4 ms·
For vertical takeoff and landing the wing surface is mostly irrelevant, right? Seems like if you gave the rotors a “landing configuration” where they rotated 90
by fwlr 4y ago
For vertical takeoff and landing the wing surface is mostly irrelevant, right? Seems like if you gave the rotors a “landing configuration” where they rotated 90 degrees you could lay the wing flat on the ground.
- w-ll 4y agoThe wings look like they have smaller control surfaces the full wings are not. But to make cheap drones that are dropped or launches from a cheap taco holder its probably fine.
- jasonwatkinspdx 4y agoThis is the distinction between tilt wing aircraft and tilt rotors. The former were explored in the 60s and found impractical. The latter took longer to develop but are now practical. The original comment is spot on: hovering vertically with a big wing also vertical just doesn't work well in the real world. That said, the situation might be different for very small drones, for similar reasons to why you don't build full size quadcopters.
- dtgriscom 4y agoMovable motors would greatly increase the complexity and weight.
- robotresearcher 4y agoThe Harrier, Osprey and the carrier variant of F-35 are real world aircraft that point the thrust vector at the ground for takeoff and landing, then rotate it to the back for forward flight.