An Aircraft That Promises Helicopter Convenience at Jet Speeds

Barrons ^ | 05/02/2018 | Mark Huber

[DFG]

Imagine an aircraft that will take off and land like a helicopter but fly as fast and high as some light private jets. If all goes according to plan, a prototype of such an aircraft will fly in the fall and could be in customer hands by 2023.

The six-seat, $6.5 million TriFan 600 being built by XTI Aircraft in Denver holds the promise of dramatically cutting travel times between major city centers and offering the ultimate in private, secure transport.

“It affords you utmost privacy as it eliminates the need for an airport,” said XTI CEO Robert LaBelle.

When you factor in ground transportation, the TriFan shaves at least an hour off a typical three-hour combination corporate jet/car ride from executive airports to the central business districts in New York and Chicago.

[Bobalu]

[The_Media_never_lie]

Too complex for the gain in time. Not worth it. Safety issues, extra cost in training, etc. We have heard this before.

[CJ Wolf]

Wow, Trump gonna bring us flying cars! Never thought it would happen. Price is a bit steep but these would also be great in ambulance rescue missions.

[taildragger]

Call me a Luddite, I get VTOL and the coming electric niche with that within given flight profiles.

However I have seen to many helicopters end up in fatalities and I wonder why no one has ever truly considered STOL ( and I mean really short takeoff as an alternative to VTOL until the kinks are out of these magic carpets.

With the advent of e-power and or hybrid an updated version of the Flying Flapjack ( yes in electric ) is not out of the question and would make a unique medivac machine IMHO, especially with the speed range it had. More that one homebuilder has discussed an update electric version of it. A lot of folks with more grey matter than I, have come up with some artist conceptions / CAD models that are enough to make you hmmmm...

[Deaf Smith]

"Can't remember exactly why it didn't take off"

In street dress, it was propelled by the spinning prop.

Would have a nasty habit of chewing up pedestrians and anyone else who got too close.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

I have seen to many helicopters end up in fatalities and I wonder why no one has ever truly considered STOL ( and I mean really short takeoff as an alternative to VTOL until the kinks are out of these magic carpets.

Taking off and landing like a helicopter, it can fly unrefueled for 670 nautical miles. That number increases to 1,000 nautical miles when you make a “running takeoff” from a short runway.

That last line makes it kinda hard to say that they are ignoring STOL altogether. Clearly, the fuel cost of a 670 nautical mile VTOL flight is expected to be dramatically higher than that of a 670 nautical mile STOL flight.

[SES1066]

I wonder what the mileage is.

Depends upon 'angle of attack' and direction. Straight down gets WONDERFUL mileage but has some minor problems in matching take-offs with landings. For other selections, your results may vary!

[Calvin Locke]

I’m pretty sure it was a pusher-prop.

This is probably the car in the segment I watched on the History Channel:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerocar

[Deaf Smith]

It was.

The hazard was still present.

[Calvin Locke]

I thought the prop was in the fuselage addition.

I hope I’d remember that the prop was active for road duty, sans wings.

[Paal Gulli]

Jet speeds? Seriously?

Pure puffery. Everything with propellers -- to include ducted fans -- has speed limits that do not pertain to jets.

And vertical take-off and landing is an extremely costly provision. It's not technology that's prevented something like this in the past, is the presence of a market with deep enough pockets that it would be willing to absorb the developmental and production costs.