I think this idea has more to do with lift than propulsion. Because the top part of the rotors are moving forward, and the bottom are moving backwards, there's a difference in pressure on the surfaces when the vehicle moves forward. there is a lower pressure at the top and you get lift.
A Canadian BUILT this a while ago to move lumber from remote locations, used a balloon to float the main apparatus to the site and when extra lift was required used a huge (70 ft or so) paddle wheel dohicky (technical term) to lift the lumber out... turns out helicopters are more efficient since the price of the pilots for both is about the same and are the main contributors to the cost of a given vehicle. Fuel efficiency may bring this back though....more susceptible to turbulence though.
AAHHHHH Someone made this work like less than 10 years ago check out the magazine POPULAR SCIENCE............IF memory serves me correctly the top of the paddle there was a curved wing .....must check it out
It may seem insignificant, but there maybe some applications for this technology further down the line. It may halp to better current aircraft designs, such as helping to eliminate vortex ring state in helicopters or something like that, you just never know.
Well I'd imagine it'd require much less fuel to power the paddle-wings since it's just rotating a gear. You'd also save money and metal not having to create giant jet engines.
Quote from wikipedia: Modern jet aircraft usually use high-bypass turbofan engines which help give high speeds as well as, over long distances, better fuel efficiency than many other forms of transport.
This is way less eficient because the paddles push in all directions - not just down.
Well granted they'd still need to make some changes to the design, but wouldnt you agree making a couple of paddle wings costs much less than making a complex airplane engine.
Paddlewings would be hard to make - and be too easy to break off. Airplane (propellor) planes use standard motors (about). Jets are hard to make but just are way better.
Paddlewings would be hard to make - and be too easy to break off. Airplane (propellor) planes use standard motors (about). Jets are hard to make but just are way better.
this is cool, i wonder if it would work at full scale and if it would even be controllable. Either way i want one. If it works i'll have a cool way to get around and if it doesnt i can let someone i dont like fly it : )
... it's a design for minature robots. I'm pretty sure they didn't divert anyone's lunch money to make it, so people can relax; their lunch money is safe...until we divert it to finding a cure for cancer.
That's cool and all but it should never be used full scale or for practical use. Not only because it is a prototype, but even when it is perfected, it would be incredibly dangerous. 1. What would be the emergency procedure for one paddle loss? 2. The paddles and the shafts could easily kill somebody that is hit by one or more. Just stick with the fixed wing aircraft, helos, and whatever's out there already. Don't go trying to reinvent the thing, they both work well enough.
Imagine if Nikola Tesla, or Alexander Graham Bell decided to "just stick with" whatever was already available to them. The world would be a very different place now. It may be better, it may be worse! Just a thought.
@AgdrAgon999 Aside from the fact that your argument has nothing to do with what I posted originally, which makes your response merely just a random rant, what inventions that are currently in production would Tesla not approve of?
@darrenphughes my apologies for falsely assuming that it was painfully obvious that I was responding to your comment regarding Tesla, in which you stated, "The world would be a very different place now. It may be better, it may be worse! Just a thought."
Given Tesla's love of the Vedic philosophy along with his strong adoration for Swami Vivekananda, I tend to doubt that he would enjoy the fact that his work was used to develop what's since come to be known as "Tesla Weapons."
It seems odd that at a university the persons filming such a ground-breaking model "cyclogyro" couldn't use a decent video recorder... You'd think that if it were so important and that if the persons were smart enough to design and build one of these things that they'd be able to post a 44 second video clip of it in a higher quality than this on YouTube. I mean, hell, I've seen near tv-like quality vids on here. Surely a university would know how to post one such vid.
According to the article in New Scientist, this design has the potential for a far greater degree of maneuverability in small craft and can travel a lot faster. While it doesn't scale up well, for machines up to maybe a meter in length its far superior to a helicopter in that sense. It isn't very stable though, no doubt working versions of this will have fairly advanced computerised stability controls. The tether in these experiments is partly to stablilise the craft and partly for power.
im not gonna lie, thats awesome, they must have had to design the wings/propellers just right so the airflow would create a low pressure, unless the air just pushes it up, either way its tight
Well, it was moving up and down without the stick above it moving. That was probably so it stays in one area and doesn't fly off somewhere random. Since there's no one inside the plane controlling it and whatnot.
Bird blender! Keep that thing away from my face.
CANNUCK72 1 year ago
I think this idea has more to do with lift than propulsion. Because the top part of the rotors are moving forward, and the bottom are moving backwards, there's a difference in pressure on the surfaces when the vehicle moves forward. there is a lower pressure at the top and you get lift.
GIRlovesWaffles 1 year ago
if you can keep the wings horizontle while spinning, you can do this by a simple belt transmission it might work
Rietskuh 1 year ago
reminds me of a dragonfly, as the way it hovers!
ushouldntjudgeme 1 year ago
no voice is better than the usual voice
shim2dawg 2 years ago
It's using much much more power to stay in the air than a propeller.
they don't use paddle wing on real helicopters.
jetplane? LOL
benausang 2 years ago
A Canadian BUILT this a while ago to move lumber from remote locations, used a balloon to float the main apparatus to the site and when extra lift was required used a huge (70 ft or so) paddle wheel dohicky (technical term) to lift the lumber out... turns out helicopters are more efficient since the price of the pilots for both is about the same and are the main contributors to the cost of a given vehicle. Fuel efficiency may bring this back though....more susceptible to turbulence though.
PsychoticusRex 3 years ago
AND IT USED LESS ENERGY TO OPERATE
ratificus 3 years ago
AAHHHHH Someone made this work like less than 10 years ago check out the magazine POPULAR SCIENCE............IF memory serves me correctly the top of the paddle there was a curved wing .....must check it out
ratificus 3 years ago
but it pushs air up as well so wont just stay in spot
he8me2 3 years ago
This innovation is great.
Ronwang 3 years ago
We can use this technology for jet plane; so that, jet plane can fly free in the sky like helicopter.
Best wishes,
Ron Wang
Ronwang 3 years ago
this is useless..using alot of energy
seablue111 3 years ago
it's just wrong leave it at that!
AMAZINGPROSTATE 3 years ago
Connect a really huge rubber band to a propeller on an airplane. Then twist the propeller 1000 times...
MishuTaste 3 years ago
Looks like the bean table on a combine.
Delenko 3 years ago
Heh, it looks like its hanging from a wire...
And not only the wire to keep it from hitting the wall.
slikind 3 years ago
ah a future helecopter you can eject from without blowing the blades
yort02 3 years ago
It may seem insignificant, but there maybe some applications for this technology further down the line. It may halp to better current aircraft designs, such as helping to eliminate vortex ring state in helicopters or something like that, you just never know.
darrenphughes 3 years ago
or you could just use a helicopter...?
Scooter2020259725 3 years ago
Wow. Imagine if we were to use full scale paddle-wing planes in the future? We'd save so much resources being consumed by current-day planes.
However it'd be tricky making it work out with all the factors of safety the FAA require.
BlazinAsian35 3 years ago
How would it save resources?
pubby8 3 years ago
Well I'd imagine it'd require much less fuel to power the paddle-wings since it's just rotating a gear. You'd also save money and metal not having to create giant jet engines.
BlazinAsian35 3 years ago
Quote from wikipedia: Modern jet aircraft usually use high-bypass turbofan engines which help give high speeds as well as, over long distances, better fuel efficiency than many other forms of transport.
This is way less eficient because the paddles push in all directions - not just down.
pubby8 3 years ago 4
Well granted they'd still need to make some changes to the design, but wouldnt you agree making a couple of paddle wings costs much less than making a complex airplane engine.
BlazinAsian35 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Paddlewings would be hard to make - and be too easy to break off. Airplane (propellor) planes use standard motors (about). Jets are hard to make but just are way better.
pubby8 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Paddlewings would be hard to make - and be too easy to break off. Airplane (propellor) planes use standard motors (about). Jets are hard to make but just are way better.
pubby8 3 years ago
this is cool, i wonder if it would work at full scale and if it would even be controllable. Either way i want one. If it works i'll have a cool way to get around and if it doesnt i can let someone i dont like fly it : )
carnut666 3 years ago
thats so cool
xplosivepizza 3 years ago
if there was a cure for cancer no one would know about it sadly cause the medical companies make too much money off your death
westco3894 3 years ago
Sad but true
shpazshpaz 3 years ago
... it's a design for minature robots. I'm pretty sure they didn't divert anyone's lunch money to make it, so people can relax; their lunch money is safe...until we divert it to finding a cure for cancer.
BornAtNight 3 years ago
it cannot work,puling thru air is different from puling thru water,
for a true padlewing plane search for
ORNITHOPTER .
maxaccel 3 years ago
Actually, at the sort of speeds that these aerofoils work at Air has alot of the same qualities as a fluid like water. So it may work.
darrenphughes 3 years ago
That's cool and all but it should never be used full scale or for practical use. Not only because it is a prototype, but even when it is perfected, it would be incredibly dangerous. 1. What would be the emergency procedure for one paddle loss? 2. The paddles and the shafts could easily kill somebody that is hit by one or more. Just stick with the fixed wing aircraft, helos, and whatever's out there already. Don't go trying to reinvent the thing, they both work well enough.
BMX4life311 3 years ago
Imagine if Nikola Tesla, or Alexander Graham Bell decided to "just stick with" whatever was already available to them. The world would be a very different place now. It may be better, it may be worse! Just a thought.
darrenphughes 3 years ago 6
@darrenphughes I don't think Tesla would have liked what's ultimately resulted from the work that "they" stole from his laboratory.
watch?v=YIFRzAua3m0
AgdrAgon999 8 months ago
@AgdrAgon999 Aside from the fact that your argument has nothing to do with what I posted originally, which makes your response merely just a random rant, what inventions that are currently in production would Tesla not approve of?
darrenphughes 6 months ago
@darrenphughes my apologies for falsely assuming that it was painfully obvious that I was responding to your comment regarding Tesla, in which you stated, "The world would be a very different place now. It may be better, it may be worse! Just a thought."
Given Tesla's love of the Vedic philosophy along with his strong adoration for Swami Vivekananda, I tend to doubt that he would enjoy the fact that his work was used to develop what's since come to be known as "Tesla Weapons."
AgdrAgon999 6 months ago
Now, if they set out to cure AIDS (o something even remotely useful)...
eventually308 3 years ago
Quit whining. People do what they like to do. If you are so keen on finding a cure for a AIDS why don't you go do it yourself(tm)?
mephis 3 years ago 2
Yeah, gee, why aren't any scientists working on that?
mofolotopo 3 years ago
Why? There's too many people on this planet already..
anfenn 3 years ago
According to anfenn there are too many people on this planet. I think anfenn should be the first passenger then.
TomUtter 3 years ago
pointless, isn't it? Sort of "why did you climb the mountain?! "Cause it was there!"
StuartsStuff 3 years ago 2
thatsG
i3iograffiti 3 years ago
It seems odd that at a university the persons filming such a ground-breaking model "cyclogyro" couldn't use a decent video recorder... You'd think that if it were so important and that if the persons were smart enough to design and build one of these things that they'd be able to post a 44 second video clip of it in a higher quality than this on YouTube. I mean, hell, I've seen near tv-like quality vids on here. Surely a university would know how to post one such vid.
WatcherofTrends 3 years ago
And still no cure for cancer.
cheesewater 3 years ago
According to the article in New Scientist, this design has the potential for a far greater degree of maneuverability in small craft and can travel a lot faster. While it doesn't scale up well, for machines up to maybe a meter in length its far superior to a helicopter in that sense. It isn't very stable though, no doubt working versions of this will have fairly advanced computerised stability controls. The tether in these experiments is partly to stablilise the craft and partly for power.
TravisMorien 3 years ago
read the words carefully; "tethered" and "may be". I think that is clear enough to me.
t4kne 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
rubbish.
werf4 3 years ago
That is so damn cool. (Simpsons did it.)
cerebulon 3 years ago 2
Thats the dumbest structure ever.
Idonthinkso7331 3 years ago
im not gonna lie, thats awesome, they must have had to design the wings/propellers just right so the airflow would create a low pressure, unless the air just pushes it up, either way its tight
hock3ydud3 3 years ago 2
Well, it was moving up and down without the stick above it moving. That was probably so it stays in one area and doesn't fly off somewhere random. Since there's no one inside the plane controlling it and whatnot.
tsunamineko 3 years ago
Um - it's tethered from the top? You'd think a proof of flight video would be more effective without, you know, a string holding the thing up.
olclops 3 years ago
its just stoping it from goin to side to side like a string on a kite its not holding it just giving it some stability.
the paddles are doing the work
ollietolly 3 years ago
Nice!
superfisto 3 years ago
What in the....coolness.
Nemarguy 3 years ago 2