Funny

    Time airborn I assume...

    --
    how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
  5. Re:Gotta say it... by noidentity · · Score: 2, Funny

    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.

  6. Re:Gotta say it... by hey! · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.
  7. Escaping! by p51d007 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Some people will do just about ANYTHING to escape a communist dictatorship.

    1. Re:Escaping! by Thelasko · · Score: 2, Funny

      Some people will do just about ANYTHING to escape a communist dictatorship.

      I don't know... that one guy did create a people powered plane.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
  8. What the west has missed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:What the west has missed by vrmlguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mod parent up! I've resisted the idea, but between this and China overtaking the U.S. as the world's biggest market for automobiles, I'm about convinced that America is not only in decline but is well down the slope. OTOH, it's still way better than Russia (I've been there) which is only barely surviving thanks to its vast resources being able to overcome frightening inefficiencies.

      --
      Nothing for 6-digit uids?
    2. Re:What the west has missed by smellsofbikes · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Dude. Nobody is missing anything. W and the other people who run businesses -- on all ends of the political spectrum -- know very well that outsourcing manufacturing is a bad idea for the country as a whole, but it's a good idea for *them* personally because it increases their profit margin. So they do it. Everyone ELSE knows very well that outsourcing manufacturing is a bad idea for the country as a whole and for them personally, but they can't do anything about it because they're not running companies, and if they did, they'd be outcompeted by the companies that outsource manufacturing.

      I agree with your conclusion, that we're becoming a has-been, but I think your premises are entirely too charitable.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  9. Cessna manufacturing in China by yabos · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Cessna manufacturing in China by GooberToo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Cessna is reportedly saving about $77,000 USD by manufacturing in China yet the SkyCatcher still costs >$100,000 USD to buy.

      Half of every dollar spent on aviation in the US goes to cover liability. Also, Cessna, by far, has the largest markup of any of the light piston US manufacturers. From what I've read, the plane is targeting $111,000. If liability laws were brought into sane reason, that same aircraft could likely be had for something like $50,000. Yet one more reason to drown all the attorneys tomorrow. And if the FAA were revamped such that it more readily allowed free market competition, that price could likely be in the $30k range while at the same time making aviation safer for everyone; including commercial flights.

      If anyone has any doubt about the evils of attorneys, don't ever forget we all pay a premium price for all things aviation related and in exchange for doing so, we suffer a higher death and injury rate as a direct result. The sad thing is, this is the literal truth. If you doubt me, go learn the difference between the avionics allowed in experimentals versus certified aircraft and you'll understand both how much cheaper and better the experimental equipment generally is in almost every aspect.

    2. Re:Cessna manufacturing in China by GooberToo · · Score: 2

      we suffer a higher death and injury rate as a direct result.

      I wanted to clarify something here. That was meant to be taken in relative terms rather than an absolute. In absolute terms the death and injury rate is actually pretty low; with the most dangerous segment being on par with motorcycles. In relative terms to what it could be, its far higher than what is otherwise technically obtainable.

  10. Cessnas by zogger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  11. More than just China and aircraft by EriktheGreen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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 :)

    1. Re:More than just China and aircraft by HeyLaughingBoy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The only people making firearms non-commercially in the USA are hobbyists. For everyone else, buying them at WalMart is easy enough.

      I have a benchtop milling machine and enjoy using it (would like to get a lathe soon). I understand where you're coming from, but just because the ability is there doesn't mean people will take advantage of it. Cheap manual mills and lathes have been available for a long time and the only ones buying them are retired machinists and hobbyists. The "average Joe" could care less. How many people even do woodwork as a hobby these days? And that stuff is readily available at Home Depot and much cheaper than precision metal tools.

      Make your own car parts? Sure if you have a DXF or other CAD file of the part... for free (you don't think the guy making the drawing for you wants to get paid? Dimensioning a part to tenths and then making a drawing takes time and experience)... and the correct alloy... and you can get it ground to the right finish... Not to mention that the stuff you can make at home tends not to be the stuff that breaks -- when was the last time you had to replace an axle stub? A seat bracket?

      It's a nice idea, but I'm not holding my breath.

    2. Re:More than just China and aircraft by countertrolling · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People will trade information on technologies, how-to information, plans, and parts to make sophisticated products in their home or workshop.

      Yeah well, don't be so optimistic. You can bet there are certain groups who will always be out to nip that kind of thing at the bud.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    3. Re:More than just China and aircraft by HornWumpus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Making things is more complicated then you give it credit.

      Very much in general:

      Before you machine a part you often start with a rough casting or billet.

      After you machine a part you might heat treat and/or electroplate it, depending.

      After that you might do a final grind or EDM (Electric Discharge Machining), depending.

      Heat treatment, beyond the torch and quench, will never be anything other then hazardous and industrial. I wouldn't set up an arsenic salt bath at home, even if it were easy.

      The same is true for electroplating, although I've seen that some intrepid individuals are playing/working at that.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:More than just China and aircraft by EriktheGreen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Again, It's true that some things cannot/will not be made at home, always.

      You're wrong about heat treating, by the way. Plenty of folks out there have set up their own small foundries, and are casting aluminum and iron. Plenty of other folks (like me) have computer controlled kilns for case hardening.

      I think if some complex process is a stumbling block to making a desired item, the designer will try to work around it... redesign a part so it doesn't need the complex process, or substitute a process that can be performed simply. If you post on certain engineering or DIY boards online with a challenge like "design a toaster that can be built with hand tools" you'll get 20-30 people giving it a shot.

      I'm not saying that grandma is going to have a forging press in her living room. I'm saying that there will probably be a couple of people living in her town that build things, and then a couple more, until down the line the "best" stuff won't come from big factories, but from small shops. eg. look at the high end bicycle world... all the top of the line stuff is from tiny makers who specialize in a small list of items.

    5. Re:More than just China and aircraft by EriktheGreen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      True, but don't forget one of the more famous sayings of the internet age: "Information wants to be free." There's no better way to publicize the practice of at-home manufacturing than by having some large corporation whine about it :)

  12. Re:Gotta say it... by element-o.p. · · Score: 3, Informative

    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?
  13. If you have enough people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    It takes more than 4 Chinese to build an aircraft, because two Wongs don't make a Wright.