Slashdot Mirror
An Entirely New Class of Aircraft Arrives
fergus07 writes "Austrian research company IAT21 has presented a new type of aircraft at the Paris Air Show, which has the potential to become aviation's first disruptive technology since the jet engine. Neither fixed wing nor rotor craft, the D-Dalus uses four mechanically-linked, contra-rotating, cylindrical turbines for its propulsion, and by altering the angle of the blades, it can launch vertically, hover perfectly still, move in any direction, and thrust upwards and hence 'glue down' upon landing, which it can easily do on the deck of a ship, or even a moving vehicle. It's also almost silent, has the dynamic stability to enter buildings, handles rough weather with ease, flies very long distances very quickly and can lift very heavy loads. It accordingly holds immense promise as a platform for personal flight, for military usage, search and rescue, and much more."
First thing I thought of was fanwing (google it), also known as the flying lawnmower aircraft.
I saw it on a tv report ages ago and remember these things being said to be extremely stable and quiet, but also significantly slower than a helicopter.
Rickrolling. Don't waste your time and bandwidth.
Shachar
This article seriously lacks a video showing how the D-Dalus operates. Now it merely looks like a high-tech fan.
People are bad enough drivers in 2 dimensions; I don't want to have to deal with them in 3 dimension as well and I don't want flying cars falling on my house either.
Liberty is not granted to me as a privilege, it is my due.
Will it blend?
This is seriously impressive but nothing moves that much air in near silence.
I guess that they mean that it makes less noise than a 737.
It is still bloody magic though.
It's an entirely different kind of flying, altogether.
excuse me, but this is a fake
Dear All, this "Moeller" flying car scam has been regularly featured on Slashdot every 4 months or so for the last 5 years or so. How many time can people be duped? Maybe geeks are more gullible than redneck farmers and other people in general? Just my 0.02 (piconewtons of thrust).
And it will bring us world peace, end hunger and cure cancer.
This shows the value of issuing press releases.
All those planes that weigh less than 70kg with a pilot are sure to benefit!
I'll wait to see how it scales up.
The wikipedia page also has an animation showing how it works.
This doesn't seem that revolutionary, sure if they can get better thrust to weight out of turbines than props so it can be scaled up that's excellent, but as far as I can see the whole principle is a something that thousands of people are doing at home for a few hundred bucks.
uh, rotating cylinders generating lift? similar described in this 1925 paper? or a concept drawing in a 1950 Mechanix Illustrated?
nice engineering (if it works/flies) but nothing exceptionally new...
The issue I see here is this:
Helicopter: engine quits, it can glide (autorotate) to a landing that most of the time is successful, and nearly all of the time doesn't kill anyone.
Fixed wing: engine quits, it can glide to a landing that most of the time is successful and nearly all of the time doesn't kill anyone.
Both small fixed wing and helicopters have simple mechanical controls that are very reliable, and quite often the failure of one of these controls results in a brown-pants moment for the pilot but the aircraft can still be controlled to a landing.
This doesn't look like it has that capability, and in addition requires electronic controls, so any failure = fall out of the sky. Of course, for small aircraft based on this concept, a ballistic full-airframe parachute may be used so in most cases the landing can be survived without serious injury, but ballistic chutes don't really scale all that well. With that it doesn't seem like a disruptive technology - perhaps a disruptive technology for small aircraft that can carry a ballistic chute or unmanned aircraft that don't fly over populated areas, but that's pretty restrictive compared to the different kinds of helicopter you can make, so I don't see helicopters nor fixed wing going away any time soon. That's not to say that if this turns out to be practical it won't be very useful, just that it's not really a disruptive technology if it requires a ballistic chute to not kill anyone if there's a computer or engine failure because this seriously limits the chances of it ever being a certified aircraft by any aviation authority in the world.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
It looks like my vacuum cleaner. And I'm not trying to be funny. It has fixed spinny things, which kinda reminds me of a rotor. Forget it, too early.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
"I am now planning aerial machines devoid of sustaining planes, ailerons, propellers, and other external attachments, which will be capable of immense speeds"
"You should not be at all surprised, if some day you see me fly from New York to Colorado Springs in a contrivance which will resemble a gas stove and weigh as much. ... and could, if necessary enter and depart through a window."
"The flying machine of the future -- my flying machine -- will be heavier than air, but it will not be an airplane. It will have no wings. It will be substantial, solid, stable. You cannot have a stable airplane. The gyroscope can never be successfully applied to the airplane, for it would give a stability that would result in the machine being torn to pieces by the wind, just as the unprotected airplane on the ground is torn to pieces by a high wind. My flying machine will have neither wings nor propellers. You might see it on the ground and you would never guess that it was a flying machine. Yet it will be able to move at will through the air in any direction with perfect safety, at higher speeds than have yet been reached, regardless of weather and oblivious of 'holes in the air' or downward currents. It will ascend in such currents if desired. It can remain absolutely stationary in the air even in a wind for great length of time. Its lifting power will not depend upon any such delicate devices as the bird has to employ, but upon positive mechanical action."
-Nikola Tesla
Offtopic, but the link in your signature no longer works. The new URL is http://www.oolite.org/
Install windows on my workstation? You crazy? Got any idea how much I paid for the damn thing?
It's an entirely different kind of flying, altogether.
I guess they were holding off on this until Bin Laden got caught
My house, being in the approach lane for Dusseldorf international airport, I pray for the quite part.
It is shocking how loud an old 747 is on final. The hope has always been for tech like this to come around and silence these old POS planes.
Great if you have error-free computer system to run it on. Not so good if you do not.
Mid flight rebooting not a good idea.
Looks like it unpowered, it'll fly like bricked i-phone
Thirty years ago I was in the Propulsion & Thermodynamics group at Lockheed. One of the guys had a research project on spanwise rotor propulsion - his proof of concept used a beefed up cylindrical hair dryer rotor of the day. Yeah, you can get some net thrust, but at nowhere near the efficiency of conventional designs. There has to be a really strong reason to sacrifice all the extra fuel and weight and safety deficits when compared to better techniques. Perhaps there are niches where the tradeoffs are worth it, but that is not what I'd call "immense promise". Let's see what kind of thrust-to-weight, lift-to-drag, and thrust-specific-fuel-consumption their aircraft can produce first...
Looks like the 2D Propulsor.
Looks like the military already got a preview contract....
It's an entirely different kind of flying. :D
Looks like it's a variation on fan-wing propulsion, in which case it's basically is a big hi-tech fan... capable of blowing hard enough to generate lift [but then, so's any VTOL system really]
Is it April 1st, or just slashdot mods got bored?
As a pilot and an engineer... the sheer amount of bs in one article stymies the ability to say anything else!
Silent turbines? Do you know how a turbine works? Definitionally it moves amazing amounts of air (and fuel). Air movement = sound. It can't be silent.
It can "hover" into a building? Do you know how the threshold between "Hey we're just outside the window" and "oh now we're 2ft above the 3rd floor" and "yeah now our exhaust has nowhere to go" works?
It can "glue itself down to a deck of a ship"? How many aircraft have been swept off a deck of a carrier after landing? NONE! Gravity keeps them there. Sure, the engines can generate more than 1G of lift ... but if you need 2G to stick the aircraft to the ground... get a nice tether because you have one really expensive balloon!
Ridiculous.
Is it April 1?
E
Full disclosure: I am a licensed rotorcraft pilot. That means I fly helicopters. They don't have silent counter-rotating turbines (lol) and don't "stick to the deck."
At least not yet. All they have is a proof of concept laboratory prototype.
The current status of D-DALUS
D-DALUS is currently in prototype stage. Over recent weeks IAT21 have conducted extensive constrained flight tests in a specially prepared laboratory near Salzburg, including the transition from vertical to forward flight, and are now ready to move to an open test range for free flight tests. In trials to date D-DALUS has met the performance criteria placed upon it and appears to be scalable, becoming more efficient and less complex as it increases in size. It will therefore be ideally suited for applications that range from maritime search and rescue, through the carriage of freight, to operating alongside and within buildings during fires or, for example, nuclear accidents.
They could probably do a CG presentation, but for those satisfied with that, those couple of images on their site should suffice.
They are apparently also planning "an autonomous pallet-transportation-system" and a small roof-sized power plant based on the underlying technology.
These last two apparently only existing in text form so far.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I don't even see any proof this thing can lift ANY weight; a static display is pretty worthless. Howis it mounted; what would a plaform for it look like?
Where's the video?
does anyone have any video of it, you know, flying?
You might have a look at this:
http://serve.me.nus.edu.sg/cyclocopter/
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=6188.0;prev_next=next
Here's a marvellous 1930's ref. from Wikipedia...
http://books.google.com/books?id=xSgDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA26&dq=Popular+Science+1931+plane&hl=en&ei=5r8JTaa6Ismr8AaNmb2iAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBzgU#v=onepage&q&f=true
So... not exactly new but probably controllable with modern computer avionics.
Does it run on fossil fuel? If so, then this tech will only last until we run out of this fuel.
I think we need something that can fly on electricity.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Congrats, you are the /. user with the most accounts evar... MichealKristopeit must be jealous.
P.S. You really need to come up with a different approach, I can see all your posts coming from a mile away. How 'bout some Markov chains? Haven't seen that guy posting in stories here for quite some time now.
From the article:
The D-Dalus (a play on Daedalus from Greek mythology) is neither fixed wing or rotor craft and uses four, mechanically-linked, contra-rotating cylindrical turbines, each running at the same 2200 rpm, for its propulsion.
Also known as a rotor wing aircraft. Its not rocket science. You can take one look at it and easily deduce its a rotor wing design.
What exactly is disruptive about it?
I'm no aerospace engineer...
But I'm imagining what happens if an engine quits during take-off/landing. In a fixed wing aircraft, you're probably still screwed depending on your altitude, but at least you have a chance at restarting and/or ditching in a field. With something that hovers, you have no more lift once the engine quits, you're just a rock. Heck, not even only during take-off/landing, just during cruise, what do you do?
Helicopters can auto-rotate by storing energy in the main rotor and then "re-engaging" it when you're close to the ground. Basically, you get a one time use pillow. This thing however? How do you safely recover from an engine out?
With multi-engine airplanes, you also have the "option" of at least extending range during a single engine failure. This thing appears to apply thrust upwards to "lift" the aircraft as the wings do on a normal plane. What happens when an engine (think wing) fails on this? Does it just flip out of control (imagining multiple sets of these on a passenger plane applying lift to different areas of the fuselage).?
looks like a parachute might work, as there's no rotors or anything else that could interfere.
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
Its the SlapChop(tm) of the air!
This is going to be just as disruptive as the Segway. But less disruptive than the Fiat 500.
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
An engine attached to wires lifting of ground and maybe moving a meter or two left-right and ahead and back, probably with not that much stability...
Not really something one would want to "present".
And I'm guessing here, but I assume that they are in it for the money - not so they could "do some crappy low res video" and "get clicks" and "likes" on their fan-book thingamajig.
In fact, something like that might prove detrimental to their long-term plans.
Cause there sure as fuck exists such a thing as "bad publicity".
And if you are pitching your aircraft as an UAV and "an autonomous pallet-transportation-system", you probably want to keep more under wraps than not - your main prospective client being military and all that.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I bow my head. I was so eager for video of this that you got me. Kudos and thanks for the laugh this morning!
F&*$% this shit, anyone seen the Hoverbike article in the sidebar. I want one of THOSE!!
Golly gee wiz. It's Tom Swift and his Ultrasonic Cycloplane!
The paddle boat of the skies.
It's an entirely different kind of flying. .
The patent for the device is covered in US patent 7735773. It does indeed appear to be a variant of a Voith Schneider Propeller. The claim for autorotation is interesting, and possibly quite valid, as is the claim about flying close to buildings or vertical surfaces, based on the proposed flow mechanics of the 'turbines' (quotes on purpose). My biggest issue is with the "additional power units" to support high speed cruise, which are not shown, and not well described.
Basically, I'll believe it when I see it fly. Until then, it's a Voith Schneider quadcopter demonstration mule. I'm waiting for a person to be transported.
This is not a sig. this is a duck. quack.
There is a reason that less than 1/5 of one percent of the US population are pilots. It's not easy...
But that is because of the nature of fixed wing aircraft: they have to be moving forward at considerable speed to maintain their lift hence landing is hard because you cannot take it nice and slow. This is what makes poor visibility very difficult to cope with too: you would not drive a car at 100 km/h if you can only see 20m ahead of you but with an aircraft you have no choice because if you slow down you fall out of the sky.
This technology will not make all of the problems magically disappear but it will make it far, far easier to be a pilot since you can always slow down.
It looks like a Darrieus wind turbine on its side.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
. . . it made me spill my drink.
[British -- American English humor explanation: In American English "Hoover" is a specific brand of vacuum cleaner, but in British English it's a generic term for any vacuum cleaner. My compliments to oobayly.]
DANGER! DANGER!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipler_cylinder
I have developed a new flying machine: TARDIS - Time and Relative Dimension In Space. It is compact on the outside and much bigger on the inside. It can go anywhere and land inside buildings without destroying them. It can travel through time, so if people die you can go back in time and save them. I expect it will revolutionize travel. It does require a black hole for power, but I expect to have those problems resolved in five years. (For those of you who are not familiar with this technology, check out this Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TARDIS)
I clicked before I saw your post. God it's been awhile since I got Rick Rolled. Good times.
On topic, you guys post this summary and link to the site, something this radical in aviation and there is no video of the thing in action... REALLY
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
It's an entirely different kind of flying.
Altogether.
My gun is not a tool. I am a tool. My gun is a weapon.
The mention of a large lift capability and hovering makes me wonder if it's possible to turn this thing into a high altitude launch platform for rockets or things like SpaceShipOne or SpaceShipTwo. I understand that high altitude means there isn't a lot of air to move and generate thrust but if we can get it a few miles above sea level we've still gotten it a ways above the ground and gotten it closer to orbit. Just an idle mind wondering if it's possible a few years down the road...
For military purposes, I see the utility of this as a ground vehicle, not an aircraft. If this truly has a large lift capability it could be armored and would be a great platform for an APC with a recoilless or light recoil weapon like a TOW or small caliber (with no traction, anything big becomes a wave motion gun). Sort of a hovering Bradley fighting vehicle that can airlift itself.
No flash involved. all html. And they appear to be matter-of-fact so far.
(stolen from DaBum) I am dyslexia of borg - your ass will be laminated.
It's going to revolutionize transportation just as much as the mega-hyped Segway did in the 20th century.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
... was of thunderbirds from Shadowrun.
We live in the future, truly.
Fixed-wing aircraft use parachutes. ATTACHED TO THE PLANE. Deployed quickly using compressed air (usually).
This IS a workable answer. Yes you wear people-parachutes too. But vehicle-parachutes are the (meaning "one of the") RIGHT answer to this particular problem.
It's an entirely different kind of flying...
For all of you worried about failure modes and human passengers, keep in mind that drones do not require either.
Once militarized, this invention will change how warfare is done. Drones will longer be limited to air operations, but now can be part of ground forces (imagine a highly mobile floating turret with either ground or remote operators to aim and control).
Cue terminator theme.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
It was a static display at the Paris Air Show. If it really flew, they could have arranged to fly it there. That would have impressed potential customers. If it worked.
Just looking at the picture, I have doubts it can even be fully powered up. They have unprotected loose wires hanging within inches of their turbine blades. They say they've done "extensive constrained flight tests", but that may mean that some of the support was provided by a crane while they debugged the blade-steering mechanism.
Of course, it suffers from the curse of all pure-thrust lifters - you need a huge engine and fuel consumption is high. The only useful examples of such machines have been VTOL fighters, which are mostly a huge engine anyway.
It's a Void-Schneider Propeller application with a horizontal axis.
As a guess, this thing is going to put out a heck of a lot of wind.
Most of the claimed performance characteristics (low noise, efficiencies of scale, etc) remain to be demonstrated.
Download a neat program illustrating the design here.
But the kind of investors they are looking for (and probably have already - that does not look like a garage-made model) don't really read slashdot or gizmag comments. They arrange for a live presentation.
And everyone knows that you never mention gizmag if you want credibility - there's always a 50% chance someone will pronounce it as jiz-mag.
Also, you are kinda contradicting yourself with that "one chance with the press" and then complaining about BS articles about non-existent technology coming out every week.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
By contrast, D-Dalus is particularly suited for such conditions and can thrust upwards and hence "glue down" on landing, which it can also do on a moving vehicle.
My RC heli has as much negative pitch as it does positive. Many large helis also have a slight amount of negative pitch, precisely to "glue down" when landing on a ship.
I've also seen something like this before in an aviation museum, although, I'm not sure if it works on the same principle or if it was a working prototype.
A video would have been nice.
That word is Fugly. They have spent entirely too much on R&D and not enough on asthetics (--warning spell checker broken, the word indicated my be mispelled and other words that follow as well. I now return you to your regularly scheduled comment already in progress). I know it's just a proof of concept but they could have at least made it look better. It's just a few steel girders welded to gether and with a motor and some fans slapped on it.
110625 Slashdot re D-Dalus
Thank you for that excellent cross-reference, mcelrath. I first suspected that D-Dalus was a variation of the coander efect, but the 1928 Voith Schneider concept and application you pointed out shows that the designer of DD has 'just' rotated the blades to the horizontal. (What a fabulous pair of Austrian engineers they must have been!)
Engine failure? Ever flipped a ruler horizontal with good rotation? I thought all kids would have done that. Low level failure? Some think that choppers are different! Try a low level engine failure in one. Or better, don't. Those commentators obviously have no practical experience. I'm an ancient aviator of all manner of elevating devices (except for hot air balloons, they frighten me :?) and this machine-for-flying *really, *really* excites me (and I normally loath the use of the term.)
Of *course there will be initial problems. They are just things aching for solutions. It may even take a long time. Releasing information at an early stage at a major air show? I'll bet the principals are now set for development finance, at long last.
Revolutionary? I'll be amazed if it isn't.
(Exits right, to sell any shares related to helicopters.)