The future of GA is one step closer....

Meh. The physical act of levitation and an elevated sightseeing point themselves are not what drew me to flying. There were utilitarian elements of that act that are part and parcel of why I fly. I'm sure there are others like me. To each their own. Glorified hang-gliding wasn't my hook....
 
This would definitely be a fun way to commute to work though!
 
My first thought was what happens during a rough landing and the pilot is tossed into the Bass-O-Matic?
 
Six motors all too small to autorotate?

What could possibly go wrong?

Lose one and you'll flip pretty quickly with a lever arm that far out. That's gotta be at least 50 lb of thrust apiece. 250 ft-lb flipping torque sounds very messy with all those rapidly moving parts.
 
Last edited:
hindsight2020 said:
Meh. The physical act of levitation and an elevated sightseeing point themselves are not what drew me to flying. There were utilitarian elements of that act that are part and parcel of why I fly. I'm sure there are others like me. To each their own. Glorified hang-gliding wasn't my hook....
Click to expand...

That's you and me and the rest of the people already in GA. For GA to grow and attract more people, you have to be able to fly from home to the store.
 
MAKG1 said:
Six motors all too small to autorotate?

What could possibly go wrong?

Lose one and you'll flip pretty quickly with a lever arm that far out. That's gotta be at least 50 lb of thrust apiece. 250 ft-lb flipping torque sounds very messy with all those rapidly moving parts.
Click to expand...

Actually, from the sounds I heard it sounds like they are redundant on each post, one being able to meet the requirements of both to get you down on a failure.
 
I hope they had a big first aid kit nearby. One wrong move and the guy will look like he fell in a food processor.
 
Henning said:
That's you and me and the rest of the people already in GA. For GA to grow and attract more people, you have to be able to fly from home to the store.
Click to expand...

This is probably the most important thing that the "old hats" keep forgetting about or just have ignored for decades. Aviation HAS to be a regular old boring form of every day transportation first, THEN we can start to build "toys" and "recreational aircraft" for fun.
If we don't change this and make is reality very very quickly, GA will die before you do.
 
Henning said:
Actually, from the sounds I heard it sounds like they are redundant on each post, one being able to meet the requirements of both to get you down on a failure.
Click to expand...

Odd. Your post looked like you were calling him a rude name but the quoted post doesn't read that way. See the attached picture for what I saw.

Back on topic, if you have enough lift and it has the programming of a drone, the engine out will be handled by the other engines. As it starts to flip, the gyros/accelerometers will detect it and reduce power to the appropriate motors to keep it upright.

I still prefer a plane though.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    440.8 KB · Views: 43
Cap'n Jack said:
Odd. Your post looked like you were calling him a rude name but the quoted post doesn't read that way. See the attached picture for what I saw.

Back on topic, if you have enough lift and it has the programming of a drone, the engine out will be handled by the other engines. As it starts to flip, the gyros/accelerometers will detect it and reduce power to the appropriate motors to keep it upright.

I still prefer a plane though.
Click to expand...

Yeah, on the iPad sometimes I hit the m instead of the space bar and it autocorrects it into the weirdest crap.
 
Henning said:
Yeah, on the iPad sometimes I hit the m instead of the space bar and it autocorrects it into the weirdest crap.
Click to expand...

But you didn't this time. Look at the quoted text. I quoted it 3 or 4 times just in case you edited it because I thought it may have been an autocorrect thing you fixed. Android is just as bad on the autocorrect.

Edit....I see the fix you made finally showed up. It just took a really long time to update in the thread.

Hoe long does that thing fly? I can see some people giving it a try.
 
Last edited:
Just like a motorcycle, if anything goes wrong, you're fooked...
 
Cap'n Jack said:
But you didn't this time. Look at the quoted text. I quoted it 3 or 4 times just in case you edited it because I thought it may have been an autocorrect thing you fixed. Android is just as bad on the autocorrect.

Edit....I see the fix you made finally showed up. It just took a really long time to update in the thread.

How long does that thing fly? I can see some people giving it a try.
Click to expand...

That my friend is the $64,000 question. If you can only fly it for a few minutes, not very useful. Personally I think it'll need a 75 mile range to be a success, maybe 50.
 
Henning said:
That my friend is the $64,000 question. If you can only fly it for a few minutes, not very useful. Personally I think it'll need a 75 mile range to be a success, maybe 50.
Click to expand...

Maybe a 15 to 20 minute ride is sufficient. But it need to be ready to fly again fairly quickly. Really depends on the purpose of the flight.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Maybe a 15 to 20 minute ride is sufficient. But it need to be ready to fly again fairly quickly. Really depends on the purpose of the flight.
Click to expand...

That would likely be sufficient for an entertainment industry setting. Since these will be stabilized by software, there's a good chance the learning curve will be minimal and they could be rented to novices like jet skis. In that setting turn around is just a matter of having enough spare batteries on hand that you can always have a charged one ready.

If they only make it 20 minutes though, I don't think it will make them practical as transportation unless they are way faster than I think they'll be. That's always been the problem with the flying car/cycle concept, energy density.
 
Archammer said:
This is probably the most important thing that the "old hats" keep forgetting about or just have ignored for decades. Aviation HAS to be a regular old boring form of every day transportation first, THEN we can start to build "toys" and "recreational aircraft" for fun.
If we don't change this and make is reality very very quickly, GA will die before you do.
Click to expand...
Nobody has "ignored" it. The golden age of GA is over because of liability. Whatever new form of flying machine is invented, it will not be immune to accidents. We can't keep an umbrella on our patio from blowing away, yet we are supposed to be able to have multiple people in close proximity landing in a Walmart parking lot? You can't get someone to take responsibility for stepping on the gas instead of the brake. If anything happens that brings down one of these machines, the pilot and the people on the ground are going to sue the manufacturer.

The most important thing that the new generation needs to remember is that the only reason things like motorcycles and GA exist today is that they were invented and popularized before the country went sue happy and there are too many for an outright ban. Heck, the Segway was supposed to revolutionize city travel. It was green, practical, what's not to like? Without any data, cities banned them because of potential incursions with pedestrians. What are the odds that a new vehicle that weighs a few hundred pounds loaded and zips along above peoples heads getting any approval? If GA is relying on local utility travel to survive, it's already dead.
 
Henning said:
That's you and me and the rest of the people already in GA. For GA to grow and attract more people, you have to be able to fly from home to the store.
Click to expand...


Have you seen all the dents and scratches on the average joes car? Their opinion of mx?

Guess if the masses start flying we all better get some heavy duty walls and windows installed, it's gonna be raining idiots.
 
By the time NTSB, FAA, MADD, PETA, and the local tax collector get done, it'll take a revocation of the basic laws of physics to get that thing to fly.
 
Henning said:
That would likely be sufficient for an entertainment industry setting. Since these will be stabilized by software, there's a good chance the learning curve will be minimal and they could be rented to novices like jet skis. In that setting turn around is just a matter of having enough spare batteries on hand that you can always have a charged one ready.

If they only make it 20 minutes though, I don't think it will make them practical as transportation unless they are way faster than I think they'll be. That's always been the problem with the flying car/cycle concept, energy density.
Click to expand...
If some of the Tesla car guys' stuff sees the light of day practically, it might be possible. It'd be fun to have one of those out at the family ranch to run out and do stuff.
 
James331 said:
Have you seen all the dents and scratches on the average joes car? Their opinion of mx?

Guess if the masses start flying we all better get some heavy duty walls and windows installed, it's gonna be raining idiots.
Click to expand...

Well the other option is that you can be up there all by yourself with nowhere to land because they closed all the airports down. How's that sound?
 
Sling the cockpit underneath the rotors in the Superman position, throw the controls out front so you actually lie Superman with hands ahead, slap a single pusher prop (above, maybe on the rear shaft) and you have the absolutely coolest toy ever. You'd have limited / no sight of the blades and complete freedom of movement ... think hang glider position with the sail replaced by 3/6 rotor contraption they built.

I want one, just not the "sit on top of the blender" style they have now.
 
James331 said:
Have you seen all the dents and scratches on the average joes car? Their opinion of mx?

Guess if the masses start flying we all better get some heavy duty walls and windows installed, it's gonna be raining idiots.
Click to expand...

That's actually the advantage to solid state electronics and electric motors, much less demanding of maintenance than what we fly now. Snap an injection molded plastic body with blade guards on it and it won't be too bad. Reinforced roofs would probably be wise.:lol:
 
iflyforfun said:
Sling the cockpit underneath the rotors in the Superman position, throw the controls out front so you actually lie Superman with hands ahead, slap a single pusher prop (above, maybe on the rear shaft) and you have the absolutely coolest toy ever. You'd have limited / no sight of the blades and complete freedom of movement ... think hang glider position with the sail replaced by 3/6 rotor contraption they built.

I want one, just not the "sit on top of the blender" style they have now.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, prone would be ok, but I don't think I would want to be underneath, on top like a drag bike would be ok for short durations. Long range cruising I find still more comfortable in an upright seated position.
 
If that is the future of GA, I'd rather live in the past. That does not look like anything I would want to fly.
 
SkyDog58 said:
If that is the future of GA, I'd rather live in the past. That does not look like anything I would want to fly.
Click to expand...

And this brings up a question I have often wondered- For GA to truly prosper and costs to come way down, we need far more of John Q Public to owning and operating aircraft. To get more of the general public into general aviation, the aircraft themselves have to provide greater utility and much simpler learning curve. Technology will likely be able make this so in the near future. Would today's pilots accept this new future?

What if it were super easy to travel across country with your family in all weather, like say 8 hours of training and you're off? Much like the Google self driving car, the GA plane of the future could be nearly all self flying. The "pilot", or driver of the aircraft would simply be there to monitor the progress and have very basic emergency skills. Would the pilots today accept this way of flying, or would they quit flying altogether in disgust?

I think a good comparison might be how R/C model airplane flying has been around forever, but the introduction of super simple to fly quad copter drones has caused more people to fly R/C than ever in history. It's an example of how a technology can be disruptive and create wide spread adoption.
 
Last edited:
Dav8or said:
And this brings up a question I have often wondered- For GA to truly prosper and costs to come way down, we need far more of John Q Public to owning and operating aircraft. To get more of the general public into general aviation, the aircraft themselves have to provide greater utility and much simpler learning curve. Technology will likely be able make this so in the near future. Would today's pilots accept this new future?

What if it were super easy to travel across country with your family in all weather, like say 8 hours of training and you're off? Much like the Google self driving car, the GA plane of the future could be nearly all self flying. The "pilot", or driver of the aircraft would simply be there to monitor the progress and have very basic emergency skills. Would the pilots today accept this way of flying, or would they quit flying altogether in disgust?

I think a good comparison might be how R/C model airplane flying has been around forever, but the introduction of super simple to fly quad copter drones has caused more people to fly R/C than ever in history. It's an example of how a technology can be disruptive and create wide spread adoption.
Click to expand...

I doubt that a proliferation of human sized quadcopters would have an impact on the cost of flying more conventional GA aircraft. So I see no benefit to those of us who fly real airplanes.

We have already seen how irresponsible so many (most?) operators of the models have been. Disruptive? Well, yes.

To me part of the allure of flying besides the view is the internal satisfaction from the achievement of learning the skill. I also believe that adds a higher level of responsibility and respect for what one is doing. That would be missing if it is too easy.

Just keep them below 400' and away from airports. And yes, I mean human carrying ones as well as the models.
 
SkyDog58 said:
I doubt that a proliferation of human sized quadcopters would have an impact on the cost of flying more conventional GA aircraft. So I see no benefit to those of us who fly real airplanes.
Click to expand...

I know the intent of this thread is about quad copters that carry people, but my question is more about any kind of aircraft that can be easily utilized. So imagine a traditional airplane with an auto pilot on steroids and an ATC system to match so that this plane flies it's occupants anywhere any time pretty much by itself. That's what I'm talking about.
 
No matter how advanced the planes get the FAA still impedes the creation of new pilots by requiring very expensive and time-consuming training. And the aging baby boomers that created the spike in GA in the 70s are now too old to pass a medical exam...and on fixed incomes so they have no money or energy to buy and fly new planes.

Like other high end hobbies, GA is going to get a LOT smaller. Other examples of in declines are golf, new home purchase, motorcycle sales. Things in ascent are senior housing, medical system use, RV sales, coffin sales, and cruises.
 
LoxaBagels said:
No matter how advanced the planes get the FAA still impedes the creation of new pilots by requiring very expensive and time-consuming training. And the aging baby boomers that created the spike in GA in the 70s are now too old to pass a medical exam...and on fixed incomes so they have no money or energy to buy and fly new planes.

Like other high end hobbies, GA is going to get a LOT smaller. Other examples of in declines are golf, new home purchase, motorcycle sales. Things in ascent are senior housing, medical system use, RV sales, coffin sales, and cruises.
Click to expand...

I live next to the biggest Cruise Ship port in the world, the expansion of the cruise ship industry that I see is younger people and young families.
 
A self-flown aircraft that hits mass-market numbers will not be seen in our lifetime.

The public (and govt) has to accept self-driving cars first, and that's a long way off.

The certification costs for such a plane vs the sales volume would be a "chicken and egg" roadblock.
 
Drones will fly with or without FFA approval. It is simply too easy to do so. Human carrying quad cycles will also be cheap (outside of FFA regs using off the shelf parts) , easy to fly, an impossible to hold down. The FFA will make rules that will be ignored. Those who grew up with the freedom of the Internet will ignore any attempt to curb their freedom to fly.

And it will happen very quickly - - by year 2020.
 
dans2992 said:
A self-flown aircraft that hits mass-market numbers will not be seen in our lifetime.

The public (and govt) has to accept self-driving cars first, and that's a long way off.

The certification costs for such a plane vs the sales volume would be a "chicken and egg" roadblock.
Click to expand...

Not really, 1-500' is a "no man's land" legislatively, it's no agencies territory to govern. It's not on the highways and not in the FAA's domain either.
 
dans2992 said:
A self-flown aircraft that hits mass-market numbers will not be seen in our lifetime.

The public (and govt) has to accept self-driving cars first, and that's a long way off.

The certification costs for such a plane vs the sales volume would be a "chicken and egg" roadblock.
Click to expand...

It may not be that far off. Technologically, we could build this plane today as it is many magnitudes simpler than the self driving car, however ATC would have to be completely overhauled to support this future flight.

Public acceptance might not be as tough of a sell as one might think. Most people today are fully aware that the Jumbo Jets they frequently fly on fly all by themselves a lot and the word autopilot is well understood in popular culture. I was not suggesting that these new planes would not require someone who is trained to command it though. I still see a "pilot" being required to monitor the flight and deal with problems. The idea being that the amount of training required for this new pilot would be vastly reduced from what it is now.

Anyhow, my question was more hypothetical than it was to be prophetic. Would the GA community accept and embrace these new airplanes, or would they see it as the death of aviation. I think likely the later. It seems that pilots today are firmly rooted in some sort of romantic past. If so, it would seem that for GA to grow and thrive on a large scale, GA has to die in the process if that makes any sense.
 
tinerj said:
Drones will fly with or without FFA approval. It is simply too easy to do so. Human carrying quad cycles will also be cheap (outside of FFA regs using off the shelf parts) , easy to fly, an impossible to hold down. The FFA will make rules that will be ignored. Those who grew up with the freedom of the Internet will ignore any attempt to curb their freedom to fly.

And it will happen very quickly - - by year 2020.
Click to expand...

Really? Are there new game changing batteries I haven't heard about yet? If so that would be awesome!! Finally I can convert my Mooney to electric! Sadly, I think your 2020 prediction is very, very optimistic. The practical human sized quad copter is stuck waiting for better batteries too.
 
Dav8or said:
It may not be that far off. Technologically, we could build this plane today as it is many magnitudes simpler than the self driving car, however ATC would have to be completely overhauled to support this future flight.
Click to expand...

It's already underway, why do you think we have an ADS-B mandate? It's the entire purpose behind NextGen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top