"minimum" personal mobility device --ground and airmobile.

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Kingfisher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
448
Location
Perth, WA, Australia
I agree - But!

On the other hand it is nice to not be an aircraft so as not to have to comply with FAR 61 and 91 and all the other requirements. I like being off the radar. This makes operations much easier. Also not being a licenced road vehicle makes around town road operations much better. How many trails and parks do not allow motorized vehicles? Why are bicycles so popular?

I say 250 pounds is a lot of equipment to lug around if it is not needed. 65 mph is fast enough for short trips. And, $25 worth of gas (5 gallons) is enough to burn in a reasonable time before pit stops.

Perhaps some day I will want more but I will worry about some day, some day. Right now I have more and want less. Less is more. More difficult perhaps but what I have now is more and it is not good enough.

This is the concept of "Minimum". Think about a flying solo wheel. That is the freedom of flight that is the long term dream of personal flight. We are closer than ever to that goal. Don't let it slip away.

Who said "If you want to make a man happy do not give him more but have him want less." It's true.
Very well said! I don't understand how people get lost on this topic in discussions about which rules to comply to and whether their insurance might cover the new design. Imagine Wilbur Wright saying: "Oh, we won't meet paragraph @#@#$ of the flying steam carriage regulations! Orville, we are stuffed!"
 

bmcj

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
13,346
Location
Fresno, California
Why would someone (bmcj) like a comment like this? Beats me...
My "like" was not aimed at the Falcon. It was in response to the notion of lots of ideas, but none of them to fruition. It was a notion that I could sympathize with. While I do have some completions under my belt, I also have countless other projects or ideas that are yet to complete or may never be done. Such is the dilemma of a dreamer.

I will withhold comment on the Falcon because I have not studied it in detail, but I am skeptical in one's ability to find suitable power sources that are together light, powerful, and with long endurance. I also wonder if the bird-like biometric motion and control of a flapping wing is yet within our grasp or understanding.
 

Rienk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,364
Location
Santa Maria, CA (SMX)
I also wonder if the bird-like biometric motion and control of a flapping wing is yet within our grasp or understanding.
I don't know why it's so difficult to understand.
Supposedly, the process was simple enough that, after only a few (thousand?) iterations of evolutionary change, the ability to correctly use wings/tail/head for flight was quickly transferred directly into the genetic coding referred to as "instinct". Not sure how many of these critters actually had to mutate/develop/learn and stay alive long enough to procreate - let alone figure out how to pass on the information genetically... but if it all happened by random luck, then certainly with humanity's discovery of intellect and cognitive thinking, we can figure out how to design a wing mechanism like this!

Of course, I prefer to learn design from the Designer... just saying :)
 

WonderousMountain

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
1,853
Location
Clatsop, Or
It just takes someone with enough credibility stealing the idea from someone talented and dedicated enough to get someone wealthy enough to make it feasible.

LuPi
 

bmcj

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
13,346
Location
Fresno, California
I don't know why it's so difficult to understand.
Supposedly, the process was simple enough that, after only a few (thousand?) iterations of evolutionary change, the ability to correctly use wings/tail/head for flight was quickly transferred directly into the genetic coding referred to as "instinct".
Instinct can be hard earned. Kicking a ball is simple... kicking it consistently well requires a bit of practice to make it instinctual. I do not see birds kicking balls any more than I see people flapping wings. Especially telling when you consider that learning to kick a ball is relatively safe and easy, yet getting the hang of flapping is best done before you reach the ground. :gig:
 
Last edited:

Rienk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,364
Location
Santa Maria, CA (SMX)
Instinct can be hard earned. Kicking a ball is simple... kicking it well and consistently requires a bit of practice to make it instinctual. I do not see birds kicking balls any more than I see people flapping wings. Especially telling when you consider that learning to kick a ball is relatively safe and easy, yet getting the hang of flapping is best done before you reach the ground. :gig:
But kicking that ball well does not get coded into the genes and past on to future generations... otherwise, I'd be good looking AND smart!
 

autoreply

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
10,748
Location
Rotterdam, Netherlands
I also wonder if the bird-like biometric motion and control of a flapping wing is yet within our grasp or understanding.
On the verge of it, based on closely following and meeting (sometimes even sober !!) with the respective Delfly teams.

Not sure however how easy it would be to teach to a human (linear feedback). That's the real unknown. Based on nothing more than gut feeling and mastering 1 and 2 wheels, I'd venture is well within our abilities.
 

Kingfisher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
448
Location
Perth, WA, Australia
But kicking that ball well does not get coded into the genes and past on to future generations... otherwise, I'd be good looking AND smart!
The emerging science of Epigenetics (I think it's called that) does now acknowledge that what you do in your current life might indeed turn certain genes on or off and therefore affect your offspring’s abilities. So keep flapping!
 

Kingfisher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
448
Location
Perth, WA, Australia
On the verge of it, based on closely following and meeting (sometimes even sober !!) with the respective Delfly teams.

Not sure however how easy it would be to teach to a human (linear feedback). That's the real unknown. Based on nothing more than gut feeling and mastering 1 and 2 wheels, I'd venture is well within our abilities.
Agree, it's just around the corner. I envy you, I wish I had friends I could talk with about these dreams…

 

Kingfisher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
448
Location
Perth, WA, Australia
My "like" was not aimed at the Falcon. It was in response to the notion of lots of ideas, but none of them to fruition. It was a notion that I could sympathize with. While I do have some completions under my belt, I also have countless other projects or ideas that are yet to complete or may never be done. Such is the dilemma of a dreamer.

I will withhold comment on the Falcon because I have not studied it in detail, but I am skeptical in one's ability to find suitable power sources that are together light, powerful, and with long endurance. I also wonder if the bird-like biometric motion and control of a flapping wing is yet within our grasp or understanding.
Sorry, I misinterpreted your "like", then!

Regarding the power source for the Falcon: I think if it was just a hang glider with the variable geometry wing, it would already be a winner. The flapping I also see as the biggest challenge. Also, I have my doubts that the pitch control by rotating both wings in the same direction around the shoulder joint is enough. It only changes the angle of incidence with respect to the relatively small tail. I thought if one could also move the entire wing forwards and backwards, this would allow to move the centre of gravity and enable birdlike landings, using the tail as a brake, instead of tilting it up like an elevator.
 

aeromomentum

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
101
Location
Stuart, FL USA
The problem with this whole thread is trying to compete with cars and motorcycles for personal transportation. Yes they require a huge amount of infrastructure (roads) but they are already in place in most of the world. And local landing sites are few and far between in congested areas. Why take to the air unless you can go much faster or want to travel in areas without roads? Or you are doing it just for sport and not personal transportation. So why not just get a motorcycle, Elio, Twin Up! or similar and then have a trike, LSA, Pitts, etc for sport?
 

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,080
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
The problem with this whole thread is trying to compete with cars and motorcycles for personal transportation. Yes they require a huge amount of infrastructure (roads) but they are already in place in most of the world. And local landing sites are few and far between in congested areas. Why take to the air unless you can go much faster or want to travel in areas without roads? Or you are doing it just for sport and not personal transportation. So why not just get a motorcycle, Elio, Twin Up! or similar and then have a trike, LSA, Pitts, etc for sport?
But, in many locatons the infrastructure (roads) are congested to the point of being non functional. The objective is to be independent of the surface streets with the limitations of heavy traffic, stop lights and stop signs and to avoid roadway obsticles such as lakes, rivers and railways so that even a reletively low speed related to air travel is competative with and faster than surface traffic.

Consider the bicycle commuter effect in congested automotive traffic (where a 25 mph cyclist can compete with an 85 mph automobile) applied to air commuting. While a cycling commute is limited to 15 to 25 miles, the "minimum airmobile" commute would expand to 40 to 80 miles and be powered by low powered motor (low fuel cost) and because of being off highway it would be safer than a motorcycle or bicycle commute.

I am seeking the ultimate touring motorcycle (more accurately a lightweight powered bicycle) for both rural and urban transportation. I do not accept ridding in heavy, high speed traffic and want more than a 25 mph max speed. Bicyles going 45 mph or faster should have aerodynamic controls and wings. Try a downhill bicycle run at 50 mph and you will get the feel for what I am saying. At any speed over 45 mph I would rather be in the air.
 

WonderousMountain

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
1,853
Location
Clatsop, Or
One of the biggest thrills of my life was going +45 mph on a racing bike from the 80's (with wholly inadequate brakes). You would have me give that up for slow flying???

The shimmy was to die for!
 

Sockmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Messages
1,810
Location
Flint, Mi, USA
Whenever I see a guy who has lost his legs in an accident or something my first thought is "Without the weight of his legs, if he trained hard, could he make an ornithopter work on just arm strength?"
 

Kingfisher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
448
Location
Perth, WA, Australia
Very cool, I like the TED talk. Flapping wing certainly comparable in performance to the quadcopter, in small scale. More directly applicable to man-carrying aircraft is the autonomous flying with GPS, obstacle avoidance and associated stability control. All that is needed is a homebuilt with electric actuators for control. Of course it is boring if you are flying for fun, but if travelling by air is going to be a part of the future for everyone, than this stuff has to go in.
 

Kingfisher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
448
Location
Perth, WA, Australia
Whenever I see a guy who has lost his legs in an accident or something my first thought is "Without the weight of his legs, if he trained hard, could he make an ornithopter work on just arm strength?"
Let's look at the falcon example again. Assume this guy is right and you needed a 14m wingspan. Assume the centre of lift for each wing is at 3m distance from the centre/your body. Assume legless you'd weigh 50 kg. Assume the ornithopter weighs nothing. So it's like you strap a 3m plank on each arm and support it at the end on each side. Now to try to lift your body up into the air, you'd have to push down 25kg each side, at a distance of 3m. Each shoulder has to produce ~750Nm. So i think even losing your legs won't make you fly by flapping without any mechanical assistance. However, folding the wing in and out like a diving falcon may be possible with a person's arm strength.
 

WonderousMountain

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
1,853
Location
Clatsop, Or
Nope, you would only be required to provide power (force x distance)/s equal to power required for level flight, and whatever the losses from flapping. You would ride the wings up and force them down. Pulling provides more force than pushing. Fortunately, people muscles work well in cyclic uses. That said, even the best hpa has power requirements that are difficult to sustain by accomplished athletes.

LuPi
 
2
Top