I'm glad we were all forthright about technical issues.I'll be blunt - If you really knew Mr. Sikorsky and studied more you'd know your idea [patent] is a pipe dream.
Igor has the same designs proposed by "Military Idealists" Hidden rotors, added wings. JATO, Ejection seats etc.
1. A wing forward of c/g adds a destabilizing effect on any rotor craft
2. rotors set too close to a fuselage subject it to drumming and collision [even rigid rotors flex] hub rigid not blades
3. Lower rotor hazards -FoD, hazardous ground handling, bad performance, tip strikes, Excessive landing gear highth
4, Aircraft entry, hovering = no hoist or parachute operations only exit is tail, cockpit = C/G limits?
5. autorotation - wings and more blades will cause a near vertical descent. A CH 53 is look at your crotch landing
6. weight of folding and storing rotors remove useful load [It's all about the load, the load is the reason]
7. going rigid rotor only means the hub action had feathering bearings blade will still flex, Lead, Lag, Flap, Cone.
I've seen this same idea 35 years ago. A Japanese student getting his helicopter certificate at Hiser,
Charles York and I spent days setting with him going over ideas. He too had ideas he thought were only his.
Igor was a fine practical man. One of his sons was a fine artist "Hi Sergi, My old man knew your old man"
My family worked at Los Angeles Airways [Mom Dad Aunt Uncle & George Bingo]
Sergi got a nice drawing of his fire hawk with a cartoon fireman... He has it with his other art work.
All the World's Helicopters and Rotorcraft - the most complete helicopter collection in the world. Helicopters, autogyros, tilt-rotors, tilt-wings etc.
Discussion forum about helicopters and other rotorcraft - a part of the world's largest rotorcraft archive, "Stingray's List of Rotorcraft"stingraysrotorforum.activeboard.com
Here's some links - Study more, Think how to move more cargo with less weight, parts, cost.
The Robinson Helicopter is #1 in sales ... A. cost B. 2 or 4 persons C. economically sound
Not because of a government contract - It fills a need. Low cost transportation.
If an unprecedented scheme is not questioned, I think it must be doubtful.
My respect for Sikorsky does not mean that I can't question his company's thinking, otherwise it would be blind worship.
1. The fixed wing interferes with the rotor, this is certain, the question is how much impact when short-term working.
2. Too close to the fuselage is a problem, so is it impossible to use the altitude difference of the S-97 on this aircraft?
3. The problems and solutions of the lower rotor will be discussed later. Because this is the most easily criticized.
4. The steps for this aircraft to hover in the air will be complicated and inefficient, but it is not impossible.
6. The weight of death is an eternal topic, and the most important thing is: whether it can be accepted or not.
7. I understand that even with rigidity, the rotor still bends, what matters is: how much margin should we leave in the design