7 ms·
Volocopter – The world’s first green helicopter
- benjamincburns 13y agoCool stuff. However, the first thing I wondered was "does it use variable pitch props so I can get it to autorotate?" Our volocopters are fitted with a rescue system in the form of a parachute which safely lets the entire aircraft sink to the ground in the case of an emergency. At helicopters in contrast, is the main rotor in the way. -- http://www.e-volo.com/information/safety-concept http://www.e-volo.com/information/safety-concept This (combined with an emergency back-up battery) is probably better than a traditional helicopter for low-altitude power failures, but worse for higher-altitude. With a main engine failure at sufficient altitude, a helicopter pilot can reverse the pitch of the main rotor so that it builds momentum while the craft falls. During the decent the pilot also has control over the craft, so he/she can hopefully avoid trees, power lines, etc. Finally, at the end of the decent the pilot is able to reverse the pitch of the blades again, turning the stored momentum back into downward thrust, safely landing the craft.
- ominous_prime 13y agoI think lack of autorotation would make this idea dead in the water. Very low altitude failures would also be dangerous, as parachutes are hard to deploy without a few hundred feet to spare. Also currently, all single engine helicopters must be able to complete an autorotation to get certified. I'm not sure where this would stand though, since it may end up as an experimental category aircraft. A clarification for those who haven't seen one, an autorotation is less about falling than gliding. You have very good control, though you do only get one shot at the landing. A quick search brought up this video with a few landings: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2a9H8Xw8Mo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2a9H8Xw8Mo
- benjamincburns 13y agoYes. Also, Smarter Every Day's Helicopter Physics series on YouTube had one of the best explanations of autorotation I've seen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7u8m0Qpn38 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7u8m0Qpn38
- WayneS 13y agoGreen? Because it runs off batteries? Is that all it takes. OK, but didn't we just have a discussion on hacker news showing that helicopters with one large blade are more efficient than ones with many smaller blades?
- Scaevolus 13y agoIt's easy to ignore where your power's coming from when your vehicle's not burning fuel-- in the US, ~40% from coal and ~30% natural gas. Morality fades away when the results occur at a distance. Compare plugging into a socket to pumping gas, or buying cuts of meat to slaughtering an animal.
- ihh 13y agoRight now gasoline-powered vehicles are a problem along with burning coal and natural gas. At least by replacing gasoline-powered vehicles with electric we solve one issue and focus can be directed to how we generate that electricity.
- sp332 13y agoCentralizing power production, even in a coal-burning plant, is better for the environment than burning fuel locally (and extremely inefficiently) in a helicopter.
- ithkuil 13y agoAh interesting. I don't understand much about efficiency, but after reading http://www.geek.com/science/weve-been-designing-quadcopters-incorrectly-since-day-one-1577256/ http://www.geek.com/science/weve-been-designing-quadcopters-... I thought that a big rotor was inherently more efficient, so how can this design be more "green"?
- wuschel 13y agoI am not into flying, but last time I was a passenger I remember that a helicopter engine needs a certain cooldown time after landing which could be around 30 minutes. In this time the engine needs continue running. My guess is that the electric motors in the Volocopters do not have this requirement. But again, I am not a helicopter specialist.
- timmaah 13y agoIt is "green" because the emissions are out of sight out of mind.. Just ignore the coal plant in the background.
- moocowduckquack 13y agoTo be fair, people who get involved in developing green tech these days are fairly likely to have bought solar panels, especially given the price of them.
- jpollock 13y agoDidn't I just see a story about quadcopter design, and how helicopters were actually more efficient due to the single large rotor? Here it is: http://www.geek.com/science/weve-been-designing-quadcopters-incorrectly-since-day-one-1577256/ http://www.geek.com/science/weve-been-designing-quadcopters-...
- markeganfuller 13y agoExactly what I thought of the moment I saw this.
- blktiger 13y agoNot only that, but the range for a battery-powered helicopter is going to be severely limited.
- ominous_prime 13y agoTraditional helicopters are also far more efficient in normal cruising forward flight. They can glide quite well, which is how you can safely land in the case of engine failure [0] [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autorotation_(helicopter) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autorotation_(helicopter)
- baddox 13y agoI wonder if, at larger scales like this, electric motors and batteries are unable to efficiently power a tradition helicopter design (one main rotor and a small tail rotor).
- nether 13y agoBatteries are less energy dense (J/kg) than fossil fuels at any scale. For flight applications this makes batteries not so great because reducing weight is so critical. This becomes especially pronounced for larger aircraft sizes. You also don't get the weight reduction as you burn off fuel. For tiny RC aircraft the short flight times are fine, you can use cheap electric motors and they're safer. Larger RC aircraft are gas powered though.
- moocowduckquack 13y ago
- rtpg 13y agoFirst time I read this I honestly thought they were talking about a helicopter painted green... I wonder if this can allow for bigger sizes. The most common use cases for helicopters (transporting people like for medivac) can't seem to be filled by this. I did hear once about IBM using a helicopter to fly in a technician to some server farm to fill in a "on site in 60-minutes" contractual clause with a client.
- gress 13y ago20 minutes flight time, constrained by battery technology. They say it's 'conceivable' that there could be a considerable improvement in battery technology over the next few years to allow up to an hour of flight. I hope so - both for cars and for mobile devices a 3x improvement in battery capacity per unit weight would be transformative. Imagine an iPad air at half the weight again, or a Tesla Roadster with a 750 mile range.
- jared314 13y agoEven the DoE is trying to help battery technology along with $120 million in research funding. http://www.extremetech.com/computing/142155-doe-calls-for-a-chemical-battery-with-5x-capacity-within-5-years-can-it-be-done http://www.extremetech.com/computing/142155-doe-calls-for-a-...
- wuschel 13y agoWell, as research goes, $ does not guarantee to reach a specific outcome (it does help tremendously, though). But there is a lot work done nowadays when it comes to batteries, fuel cell membranes and solar cells - so let us hope something will come out of it.
- tjoff 13y agoYou mean, imagine an iPad too hot to touch. Because we always optimize for performance, keeping battery on the bare acceptable minimum. With the newest trend to also seal the batteries to ensure that the device has a limited useful life. While I often cringe at how terrible batteries are, the alternative wouldn't be that attractive for mobile devices either. Because we wouldn't have had the same focus on low power if we had decent batteries.
- gress 13y agoDo you seriously think that sealed batteries are designed to shorten the life of devices?
- 13y ago
- pierlux 13y agoMore videos on YouTube while their side is hammered: http://www.youtube.com/user/forschungsbuero http://www.youtube.com/user/forschungsbuero
- spajus 13y agoROFLcopter was first - it runs on plain text :-)
- rdtsc 13y agoFrom a quick look at it, it seems they are just fishing for investors. They have a cool looking prototype and use "green" in their marketing a bit too much. I couldn't find any studies or more detailed explanation justifying their design vs the traditional one.
- Timmmmbob 13y agoThese are the advantages and disadvantages I can think of: Pros * Probably much cheaper than a traditional helicopter - you don't need any complicated mechanical components like swash plates. * Increased redundancy would be much easier - you can wire up batteries in parallel, and it can no doubt fly with a significant number of broken propellers. The only other component is the microcontroller, which is cheap enough that you could have multiple copies of it. * Looks like you could fly it indoors fairly safely (in large buildings). With minor modifications it could be flown closer to buildings more safely than a traditional helicopter. * Easy to remote control, as already demonstrated in the video! This could make a great medical evacuation helicopter. * Should be virtually maintenance-free. The only thing I can think that you'd need to do is replace the battery. Cons: * Undoubtedly has a much shorter flight time than non-electric helicopters. * Lower capacity than (most) traditional helicopters. * Can't autogyro, so running out of fuel is much more serious! * Possibly costs more to run when you consider the cost of replacement batteries. Hard to say for sure. It's certainly not a worthless design.
- crististm 13y agoWhat's the point of flying it indoors!? And how many buildings you know are suitable, not to mention need, such an apparatus?
- protomyth 13y ago"However, a considerable advancement in battery technology is conceivable during the next few years, so that a multiplication of the energy capacity will occur within a short period of time. At present a battery flight time of 20 minutes is possible, but in the near future this will be extended to one hour or more." What companies / people are working on new technology to make this true? We hear this with every new project, but it doesn't seem like enough people are choosing that as their goal.
- moocowduckquack 13y agoThere have been quite a few developments in battery and ultracap technology that seem pretty promising in the last few years, but it is one thing to have something up and running in the lab and quite another to bet on a particular technology and then industrialise the production process for global mass production. Luckily there is now money being waved around by the car industry that should see at least some of the developments enter the marketplace, which is what more specialist companies like this one are banking on, as they don't have enough money themselves to wave around.
- kokey 13y agoI don't really agree with the 'green' hype, and banking on battery improvements etc. However, I think designs like this will become useful along with other forms of drone technology. This helicopter actually looks fairly cheap to manufacture and maintain, and a 10 minute flight can easily be, for example, a hop across a river or over dense traffic as part of a daily commute, and it can stand and charge at each end.
- shittyanalogy 13y agoWith what looks like a collection of interesting new-technology and innovation it's kind of sad to see them marketing it as It's electric. Greeeeeeeeeeeen.
- noonespecial 13y agoAs most rc hobbyists know today, you can make just about anything fly by festooning it with little propellors. Flying well on the other hand...
- Zoomla 13y agoA plane is much greener