RunRyder RC
WATCH
 5 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3      4     NEXT    >> ] 3292 views TOPIC CLOSED
HomeAircraftHelicopterHelicopter Main Discussion › What if you had a Heli (electric) on the space station, what would be the settings
02-09-2008 03:54 PM  10 years agoPost 21
synodontis

rrKey Veteran

United Kingdom

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

This question can be answered at once: get who ever makes these flight sims to take out the gravity effect (or have an option in the program to do this), then you all can flight it on the sim to your heart's content and not have to talk about it at length here.

Anyway, this is an absurd question since I don't think any one of us here will have the privilege to try this out in real life.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-09-2008 03:55 PM  10 years agoPost 22
Invrted1

rrVeteran

Cincinnati, Ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Now that is what I am looking for, intelligent answers. I did not think about the greatly reduced torque. At this point I think the word "hover" does not even apply. Stationary would be more appropriate, because it could "hover" at 90 degrees relative to the floor. Seems like a little left cyclic trim would easily offset the roll effect. The more I think about it, half a degree of pitch might work fine to move the heli around.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-09-2008 05:16 PM  10 years agoPost 23
spork

rrVeteran

Mountain View, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

So you are saying that we could not input enough left cyclic to offset the torque?
Cyclic doesn't offset the torque. Cyclic controls pitch and roll. The tail rotor counters the torque of the mains.
He is forgeting that the tail rotor would be running at near zero pitch also because there would be very little torque to fight.
I assure you I'm not forgetting anything. There would be less torque at zero pitch, but there would still be plenty that you'd need to counter it with your tail rotor.
get who ever makes these flight sims to take out the gravity effect
Perhaps you can just set the mass of the heli to zero. There's no guarantee this will faithfully represent the real world, because we don't know if they've modelled the torque at zero-pitch accurately. But it's worth a try.
Anyway, this is an absurd question since I don't think any one of us here will have the privilege to try this out in real life.
Even if this is true, how does that make it an absurd question?
Now that is what I am looking for, intelligent answers. I did not think about the greatly reduced torque.
Oh - I thought you were looking for correct answers.
Seems like a little left cyclic trim would easily offset the roll effect.
It's not a matter of offsetting the roll effect. The question is what offsets the sidewards force the tail rotor applies? With gravity we can offset that with a slight lean to the right. Without gravity we need to roll 90 degrees to the right - but then the sidewards force has rolled 90 degrees to the right as well. So we have to roll another 90 degrees, etc.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-09-2008 05:36 PM  10 years agoPost 24
Invrted1

rrVeteran

Cincinnati, Ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

So you are saying that we could not input enough left cyclic to offset the torque?
Cyclic doesn't offset the torque. Cyclic controls pitch and roll
I was talking about the roll that you mentioned.
quote]Now that is what I am looking for, intelligent answers. I did not think about the greatly reduced torque.
Oh - I thought you were looking for correct answers[/quote]

By that I guess you mean that only yours are correct, wow, thats impressive

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-09-2008 06:24 PM  10 years agoPost 25
Nathan

rrApprentice

Elkhart, Indiana

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The helicopter per say would not be hovering since there is no up or down. A force in one direction would make it move in that direction and it would continue in that direction until acted upon by an equal and opposite force. This is Newton’s laws guys come on. The speed and acceleration one could achieve wow. At the kind of pitches that we run here in gravity it would be one fast machine.

That said small amounts of pitch (¼ degree ½ degree) and very small inputs would be needed to keep it in control. If you landed it against the walls you could push the space station around.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
02-09-2008 09:40 PM  10 years agoPost 26
helicrack

rrVeteran

Indiana

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Does anyone have access to the Vomit Comet? Could give it a go for a lot cheaper in one of those rather than sending a heli and pilot into low earth orbit. Plus there is probably alot more room inside to try it....

".........said the joker to the thief"

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-09-2008 09:45 PM  10 years agoPost 27
QuantumPSI

rrElite Veteran

Atlanta, GA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Spork is absolutely right on that is one. The only way you could get away with the machine actually working in this environment is by tilting the tail rotor slightly up and adding in slight positive pitch, some forward cyclic, and some right cyclic.. If the force is perfectly 90 degrees to the main shaft, you would be in a constant roll. What Spork wasn't clear on is that this roll wouldn't be axial, it would actually be a sideways loop (how big would be dependent on a number of things, torque of the rotor, collective, etc.).

...now where was I, dh/dt = BS-dx/dt
I will fly you forever... till earth do us part

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-09-2008 10:58 PM  10 years agoPost 28
GMPheli

rrElite Veteran

W. Bridgewater, MA USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

OK, so we go couter rotating main blades

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-09-2008 11:15 PM  10 years agoPost 29
spork

rrVeteran

Mountain View, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I was talking about the roll that you mentioned.
You don't need cyclic to counter the roll that I mentioned - you need it to make it roll like I mentioned since you'll be constantly chasing the side force created by the tail rotor.
By that I guess you mean that only yours are correct, wow, thats impressive
Well, I happen to be correct here, and you just wait for incorrect answers to come along so you can say "Now that is what I am looking for, intelligent answers." But that's OK. I don't expect to be flying in a craft you designed.
This is Newton’s laws guys come on.
I think we're pretty familiar with Newton's laws. Something give you a different idea?
If you landed it against the walls you could push the space station around.
That'd be kind of tricky since there's no atmosphere to speak of outside the orbiting space station, and landing on the walls inside wouldn't create net force on the space station. Remember your quote about Newton?

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-09-2008 11:23 PM  10 years agoPost 30
darksidedave

rrVeteran

niles,MI

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

What about one of these with varible pitch props?

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-09-2008 11:49 PM  10 years agoPost 31
Invrted1

rrVeteran

Cincinnati, Ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

He is forgeting that the tail rotor would be running at near zero pitch also because there would be very little torque to fight. Hover would be 0 pitch on the mains, and just a slight amount of pitch on the tail to fight the friction in the bearings and areodynamic (sp?)drag
SPORK: That is what I was calling an intelligent answer.
It's just like fake t1ts. You really can't taste the difference.
Not that!
Well, I happen to be correct here, and you just wait for incorrect answers to come along so you can say "Now that is what I am looking for, intelligent answers."
And so you say that the answer at the top is not correct?

You may be PARTLY correct, but there is more to this, as you can see.

The counter-rotating blades sounds workable, this would have some very loooong flight times.
This could be a great discussion if we can keep the egos under control

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-10-2008 12:09 AM  10 years agoPost 32
chrisjj

rrNovice

uk

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

just say you did crash into the space staion ,how much would shiping cost for the spare parts

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR
02-10-2008 12:20 AM  10 years agoPost 33
Invrted1

rrVeteran

Cincinnati, Ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

just say you did crash into the space staion ,how much would shiping cost for the spare parts
Now if you were gonna do this test and did not bring lots of spares, that would be dumb huh?

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-10-2008 12:49 AM  10 years agoPost 34
GimbalFan (RIP)

rrProfessor

Big Coppitt Key, FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

If you landed it against the walls you could push the space station around.
Excuse me in advance while I laugh out loud.

Here it comes -- BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Thank you. Carry on.

Spork is quite correct in his assessment of zero-G behavior, but someone with his credentials doesn't need me nor anyone else to offer any support.

But rather than a constant roll (barrel or axial) to counteract the slight amount of side force generated by the tailrotor as it counteracts the slight amount of torque generated by the mains even at zero pitch, a slow pirouette could also keep a bird in a somewhat stationary position.

I'd give my left pinky finger and part of my right earlobe to spend five hours in a hanger-sized building at zero-G with a variety of electric helis. And some magnetic boots, of course. And three cigars. Oh -- and a thermos of coffee.

op-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-t

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-10-2008 01:15 AM  10 years agoPost 35
Mark C

rrKey Veteran

Houston, TX - USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Along with Spork's slow roll you also have to consider the fact that 0-G allows the torque generated by spinning the tail rotor into the mix and it all goes to s#it.
If you landed it against the walls you could push the space station around.
You have to have been kidding. ... I'm hoping.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-10-2008 01:35 AM  10 years agoPost 36
GimbalFan (RIP)

rrProfessor

Big Coppitt Key, FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

you also have to consider the fact that 0-G allows the torque generated by spinning the tail rotor into the mix and it all goes to s#it.
True, if all that's being attempted is a 'hover'. Hopefully, there'd be more to do than just hold it still, and enough room to do it in. Hell, even a PiccoZ would be a blast up there. If whoever's making those these days has a smart marketing dept, they'll find a way to get a few of those onboard the space station.

PS -- On 2nd thought, a heli w/out cyclic control wouldn't be all that much fun in zero-G. Better than a PiccoZ would be whatever's the smallest heli that does.

op-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-t

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-10-2008 01:40 AM  10 years agoPost 37
spork

rrVeteran

Mountain View, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

And so you say that the answer at the top is not correct?
That's more or less the case. The answer at the top says I am "forgeting that the tail rotor would be running at near zero pitch". This is patently false. I'm am not forgetting that. And it doesn't change the fact that there will still be a significant torque on the mains to counter, and therefore a significant side force from the tail, even though it would be less than we have at 1G.
That is what I was calling an intelligent answer.
And yet it doesn't in any way answer your question about what a heli would do in zero-G. Nor is it correct in it's implication that I'm forgetting an important piece of the puzzle or the implication that the dynamics that I described are wrong. How can you claim to know what the "intelligent answer" is when you admit you don't know the answer? I think you mean "I like the sound of that answer". And that's swell. As I said I don't expect to be flying in a craft you designed so you're welcome to think whatever you like.

Let's look at my original answer and see if you can detect that I'm aware the mains would be running at zero-pitch:
Without gravity we'd hover at 0-pitch. But that would still yield some torque. That torque would still be countered by the tail rotor. But the tail rotor would still give us a side force. Without gravity, the heli would have to roll 90 degrees to the right to counter the side force. And then the cycle would just continue. So you'd be rolling continuously to the right just to try and hold still.
Yeah, I guess that's the childish and unintelligent answer you're thinking of.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-10-2008 02:02 AM  10 years agoPost 38
Invrted1

rrVeteran

Cincinnati, Ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

the fact that there will still be a significant torque on the mains to counter
No very significant (except at spoolup) since there is almost no pitch and torque is related to pitch.

By intelligent answer, I mean anything that is relevant and is not some smart a$$ comment. Try to put your ego away and have some fun with this will ya?
As I said I don't expect to be flying in a craft you designed so you're welcome to think whatever you like.
Yeah, we all heard you the first time, your attempt to insult me is not working, try harder if you like, but it is not relevant, so it is boring.....
Nor is it correct in it's implication that I'm forgetting an important piece of the puzzle or the implication that the dynamics that I described are wrong.
Not wrong, just incomplete. I am really interested in this idea, and would like to hear the specifics of how it could be made to work. Could you give us your opinion of the counter-rotating blades and how that would work?

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-10-2008 02:17 AM  10 years agoPost 39
spork

rrVeteran

Mountain View, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

No very significant (except at spoolup) since there is almost no pitch and torque is related to pitch.
I'll tell you what. How about you do the calcs to work out the torque of the mains on a T-Rex 450 at 0 degrees pitch and 2500 RPM head speed. Do you actually deny there's plenty of torque to cause exactly the dynamics I described?
By intelligent answer, I mean anything that is relevant and is not some smart a$$ comment.
It seems you either missed my original answer or were simply unable to understand it. I'm guessing the latter.
Try to put your ego away and have some fun with this will ya?
Wait, I thought you were looking for serious answers (like the one I gave you). You just want to "have fun with it"? Correct doesn't count now?
your attempt to insult me is not working,
I beg to differ. In any event what you claim is an insult is a simple statement of fact.
Not wrong, just incomplete.
Sorry, but a statement that claims I forgot about the reduced torque in zero-G is WRONG.
I am really interested in this idea, and would like to hear the specifics of how it could be made to work.
It would be trivial to redesign a heli to work in zero-G. And anyone that's interested in hearing my answer is free to ask. You clearly are not. In any event, anyone that was truly interested in hearing my answer could probably work out quite easily how to make a heli that works fine in zero-G.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
02-10-2008 02:19 AM  10 years agoPost 40
GimbalFan (RIP)

rrProfessor

Big Coppitt Key, FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

since there is almost no pitch
Why would there be any pitch at all while attempting to remain motionless?
torque is related to pitch.
Except upon spool-up, torque from a heli's mainrotor is entirely related to drag, whether in one-G or zero-G. Drag amount changes with changes in pitch, but it is drag, not pitch, which causes the torque.

op-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-t

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
WATCH
 5 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3      4     NEXT    >> ] 3292 views TOPIC CLOSED
HomeAircraftHelicopterHelicopter Main Discussion › What if you had a Heli (electric) on the space station, what would be the settings
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 16  Topic Subscribe

Tuesday, December 11 - 10:33 pm - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

The RC discussion world needs to consolidate. RR is now one choice for that. Its software is cutting edge. It hosts on-topic advertising. Help RR increase traffic buy making suggestions, posting in RR's new areas (sites) and by spreading the word.

The RunRyder Difference

• Category system to allow Rep/Vendor postings.
• Classifieds with sold (hidden) category.
• Classifieds with separate view new.
• Answer PMs offsite via email reply.
• Member gallery photos with advanced scripting.
• Gallery photo viewer integrated into postings.
• Highly refined search with advanced back end.
• Hosts its own high end fast response servers.
• Hosts thousands of HD event coverage videos.
• Rewrote entire code base with latest technology.
• No off-topic (annoying) click bait advertising.
Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online