Nov 162010
 

It seems all things old are new again. Consider: prior to World War One, the “Gyroptere” was designed in France as a single seat helicopter of sorts, utilizing a single large rotor blade that revolved about the tub-like fuselage. Power was provided by an offset engine driving a fan, blowing air through the hollow rotor blade to a nozzle at the tip. As can be imagined, it was a disaster and failed utterly.  See pics here:

http://modelbox.free.fr/photoscopes/Papin_Phot/index.html

Sadly, the webpage appears to be written in some incomprehensible dead language, but the photos and drawings should get the idea across.

Now (well, in May) it seems that Lockheed can’t leave the idea alone. They’ve gone ahead and built their own version… small (tiny, in fact), with a different means of generating rotation, but at least the damned thing works… and it apparently also works autonomously.

[youtube UY38uho9ZdE]

[youtube 5LqSWiatV0Q]

[youtube Pbegin59K6s]

One thing this vehicle *won’t* do: sneak up on someone.

 Posted by at 2:51 pm

  14 Responses to “Lockheed “Samarai””

  1. “…written in some incomprehensible dead language…”

    I speak it all day long!

    Mike

  2. Oh, the Papin & Rouilly “Gyroptere”!
    My favorite crazy airplane.
    If it was right, then the Wright brothers were wrong:
    http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/papin.php
    http://www.heliport.sk/foto/01462i.jpg
    Preserved forever in my bookmarks as “Goofy French Thing”. 😀
    It always looked like some sort of giant flying guitar to me.

  3. “…written in some incomprehensible dead language…”

    C’est typique d’un clocher-américain qui semble avoir jamais mis les pieds en dehors de sa propre nation pendant une minute et l’expérience du monde réel. Votre arrogance venu naturellement ou travaillez-vous délibérément à elle? Ces orgueil!

  4. Crazy gibberish!

  5. Hint: for those like “Dragon” who obviously didn’t get the joke, but unlike “Dragon” have a sense of humor and a willingness to learn: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7osGfFTQVtU

    PS: Ces orgueil? Damned skippy!

  6. I have no idea who Dragon is or what his frame of mind was in writing that, but he did take all the fun out of simply writing “Bonjour!” and being done with it. 🙁

    Jim

  7. Also, that whatsit is officially the damnedest thing I’ve ever seen.

    Jim

  8. > he did take all the fun out of simply writing “Bonjour!” and being done with it.

    He also demonstrated a *massive* ignorance of the classics. Very likely due to cultural insularity. A common flaw among those who think that Americans are ignorant because we don’t spend all our money travelling to see *their* home-grown rubbish.

    What’s especially sad/funny was that not only was the gag – small though it was – word-for-word from Futurama, I even included the iconic image from exactly that scene. Some people just *insist* on being inappropriately angry, I guess. Well, it takes all kinds… including humorless nationalist socialists. Now that *that* combo has ever caused trouble before…

  9. This European is also “massively” ignorant and had to google Futurama. Not all American TV programmes are screened here. I must confess that I was in agreement with Dragon, but my reply was more diplomatic 🙂 . For us, your joke misfired and merely confirmed the widespread belief that many Americans do not know much, or care much, of what goes on outside their borders.

    Mike

    http://laovoices.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/americanview.gif

  10. > This European is also “massively” ignorant and had to google Futurama.

    Then it’s obvious that your education is massively flawed, leading to a shocking level of ignorance of other cultures. Clearly, Europeans do not know much, or care much, of what goes on outside their borders.

    Otherwise, you’d be fluent in Futurama.

    Sarcasm off.

    So, consider… if you think of Americans as ignorant because we don’t know every damned thing about European culture, what should Americans think about Europeans who don’t know every damned thing about American culture?

  11. The German inventor Baumgartl used a somewhat similar approach in his Heliofly III strap-on helicopter.
    It had two counter-rotating rotors mounted on above the other, each with a single blade and a small engine to drive it serving as a counterweight:
    http://img467.imageshack.us/i/heliofly2xh8.jpg/
    I’ve never seen photos of one of his designs in flight, so I assume he never did get the idea to work.

  12. I expect the success of the modern experiments relates to modern computer control tech.

    I’ve had an idea of a similar vehicle flying to altitude, rocket shot-putting above atmosphere, deploying a payload at the end of a tether from the end of the wing, and flinging the payload into orbit.

  13. Pat, I think you mean Nagler and Rolz, and their’s was the NR 54 V2, with 8 HP engines driving small propellors to spin the rotor. Theirs was the lower illustration, and the Baumgartl was the upper illustration.

  14. Embry-Riddle students (including Mike Bakula) entered “Samar-Eye,” a single-blade helicopter, into a competition a couple years ago.

    You can see it briefly starting about 40 seconds into this video:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2inEjl6ju8

    I’ve seen longer videos. It’s this odd object lying on a floor. The thrust fan starts up and the thing starts spinning around, looking pathetic and useless, just turning and turning there on the floor. Until you notice that it’s not actually ON the floor any more– it’s begun to lift off and climb.

    It was built for a spy mission: to fly through the window of a simulated house, negotiate the rooms, and photograph an object there.

    Technical rundown here:
    http://iarc.angel-strike.com/2009SymposiumPapers/2009EmbryRiddle.pdf

    There’s a magazine article about it (in some goofy magazine-reader format) here:
    http://e-ditionsbyfry.com/Olive/ODE/RRD/default.aspx?href=RRD%2F2010%2F05%2F01&pageno=34&entity=Pc03401&view=entity

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.