uhh looks a bit \"tippy\"
Mike, my thots exactly. I would tend to want the primary mass (the rider) to be below the lift fans. There\'s just not much stability in the platform - pitch control is handled, but roll and yaw appear to be dicey. Three, or better, four ducts would bring it to the same control level as those little toy drone copters you see so many of on youtube these days. (Didn\'t they have a couple of them playing tennis just a while back?) Lets just say I hope he survives the pending flight tests...
Best of luck to him, tho - it sure would be awesome, and a long time in coming!
This this looks like a whole new level of hurt!
Tippy means acrobatic....
Me wantz dat =^.^=
Not much different than the 50 year old Chrysler and Piasecki Air Jeeps. VZ-6 and VZ-8.
Where do I send my deposit? This thing looks cooler than ride than my Ducati.
Looks like a machine designed for paralysing people.
I\'d love a go on it though!
You wouldn\'t last a minute if you hit turbulance, I suggest he goes flying in an aeroplane first
\"the Hoverbike employs the same basic flying principles as a tandem-rotor Chinook helicopter.\"
And the user will experience the same effects as riding on the outside of a Chinook Helicopter.
helicopters which hang under their lift blades are inherently unstable, they won\'t fly in a straight line all on their own; make a set of remotes for the controls and hang under it would be a better start but gyroscopic and uneven torque effects will play their part too. I salute the \"tron\" style design concept for sheer good looks but if this does turn turtle it will drive you into the ground faster than you can bail out, you would need to be strapped to it and tight!. double the fuel does not mean double the distance more like add one third due to the incredible weight gain. To go forward, the lift at the rear must be greater than the front therefore the resistance to rotating opposing it from the front one will be less; ergo, it will rotate in yaw as soon as you want to go forward. tilting the front and rear sideways a bit might help with this but this will vary with throttle settings when air drag increases as a square of the airspeed. the pilots workload gets very busy very quickly. the faster it goes forward the more it will dive too due to the lift created by the pilots back. A guaranteed way to leave the gene pool. talking of emergencies what happens if the engine dies? pilot does too? reserve chutes add weight too and accidental deployments kill just as many as they save, you also need altitude for a \'chute to work without rockets ( more weight). to stand any chance this would have to be a fly by wire device, The computer accelerometers and actuators will also add weight, would you trust your life to a laptop whilst trying to fly it? build a model and fly that or put a hovercraft skirt on it and then have serious fun.
I would lower the center of gravity too- but cool design. Hope he does well...
No, no no! NO forward-looking technology allowed, especially if meant only for fun.
Will these greedy capitalists give some to the poor for free?
How many polar bears will it kill per mile?
Is it recyclable? Can it be made from bamboo?
Can it be pedaled?
Is there no end to man\'s destruction of the environment?
Can it be painted green and renamed the Eco-HoverBike?
AT LAST...somebody is getting us off the ground...wanted somethinglike this ever since i saw the movie \"the fifth element\" ha ha.
I am a highly skilled and innovative master electronics technician, an inventor from a family of inventors. I wish to volunteer my skills and ability in return for a bike and some stock...
Reminds me of this thing from the 50\'s: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiller_VZ-1_Pawnee
Beyond a few degrees of lean, its going to be tippy like a kayak but with gyro stabilizers, it should work. I would definitely go with adjustable pitch rotors, otherwise the computer will have to adjust speed at each end, and that will create dangerous control lag.
First thing I thought of when I saw this thing was that Star Wars movie.
You would definitely want a rocket deployable safety chute.
The problem with that is you still need some time aka altitude to deploy it .
If too close to the ground then you don\'t even have to to deploy.
You go SPLAT !!
I like it though and it is a really neat design.
My concerns are with the stability of the craft when flying it .
The next thing is going to be the NOISE generated from the engine AND the props beating the air.
Most municipalities have noise ordinances IF you plan on running it in areas where the noise is regulated .
Most noise ordinance limits are at 85 to 90 Db .
There are not many propeller driven craft that can operate that quietly.
Other than using it in the country (outside city limits) or basing it at an airport you really can\'t launch it anywhere else.
Over cities and such you have to obey the altitude limitations just like real pilots whether you have a license or not , ultralight plane or not , it doesn\'t make a difference in the eyes of those regulating airspace in your country.
I would like to see his design go further though.
He is only just getting started on a feasible design at this point.
With enough time and money it could probably work well.
Now about that liability insurance your company will be required to carry.....
Hmmm yes it\'s obvious that this has some issues, like height, speed and gravity......
It\'s the height bit that could be a source of some serious issues.
Perhaps we could simply legislate against gravity by banning it or use Jesus Power.
Awsm idea...will be less hurtful if it is rode at motorcycle height...
how will it be propelled forward?
AWESOME!! I want one. Flying at 148k/h just by tilting fowards seems a bit iffy - you\'ll be \"pointing\" more-or-less at the ground, and travelling head-first sideways. I wonder if it would be better to tile the rotors rather than the whole bike?
If he\'s reading this - find a bridge with a bungee tied to it, and get us some flight-testing video to drool over!!!
Well it\'s nice to see I\'m not the only one who saw stability issues with this machine. I\'ll add my vote to the four fan point stabilization. But as a rider I also have to add the rider position on this thing is all wrong for 150 mph winds. The rider needs to be closer to the bike and you absolutely need a wind screen to get the airstream over the rider. Other wise he\'d have to be extremely muscular and would tire VERY quickly as the air tried to rip him off the bike.
godlike this is a nice alternative for australians to a helicopter to cross long distances at high speed if it goes fast and if you mount abid fuel tank nice to is is the missing of the swashplate low costs and a perhaps easier control by moving your body to change the direction like on a bike but perhaps a rudder would be necessary
I will take a conventional helicopter, over a ducted fan monstrosity, that doesn\'t give me higher speed.
Super sexy design. Definitely want one.
Watch out for Ewoks! I think that ultralites in the US are limited to 5 gallons of fuel or about 19 liters. I think this would show much more interest and profitability if he pursued it as a hover cycle instead of a replacement for a helicopter. 1,000 a year? Now that\'s a delusional dream.
A lot of comment above forget: fighter jets are not inherently stable but the computer flies them. The advantages : can turn on a dime.
Reality: plenty of us trust computers with our lives now, in our anti lock brakes for instance or when we fly on an air bus. As long as he gets someone who knows what he is doing to look at the software. But yes, any investor needs to look carefully, but it could pay off very well, so do look.
I can definitely see some useful applications for filmmaking. As long as it\'s sturdy enough to mount a camera and some sort of shock absorber. Sound would be a bit of an issue, but there are some simple workarounds for that.
I want one Big time, Love to rent & own,.
Add mini turbine shaft drive engine,
Neat for Sales & Rentals.
Add buddy seat & cargo Pod in rear.
or side mouints for cargom, surfboard, etc??
OK Polaris (Victory Motorbikes) Build this.
Now harry potter quidditch can really be played. Just paint one up like a nimbus 2000 and there will be plenty of buyers.
For the people debating stability - you MUST look up the \"inverted pendulum fallacy\" or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_rocket_fallacy
Also, remember http://www.trekaero.com/ ? They still have not flown their man sized one out of ground effect.
As mentioned: Stability Issues is a Major concern; AnyGyro system used will demand extra Power and slow response from Fixed pitch Rotors ; An alternative Variable Pitch system will enhance EDF response making Gyros easier functioning. Elevating Fan level near or above Rider (CG ) is a good idea for stability otherwise a lot of power will be lost to stabilize the rider .Safefy is a Major issue ; A tough light Carbon-Fiber Cage may Also be needed for rider /- Airbags. How to Stop (Breaks) in Air is an issue ..... Wind stabilization is an issue ; Thermal lifting is an issue ; The whole rotor disk rotating at the Front-Back axis is better than Vanes . II would love to see an RC model of this flying well first !
This thing wil be so noisy that it\'ll be banned from use in a city.
This looks great! It\'s also a duplicate of my fathers patent, awarded in 1998. Except that my dad had additional louvres that turned and rotated for maneuvering. Also he had freewheel for when power was lost as well as other features however the design as shown is all the same as Vernes basics. These guys are doing a great job of getting this thing going. When V passed we let it go based on available time and financing.
\"The current prototype doesn\'t feature adjustable pitch propellers so it cannot autorotate in the case of an engine failure, but Malloy says the ability to add two explosive parachutes to the Hoverbike\'s airfarme or have the rider wearing a parachute is a safer option.\"
I wonder at what elevation Malloy expect these things to operate? High enough to auto-rotate or parachute from?
[Welcome to Lawsuitville, population, You]
As a helicopter flight instructor with several hundred hours in Robinson R-22 and R-44s, I am always excited about new aircraft. I do see a few issues with this concept however. First, with the fixed-pitch propellers, how is he going to address the advancing/retreating blade issues in forward flight? Will the props flex to compensate for dissymmetry of lift? I do see issues with roll stability, thought the gyroscopic stability of the propellers will help, how about during pitch changes? I also wonder about the flight controls-- mainly the pitch control using left handlebar-- will there be enough mechanical advantage and precision? Has he calculated a height-velocity chart yet? I know in a R-22 at zero airspeed you need to be at 500 feet to safely land in an autorotation (yes, I know there will be no auto capability, but with ballistic recovery chutes there is a minimum altitude).
I do wish him luck and hope he has thought about these issues. In response to other comments, this looks to be a very quiet aircraft. Ducted propellers are much more quiet than non-ducted blades. Most of the sound of a helicopter comes from the retreating blade slapping the air as it completes it\'s downward movement and starts back up (like a whip) and from the blade tips nearing the speed of sound. In this concept, the blades do not appear to flap so no whipping, and the tip vortices are reduced or nearly eliminated by the shroud around the props.
Looks fun, and I like the idea of Quiddich.
But there\'s going to be an awful lot of air going down through the fans. You\'d want to make sure the rider, or any nearby birds, etc, weren\'t included in this airflow.
Here\'s a report of the 1958 version of this vehicle for sale on ebay- http://cgi.ebay.com/1960-Bensen-B-10-Prop-Copter-report-3-7-11-/260748736573 - from the text, it seemed to be stable, and I don\'t think there were very many computer controls on this 1958 model....
@dparks doesn\'t the fact that the props are shrouded eliminate the effects of leading/trailing blades? since the props are not in the actual airstream, I would think that dissymetry of lift would be negligible.
I\'ve had some light aircraft experience and I\'ve also ridden large motorcycles. This Hoverbike really has me interested, but I would like to see some add-ons like a balistic parachute and a fairing around the rider, for improved aerodynamics. It might also be an idea to incorporate flywheels into the Rotors, so that they keep spinning (auto-rotate) in the event of engine failure. But otherwise I admire the effort and thinking that\'s gone into this. A deluxe version could borrow some ideas from the Blackhawk and Apache, like auto-hover and auto-pilot.
The "Hoverbike" was Invented 60 years ago.. It was called The (Bensen B-10 "Prop-Copter" 1958) http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/bensen_b-10.php
Yes, the key phrase here being \"adventurous.\" Or just plain nuts.
I would love to see this with Rafael Morgado\'s engine installed. Smaller, more power, more fuel efficient and much LIGHTER. www.angellabsllc.com
Dual counter-rotating blades (4 total) will be safer but add complexity. But at least if one counter-rotating set of blades fail, you have a second set to utilize. Also, engines are getting better all the time because of the high fuel prices. As a result, you may get a smaller/lighter engine that offers the same performance while increasing range. For added safety, a compact lightweight flywheel battery may give you enough power to land the cycle if the engines fail. As far as intake goes, directional intake shielding may help with manuverability and safety if they can be made lightweight, low friction and strong. I applaud you for just going in and starting somewhere, may good luck come to you.
it is guys like this who discovered new countries, climbed unclimbable mountains. I am no expert on aircraft of any kind but this idea looks promising to me.I hope there is some well to do benefactor willing to invest in this neat bit of kit. Good luck to you Mr Malloy
years ago i saw a similar design that used vanes to direct the thrust of the rotors instead of tilt. (increased stability) using those variable geometry spoilers like on race cars would help too. while it is possible to mitigate danger under certain \"normal\" circumstances, it cannot be eliminated. a motorcycle is still a death waiting to happen and this product increases that danger by a few dimensions. (ha) good luck getting it perfected. experimenting with balsa wood and carbon fibre first will help keep the costs down. there are many economical rc kits available that may help your design direction.
Someone here wanted a turbine engine (= lots of fuel needed) and a cargo pod - then we\'re as heavy as a conventional aircraft, with FAA breathing down your neck. And landing will kick up so much dust that view will be totally lost! The torque of the two fans will only cancel out if they are loaded exactly the same, something that only occasionally will happen. In the model world hexacopters have proved to be very, very reliable, mostly due to the fact that power control is so much easier with electric motors. The fans need collective pitch control like a helicopter, or the lift will be very uneven in forward flight, with the blades moving forward creating much more lift than those receeding, just the thing that makes helicopter rotor heads complex. If each fan had two contra-rotating propellers problems would be far less, but still not simple! With four fans (with two rotors turning clock-wise, and two contra-clock-wise) the problems would be far smaller. Six are even better :-)!
He\'ll die the first time he flies it. It will tip sideways once the ground is out of blast contact & turn over completely. Perhaps the lower centre of gravity, as proposed by another reader would fix this but I would think it needs a large U-shape dip to take the weight downwards & use large focus tubes that move slightly to each direction for steering & forward propulsion otherwise it ain\'t gonna go forwards either...
Rex Alfie Lee
It needs a pair of rotors at each end for maximum stability.
Aren\'t there some better(more stable designs)on the R/C market?
Coming, close, almost there, someday.....etc
You can solve the stability issue with the right coding and an arduino! Then you\'d probably want to make that triple redundant. As others have pointed out, a normal chopper is inherently unstable despite looking otherwise. Critical to the potential of devices like this one is the development of better performing safety chutes, airbags etc. The chutes need to be able to fully inflate to the point of providing full retardation within a second or so and there will need to be airbags to cushion the worst-case, just above the ground scenario. Other than that, the device appears to be worth developing further.
Very good way for hurting your self. I prefere close canopy air veciles
Very cool vehicle!
I am very skeptical of the speed. There is a \"momentum drag\" term whenever you need to \"accelerate air\" to your forward speed. Given the amount of air being moved and the speed being reported, this seems optimistic.
If you have interest in a Personal Air Vehicle that is more conventional in nature, that does have great auto-rotational capabilities, good speed, payload and range, and is easy to fly and maintain, with a luxury car like price, I suggest you take a look at the Helodyne (www.Helodyne.com).
No one has mentioned the principle of the inherent instability of 2 bladed propellers, when their axis of rotation is translated in pitch or yaw. The variable gyroscopic or Coriolis forces WILL cause uncontrollable vibration under rapid change of axial direction, making this a certain death machine when untethered.
Use props with 3 or more blades to negate this phenomenon
Directional stability inflight would be an issue. Some horizontal and vertical stabiliser would solve that.,also make them lift inducting and reduce the fuel consumption as well. Quad fans and a ballistic parachute I would be prepared to give it a go! Great effort so far. I respect people who are shepherds....not sheep.
When I recently searched for a Hoverbike I found AirBoard. Pretty interesting - instead of having 2 big propellers it has 4 smaller ones. AirBoard flying machine design could really be a real hover bike.