Opener BlackFly

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

pictsidhe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
7,377
Location
North Carolina
It seems to be a 19lb discrepancy. Yes, i'm sure they can fix that, but it may involve another battery reduction. Ditching the canopy would help several lbs, but detract from the 'cool' that they want to portray right now.
I don't doubt their ability to engineer this. I doubt their ability to have it fly under 103. In theory as well as practice. Especially since they are pitching it as a commuter vehicle to bypass traffic. Offices and 103s do not go together. There's another thread running where a few Californians have grumped about having to drive for several hours to the nearest uncongested area that they can legally fly a 103...

It is an interesting project. But I cannot see it panning out under 103.
 

robertl

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2017
Messages
153
Location
Heath Springs, S.C. USA
It seems that non pilots, and some people that are interested in flying ultralights, think that just because you don't have to have a pilots license, you can just jump in and go. Well, you still need to know how to fly, how things work, air space and such. Push the stick forward, the houses get bigger, pull the stick back, the houses get smaller ! It's a little more than that, even for U/L. I can see hundreds of people zipping along to work at tree top level, eating a biscuit with one hand and holding a cup of coffee in the other while they try to wake up! If the vehicle is controlled by computer, well, maybe, but even that isn't a sure thing ! Just my 2 cents worth.
Bob
 

Tiger Tim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
3,087
Location
Thunder Bay
This thing came up again in conversation at work the other week and long story short, I still want one. I get the limitations of a system like this and let's be honest, the cost-benefit analysis would come out way in the red for me, but it has to be the most awesome way to scoot to work. How long do you think it will be before the 'build it in your basement' version comes along? I mean, the hardware (batteries, motors, props, flight controllers) appears to be quickly becoming more and more available and the airframe itself ought to basically be Quickie-level technology.

 

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,085
Location
Orange County, California
Don't get me wrong, because I totally understand the appeal, but the issues this thing has are not technological, but legal and logistical.

If flown as a Part 103 ultralight, you can't fly it to work unless you work on a ranch or something - no flight allowed over "congested" areas, which has essentially been interpreted as "somebody's house or business", or "any assemblage of people." If you fly it as an E-AB, I would imagine getting a local variance to have a landing pad both at work and at the office is going to be at the whim of the neighbors - most municipalities, as I understand it, require a hearing of the neighbors before you can put in a helicopter pad, and this is almost certainly not any different. If you somehow can fly it in to work, either as an ultralight or as an E-AB, it doesn't taxi, so you'll need to be able to land it right at a recharging station. How does that work? Will your employer put one in, just for you? Awesome if that could happen, but what're the odds?

It's a great dream. Society hasn't quite caught up with the technology yet.
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
7,060
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
I don't know if anyone has addressed this yet... but... how would this aircraft achieve natural stability on the pitch axis? The Rutan canards and tandem wings used a higher loading on a smaller canard at the front, combined with CG placement. This allowed the aircraft to be trimmed for level lifght at different speeds, and resume level flight within X oscillations after an upset.

If you use (what appear to be) equally sized wings with (what appears to be) equal loading, it seems to me that you will not achieve any natural stability... and be forced to rely on some kind of active system. An active system like that IMHO has no justification on this type of machine. It would be another point of failure, and possibly a catastrophic failure. One ol the positive things about this particular machine is that it LOOKS like it could glide down to a survivable landing in the event of a power system failure above some altitude threshold. If you needed an active system to prevent it from swapping ends, that important safety feature goes away.
 

Himat

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
2,868
Location
Norway
I don't know if anyone has addressed this yet... but... how would this aircraft achieve natural stability on the pitch axis? The Rutan canards and tandem wings used a higher loading on a smaller canard at the front, combined with CG placement. This allowed the aircraft to be trimmed for level lifght at different speeds, and resume level flight within X oscillations after an upset.

If you use (what appear to be) equally sized wings with (what appears to be) equal loading, it seems to me that you will not achieve any natural stability... and be forced to rely on some kind of active system. An active system like that IMHO has no justification on this type of machine. It would be another point of failure, and possibly a catastrophic failure. One ol the positive things about this particular machine is that it LOOKS like it could glide down to a survivable landing in the event of a power system failure above some altitude threshold. If you needed an active system to prevent it from swapping ends, that important safety feature goes away.
The VTOL multicopter part dictate a three axis artificial stability system. Will do in airplane mode too. A ballistic recovery system does take care of the power out condition.
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
7,060
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
Takes dotcom billionaires and carbon fiber and and terabytes worth of computer data storage and processing capability to do what Pitcairn did 80 years ago with wood and steel.

Don't you just love progress? :)
 

Himat

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
2,868
Location
Norway
Takes dotcom billionaires and carbon fiber and and terabytes worth of computer data storage and processing capability to do what Pitcairn did 80 years ago with wood and steel.

Don't you just love progress? :)
It is what progress do look like.;)
Have a look at what have happened to cars. With anti-lock brakes in place, add on features as traction control, electronic stabilization and so on have become common place. Cheap cars have disk brakes on all wheels today. Drums are gone, they cost more and do not integrate that well with the electronic control unit. Differential brake on the driving axle? To costly, much cheaper to implement traction control once the anti-lock brakes are in place. Watch out to see this happen to airplanes too.
 

Tiger Tim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
3,087
Location
Thunder Bay
It's a great dream. Society hasn't quite caught up with the technology yet.
Call me selfish, but I don’t care if the rest of society can’t integrate this thing.

I work at an airport and live six or seven nautical miles away in the country with plenty of land and no neighbours to speak of. The way I see it, my knockoff Blackfly lives in the garage (detached and surrounded by open space) plugged in and sitting on a dolly that I push out front to depart. I pop up into the air, get a clearance into the zone, and zip directly to an otherwise unused space behind the hangar at work. Plop down, plug in, walk inside for the daily morning meeting. Reverse to get home.

VB, I don’t quite have autogyro space here as I have a couple acres but they’re surrounded by tall trees. Maybe one with jump takeoff and a pilot with cojones for days could work, but it would be a nail-biter each and every time.
 

BBerson

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
12,979
Location
Port Townsend WA
It flies more or less autonomously. So the authorities likely don't have the airworthiness criteria to allow it in the airport airspace yet, is my guess.
I was flying an expensive autonomous RC fixed wing "drone" on Saturday at the club field. The owner launched it the first time and it crashed near a pot farm no-Fly zone. We tried it again and it worked. But I wouldn't trust my life to it.
 

radfordc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,333
It flies more or less autonomously. So the authorities likely don't have the airworthiness criteria to allow it in the airport airspace yet,
Explanation? I understand that as a Part 103 UL it requires prior permission to enter controlled airspace. But, such permissions are routinely granted. As and E-AB what else would be required other than the normal ATC contact call?
 

Marc Zeitlin

Exalted Grand Poobah
Joined
Dec 11, 2015
Messages
617
Location
Tehachapi, CA
Takes dotcom billionaires and carbon fiber and and terabytes worth of computer data storage and processing capability to do what Pitcairn did 80 years ago with wood and steel.
I like analogies, so I'm going to make one. The Pitcairn autogyro is to the Blackfly Opener as a Estes model rocket is to the SpaceX Falcon 9 landing on a barge in the ocean.

There's a vague similarity in that both the autogyro and the opener are things that can support themselves in the air, but other than that, there's no comparison whatsoever. Let go of the stick in the autogyro and see what happens. Lose an engine in the autogyro and see what happens. Have an untrained person try to fly the autogyro and see what happens.

Don't you just love progress? :)
If you do not think that an autonomous, redundant, human safe octocopter that can also fly using passive lift from fixed wings while incorporating fail-safe capabilities represents progress, I wonder what progress would look like to you.

This is an amazing technological device. The only bad thing I can say about it is that it's clear that no industrial designer was involved in the design of the thing :).
 

BBerson

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
12,979
Location
Port Townsend WA
Explanation? I understand that as a Part 103 UL it requires prior permission to enter controlled airspace. But, such permissions are routinely granted. As and E-AB what else would be required other than the normal ATC contact call?
A semi-autonomous EA-B requires an airworthiness certificate. None have been granted yet, as far as I know.
An EA-B requires a pilot certicate. None have been granted for electric powered lift, as far as I know.
The 777 has an airworthiness certificate.
I didn't say it will never happen.
 

henryk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
5,155
Location
krakow,poland
-not only...small diameter propellers are low energy efficiant.

-flapping (oscillating) thrusters are much better +not so dangerous !(VOLERIANE)
 

12notes

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Messages
1,020
Location
Louisville, KY
A semi-autonomous EA-B requires an airworthiness certificate. None have been granted yet, as far as I know.
An EA-B requires a pilot certicate. None have been granted for electric powered lift, as far as I know.
The 777 has an airworthiness certificate.
I didn't say it will never happen.
Hundreds of RVs have autopilot systems, which have been granted E-AB airworthiness certificates. They are semi-autonomous.

If you read the regulations on controls for E-AB, it does not specify the level of control needed. Everything from flapping your arms for turns to pressing a destination on a GPS screen is currently allowed. There are no regulatory airworthiness hurdles to surmount here. The pilot still needs a certificate, and needs to define the aircraft's flightpath, but there is no minimum amount of hands on controlling they need to do from a legal standpoint.

There's been E-AB airworthiness certificates issued for hybrid helicopters and fully electric planes. There's no regulatory hurdle to electric powered lift. There isn't one I can point to that's been publicly announced, that doesn't mean there are none, however.
 

BBerson

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
12,979
Location
Port Townsend WA
RV's also have manual control and the pilot can turn the auto pilot off if needed.
It depends on the airworthiness inspector if a certificate is issued and where it can fly, I suppose. None flew at Airventure 2018 and no credible explanation was offered.
 
2
Top