It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Taxo Supersonic Helicopter?

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 27 2004 @ 04:27 PM
(If this is a repeat, then take away thanks)

Yes, I know that this is a simulation for FS2004, but I was just wondering if a supersonic helicopter was possible. I have done a little reading in regards to the quadripple sound effects that would come off the blade tips.

There is this guy who is making this prototype helicopter/plane, called a CarterCopter

This guy is saying that he can push the helicopter/plane to 450kmh

To achieve a 400 mph cruise speed efficiently, you must reduce drag. Profile drag reduction is obtained by reducing the lifting surface drag to the minimum square footage necessary to support the aircraft; at the airfoil CL (coefficient of lift) for best L/D (lift-drag ratio), at gross weight, at 400 mph, and at 45,000 ft where drag, because of the thin air, is less than 1/5 the drag at sea level for the same speed.

A couple of questions:
1. Why would you uses depleted uranium on the wing tips, does this have any real effect as to stability or speed performance?

2. Would it be possible to design rotory blades that where similar to the projects that NASA (NACA at the time) was working on in the 50's with the XF-88 protoype plane. That could be used for supersonic flight.

I was just reading and got to thinking, any ideas?

posted on Dec, 27 2004 @ 05:35 PM
Well the super lynx by westland CAN do 400KMPH
Its blades go at mach one but the helicopter doesnt.
So a similar idea to the lynx mabye...

posted on Dec, 27 2004 @ 05:37 PM
Ever seen the Sixth Day? those types of aircraft are actually being researched by boeing!

posted on Dec, 27 2004 @ 06:34 PM
Interesting grndzero you wouldn't have any links on that would you? probably not seeing as though it is a prototype aircraft...and sorry it should say 650 kph, sorry math skills not working.

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 10:18 PM
I have seen a picture of a concept a while back, for the life of me I can't find it anymore, but it was ugly so it was obviously Boeing, don't get me wrong, Boeing makes good aircraft, they are just not pleasing to see...E.G. X-32...

Similar concept...

Also check this out:

[edit on 28/12/2004 by GrOuNd_ZeRo]

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:34 PM

Originally posted by spaceghost
1. Why would you uses depleted uranium on the wing tips, does this have any real effect as to stability or speed performance?

Do a thought experiment here with me. Okay, you are tooling along at 1000 feet AGL at 90 knots, chewing gum and wiggling your feet whilst twitching your hands. Kopacetic. And then you hear: silence.

Oops. Motor off.

Maybe you ran out of fuel, the engine died, you took a hit, or whatever.

Now. How do you fly without a motor? Easy. You autorotate.

Slight aft cyclic, right pedal (assuming US rotor here), drop the collective all at the same time. Air comes up through the rotor as you drop in a 3:1 glide ratio, windmilling the blades. Watch your airspeed and RPM. As you near the ground, aft cyclic flare, forward cyclic level the skids, raise the collective and keep the nose straight with the pedals. If all goes well, you are down all in one piece.

Problem is, reaction time. Until you drop that cyclic, the drag of the pitched rotor blades is eating RPM. If the RPM goes low enough before you do something, blades stop lifting and you become a lawn dart. So you need some energy stored in the blades. Add weights (DU) to the blade tips, and you buy time through stored centrifugal energy. So now it is easier to enter autorotation before you run out of RPM. Next problem: you've been trading altitude for RPM all the way down. Now you are at the bottom, and you have nothing left to trade. Except that stored cetrifugal energy. With enough energy in the blades, when you raise the collective at the bottom you can fly the ship down under control to a soft, controlled landing.

Weight adds stress to the rotating assemblies, so there is a limit to how much you can load on. It also has a damping effect, which can minimize some of the numerical chaos up there in the world of vortices. So more weight at the blade tips is better up to a point.

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 06:06 AM
Ground zero, a funny quote from your X-wing link; "The X-Wing may have been named after the fictional X-Wing starfighter from the Star Wars movies.


Doh, so its nothing to do with the fact that when the rotor is stopped it becomes a wing and its shaped like an 'X' then.

I just found that very funny, I actually normally like the Wikipedia site

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 09:21 AM
Yeah so do I, much comprehensive information...

Too bad I couldn't find the concept of the boeing plane...I swear I saw this, not 100% it was boeing though...

Where is OtS when you need him!

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 12:58 PM
Boeing works on canard rotor wing. It is a helicopter with 2 blades(wing) that are fixed when aircraft achieves speed greater than 120 knots and than it flies like plane. It is already officially designed as X-50 and if produced it should be named "dragonfly". Currently they are working on unmanned version (tech demonstrator), but manned version for marine corps is possible as Osprey escort. It should be able to make up to 800kmph.

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 01:05 PM
Thank you longbow, you don't happen to be the very same longbow from the TAD forum are ya?

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 01:13 PM

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Ever seen the Sixth Day? those types of aircraft are actually being researched by boeing!

I just watched this last night for the first time. Those helo planes were pretty fricken cool
I want 5 of em.

posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 05:57 PM
Pretty sweet huh? 'd be quite pleased with just one!

posted on Dec, 30 2004 @ 05:43 PM
like the idea, not so sure about the design though, not very sexy, but i like the idea.

thanks for answering the questions...cheers

new topics

top topics


log in