# Would you go VTOL if

Discussion in 'Hangar Flying' started by HeliDev, Aug 17, 2004.

### Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

1. Aug 17, 2004

### HeliDev

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jul 7, 2003
Messages:
108
0
This is just a hypothetical question, which I thought may provide an interesting discussion.
Lets assume that a VTOL aircrat existed (doesnt have to be a helo).
GW 2000lbs
2 pax 1 pilot (3 up)
Cruise 150mph (130knts)
Enurance 2.5 hrs with .5 res
Cost $35000 USD for the kit, for now assume auto conversion, +$5000.

As this is some thing that Im working on at the moment (something close anyway), if you were looking for a kit would this be something that you would consider? Bearing in mind that the training would probably be more expensive than for a traditional fixed wing.
If it is something you would consider, why, and simliarly why not?
I know that many of you have airports nearby, but what about the guys that like to go bush, would VTOL make your life easier/safer.
As for DOCs assume half way between a fixed wing and a helo.
Looking forward to replies.

2. Aug 17, 2004

### Captain_John

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Feb 4, 2003
Messages:
699
1
Location:
KPYM
Nah... STOL for me.

Smoother, cheaper, faster, sleeker, sportier (spins and loops), traditional and better for cruising.

VTOL would be for me only as a sideline. Wouldn't be feasible on my humble teacher's salary.

3. Aug 17, 2004

### HeliDev

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jul 7, 2003
Messages:
108
0
Capt John, what is the cruise speed of your STOL?

4. Aug 17, 2004

### Captain_John

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Feb 4, 2003
Messages:
699
1
Location:
KPYM
My RV isn't flying yet, but the 3,700+ others that are say it will do an honest 190 mph on a bad day. Most report over 200 mph.

The Citabria I plan at 115 mph. It is muuuuuuch slower.

:whistle: CJ

5. Aug 24, 2004

### HeliDev

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jul 7, 2003
Messages:
108
0
Hoping more more than one person.
Come on guys, little help?

6. Aug 24, 2004

### StRaNgEdAyS

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Oct 20, 2003
Messages:
816
3
Location:
Northern NSW Australia
Sure, I reckon a VTOL would be cool, would it have a standard aircraft configuration? kind of like the osprey (or a harrier : ) so you could do STOL or VTOL whichever the situation demanded?
Would it have a plans built option?

7. Aug 24, 2004

### Jman

#### Site Developer

Joined:
Oct 22, 2002
Messages:
1,881
58
Location:
Pacific NW, USA!
VTOL would be a great feature as long as death was more than just a plugged fuel line away. Any VTOL I would consider for my personal use would have to have a way to recover from an engine out either at a hover or on approaches and takeoffs. Most of the time, in a helicopter, you can recover in these modes if your react quickly; but in something like a Harrier, you're just out of luck. If I were to fly my family in something, I would want at least the possibility of a soft landing in any configuration of flight.

Flying a single engine Scout Attack helicopter, there are some modes of flight that I just have to accept as unrecoverable if I were to experience an engine failure. In fact, more than half of my flying is done this way. But, when my family is involved, it's a whole other story.

Jake

8. Aug 25, 2004

### HeliDev

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jul 7, 2003
Messages:
108
0
SD, no I think at this stage it would be a kit. Im not convinced there would be any money in just selling plans.
The layout would be more helicopter like, because I think that in VTOL situations visibility is very important. A STOL option is likely, that will depend more if I go for skids, light,cheap, simple, or wheels, expensive complex, and heavy.
One of the problems with a STOL option is that because youre taking off heavy, a VTOL landing may not be possible. However more than likely that would depend on the location.

Jman, so far Im pretty happy with the redundancy aspect. Flying in the HV curve sucks, but its managable. Right now I think that redundancy should be as good as a helo, hopefully better than the 22 :gig:
I understand your concern though, beleive me i have no interest in a machine which drops like a rock if you loose the engine.

So back to hypotheticals, assuming the kit was available would you be likely to go for it over a traditional fixed wing, what would it take to make you swap?

Jman I heard that the new scout contract was coming up, have you heard anything yet?

9. Aug 25, 2004

### Jman

#### Site Developer

Joined:
Oct 22, 2002
Messages:
1,881
58
Location:
Pacific NW, USA!
I would swap in a heart beat if I felt it was a reasonably safe design. I would probably accept a 20% reduction in speed over a comparable FW and a 40% increase in cost. I would hope that the payload and endurance would be on par with it's FW competitor. Here is a word picture that sums up how far I would be willing to go (may not jive exactly with above numbers but you get the idea) - I would pay Lancair prices for a VTOL RV-6.
Nothing but rumors at this point. The two strongest rumors being the AH-6 Mission Enhanced Little Bird (MELB) and an improved (i.e. lighter) OH-58D. There are things I like about both options but the more I fly the Kiowa, the more I like the idea of keeping it and improving it. Time will tell I guess.

Jake

10. Aug 26, 2004

Joined:
Jul 7, 2003
Messages:
108