Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DARPA unveils its next VTOL aircraft concept
engadget.com ^

Posted on 03/05/2016 1:00:20 PM PST by BenLurkin

AFS's concept would employ the same 4,000 HP engine used by the V-22 to generate 3 MW of electrical power that will drive the 24 ductless fans spread across its rear wings and front canards. These fans will rotate, as you can see in the image above, enabling the X-Plane to seamlessly transition from a hover to forward flight.

"This VTOL X-plane won't be in volume production in the next few years but is important for the future capabilities it could enable," DARPA program manager, Ashish Bagai, said. "Imagine electric aircraft that are more quiet, fuel-efficient and adaptable and are capable of runway-independent operations. We want to open up whole new design and mission spaces freed from prior constraints, and enable new VTOL aircraft systems and subsystems."

(Excerpt) Read more at engadget.com ...


TOPICS: Weird Stuff
KEYWORDS: aerospace; aviation; darpa; miltech; vtol
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last
To: marktwain

If it works... great!


21 posted on 03/05/2016 1:34:22 PM PST by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

Those wheels don’t look like they are designed for much weight (in the video). The front end looks like an air intake. (video again)


22 posted on 03/05/2016 1:35:30 PM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

Wasn’t that headed up by Al Gore?


23 posted on 03/05/2016 1:37:43 PM PST by Vermont Lt (Ask Bernie supporters two questions: Who is rich. Who decides. In the past, that meant who died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

Not Diesel-electric, turbo-electric.

In terms of thrust generated, the multiple fans certainly would spread the downward, then backward thrust more evenly over the airframe. But the structural integrity of the rotating wings would have to be beefed up to a superlative degree.

Carbon-fiber, maybe?

So far as reliability is concerned, an electric cable feeding each of the fan motors certainly beats running some kind of mechanical shaft to each fan. The aerodynamic profile of the lifting surfaces, with the box-fans inserted between them, has to be a matter of some fancy configuration.

It does show they are thinking outside the box. Some similar principles could be applied to helicopter design, while retaining the rotary-wing aspect. A helicopter, in and of itself, is a highly complex design, with the shifting change of aspect of each of the rotor blades as rotor turns, and countering the massive torque that tends to twist the fuselage of the helicopter in the opposite direction of the rotor rotation.


24 posted on 03/05/2016 1:43:38 PM PST by alloysteel (If I considered the consequences of my actions, I would rarely do anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

24 potential engine fires. Even if electrical, electrical engines start on fire.

I am surprised it wasn’t released on 4/1/16.


25 posted on 03/05/2016 1:44:42 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
... drive the 24 ductless fans ...

Ductless? Those fans look pretty ducted to me...

26 posted on 03/05/2016 1:46:54 PM PST by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
The front end looks like an air intake.

That large opening on the end is the REAR of the craft.

27 posted on 03/05/2016 1:48:01 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk

28 posted on 03/05/2016 1:50:13 PM PST by Daaave ("You Nexus, huh? I design your eyes.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

Surprise, surprise.

The artist’s concept is all messed up. The small canards are on the front of the vehicle. The fans on the wings are said to be 31 inches in diameter; that would give a wing-span of about 60 feet. They are hoping for a max airspeed of 300 kts or more.

$89.5 million has been awarded to build two prototypes to be tested in 2018.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VTOL_X-Plane


29 posted on 03/05/2016 1:50:34 PM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rey
Doesn’t seem to have too many moving parts; what could go wrong?

LOL. You are, of course, correct to point out the parts-count to weight ratio or whatever you want to call it. But to counter that you have to give Darpa points for REDUNDANCY. So a couple of props fall off. You keep right on flying.

30 posted on 03/05/2016 1:54:17 PM PST by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Well, electric motors have far fewer moving parts than most internal combustion engines...


31 posted on 03/05/2016 2:00:07 PM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

32 posted on 03/05/2016 2:20:58 PM PST by struggle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rey

Redundant operating systems overachieved.


33 posted on 03/05/2016 2:25:31 PM PST by cornfedcowboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Daaave

It is said that when the first Air Force test pilots saw the first one, one laughed and said “That thing will never fly”.

AF test pilots are typically not only very good pilots, but have degrees in Aeronautical Engineering. So sometimes even people with domain knowledge get surprised.


34 posted on 03/05/2016 2:34:51 PM PST by 5thGenTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: PAR35; Kirkwood

Yes, you are correct. They helped create ARPANET with a few universities and National Labs. But they didn’t create the internet. Al Gore did. Just kidding. It took people with broader ideas to create the internet than ARPA (now DARPA) ever had. DARPA is a cesspool of wasted money.


35 posted on 03/05/2016 2:42:12 PM PST by Purdue77 ("Hillary for Prison, 2016.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: rey

Looks like a fixed wing scale up of drone technology to me. I bet the electric motors have plenty of design margin and there is ample thrust for fault tolerance.

I find the top wing curious. The bottom appears to be the airfoil while the top appears flat. Maybe the top is there for turbulence reduction across the top and sides of the motor housings.

I like it. A diesel genset in the fuseleage could make for hours of lumbering over a battle zone. Add in a ground troop support electronics payload, and tell it to autonomously circle a set of GPS coordinates. Give our troops 24/7 eyes and ears.


36 posted on 03/05/2016 2:42:43 PM PST by 5thGenTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Purdue77

DARPA funded programs created the internet and world wide web, stealth technology, GPS systems, robotic systems, satellite mapping Unix, Linux, and Android systems... the list goes on. You can whine all you want that these were not fully funded and realized by DARPA, but then you don’t understand the purpose of DARPA, which is to fund and demonstrate innovation technology of strategic national importance. Far from being a cesspool of wasted money, DARPA has been one of the most productive national programs in science and technology.


37 posted on 03/05/2016 3:06:51 PM PST by Kirkwood (Zombie Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Kirkwood

I agree. DARPA has done far more with far less than NASA.

DARPA continues to do amazing things. Much of he 3D printing organ development was started/done with DARPA money.

Another tech we can attribute to DARPA is Autonomous Vehicles. And it is another game changer that will increase productivity in untold numerous ways.


38 posted on 03/05/2016 3:45:18 PM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Well, electric motors have far fewer moving parts than most internal combustion engines...

Electric motors also have very low maintenance requirements.

I expect the one turbo generator needs more maintenance than all of the fans combined.

39 posted on 03/05/2016 3:57:21 PM PST by CurlyDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Daaave

Just an FYI, I’ve worked on that F117 pictured...it was a 410th Flight Test Sq jet.

Thanks for posting.


40 posted on 03/05/2016 10:50:47 PM PST by SZonian (Throwing our allegiances to political parties in the long run gave away our liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson