The GL-10 in vertical take-off mode. Credits: NASA Langley/David C. Bowman
Posted on 05/06/2015 6:23:51 PM PDT by BenLurkin
The Greased Lightning 10, or GL10, is a remotely piloted, ten engine aircraft that can take off and land vertically, and then rotate its wings for forward flight. This type of system has been developed before in full size, piloted aircraft like the V22 Osprey, but it’s never been done before in a small, remotely-piloted aircraft.
Switching from vertical flight to forward flight is a complicated maneuver, and the aerodynamic challenges for vehicles like these are substantial. As a result, there’ve been some hard landings during the testing phase. But the NASA team, including aerospace engineer Bill Fredericks, have had more success in recent tests. “During the flight tests we successfully transitioned from hover to wing-borne flight, like a conventional airplane, then back to hover again,” said Fredericks. “So far we have done this on five flights. Now we’re working on our second goal — to demonstrate that this concept is four times more aerodynamically efficient in cruise than a helicopter.”
The forward wing of the GL10, with eight engines on it, rotates as one unit. The tail section, with two engines mounted on it, also rotates as one unit. This gives the GL10 the much sought after ability to take off and land vertically, and to hover. For forward flight, it rotates its wings so the propellers and wings are facing forward, which isa much more efficient way for an aircraft to cruise.
(Excerpt) Read more at universetoday.com ...
Bet this concept outlasts the federal funding...
I would not take that bet. There are probably hundreds of people making the case that this project needs to be funded.
1. Improve the environment
2. Create new jobs
3. Reduce our dependence on foreign oils.
4. New technological spin offs to help hundreds of industries.
5-50. Fill in.
They skipped right by the rubber band plane.
/johnny
LOL.
Someone probably tried to get federal funding for that too!
They seem to have taken the opposite approach as the Osprey.
Instead of two big-ass engines and props, they have 10 small ones. I guess that helps with ground clearance and the motors can be smaller.
This reminds me of a song from my childhood.
“One little, two little, three little engines, four little, five little, six little engines, seven little, eight little, nine little engines, ten little engine boys”.
It’s wonderful to have grown up in a non PC time!
The “dreaded nine-engine landing.”
The government or the plane? ;>}
Absolutely.
/johnny
It does have a certain brute-force engineering to it, like something out of a 60's or 70's Soviet design bureau.
"Ten engines, what's not to like?" - Ivan the engineer.
/johnny
NASA already has other plans for that.
They’re sending me and Emily Blunt on a one way trip to Alpha Centari. We’re are going to have a dozen kids along the way.
I bet it would fly better if it had Eleven motors.
If it had Eleven motors there would be naught to worry you.
My wave function delocalizes in multiple places. I’ve been hanging out intermittently on Tralfamadore with Valerie Perrine since 1945 [her 1972.] Life is good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.