Fairey Rotodyne

For everything else UK defence-related that doesn't fit into any of the sections above.
Post Reply
james k
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 31 Aug 2017, 16:51
United Kingdom

Fairey Rotodyne

Post by james k »

The Tilt Rotor Osprey might have had a serious competitor if the Fairy Rotordyne concept had been revisited with modern technology.

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

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Time to revisit the Rotadyne?

Post by RetroSicotte »

If creating new threads as regularly as you do, could you please attempt to consider their initial post a little more? Include some information on what it is you are bringing up, title the thread appropriately and initiate discussion with more than an extremely vague question that isn't even in the thread content itself.

I'm content to allow a thread on the Rotodyne, however I am becoming concerned with the regularity of short-spoken threads being created like this.

I have replaced the thread title and added a wikipedia link instead of a google images cross-link that doesn't go direct to anything.

james k
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 31 Aug 2017, 16:51
United Kingdom

Re: Fairey Rotadyne

Post by james k »

If you don't like it delete it. I've followed your instructions and placed it in general discussion and you're still not happy, so since it's abundantly clear that you have a problem why don't you just ban me?

james k
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 31 Aug 2017, 16:51
United Kingdom

Re: Fairey Rotadyne

Post by james k »

I mentioned this because other manufacturers seem to be going down the same route and concept. I mentioned the black Puma because it was unusual and I asked a question about Coast Guard Helicopters. But if you only allow discussions on topics that you or your mates choose then why allow anyone else to join?

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1747
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Fairey Rotadyne

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

james k wrote:If you don't like it delete it. I've followed your instructions and placed it in general discussion and you're still not happy, so since it's abundantly clear that you have a problem why don't you just ban me?
You placed the topic in the correct section, but like RetroSicotte stated above, it just needed a little more effort put into the initial post to help spark some discussion. Please bare that in mind when creating topics in future.
james k wrote:I mentioned this because other manufacturers seem to be going down the same route and concept. I mentioned the black Puma because it was unusual and I asked a question about Coast Guard Helicopters. But if you only allow discussions on topics that you or your mates choose then why allow anyone else to join?
All members of this forum are welcome to create topics as long as they are not duplicates of already existing topics or topics that just won't be of any interest to the rest of the board. Your recent topic on the Puma was closed, not just because we had a thread which you could have discussed it in already, but also because it was massively inaccurate. The initial post also put across a clear bitterness towards the RAF, which just didn't set a good precedent for the rest of the topic.

If you wish to discuss things further, send me or RetroSicotte a private message.

Dahedd
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: 06 May 2015, 11:18

Re: Fairey Rotadyne

Post by Dahedd »

Totally off the wall but the mention of the Rotadyne made me remember an old forum post, pretty sure I saw this on the Think Defence website at one stage.

http://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=455.15

A rotadyne Hercules conversion.

User avatar
swoop
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 03 May 2015, 21:25
Pitcairn Island

Re: Fairey Rotadyne

Post by swoop »

Two spelling mistakes in the aircraft's name within the thread title and first post...
Hmmm.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Fairey Rotodyne

Post by SKB »

Fairey Rotodyne

(Mustard) 23rd October 2019
In the late 1950’s, intercity air travel was on the rise. But while a trip from New York to Boston by airplane might only take about an hour, you’d still need to get to and from the airport. And in many congested cities, that was already taking longer than the flight itself. As a solution, helicopter airlines had begun to crop up in major cities, letting passengers skip over traffic to connect airports with their city centers. But helicopters were ultimately too inefficient to become a viable form of mass transport. The Rotodyne was going to change all that. Taking off from downtown rooftops and heliports, but flying faster, further, and more economically than any helicopter, the Rotodyne would be the quickest way to move from one city centre to the next.

The Rotodyne might have looked like part helicopter, part plane, but it was actually neither. Where a helicopter uses engine power to spin a rotor blade to force air down and create lift, on a Rotodyne the large rotor wasn’t directly driven by a motor. Instead it used a freely-spinning rotor called an autogyro. As air passed naturally through the rotor blades during flight, it caused the rotor spin around like a pinwheel to create lift. The Rotodyne still had wings and a pair of turboprops much like an airplane. But in forward flight, the unpowered spinning rotor lifted more than half the aircraft’s weight. To take off and land vertically and hover, tip jets at the end of each rotor blade would be used to spin up the Rotodyne’s rotor. Once in forward flight, the tip jets were shut off and the rotor would once again spin freely.

When the first Rotodyne prototype took to the skies, it could carry 40 passengers over 700km and reach speeds of over 300km/h, all while being able to land and take off on a space not much larger than the aircraft itself. And after 350 successful test flights, the Rotodyne proved to be safe and capable. But despite plans for an even larger more powerful version, a combination of noise concerns and lack of government support for research and development ultimately led to cancellation of the project.

serge750
Senior Member
Posts: 1068
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
United Kingdom

Re: Fairey Rotodyne

Post by serge750 »

Think it would be awesome if we in the UK could develop a modern version to replace the Merlins…. :D i know im wishing but 8-)

J. Tattersall

Re: Fairey Rotodyne

Post by J. Tattersall »

The rotordyne had some major draw backs. The rotor tip jets used to turn the main rotors (it had no main rotor gearbox) meant it had both a high acoustic and (at night) visual signature as the hot gases exited the rotor tips. Both environmentally and tactically a non-starter.

However the compound helicopter in general (i.e. a helicopter with the addition of a fixed main wing) does have an advantage in that during relatively high speed forward fight the lift produced by the main wing means that the rotors need to produce less lift which means that rotor power can be less and importantly less rotor drag. However this effect is much less evident at low speeds and if the aircraft its to be operating predominantly in the low speed regime then the extra weight of the fixed wing can outweigh its advantage.

Little J
Member
Posts: 973
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
United Kingdom

Re: Fairey Rotodyne

Post by Little J »

Just found this, showing a lot of the testing done...


Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Fairey Rotodyne

Post by Lord Jim »

If you think that is impressive, look up some video of the Mi-12. Here is one for starters;

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7931
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Fairey Rotodyne

Post by SKB »

The Rotordyne is is classed as a gyrocopter, not a helicopter - as the Rotordynes rotors are not mechanically powered.


(Mustard) 10th September 2020

But the Mi-12 is an interesting machine, so here's a video explaining more about the Mi-12, why it was built and what its actual secret purpose was for.

Post Reply