USRE36487E - Airplane with variable-incidence wing - Google Patents

Airplane with variable-incidence wing Download PDF

Info

Publication number
USRE36487E
USRE36487E US08/557,374 US55737495A USRE36487E US RE36487 E USRE36487 E US RE36487E US 55737495 A US55737495 A US 55737495A US RE36487 E USRE36487 E US RE36487E
Authority
US
United States
Prior art keywords
fuselage
flight
wing
aircraft
vertical
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Expired - Lifetime
Application number
US08/557,374
Inventor
Barnaby Wainfan
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Freewing Aerial Robotics Corp
Original Assignee
Freewing Aerial Robotics Corp
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Priority claimed from US07/308,655 external-priority patent/US5086993A/en
Application filed by Freewing Aerial Robotics Corp filed Critical Freewing Aerial Robotics Corp
Priority to US08/557,374 priority Critical patent/USRE36487E/en
Application granted granted Critical
Publication of USRE36487E publication Critical patent/USRE36487E/en
Assigned to JOAO VERDI CARVALHO LEITE reassignment JOAO VERDI CARVALHO LEITE ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: ASKANASE, DAVID
Anticipated expiration legal-status Critical
Expired - Lifetime legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • BPERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B64AIRCRAFT; AVIATION; COSMONAUTICS
    • B64CAEROPLANES; HELICOPTERS
    • B64C39/00Aircraft not otherwise provided for
    • B64C39/06Aircraft not otherwise provided for having disc- or ring-shaped wings
    • B64C39/062Aircraft not otherwise provided for having disc- or ring-shaped wings having annular wings
    • BPERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B64AIRCRAFT; AVIATION; COSMONAUTICS
    • B64CAEROPLANES; HELICOPTERS
    • B64C29/00Aircraft capable of landing or taking-off vertically, e.g. vertical take-off and landing [VTOL] aircraft
    • B64C29/02Aircraft capable of landing or taking-off vertically, e.g. vertical take-off and landing [VTOL] aircraft having its flight directional axis vertical when grounded
    • BPERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B64AIRCRAFT; AVIATION; COSMONAUTICS
    • B64CAEROPLANES; HELICOPTERS
    • B64C3/00Wings
    • B64C3/38Adjustment of complete wings or parts thereof
    • B64C3/385Variable incidence wings

Definitions

  • This invention relates generally to vertical-takeoff-and-landing (VTOL) airplanes; and more particularly to tail-sitting aircraft capable of hovering flight, generally vertical takeoff and landing, and substantially horizontal forward flight.
  • VTOL vertical-takeoff-and-landing
  • ducted -fan craft such as the French Coleopter (FIG. 8) and the 1972 Shorts Skyspy; and
  • FIGS. 9 through 12 show a craft of this type, designed by Spratt.
  • FIG. 8 has been adapted from page 220 of the same work.
  • the Coleopter In cruise, the Coleopter is handicapped by having a wingspan that is small (i.e., equal to the duct diameter). This small causes span the cruise induced drag (drag due to lift) to be unacceptably high.
  • the GEMINI TURBOPROP-350 is a new, innovative, single-engine, special performance aircraft.
  • the GTP-350 is powered by Allison's soon-to-be-certified turbine, the 225-B10, delivering 350 shaft horse power (SHP).
  • SHP shaft horse power
  • Combining the 225-B10 with the low weight, high strength characteristics of Allied's SPECTRA and COMPET Fibers creates a high-performance state-of-the-art aircraft.
  • What really sets the GTP-350 apart, however, is the patented Slaved Tandem Freewing design; this configuration provides dramatic safety improvements as well as giving the plane near vertical take-offs and landings (VTOL).
  • This brochure tells the story of the revolutionary GEMINI TURBOPROP-350. . . .
  • the fully acrobatic GTP-350 is designed for multi-mission applications. Proposed applications include training such as high maneuverability aerial combat; high performance off-airport operations such as medical and other evacuation from remote areas; close support of combat troops with helicopter-like performance; border patrol, reconnaissance, agricultural and wide area land management missions and general purpose use.
  • the GTP-350 presently available without an FAA certificate (as either a kit or an exempt airplane), is excepted to receive FAA Part 23 certification.
  • Allen Aircraft Company presently has production capacity for 10 GTP-350s per year. Substantial contribution to the development effort was made by Allison Division or General Motors Corporation. . . .
  • the GEMINI TURBOPROP-350 is the world's first aircraft to offer near vertical takeoff and landing performance without the mechanical complexity of a helicopter--and without losing high speed performance.
  • the unique STF configuration allows the pilot to control deck angle independent of the wing's angle of attack. By rotating the fuselage to a high angle of attack while leaving the wings in a level flight attitude, the pilot is able to direct or ⁇ vector ⁇ the thrust.
  • the benefit of this ⁇ extreme flair [sic] ⁇ landing and takeoff maneuver is the ability to operate from confined areas with little takeoff run and even less landing roll.
  • the Spratt wing was similar to that of the Mignet Flying Flea in being the primary pitch control for the airplane, but did much more in that it was also pivoted in such a way that it could be banked to put the plane in a turn.
  • the wing was mounted above an elongated auto-like body with a buried engine driving a pusher propeller at the rear through an extension shaft [see FIG. 13].
  • the fixed end finds were used for stability only, not control. With the movable wing, there was no need for elevators, rudder, or ailerons.
  • Allen's and Spratt's craft are relatively complex in that each requires a separate horizontal tail. Moreover, neither is intended to hover.
  • the wing bending moments are carried on a shaft; this wastes weight, because the shaft must be relatively large and heavy.
  • a first preferred embodiment of my invention is an aircraft for hovering flight, generally vertical takeoff and landing, and substantially horizontal forward flight. It includes a fuselage that has a generally longitudinal axis.
  • This preferred embodiment also includes some means for propelling the aircraft in both (a) hovering and vertical flight and (b) substantially horizontal forward flight.
  • These means comprise at least one ducted fan, and--again for generality and breadth--I shall call them the "ducted-fan means” or simply the “fan means”.
  • the fan means are supported from the fuselage aft.
  • This preferred embodiment must also include some means, comprising at least one floating wing, for providing lift in forward flight.
  • Some means comprising at least one floating wing, for providing lift in forward flight.
  • the fuselage-axis attitude varies between substantially vertical in hovering and vertical flight, and generally horizontal in forward flight.
  • my invention shares the advantages of the Coleopter's ducted fan--namely, the very high level of available static thrust that is of enormous value for efficient VTOL and hover operation, and also the greater safety of the guarded fan.
  • my invention provides induced-drag levels comparable with those of a conventional airplane configuration--and thus is vastly superior in cruise performance to all prior flying-duct craft. Added safety advantages accrue from the stall resistance of the floating wing.
  • the fuselage is preferably substantially unarticulated, at least between (1) an attachment location of the floating-wing means to the fuselage and (2) the fan means.
  • the fuselage is substantially unitary and unarticulated--i.e., along its entire length.
  • the fan means comprise exactly one fan (which may be a contrarotating fan), of adequate size for efficient operation in hovering flight; and that the fan be substantially the only means of propulsion in vertical takeoff and landing, hover, and forward flight.
  • the fan means also comprise a generally cylindrical duct surrounding the fan and generally surrounding an aft segment of the fuselage; and some means for vectoring thrust developed by the fan.
  • These "thrust-vectoring means" (considered as a unit) are fixed relative to the fuselage.
  • the thrust-vectoring means comprise a plurality of deflection vanes, each mounted for rotation about a respective axis.
  • the axis of rotation of each vane is fixed in relation to the fuselage and the duct, aft of the fan. Full control capability for hover is provided by use of these movable vanes located near the duct exit.
  • the fan be fixed, relative to the fuselage, for rotor rotation about exclusively an axis substantially parallel to the fuselage axis.
  • the spanwise axis of rotation of the floating-wing means be along a surface of the wing; and that this embodiment of my invention further comprise a long hinge supporting the floating-wing means for rotation about the spanwise axis.
  • the spanwise axis is preferably along a lower surface of the wing.
  • the "break" in the wing is arranged differently--in such a way that wing bending moments are resisted by the long hinge, instead or being carried on a single short shaft. This saves weight, since the hinge pin can be made smaller and lighter than a shaft.
  • this embodiment of my invention also comprise, at each side of the fuselage, a wing segment that is fixed to the fuselage against rotation.
  • the floating-wing means preferably define, along trailing portions thereof, a corner notch or slot generally near the fuselage; and forward portions of the fixed wing segment are preferably disposed within that slot in the floating wing.
  • the aircraft is further expressly understood to be also for transitional flight between vertical and horizontal flight.
  • the fan means propel the craft in vertical, horizontal and transitional flight.
  • the wing is supported for rotation as in the first embodiment; but as further explained below this rotation is not necessarily passive.
  • this rotation is not necessarily passive.
  • the leading edge of the wing is down relative to the fuselage axis.
  • a third preferred embodiment of my invention is comparable to the second, except that the leading-edge-down condition is not necessarily satisfied. Instead it is expressly understood that the rotating wing provides lift in transitional as well as horizontal flight and that the wing incidence in transitional flight is substantially always within a small range of angles of attack with respect to an oncoming airstream.
  • the wing incidence be controlled by actuators, at least during transitional flight; and that the actuators be scheduled by a flight-control system.
  • FIG. 1 is a perspective view of a preferred embodiment of my invention in its tail-sitting orientation, but showing the rotatable wing angled relative to the fuselage as for transitional flight.
  • FIG. 2 is a like view of the FIG. 1 embodiment, but with the wing aligned with the fuselage as for generally horizontal cruising flight.
  • FIG. 3 is a perspective view of the same embodiment with the fuselage oriented horizontally, also as for generally horizontal cruising flight.
  • FIG. 4 is an elevation of the same embodiment in its tail-sitting orientation, viewing the broad surfaces of the wing substantially straight on--i.e., from the viewpoint that would be above the craft if it were in flight.
  • FIG. 5 is a plan view or the same embodiment, still in a tail-sitting orientation--i.e., a view that would correspond to a front elevation of the craft, if it were in flight.
  • FIG. 6 is an elevation of the same embodiment, similar to FIG. 4 but taken viewing the wing at one side of the craft edge on--i.e., from the viewpoint that would be at one side of the craft if it were in flight.
  • FIG. 7 is a composite elevation showing the craft--very diagrammatically or schematically--in successive stages of operation from tail-sitting position for takeoff through ascending transition, cruise, and descending transition into a tail-sitting landing.
  • FIG. 8 is an elevation (after Taylor, supra, at 220) of the prior-art Coleopter with its special truck-mounted hoist.
  • FIG. 9 is a perspective view (after promotional literature of the Allen Aircraft Company) of the prior-art Gemini Turboprop-350 (understood to be a trademark of that firm) in an environment characteristic of that craft's short takeoff-roll and short landing-rollout distances.
  • FIG. 10 is a diagrammatic side elevation (ibid.) of the same prior-art craft in a preliminary takeoff-roll or landing-rollout orientation wherein the fuselage is generally horizontal.
  • FIG. 11 is a like view (ibid.) of the same craft in a later stage of takeoff roll, in which the fuselage is oriented steeply upward.
  • FIG. 12 is a front elevation (ibid.) of the same craft in its FIG. 10 orientation.
  • FIG. 13 is a perspective view of the Spratt Wing/Stout Skycar IV (after Bowers, supra, at 195).
  • FIGS. 1 through 6 The configuration of my contemplated vehicle is shown in FIGS. 1 through 6. Thrust is provided by an aft-mounted, ducted 22, preferably contrarotating fan 21 (FIG. 4). Vanes 25 in the fan efflux provide control about all three axes in cruise as well as when the vehicle is hovering.
  • the wing 31 is pivoted along an approximately spanwise axis 24 (FIG. 1), allowing the wing to vary in angle of attack.
  • wing incidence controlled by actuators and scheduled by a flight-control system.
  • the combination of hinge axis 24 and wing pitching-moment coefficient at zero lift are tailored so that the wing tends to float at a lift coefficient near the maximum value.
  • stops are arranged so that the wing may only float leading-edge-down relative to the body. These stops, in conjuction with the floating characteristics just mentioned, cause the wing and body to remain coupled as long as the body angle of attack is lower than the trimmed floating angle of attack of the wing (typically about fifteen degrees).
  • the vehicle flies and maneuvers like a conventional, rigid airplane.
  • the wing decouples from the body and floats at its designed angle of attack.
  • the incidence angle can be programmed for various objectives. (For example, it may emulate either of the first two options but with optimized dynamic response.)
  • Lateral (roll) control options include at least these:
  • ailerons scheduled by a flight-control system such that they control wing incidence when the wing is floating and operate in the same manner as conventional ailerons when the wing is locked:
  • Antitorque control possibilities include at least these three strategies:
  • dual-rotation fans 21 (FIG. 4)--i.e., a contrarotating fan;
  • FIGS. 1 through 4 the wing segment 23 that is fixed to the fuselage 11 against rotation, and structurally integrated with the duct 22--very firmly securing the duct to the fuselage.
  • some forward portions of this fixed wing segment 23 are disposed within a corner notch or slot 32 that is formed in the rotating wing 31, generally near the fuselage.
  • FIG. 7 illustrates the transition and conversion process.
  • the following discussion is in terms of the second wing-incidence control option, though as will be understood the process may be described equally straightforwardly for the other two.
  • Transition from takeoff or hover 41 to cruise 43 is accomplished by progressively tilting the body 11 from the vertical. As forward speed builds, the floating wing develops progressively more lift--allowing the body 11 and fans 21 to nose down, which increases the forward component of thrust and decreases the lift component of thrust.
  • Conversion from cruise to hover or landing 46 begins with a steady, one-g, wing-borne deceleration.
  • the body angle of attack equals the trimmed float angle of attack of the wing.
  • the body rotates to a more nose-up attitude 44, 45 and the wing decouples from the body and remains floating at its trimmed angle of attack. This allows the vehicle to fly at body angles of attack above the stall angle of attack of the wing without stalling the wing.
  • the wing floats at its designed angle of attack throughout the conversion 44, 45. This allows a progressive transfer of lift from the wing to the fans as the vehicle decelerates.
  • the tilt-body craft is much simpler than other VTOL vehicles. It requires almost no additional systems besides the wing hinges 24 (at the underside of the wing, FIG. 1) and the duct to give an otherwise conventional plane VTOL capability.
  • the same propulsion system is used for powered lift and cruise propulsion. There is no need for cross-shafting, rotor-tilt actuators and systems, or angle-drive gearboxes.
  • the fans 21 may be made fixed-pitch, although they are no more complex than conventional variable-pitch propellers in any case. There is no need for cyclic pitch-control mechanisms. Control in both hover and cruise is provided by at least three stator vanes 25 mounted in the fan efflux.
  • vanes 25 In cruising flight the vanes 25 merely replace the elevators, rudder and ailerons of a conventional airplane. In VTOL and hover the same vanes perform the functions normally associated with cyclic pitch and tail-rotor variation for a conventional helicopter.
  • the tilt-body therefore requires no more control actuators than a conventional airplane.
  • the control system can be quite simple, since all of the controls operate in the same sense in cruise and hover.
  • the tilt-body offers a large improvement in ease of handling and safety over prior aircraft, including prior remotely-piloted vehicles (RPVs).
  • RSVs prior remotely-piloted vehicles
  • the VTOL capability of the craft allows it to be launched and recovered without special equipment such as catapults, JATO bottles or recovery nets.
  • the ducted propulsion system is fully enclosed. Unlike the rotors of a helicopter or tilt-rotor vehicle, it poses little threat to nearby personnel.
  • Hover performance of the tilt-body lies between that of a low-disc-loading vehicle like a helicopter or tilt-rotor craft and a high-disc-loading vehicle like a vectored-thrust jet-lift craft. Incorporating the duct 22 improves hover efficiency. Unlike a tilt-rotor, the tilt-body does not suffer from rotor-induced downloads on the wings.
  • a preferred embodiment of my invention can fly at sustained altitudes up to 40,000 feet and has a sea-level top speed of 248 knots.
  • the combination of high speed and VTOL capability give the tilt-body the ability to provide quick response, particularly when the VTOL capability is exploited to allow forward basing.
  • the till-body craft would benefit from both force-balance-mounted wind-tunnel testing and free-flying tests.
  • the latter would be particularly useful in defining the aircraft transition corridor and in refining control strategies for hovering and transition. In either case, power effects are sufficiently dominant that testing must be done with a powered model.
  • the tilt-body aircraft could be demonstrated by constructing and flying a scaled-down radio-controlled model of the proposed operational tilt-body vehicle. Flight-testing of the model would demonstrate the controllability of the vehicle over its entire night envelope, including hover, transition and conversion.

Abstract

The craft is for hovering flight, vertical takeoff and landing, and horizontal forward flight. It has a tail-sitting fuselage and a ducted fan mounted to the fuselage aft to provide propulsion in both (a) hovering and vertical flight and (b) horizontal forward flight. At each side is a floating wing, supported from the fuselage for passive rotation (or an actuator-controlled optimized emulation of such rotation) about a spanwise axis, to give lift in forward flight. The fuselage attitude varies between vertical in hovering and vertical flight, and generally horizontal in forward flight. Preferably the fuselage is not articulated; there is just one fan, the sole source of propulsion, rotating about only an axis parallel to the fuselage; and thrust-vectoring control vanes operate aft of the fan. Preferably at each side a small, nonrotating wing segment is fixed to the fuselage, and the floating wing defines--along its trailing portions--a corner notch or slot near the fuselage; forward portions of the fixed wing segment are within this notch. Preferably the spanwise axis is along a surface of the floating wing, and a long hinge supports that wing from the fixed wing segment, within the notch. During vertical and transitional flight characteristically the leading edge of the floating wing is down relative to the fuselage axis.

Description

.Iadd.This application is a continuation of application Ser. No. 08/195,247 filed Feb. 14, 1994 which is a Re of 07/308,655 filed Feb. 9, 1989, now U.S. Pat. No. 5,086,993. .Iaddend.
BACKGROUND
1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates generally to vertical-takeoff-and-landing (VTOL) airplanes; and more particularly to tail-sitting aircraft capable of hovering flight, generally vertical takeoff and landing, and substantially horizontal forward flight.
2. Prior Art
Two types of prior aircraft are pertinent to my invention:
ducted -fan craft, such as the French Coleopter (FIG. 8) and the 1972 Shorts Skyspy; and
"free wing" or "floating wing" craft in which the wing pivots about a spanwise axis, and is free to float in response to gusts. FIGS. 9 through 12 show a craft of this type, designed by Spratt.
In operation near hover, for a given diameter and power, a ducted fan produces more static thrust than an unducted propeller. The Coleopter enjoys this important advantage. Following is an excerpt from Taylor, J. W. R., ed., Jane's Pocket Book of Research & Experimental Aircraft (1976), at page 221, on the "SNECMA C.450-01 Coleopterere". FIG. 8 has been adapted from page 220 of the same work.
"Power plant: One SNECMA Atar 101E V turbojet engine (8,157 lb. 3,700 kg st).
"Diameter of wing: 10 ft 6 in (3.20 m).
"Length: 26 ft 31/2 in (8.022 m).
"Accomodation: Pilot only.
"Special design features: Annular wing of light alloy construction, consisting of two skins and internal structure (chord 9 ft 10 in, 3.0 m). Retractable foreplanes in fuselage nose. Cruciform fins and rudders to provide directional control in all axes. Four oleo-pneumatic landing legs mounted on trialing-edge of wing, small castoring wheels with rubber tyres. Tilting pilot's seat which could be ejected in an emergency.
"History: Initial tests with the `Atar Volant` pilotless and piloted test vehicles proved the ability of a vertically-mounted turbojet to raise a VTOL aircraft safely from the ground, to accelerate it is vertical flight to a speed where it could become airborne like a conventional aircraft, and to return it to the ground in a vertical descent. SNECMA then built a prototype research aircraft around this type of power plant. Known as the C.450-01 Coleoptere, this prototype was basically similar to the C.400 P-3 piloted `Atar Volant`, but was fitted with an annular wing to permit transition into horizontal flight. The airframe, built by the Nord company in its Chatillonsous-Bagneux works, was intended for tests at subsonic speeds. Directional control at take-off and landing was by pneumatic deflection of the main jet efflux, directional control during normal horizontal flight was by four swiveling fins equally spaced around the rear of the annular wing. Under an agreement signed in 1958, the Federal German Ministry of Defence collaborated with SNECMA in this research programme. The C.450-01 made the first free vertical flight on May 6, 1959 at Melun-Villaroche, but on July 25, during a transition from vertical to horizontal flight, control of the aircraft was lost and it crashed from 250 ft (75 m). Although the aircraft was destroyed the pilot ejected successfully. Testing the Coleopiere, however, was considered to have been successful despite the accident."
In cruise, the Coleopter is handicapped by having a wingspan that is small (i.e., equal to the duct diameter). This small causes span the cruise induced drag (drag due to lift) to be unacceptably high.
Several free-wing aircraft have been proposed and built. I do not know of any that have claimed static-thrust capability, although a brochure of the Allen Aircraft Company does describe an aircraft with capability of takeoff and landing over short distances. Excerpts (not necessarily in their original order) follow.
"The GEMINI TURBOPROP-350 is a new, innovative, single-engine, special performance aircraft. The GTP-350 is powered by Allison's soon-to-be-certified turbine, the 225-B10, delivering 350 shaft horse power (SHP). Combining the 225-B10 with the low weight, high strength characteristics of Allied's SPECTRA and COMPET Fibers creates a high-performance state-of-the-art aircraft. What really sets the GTP-350 apart, however, is the patented Slaved Tandem Freewing design; this configuration provides dramatic safety improvements as well as giving the plane near vertical take-offs and landings (VTOL). This brochure tells the story of the revolutionary GEMINI TURBOPROP-350. . . .
"SPECIFICATIONS
"The fully acrobatic GTP-350 is designed for multi-mission applications. Proposed applications include training such as high maneuverability aerial combat; high performance off-airport operations such as medical and other evacuation from remote areas; close support of combat troops with helicopter-like performance; border patrol, reconnaissance, agricultural and wide area land management missions and general purpose use. The GTP-350, presently available without an FAA certificate (as either a kit or an exempt airplane), is excepted to receive FAA Part 23 certification. Allen Aircraft Company presently has production capacity for 10 GTP-350s per year. Substantial contribution to the development effort was made by Allison Division or General Motors Corporation. . . .
______________________________________                                    
"DIMENSIONS, EXTERNAL                                                     
Wing span              38.33   ft.                                        
Chord at root          5.83    ft.                                        
Chord at tip           3.83    ft.                                        
Mean Aerodynamic Chord 5.45    ft.                                        
Wing Aspect Ratio      7.60                                               
Wing taper ratio       0.67                                               
Sweep                  4.00    deg.                                       
Length overall         20.54   ft.                                        
Fuselage: max width    4.50    ft.                                        
max depth (excluding ascelle)                                             
                       4.20    ft.                                        
Height overal          9.38    ft.                                        
Rear wing span         25.33   ft.                                        
Rear wing chord at root                                                   
                       3.83    ft.                                        
Rear wing chord at tip 2.33    ft.                                        
Wheel track            8.33    ft.                                        
Wheel base             5.33    ft.                                        
Propeller diameter     85.0    inches                                     
Propeller ground clearance                                                
                       2.28    ft.                                        
"DIMENSIONS, INTERNAL:                                                    
Cabin:                                                                    
max length             9.80    ft.                                        
max width              3.41    ft.                                        
max height             3.50    ft.                                        
"AREAS:                                                                   
Wings, gross           187.72  sq. ft.                                    
Ailerons, total        33.68   sq. ft.                                    
Exposed vertical fin   41.43   sq. ft.                                    
Rudder                 9.23    sq. ft.                                    
Rear wings, gross      78.48   sq. ft.                                    
"WEIGHTS and LOADINGS:                                                    
Basic weight empty (typical equipment)                                    
                       754     lbs.                                       
Maximum take-off weight (aerobasic)                                       
                       1500    lbs.                                       
Maximum take-off weight (utility)                                         
                       2200    lbs.                                       
Fuel, max capacity     700     lbs.                                       
Maximum wing loading   11.5    lbs./sq. ft.                               
Maximum power loading  6.28    lbs./shp                                   
"PERFORMANCE:                                                             
Never exceed speed     230     mph                                        
Maximum level speed at sea level                                          
                       190     mph                                        
75% normal cruise      173     mph                                        
Minimum level speed, no vectored thrust                                   
                       70      mph                                        
Minimum controllable speed,                                               
                       20      mph                                        
full thrust vectoring                                                     
Maximum sustainable climb angle                                           
                       90      degrees                                    
Maximum climb rate at sea level                                           
                       3520    fpm                                        
Take-off run, no vectored thrust                                          
                       1200    ft.                                        
Take-off run, full thrust vectoring                                       
                       75      ft.                                        
Landing roll out, no vectored thrust                                      
                       600     ft.                                        
Landing roll out, full thrust vectoring                                   
                       65      ft.                                        
Service ceiling        25,000  ft.                                        
Range with 45 min. reserves                                               
                       800     n.m.                                       
g limits, max aerobatic TOW                                               
                       +6/-3                                              
g limits, max utility TOW                                                 
                       +4.4/-2.2                                          
______________________________________                                    
HISTORY OF THE GEMINI TURBOPROP-350 PROJECT
"The GEMINI TURBOPROP-350 (GTP-350) lineage began prior to World War II when George K. Spratt and Daniel R. Zuck independently invented pure `freewing` design aircraft. Spratt, the more active researcher or the two, has designed, built and flown more than a dozen freewing vehicles. Further development came in the 1950s and 60s when several other researchers--including teams from NASA, General Dynamics and Battelle Memorial Laboratories [--] reported the study, building and successful flying of freewing designs. "In early 1977, Edward H. Allen, Ph.D., a professional systems scientist and experienced pilot, began to examine freewing development and perform experiments that eventually led to the formulation of a new concept--the `Slaved Tandem Freewing` (STF) configuration. Dr. Allen believed that theoretically the new configuration could be shown to be 10 times safer than existing general aviation aircraft. As a result, when the U.S. Department of Transportation requested proposals in 1984 for innovative means to reduce accidents and increase the safety of vehicles, Dr. Allen submitted a proposal for developmental funding of the STF design. A feasibility study contract was awarded by the DOT and after evaluating the results of that study, a two-year, follow-on contract for additional development work was awarded--including the design, manufacture and testing of a manned prototype. The DOT-sponsored work included the testing of four subscale, remotely piloted research vehicles (RPRVs . . .)--the largest of which had a 17-foot wing span and weighed more than 100 pounds. The [RPRVs] served to demonstrate the concept and the GEMINI TURBOPROP-350 was born.
"Construction of the full-scale manned prototype began early in 1987. Flight testing is scheduled to begin with ground tests and system check-out in October 1987, with the first flight the following month.
"THRUST VECTORING: THE SECRET TO NEAR VTOL
"The GEMINI TURBOPROP-350 is the world's first aircraft to offer near vertical takeoff and landing performance without the mechanical complexity of a helicopter--and without losing high speed performance. The unique STF configuration allows the pilot to control deck angle independent of the wing's angle of attack. By rotating the fuselage to a high angle of attack while leaving the wings in a level flight attitude, the pilot is able to direct or `vector` the thrust. The benefit of this `extreme flair [sic]` landing and takeoff maneuver is the ability to operate from confined areas with little takeoff run and even less landing roll.
"SAFETY-THE VALUE OF THE STF CONCEPT
"Ease of operation and inherent safety in vehicle design are the greatest strengths of the STF concept. Of primary importance is the fact that STF vehicles cannot be stalled or spun in the dramatic way that fixed wing aircraft can. In addition, the natural tendency of an STF system to reduce the shocks from sudden changes in wind direction--the `gust allevation` tendency--is as important as stall resistance. In aerodynamic vehicles, the freewing is comparable to an automobile's suspension system . . . : it provides a safe and comfortable flight."
A related prior aircraft, the Spratt/Stout Skycar, is shown in FIG. 13--which is adapted from Bowers, Unconvenional Aircraft (1984), page 195. The accompanying test at pages 194 and 195 of that same work follows.
"Spratt Wing/Stout Skycar IV
"Since 1930, famous American designer William B. Stout had been trying to develop an easy-to-fly `everyman's airplane` through his series of Skycars. At the end of World War II he teamed up with George Spratt of the Stout Research Division or Convair, who had been developing airplanes with movable wings for several years. The Spratt/Stout collaboration, identified as Skycar IV, was built by Convair when that firm became interested in flying automobiles in 1946.
"The Spratt wing was similar to that of the Mignet Flying Flea in being the primary pitch control for the airplane, but did much more in that it was also pivoted in such a way that it could be banked to put the plane in a turn. The wing was mounted above an elongated auto-like body with a buried engine driving a pusher propeller at the rear through an extension shaft [see FIG. 13]. The fixed end finds were used for stability only, not control. With the movable wing, there was no need for elevators, rudder, or ailerons.
"This proof-of-concept prototype concentrated more on the aerodynamic details than the automotive. Although this one, for which technical data is conspicuously absent, was abandoned, Mr. Spratt is still developing aircraft with his wing at this writing."
Allen's and Spratt's craft are relatively complex in that each requires a separate horizontal tail. Moreover, neither is intended to hover. The wing bending moments are carried on a shaft; this wastes weight, because the shaft must be relatively large and heavy.
SUMMARY OF THE DISCLOSURE
A first preferred embodiment of my invention is an aircraft for hovering flight, generally vertical takeoff and landing, and substantially horizontal forward flight. It includes a fuselage that has a generally longitudinal axis.
It also includes some means for standing the aircraft for vertical takeoff and landing, with the fuselage axis substantially vertical, on a landing surface. For generality and breadth of expression I shall refer to these means as the "support means".
This preferred embodiment also includes some means for propelling the aircraft in both (a) hovering and vertical flight and (b) substantially horizontal forward flight. These means comprise at least one ducted fan, and--again for generality and breadth--I shall call them the "ducted-fan means" or simply the "fan means". The fan means are supported from the fuselage aft.
This preferred embodiment must also include some means, comprising at least one floating wing, for providing lift in forward flight. These means--once again for generality the "floating-wing means"--are supported from the fuselage, at each side or the fuselage, for passive rotation about a generally spanwise axis.
The fuselage-axis attitude varies between substantially vertical in hovering and vertical flight, and generally horizontal in forward flight.
The foregoing may be a description of the first preferred embodiment of my invention in its most general or broad form. From what has already been stated, it can now be appreciated that my invention resolves the above-noted fundamental in adequacies of the prior art.
In particular, as compared to prior free-wing configurations of, e.g., Spratt and Stout, my invention shares the advantages of the Coleopter's ducted fan--namely, the very high level of available static thrust that is of enormous value for efficient VTOL and hover operation, and also the greater safety of the guarded fan. On the other hand, by adding a wing that can be of far greater span than the duct diameter, my invention provides induced-drag levels comparable with those of a conventional airplane configuration--and thus is vastly superior in cruise performance to all prior flying-duct craft. Added safety advantages accrue from the stall resistance of the floating wing.
As will be appreciated, however, I prefer to contemplate practice of my invention with certain additional characteristics or features that provide the fullest enjoyment of its potential benefits and advantages.
For example, the fuselage is preferably substantially unarticulated, at least between (1) an attachment location of the floating-wing means to the fuselage and (2) the fan means. Preferably the fuselage is substantially unitary and unarticulated--i.e., along its entire length.
As another example, I prefer that the fan means comprise exactly one fan (which may be a contrarotating fan), of adequate size for efficient operation in hovering flight; and that the fan be substantially the only means of propulsion in vertical takeoff and landing, hover, and forward flight.
In this latter case I prefer that the fan means also comprise a generally cylindrical duct surrounding the fan and generally surrounding an aft segment of the fuselage; and some means for vectoring thrust developed by the fan. These "thrust-vectoring means" (considered as a unit) are fixed relative to the fuselage.
I also prefer that the thrust-vectoring means comprise a plurality of deflection vanes, each mounted for rotation about a respective axis. The axis of rotation of each vane is fixed in relation to the fuselage and the duct, aft of the fan. Full control capability for hover is provided by use of these movable vanes located near the duct exit.
In addition I prefer that the fan be fixed, relative to the fuselage, for rotor rotation about exclusively an axis substantially parallel to the fuselage axis. I also prefer to include a mechanical stop for limiting passive rotation of the wing to an attitude suited for rapid forward flight.
I further prefer that the spanwise axis of rotation of the floating-wing means be along a surface of the wing; and that this embodiment of my invention further comprise a long hinge supporting the floating-wing means for rotation about the spanwise axis. The spanwise axis is preferably along a lower surface of the wing.
Thus, compared with the Allen or Spratt craft, the "break" in the wing is arranged differently--in such a way that wing bending moments are resisted by the long hinge, instead or being carried on a single short shaft. This saves weight, since the hinge pin can be made smaller and lighter than a shaft.
Moreover I prefer that this embodiment of my invention also comprise, at each side of the fuselage, a wing segment that is fixed to the fuselage against rotation. In this case the floating-wing means preferably define, along trailing portions thereof, a corner notch or slot generally near the fuselage; and forward portions of the fixed wing segment are preferably disposed within that slot in the floating wing.
In a second preferred embodiment of my invention, the aircraft is further expressly understood to be also for transitional flight between vertical and horizontal flight. The fan means propel the craft in vertical, horizontal and transitional flight.
The wing is supported for rotation as in the first embodiment; but as further explained below this rotation is not necessarily passive. In this embodiment, during vertical and transitional flight the leading edge of the wing is down relative to the fuselage axis.
A third preferred embodiment of my invention is comparable to the second, except that the leading-edge-down condition is not necessarily satisfied. Instead it is expressly understood that the rotating wing provides lift in transitional as well as horizontal flight and that the wing incidence in transitional flight is substantially always within a small range of angles of attack with respect to an oncoming airstream.
As to the second and third embodiments, I prefer that the wing incidence be controlled by actuators, at least during transitional flight; and that the actuators be scheduled by a flight-control system. Advantages of these embodiments will become more clear from the detailed description that follows.
All of the operational principles and advantages of the present invention will be more fully appreciated upon consideration of the following detailed description, with reference to the appended drawings, of which:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
FIG. 1 is a perspective view of a preferred embodiment of my invention in its tail-sitting orientation, but showing the rotatable wing angled relative to the fuselage as for transitional flight.
FIG. 2 is a like view of the FIG. 1 embodiment, but with the wing aligned with the fuselage as for generally horizontal cruising flight.
FIG. 3 is a perspective view of the same embodiment with the fuselage oriented horizontally, also as for generally horizontal cruising flight.
FIG. 4 is an elevation of the same embodiment in its tail-sitting orientation, viewing the broad surfaces of the wing substantially straight on--i.e., from the viewpoint that would be above the craft if it were in flight.
FIG. 5 is a plan view or the same embodiment, still in a tail-sitting orientation--i.e., a view that would correspond to a front elevation of the craft, if it were in flight.
FIG. 6 is an elevation of the same embodiment, similar to FIG. 4 but taken viewing the wing at one side of the craft edge on--i.e., from the viewpoint that would be at one side of the craft if it were in flight.
FIG. 7 is a composite elevation showing the craft--very diagrammatically or schematically--in successive stages of operation from tail-sitting position for takeoff through ascending transition, cruise, and descending transition into a tail-sitting landing.
FIG. 8 is an elevation (after Taylor, supra, at 220) of the prior-art Coleopter with its special truck-mounted hoist.
FIG. 9 is a perspective view (after promotional literature of the Allen Aircraft Company) of the prior-art Gemini Turboprop-350 (understood to be a trademark of that firm) in an environment characteristic of that craft's short takeoff-roll and short landing-rollout distances.
FIG. 10 is a diagrammatic side elevation (ibid.) of the same prior-art craft in a preliminary takeoff-roll or landing-rollout orientation wherein the fuselage is generally horizontal.
FIG. 11 is a like view (ibid.) of the same craft in a later stage of takeoff roll, in which the fuselage is oriented steeply upward.
FIG. 12 is a front elevation (ibid.) of the same craft in its FIG. 10 orientation.
FIG. 13 is a perspective view of the Spratt Wing/Stout Skycar IV (after Bowers, supra, at 195).
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS
1. General Configuration and Operation
The configuration of my contemplated vehicle is shown in FIGS. 1 through 6. Thrust is provided by an aft-mounted, ducted 22, preferably contrarotating fan 21 (FIG. 4). Vanes 25 in the fan efflux provide control about all three axes in cruise as well as when the vehicle is hovering.
The wing 31 is pivoted along an approximately spanwise axis 24 (FIG. 1), allowing the wing to vary in angle of attack. There are at least three wing-incidence control options:
fully-floating wing;
floating wing which couples with body or fuselage 11 incidence at low angles of attack; and
wing incidence controlled by actuators and scheduled by a flight-control system.
In the first of these options, the combination of hinge axis 24 and wing pitching-moment coefficient at zero lift are tailored so that the wing tends to float at a lift coefficient near the maximum value.
In the second option, stops are arranged so that the wing may only float leading-edge-down relative to the body. These stops, in conjuction with the floating characteristics just mentioned, cause the wing and body to remain coupled as long as the body angle of attack is lower than the trimmed floating angle of attack of the wing (typically about fifteen degrees).
In this mode, the vehicle flies and maneuvers like a conventional, rigid airplane. At body angles of attack in excess of the wing trimmed floating angle of attack, the wing decouples from the body and floats at its designed angle of attack.
In the third option the incidence angle can be programmed for various objectives. (For example, it may emulate either of the first two options but with optimized dynamic response.)
Lateral (roll) control options include at least these:
spoilers on outboard wings;
ailerons which are locked out when the wing is floating;
ailerons scheduled by a flight-control system such that they control wing incidence when the wing is floating and operate in the same manner as conventional ailerons when the wing is locked:
differential variation of wing incidence about a "tilting" hinge axis; and
all roll control by differential deflection of vanes 25 in the fan duct.
Antitorque control possibilities include at least these three strategies:
dual-rotation fans 21 (FIG. 4)--i.e., a contrarotating fan;
a single-rotation fan plus antitorque stator vanes; and
an antitorque rotor or reaction-control antitorque system.
Note from FIGS. 1 through 4 the wing segment 23 that is fixed to the fuselage 11 against rotation, and structurally integrated with the duct 22--very firmly securing the duct to the fuselage. As is clear from the illustrations, some forward portions of this fixed wing segment 23 are disposed within a corner notch or slot 32 that is formed in the rotating wing 31, generally near the fuselage.
2. Transition and Conversion
FIG. 7 illustrates the transition and conversion process. For definiteness the following discussion is in terms of the second wing-incidence control option, though as will be understood the process may be described equally straightforwardly for the other two.
Transition from takeoff or hover 41 to cruise 43 is accomplished by progressively tilting the body 11 from the vertical. As forward speed builds, the floating wing develops progressively more lift--allowing the body 11 and fans 21 to nose down, which increases the forward component of thrust and decreases the lift component of thrust.
When the body angle of attack decreases to the wing floating angle of attack, the wing and body couple. The vehicle then flies in the manner of a conventional rigid airplane.
Conversion from cruise to hover or landing 46 begins with a steady, one-g, wing-borne deceleration. When the airspeed falls to the point that the wing is flying at its designed floating lift coefficient in order to support the aircraft in level flight, the body angle of attack equals the trimmed float angle of attack of the wing.
As deceleration proceeds, the body rotates to a more nose-up attitude 44, 45 and the wing decouples from the body and remains floating at its trimmed angle of attack. This allows the vehicle to fly at body angles of attack above the stall angle of attack of the wing without stalling the wing.
When the body and duct angle of attack pass through the critical duct-flow separation angle-of-attack range (typically thirty to forty degrees), the wing is still generating considerable lift--unloading the fans and duct, and greatly decreasing duct buzz or flow separation. Conversion from wingborne flight to hover is accomplished by progressively nosing up the body until it is oriented vertically 46.
The wing floats at its designed angle of attack throughout the conversion 44, 45. This allows a progressive transfer of lift from the wing to the fans as the vehicle decelerates.
3. System Simplicity
The tilt-body craft is much simpler than other VTOL vehicles. It requires almost no additional systems besides the wing hinges 24 (at the underside of the wing, FIG. 1) and the duct to give an otherwise conventional plane VTOL capability.
The same propulsion system is used for powered lift and cruise propulsion. There is no need for cross-shafting, rotor-tilt actuators and systems, or angle-drive gearboxes.
The fans 21 may be made fixed-pitch, although they are no more complex than conventional variable-pitch propellers in any case. There is no need for cyclic pitch-control mechanisms. Control in both hover and cruise is provided by at least three stator vanes 25 mounted in the fan efflux.
In cruising flight the vanes 25 merely replace the elevators, rudder and ailerons of a conventional airplane. In VTOL and hover the same vanes perform the functions normally associated with cyclic pitch and tail-rotor variation for a conventional helicopter.
The tilt-body therefore requires no more control actuators than a conventional airplane. The control system can be quite simple, since all of the controls operate in the same sense in cruise and hover.
4. Operational Advantages
For operations from confined areas 29 (FIG. 1) and aboard ships, the tilt-body offers a large improvement in ease of handling and safety over prior aircraft, including prior remotely-piloted vehicles (RPVs). The VTOL capability of the craft allows it to be launched and recovered without special equipment such as catapults, JATO bottles or recovery nets.
The ducted propulsion system is fully enclosed. Unlike the rotors of a helicopter or tilt-rotor vehicle, it poses little threat to nearby personnel.
Incorporation of the floating wing gives the tilt-body a much wider transition corridor than either fixed-wing tail-sitting vehicles or pure "flying duct" vehicles such as the SkySpy, or the Coleopter. The wing also gives the tilt-body a far lower span-loading and hence greatly improved altitude and loiter performance than a "flying duct" vehicle.
Hover performance of the tilt-body lies between that of a low-disc-loading vehicle like a helicopter or tilt-rotor craft and a high-disc-loading vehicle like a vectored-thrust jet-lift craft. Incorporating the duct 22 improves hover efficiency. Unlike a tilt-rotor, the tilt-body does not suffer from rotor-induced downloads on the wings.
5. Performance
The combination of sufficient power to hover with a clean, low-drag airframe yields exceptional performance in horizontal flight. Based on computer modeling, a preferred embodiment of my invention can fly at sustained altitudes up to 40,000 feet and has a sea-level top speed of 248 knots. The combination of high speed and VTOL capability give the tilt-body the ability to provide quick response, particularly when the VTOL capability is exploited to allow forward basing.
Following is a calculated performance summary for a preferred embodiment of my tilt-body vehicle that is described by the specifications indicated.
______________________________________                                    
BASELINE SPECIFICATIONS                                                   
______________________________________                                    
control type      RPV                                                     
span              15 feet                                                 
area              32 square feet                                          
span efficiency   0.850                                                   
aspect ratio      7.03                                                    
weight            430 pounds                                              
fuel fraction     0.1                                                     
power             150 shaft horsepower                                    
fan diameter      4 feet                                                  
prop efficiency   0.900                                                   
payload           134 pounds                                              
______________________________________                                    
BASELINE PERFORMANCE                                                      
drag buildup                                                              
parasite drag buildup                                                     
______________________________________                                    
fuselage D/Q           0.10000                                            
wing D/Q               0.32000                                            
empennage D/Q          0.37000                                            
gear D/Q               0.00000                                            
additional D/Q         0.00000                                            
interference           0.04740                                            
total airplane         0.83740                                            
CD minimum             0.026                                              
C.sub.D /C.sub.L.sup.2 0.053                                              
L/D maximum            13.39                                              
C.sub.L at L/D maximum 0.700                                              
______________________________________                                    
CRUISE PERFORMANCE                                                        
             at altitude (feet)                                           
parameter      0         20.000   40.000                                  
______________________________________                                    
minimum power (THP)                                                       
               6.50      8.91     13.11                                   
maximum engine power                                                      
               150.0     72.9     25.6                                    
(SHP)                                                                     
maximum speed (KTAS)                                                      
               248.7     239.2    200.8                                   
75% cruise (KTAS)                                                         
               225.7     215.9    169.7                                   
C.sub.L at 75% power                                                      
               0.078     0.159    0.550                                   
cruise                                                                    
maximum rate of climb                                                     
               5,386.01  2,403.50 355.01                                  
(FPM)                                                                     
climb power (THP)                                                         
               89.8      45.3     18.7                                    
climb C.sub.L  0.2500    0.4500   0.8000                                  
climb speed (KTAS)                                                        
               126.1     128.7    142.0                                   
climb gradient 0.42220   0.18452  0.02470                                 
1-g wing-dccouple speed                                                   
               57.5      78.8     116.0                                   
(KTAS)                                                                    
best climb gradient                                                       
               0.65354   0.23871  0.023539                                
best angle-of-climb                                                       
               57.5      78.8     133.9                                   
speed (KTAS)                                                              
loiter endurance (hours)                                                  
               12        9.5      6                                       
______________________________________                                    
HOVER PERFORMANCE                                                         
at sea level                                                              
______________________________________                                    
figure of merit        0.60                                               
static thrust (pounds) at maximum power                                   
                       485                                                
thrust/weight ratio at 1.12                                               
maximum power and gross weight                                            
                       25                                                 
hover endurance (minutes)                                                 
______________________________________                                    
6. System Development
The information presented in this document is believed lo be sufficient to enable persons of ordinary skill in the art of aircraft development to practice my invention--i.e., to refine the design and build the craft--in a generally routine fashion. Some of the steps contemplated for such development are discussed below.
The till-body craft would benefit from both force-balance-mounted wind-tunnel testing and free-flying tests. The latter would be particularly useful in defining the aircraft transition corridor and in refining control strategies for hovering and transition. In either case, power effects are sufficiently dominant that testing must be done with a powered model.
The tilt-body aircraft could be demonstrated by constructing and flying a scaled-down radio-controlled model of the proposed operational tilt-body vehicle. Flight-testing of the model would demonstrate the controllability of the vehicle over its entire night envelope, including hover, transition and conversion.
It will be understood that the foregoing disclosure is intended to be merely exemplary, and not to limit the scope of the invention--which is to be determined by reference to the appended claims.

Claims (27)

I claim:
1. An aircraft for hovering flight, generally vertical takeoff and landing, and substantially horizontal forward flight, comprising:
a fuselage having a generally longitudinal axis;
support means for standing the aircraft for vertical takeoff and landing, with the fuselage axis substantially vertical, on a landing surface;
ducted-fan means, supported from the fuselage aft, for propelling the aircraft in both (a) hovering and vertical flight and (b) substantially horizontal forward flight; and
at each side of the fuselage, floating-wing means, supported from the fuselage for passive rotation about a generally spanwise axis, for providing lift in forward flight;
wherein the fuselage-axis attitude varies between substantially vertical in hovering and vertical flight, and generally horizontal in forward flight.
2. The aircraft of claim 1, wherein:
at each side of the fuselage, the floating-wing means are supported from the fuselage at an attachment location; and
at least between the wing-means attachment locations and the fan means, the fuselage is substantially unarticulated.
3. The aircraft of claim 1, wherein:
the fuselage is substantially unitary and unarticulated.
4. The aircraft of claim 1, wherein the fan means comprise:
exactly one fan, of adequate size for efficient operation in hovering flight;
said one fan being substantially the exclusive means of propulsion for the aircraft in vertical takeoff and landing, hover, and forward flight;
a generally cylindrical duct surrounding the fan and generally surrounding an aft segment of the fuselage; and
means, fixed in relation to the fuselage, for vectoring thrust developed by the fan.
5. The aircraft or claim 4, wherein:
the thrust-vectoring means comprise a plurality of deflection vanes, each mounted for rotation about a respective axis that is fixed in relation to the fuselage and the duct, aft of the fan.
6. The aircraft of claim 4, wherein:
the fan is fixed, relative to the fuselage, for rotor rotation about exclusively an axis substantially parallel to the fuselage axis.
7. The aircraft of claim 1, wherein:
the ducted-fan means comprise:
a fan, and
a generally cylindrical duct surrounding the fan, and generally surrounding a segment of the fuselage; and
the floating-wing means extend outboard beyond the duct.
8. The aircraft of claim 7, wherein:
the outboard extension or the floating-wing means beyond the duct is larger than the duct diameter.
9. The aircraft of claim 7, further comprising:
at each side of the fuselage, a wing segment fixed to the fuselage against rotation;
wherein the floating-wing means define, along trailing portions thereof, a corner notch or slot generally near the fuselage; and
wherein forward portions of the fixed wing segment are disposed within the notch or slot in the foaling wing.
10. The aircraft of claim 9:
wherein the spanwise axis is along a surface of the wing; and
further comprising a long hinge supporting the floating-wing means from the fixed wing segment, within the notch or slot, for rotation about the spanwise axis.
11. The aircraft of claim 1:
wherein the spanwise axis is along a surface of the wing; and
further comprising a long hinge supporting the floating-wing means for rotation about the spanwise axis.
12. The aircraft of claim 11, wherein:
the spanwise axis is along a lower surface of the wing.
13. The aircraft of claim 1, further comprising:
a mechanical stop for limiting passive rotation of the wing to an attitude suited for rapid forward flight.
14. An aircraft for generally vertical flight in takeoff, hover and landing, substantially horizontal cruising flight; and transitional flight between vertical and horizontal flight; said aircraft comprising:
a fuselage having a generally longitudinal axis;
support means for standing the aircraft for vertical takeoff and landing, with the fuselage axis substantially vertical, on a landing surface;
ducted-fan means, supported from the fuselage aft, for propelling the aircraft in vertical, horizontal and transitional flight; and
at each side of the fuselage, a wing supported from the fuselage for rotation about a generally spanwise axis, substantially for providing lift in forward flight;
wherein the fuselage-axis attitude for transitional flight varies between substantially vertical in vertical flight, and generally horizontal in horizontal flight; and
wherein during vertical and transitional flight the leading edge of the wing is down relative to the fuselage axis.
15. The aircraft of claim 14, wherein the wing is supported from the fuselage for rotation about said axis, between:
a leading-edge-down attitude with respect to the fuselage, in vertical and transitional flight; and
a substantially conventional attitude with respect to the fuselage, in cruising forward flight.
16. The aircraft of claim 15, wherein:
the substantially conventional attitude is leading-edge-up with respect to an oncoming air stream.
17. The aircraft of claim 15, wherein:
in cruising forward flight, the wing is limited to the substantially conventional attitude by a positive mechanical stop.
18. The aircraft of claim 15, wherein:
the wing is supported for passive rotation relative to the fuselage, in vertical and transitional flight; and
is limited to the substantially conventional attitude by a positive mechanical stop, in cruising forward night.
19. The aircraft of claim 15, further comprising:
actuators for controlling incidence of the wing in transitional flight.
20. The aircraft or claim 14, wherein:
the ducted-fan means comprise:
a fan, and
a generally cylindrical duct surrounding the fan, and generally surrounding a segment of the fuselage; and
the wing extends outboard beyond the duct.
21. The aircraft of claim 20, wherein:
the outboard extension of the wing beyond the duct is larger than the duct diameter.
22. An aircraft for generally vertical flight in takeoff, hover and landing: substantially horizontal crusing flight; and transitional flight between vertical and horizontal flight; said craft comprising:
a fuselage having a generally longitudinal axis;
support means for standing the aircraft for vertical takeoff and landing, with the fuselage axis substantially vertical, on a landing surface;
ducted-fan means, supported from the fuselage aft, for propelling the aircraft in vertical, horizontal and transitional flight, and
at each side of the fuselage, a wing supported from the fuselage for rotation, relative to the fan means and relative to the fuselage, about a generally spanwise axis, the primary function of said wing being provision of lift in horizontal and transitional flight;
wherein the fuselage-axis attitude in transitional flight varies between substantially vertical in vertical flight, and generally horizontal in horizontal flight; and
wherein the wing incidence in transitional flight is substantially always within a small range of angles of attack with respect to an oncoming airstream.
23. The aircraft of claim 22, further comprising:
means for maintaining the wing incidence, during transitional flight, within said small range of angles of attack with respect to the oncoming airstream.
24. The aircraft of claim 23, wherein:
the incidence-maintaining means comprise actuators scheduled by a flight-control system.
25. The aircraft of claim 22, wherein:
the ducted-fan means comprise:
a fan, and
a generally cylindrical duct surrounding the fan, and generally surrounding a segment of the fuselage; and
the wing extends outboard beyond the duct.
26. The aircraft of claim 25, wherein:
the outboard extension of the wing beyond the duct is larger than the duct diameter. .Iadd.
27. An aircraft for hovering flight, generally vertical takeoff and landing, and substantially horizontal forward flight, comprising:
a fuselage having a generally longitudinal axis;
a support arrangement for standing the aircraft for vertical takeoff and landing, with the fuselage axis substantially vertical on a landing surface;
a propulsion system, supported from the fuselage, for propelling the aircraft in both (a) hovering and vertical flight and (b) substantially horizontal forward flight; and
at each side of the fuselage, a floating-wing, supported from the fuselage for passive rotation about a generally spanwise axis, for providing lift in forward flight;
wherein the fuselage-axis attitude varies between substantially vertical in hovering and vertical flight, and generally horizontal in forward flight. .Iaddend.
US08/557,374 1989-02-09 1995-11-13 Airplane with variable-incidence wing Expired - Lifetime USRE36487E (en)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US08/557,374 USRE36487E (en) 1989-02-09 1995-11-13 Airplane with variable-incidence wing

Applications Claiming Priority (3)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US07/308,655 US5086993A (en) 1989-02-09 1989-02-09 Airplane with variable-incidence wing
US19524794A 1994-02-14 1994-02-14
US08/557,374 USRE36487E (en) 1989-02-09 1995-11-13 Airplane with variable-incidence wing

Related Parent Applications (2)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US07/308,655 Reissue US5086993A (en) 1989-02-09 1989-02-09 Airplane with variable-incidence wing
US19524794A Continuation 1989-02-09 1994-02-14

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
USRE36487E true USRE36487E (en) 2000-01-11

Family

ID=26890834

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US08/557,374 Expired - Lifetime USRE36487E (en) 1989-02-09 1995-11-13 Airplane with variable-incidence wing

Country Status (1)

Country Link
US (1) USRE36487E (en)

Cited By (20)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US6343768B1 (en) 2000-05-16 2002-02-05 Patrick John Muldoon Vertical/short take-off and landing aircraft
US6398157B1 (en) * 1999-12-29 2002-06-04 Gkn Westland Helicopter Limited Aircraft
WO2003004353A2 (en) * 2001-07-06 2003-01-16 The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. Vertical takeoff and landing aerial vehicle
WO2003106259A2 (en) * 2002-06-12 2003-12-24 Thomas Sash Control of an aircraft as a thrust-vectored pendulum in vertical, horizontal and all flight transitional modes thereof
US20050178879A1 (en) * 2004-01-15 2005-08-18 Youbin Mao VTOL tailsitter flying wing
US20050224631A1 (en) * 2004-03-05 2005-10-13 The Boeing Company Mortar shell ring tail and associated method
US20060065776A1 (en) * 2004-09-17 2006-03-30 Robert Parks System and method for controlling a roll rate of a torsionally-disconnected freewing aircraft
US20060097107A1 (en) * 2004-09-17 2006-05-11 Robert Parks System and method for controlling engine RPM of a ducted fan aircraft
US20060248873A1 (en) * 2004-09-17 2006-11-09 Robert Parks Vibration isolation engine mount system and method for ducted fans
WO2007005040A2 (en) * 2004-09-17 2007-01-11 Aurora Flight Sciences Adaptive landing gear
US20070069065A1 (en) * 2004-09-17 2007-03-29 Robert Parks Inbound transition control for a tail-sitting vertical take off and landing aircraft
US20090236470A1 (en) * 2008-03-19 2009-09-24 Honeywell International, Inc. Launch and capture systems for vertical take-off and landing (vtol) vehicles
US20100019098A1 (en) * 2008-07-25 2010-01-28 Honeywell International Inc. Ducted Fan Core for Use with an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
US20100129215A1 (en) * 2008-11-21 2010-05-27 Preus Robert W System for providing dynamic pitch control in a wind turbine
US20120286102A1 (en) * 2009-08-24 2012-11-15 Pranay Sinha Remotely controlled vtol aircraft, control system for control of tailless aircraft, and system using same
US8505846B1 (en) * 2010-05-11 2013-08-13 II Stanley Gordon Sanders Vertical takeoff and landing aircraft
US9365290B1 (en) * 2015-08-27 2016-06-14 Martin Uav, Llc Vertical take off aircraft
US9540101B2 (en) 2012-02-15 2017-01-10 Aurora Flight Sciences Corporation System, apparatus and method for long endurance vertical takeoff and landing vehicle
US10464668B2 (en) * 2015-09-02 2019-11-05 Jetoptera, Inc. Configuration for vertical take-off and landing system for aerial vehicles
US11148801B2 (en) * 2017-06-27 2021-10-19 Jetoptera, Inc. Configuration for vertical take-off and landing system for aerial vehicles

Citations (65)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US18181A (en) * 1857-09-15 Machine fob habdening hat-bodies
GB190907209A (en) * 1908-10-28 1909-12-02 Louis Breguet Improvements in Flying Machines, Air Ships, and the like.
US1016929A (en) * 1911-02-09 1912-02-13 David Black Aeroplane.
US1083464A (en) * 1911-06-01 1914-01-06 Jean Roche Aeroplane.
US1132503A (en) * 1914-10-06 1915-03-16 Otto Wittkowski Automatic stabilizing apparatus for flying-machines.
US1472103A (en) * 1920-11-24 1923-10-30 Jean Frederic Henri D Vandevel Elevating planes for aeroplanes
US1771257A (en) * 1928-10-24 1930-07-22 William S Ingram Aeroplane
US1772586A (en) * 1928-01-28 1930-08-12 Wilford Edward Burke Aircraft
USRE18181E (en) 1931-09-08 Elastically mounted self adjusting airfoil
US1844448A (en) * 1930-08-22 1932-02-09 Sramek William Airplane
US1845307A (en) * 1929-08-12 1932-02-16 John S Maxwell Aircraft
US1861336A (en) * 1931-09-03 1932-05-31 Cox Patrick Airplane
GB375530A (en) * 1931-06-10 1932-06-30 John Kenneth Crowe Improvements in aeroplanes
US1875267A (en) * 1932-08-30 Umberto savoja
US1892925A (en) * 1931-09-08 1933-01-03 Frank V Barycz Collapsible fuselage for airplanes and the like
US1906005A (en) * 1931-08-13 1933-04-25 Theodore P Hall Airplane
US2058678A (en) * 1933-04-29 1936-10-27 Fry Vern Keith Flying machine
US2063030A (en) * 1931-12-31 1936-12-08 Crouch Rupert J Goodman Aircraft
US2066649A (en) * 1935-01-09 1937-01-05 Mechanical Dev Co Flexible airplane wing construction
US2082674A (en) * 1933-09-12 1937-06-01 Arthur M Young Floating wing assembly
US2118987A (en) * 1935-11-07 1938-05-31 Smith Charles Variable incidence wing for airplanes
US2347230A (en) * 1938-12-16 1944-04-25 Daniel R Zuck Airplane with nonstalling and glide angle control characteristics
US2362224A (en) * 1942-11-02 1944-11-07 Roseland Gustav Aircraft
US2416958A (en) * 1942-09-24 1947-03-04 Northrop Aircraft Inc Tailless airplane
US2438309A (en) * 1944-04-11 1948-03-23 United Aircraft Corp Control device for airplanes
US2481379A (en) * 1945-07-26 1949-09-06 Charles H Zimmerman Aircraft having extensible landing gear positionable for horizontal and vertical take-off
US2541922A (en) * 1948-08-07 1951-02-13 Clarence X Hosford Incidence angle adjustment for aircraft wings
US2563298A (en) * 1947-04-01 1951-08-07 William R Winslow Stabilizing surface for aircraft
US2580312A (en) * 1947-01-20 1951-12-25 Hamilton K Moore Convertible airplane and helicopter
US2584667A (en) * 1947-02-14 1952-02-05 George E Bockrath Gust alleviating control means for airplanes
US2589994A (en) * 1950-01-03 1952-03-18 Willard R Custer High lift wing channel with movable wing
US2623712A (en) * 1946-09-21 1952-12-30 George G Spratt Airplane with pivotally mounted sustaining wing
US2678783A (en) * 1940-04-15 1954-05-18 Myers George Francis Convertible aircraft
US2708081A (en) * 1950-09-11 1955-05-10 Black John Oliver Convertible aircraft structure
GB732657A (en) * 1950-06-14 1955-06-29 Francis James Eckington Improvements to rotary wing aircraft
FR1162174A (en) * 1956-08-18 1958-09-09 Propulsion apparatus with stato-reactors
US2874920A (en) * 1955-10-20 1959-02-24 George E Mallinckrodt Aircraft
US2953322A (en) * 1954-05-21 1960-09-20 William L Lewis Airborne vehicle with variable area sustentation means
US2959373A (en) * 1954-12-10 1960-11-08 Daniel R Zuck Convertiplane
US2960285A (en) * 1956-02-02 1960-11-15 Lopez Robert Aircraft wing with control elements at wing tips
US3006582A (en) * 1956-08-10 1961-10-31 Gen Electric Stabilizing device
US3035789A (en) * 1957-11-27 1962-05-22 Arthur M Young Convertiplane
US3036794A (en) * 1959-09-03 1962-05-29 George E Mallinckrodt Aircraft
US3147938A (en) * 1963-04-12 1964-09-08 David L Danner Aircraft wing structure having variable angle of incidence
US3166271A (en) * 1962-08-20 1965-01-19 Daniel R Zuck Airplane having non-stalling wings and wing-mounted propellers
US3236182A (en) * 1964-06-03 1966-02-22 Werner K Dahm Air vanes of low hinge moments
US3415469A (en) * 1966-09-22 1968-12-10 George G. Spratt Airplane
US3430894A (en) * 1967-04-17 1969-03-04 Air Vehicle Corp Vtol aircraft having free-floating wings and independently tilting propellers
US3477664A (en) * 1967-10-11 1969-11-11 Edward B Jones Flutter wing for a sailplane
DE1531444A1 (en) * 1967-10-23 1970-03-19 Udo Plinke Whiz kid
US3561702A (en) * 1968-11-01 1971-02-09 Edward B Jones Swept wing variable pitch sailplane
US3587770A (en) * 1968-03-15 1971-06-28 Nat Res Dev Undesirable yawing movement correcting means for gas-cushion vehicles
US3653611A (en) * 1970-03-24 1972-04-04 Mason Trupp Slotted delta wing aircraft
US3730459A (en) * 1969-09-18 1973-05-01 D Zuck Airplane with floating wing and reverse propeller thrust
US3795373A (en) * 1971-07-22 1974-03-05 A Gerard Aircraft
US3934843A (en) * 1974-08-05 1976-01-27 Black John O Free wing for convertible aircraft structure
US3966142A (en) * 1975-03-06 1976-06-29 Grumman Aerospace Corporation Vertical takeoff and landing aircraft
US4124180A (en) * 1977-09-08 1978-11-07 The United States Of America As Represented By The Administrator Of The National Aeronautics And Space Administration Free wing assembly for an aircraft
US4415132A (en) * 1981-11-25 1983-11-15 The United States Of America As Represented By The Secretary Of The Air Force Aircraft having variable incidence forward-swept wing
US4568043A (en) * 1983-10-21 1986-02-04 Schmittle Hugh J Ultra-light aircraft with freely rotating rigid wing
US4596368A (en) * 1983-10-21 1986-06-24 Schmittle Hugh J Ultralight aircraft with freely rotating wing
US4730795A (en) * 1984-03-26 1988-03-15 David Constant V Heliplane
US4928907A (en) * 1988-02-29 1990-05-29 Y & B Investment Corporation Compound helicopter with no tail rotor
US4967984A (en) * 1987-07-20 1990-11-06 Allen Edward H Slaved tandem freewing (STF) and device
US5098034A (en) * 1989-11-24 1992-03-24 Lendriet William C Vertical/short takeoff or landing aircraft having a rotatable wing and tandem supporting surfaces

Patent Citations (65)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US18181A (en) * 1857-09-15 Machine fob habdening hat-bodies
USRE18181E (en) 1931-09-08 Elastically mounted self adjusting airfoil
US1875267A (en) * 1932-08-30 Umberto savoja
GB190907209A (en) * 1908-10-28 1909-12-02 Louis Breguet Improvements in Flying Machines, Air Ships, and the like.
US1016929A (en) * 1911-02-09 1912-02-13 David Black Aeroplane.
US1083464A (en) * 1911-06-01 1914-01-06 Jean Roche Aeroplane.
US1132503A (en) * 1914-10-06 1915-03-16 Otto Wittkowski Automatic stabilizing apparatus for flying-machines.
US1472103A (en) * 1920-11-24 1923-10-30 Jean Frederic Henri D Vandevel Elevating planes for aeroplanes
US1772586A (en) * 1928-01-28 1930-08-12 Wilford Edward Burke Aircraft
US1771257A (en) * 1928-10-24 1930-07-22 William S Ingram Aeroplane
US1845307A (en) * 1929-08-12 1932-02-16 John S Maxwell Aircraft
US1844448A (en) * 1930-08-22 1932-02-09 Sramek William Airplane
GB375530A (en) * 1931-06-10 1932-06-30 John Kenneth Crowe Improvements in aeroplanes
US1906005A (en) * 1931-08-13 1933-04-25 Theodore P Hall Airplane
US1861336A (en) * 1931-09-03 1932-05-31 Cox Patrick Airplane
US1892925A (en) * 1931-09-08 1933-01-03 Frank V Barycz Collapsible fuselage for airplanes and the like
US2063030A (en) * 1931-12-31 1936-12-08 Crouch Rupert J Goodman Aircraft
US2058678A (en) * 1933-04-29 1936-10-27 Fry Vern Keith Flying machine
US2082674A (en) * 1933-09-12 1937-06-01 Arthur M Young Floating wing assembly
US2066649A (en) * 1935-01-09 1937-01-05 Mechanical Dev Co Flexible airplane wing construction
US2118987A (en) * 1935-11-07 1938-05-31 Smith Charles Variable incidence wing for airplanes
US2347230A (en) * 1938-12-16 1944-04-25 Daniel R Zuck Airplane with nonstalling and glide angle control characteristics
US2678783A (en) * 1940-04-15 1954-05-18 Myers George Francis Convertible aircraft
US2416958A (en) * 1942-09-24 1947-03-04 Northrop Aircraft Inc Tailless airplane
US2362224A (en) * 1942-11-02 1944-11-07 Roseland Gustav Aircraft
US2438309A (en) * 1944-04-11 1948-03-23 United Aircraft Corp Control device for airplanes
US2481379A (en) * 1945-07-26 1949-09-06 Charles H Zimmerman Aircraft having extensible landing gear positionable for horizontal and vertical take-off
US2623712A (en) * 1946-09-21 1952-12-30 George G Spratt Airplane with pivotally mounted sustaining wing
US2580312A (en) * 1947-01-20 1951-12-25 Hamilton K Moore Convertible airplane and helicopter
US2584667A (en) * 1947-02-14 1952-02-05 George E Bockrath Gust alleviating control means for airplanes
US2563298A (en) * 1947-04-01 1951-08-07 William R Winslow Stabilizing surface for aircraft
US2541922A (en) * 1948-08-07 1951-02-13 Clarence X Hosford Incidence angle adjustment for aircraft wings
US2589994A (en) * 1950-01-03 1952-03-18 Willard R Custer High lift wing channel with movable wing
GB732657A (en) * 1950-06-14 1955-06-29 Francis James Eckington Improvements to rotary wing aircraft
US2708081A (en) * 1950-09-11 1955-05-10 Black John Oliver Convertible aircraft structure
US2953322A (en) * 1954-05-21 1960-09-20 William L Lewis Airborne vehicle with variable area sustentation means
US2959373A (en) * 1954-12-10 1960-11-08 Daniel R Zuck Convertiplane
US2874920A (en) * 1955-10-20 1959-02-24 George E Mallinckrodt Aircraft
US2960285A (en) * 1956-02-02 1960-11-15 Lopez Robert Aircraft wing with control elements at wing tips
US3006582A (en) * 1956-08-10 1961-10-31 Gen Electric Stabilizing device
FR1162174A (en) * 1956-08-18 1958-09-09 Propulsion apparatus with stato-reactors
US3035789A (en) * 1957-11-27 1962-05-22 Arthur M Young Convertiplane
US3036794A (en) * 1959-09-03 1962-05-29 George E Mallinckrodt Aircraft
US3166271A (en) * 1962-08-20 1965-01-19 Daniel R Zuck Airplane having non-stalling wings and wing-mounted propellers
US3147938A (en) * 1963-04-12 1964-09-08 David L Danner Aircraft wing structure having variable angle of incidence
US3236182A (en) * 1964-06-03 1966-02-22 Werner K Dahm Air vanes of low hinge moments
US3415469A (en) * 1966-09-22 1968-12-10 George G. Spratt Airplane
US3430894A (en) * 1967-04-17 1969-03-04 Air Vehicle Corp Vtol aircraft having free-floating wings and independently tilting propellers
US3477664A (en) * 1967-10-11 1969-11-11 Edward B Jones Flutter wing for a sailplane
DE1531444A1 (en) * 1967-10-23 1970-03-19 Udo Plinke Whiz kid
US3587770A (en) * 1968-03-15 1971-06-28 Nat Res Dev Undesirable yawing movement correcting means for gas-cushion vehicles
US3561702A (en) * 1968-11-01 1971-02-09 Edward B Jones Swept wing variable pitch sailplane
US3730459A (en) * 1969-09-18 1973-05-01 D Zuck Airplane with floating wing and reverse propeller thrust
US3653611A (en) * 1970-03-24 1972-04-04 Mason Trupp Slotted delta wing aircraft
US3795373A (en) * 1971-07-22 1974-03-05 A Gerard Aircraft
US3934843A (en) * 1974-08-05 1976-01-27 Black John O Free wing for convertible aircraft structure
US3966142A (en) * 1975-03-06 1976-06-29 Grumman Aerospace Corporation Vertical takeoff and landing aircraft
US4124180A (en) * 1977-09-08 1978-11-07 The United States Of America As Represented By The Administrator Of The National Aeronautics And Space Administration Free wing assembly for an aircraft
US4415132A (en) * 1981-11-25 1983-11-15 The United States Of America As Represented By The Secretary Of The Air Force Aircraft having variable incidence forward-swept wing
US4568043A (en) * 1983-10-21 1986-02-04 Schmittle Hugh J Ultra-light aircraft with freely rotating rigid wing
US4596368A (en) * 1983-10-21 1986-06-24 Schmittle Hugh J Ultralight aircraft with freely rotating wing
US4730795A (en) * 1984-03-26 1988-03-15 David Constant V Heliplane
US4967984A (en) * 1987-07-20 1990-11-06 Allen Edward H Slaved tandem freewing (STF) and device
US4928907A (en) * 1988-02-29 1990-05-29 Y & B Investment Corporation Compound helicopter with no tail rotor
US5098034A (en) * 1989-11-24 1992-03-24 Lendriet William C Vertical/short takeoff or landing aircraft having a rotatable wing and tandem supporting surfaces

Non-Patent Citations (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
NASA Contractor Report 2946, "Analytical Study of a Free-Wing/Free-Trimmer Concept", Porter et al, Feb. 1978, pp. v-115.
NASA Contractor Report 2946, Analytical Study of a Free Wing/Free Trimmer Concept , Porter et al, Feb. 1978, pp. v 115. *
NASA Contractor Report 3135, "Extended Analytical Study of the Free-Wing/Free-Trimmer Concept," Porter et al, 1979, pp. iii-85.
NASA Contractor Report 3135, Extended Analytical Study of the Free Wing/Free Trimmer Concept, Porter et al, 1979, pp. iii 85. *

Cited By (42)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US6398157B1 (en) * 1999-12-29 2002-06-04 Gkn Westland Helicopter Limited Aircraft
US6343768B1 (en) 2000-05-16 2002-02-05 Patrick John Muldoon Vertical/short take-off and landing aircraft
WO2003004353A2 (en) * 2001-07-06 2003-01-16 The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. Vertical takeoff and landing aerial vehicle
WO2003004353A3 (en) * 2001-07-06 2003-09-18 Draper Lab Charles S Vertical takeoff and landing aerial vehicle
US6691949B2 (en) * 2001-07-06 2004-02-17 The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. Vertical takeoff and landing aerial vehicle
WO2003106259A2 (en) * 2002-06-12 2003-12-24 Thomas Sash Control of an aircraft as a thrust-vectored pendulum in vertical, horizontal and all flight transitional modes thereof
WO2003106259A3 (en) * 2002-06-12 2004-04-01 Thomas Sash Controlable rotorcraft using a pendulum
US20040075017A1 (en) * 2002-06-12 2004-04-22 Thomas Sash Control of an aircraft as a thrust-vectored pendulum in vertical, horizontal and all flight transitional modes thereof
US6863241B2 (en) 2002-06-12 2005-03-08 Thomas Sash Control of an aircraft as a thrust-vectored pendulum in vertical, horizontal and all flight transitional modes thereof
US20050178879A1 (en) * 2004-01-15 2005-08-18 Youbin Mao VTOL tailsitter flying wing
US7262394B2 (en) * 2004-03-05 2007-08-28 The Boeing Company Mortar shell ring tail and associated method
US20050224631A1 (en) * 2004-03-05 2005-10-13 The Boeing Company Mortar shell ring tail and associated method
WO2007005040A3 (en) * 2004-09-17 2009-04-09 Aurora Flight Sciences Adaptive landing gear
US8001764B2 (en) 2004-09-17 2011-08-23 Aurora Flight Sciences Corporation Vibration isolation engine mount system and method for ducted fans
WO2007005040A2 (en) * 2004-09-17 2007-01-11 Aurora Flight Sciences Adaptive landing gear
US20070069065A1 (en) * 2004-09-17 2007-03-29 Robert Parks Inbound transition control for a tail-sitting vertical take off and landing aircraft
US20060097107A1 (en) * 2004-09-17 2006-05-11 Robert Parks System and method for controlling engine RPM of a ducted fan aircraft
US20070221783A1 (en) * 2004-09-17 2007-09-27 Robert Parks Adaptive landing gear
US7364115B2 (en) 2004-09-17 2008-04-29 Aurora Flight Sciences Corporation System and method for controlling engine RPM of a ducted fan aircraft
US7506837B2 (en) 2004-09-17 2009-03-24 Aurora Flight Sciences Corporation Inbound transition control for a tail-sitting vertical take off and landing aircraft
US20060065776A1 (en) * 2004-09-17 2006-03-30 Robert Parks System and method for controlling a roll rate of a torsionally-disconnected freewing aircraft
US20060248873A1 (en) * 2004-09-17 2006-11-09 Robert Parks Vibration isolation engine mount system and method for ducted fans
US20090236470A1 (en) * 2008-03-19 2009-09-24 Honeywell International, Inc. Launch and capture systems for vertical take-off and landing (vtol) vehicles
US8162256B2 (en) 2008-03-19 2012-04-24 Honeywell International Inc. Launch and capture systems for vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) vehicles
US8387911B2 (en) * 2008-07-25 2013-03-05 Honeywell International Inc. Ducted fan core for use with an unmanned aerial vehicle
US20100019098A1 (en) * 2008-07-25 2010-01-28 Honeywell International Inc. Ducted Fan Core for Use with an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
US20100129215A1 (en) * 2008-11-21 2010-05-27 Preus Robert W System for providing dynamic pitch control in a wind turbine
US8573937B2 (en) 2008-11-21 2013-11-05 Xzeres Corp. System for providing dynamic pitch control in a wind turbine
US20120286102A1 (en) * 2009-08-24 2012-11-15 Pranay Sinha Remotely controlled vtol aircraft, control system for control of tailless aircraft, and system using same
US8505846B1 (en) * 2010-05-11 2013-08-13 II Stanley Gordon Sanders Vertical takeoff and landing aircraft
US9682774B2 (en) 2012-02-15 2017-06-20 Aurora Flight Sciences Corporation System, apparatus and method for long endurance vertical takeoff and landing vehicle
US9540101B2 (en) 2012-02-15 2017-01-10 Aurora Flight Sciences Corporation System, apparatus and method for long endurance vertical takeoff and landing vehicle
US9567071B1 (en) 2015-08-27 2017-02-14 Martin Uav, Llc Vertical take off aircraft
US9365290B1 (en) * 2015-08-27 2016-06-14 Martin Uav, Llc Vertical take off aircraft
US9828090B2 (en) 2015-08-27 2017-11-28 Martin Uav, Llc Vertical take off aircraft
US9902494B2 (en) 2015-08-27 2018-02-27 Martin Uav, Llc Vertical take off aircraft
US10486808B2 (en) 2015-08-27 2019-11-26 Martin Uav, Llc Vertical take off aircraft
US10464668B2 (en) * 2015-09-02 2019-11-05 Jetoptera, Inc. Configuration for vertical take-off and landing system for aerial vehicles
US11505316B2 (en) * 2015-09-02 2022-11-22 Jetoptera, Inc. Configuration for vertical take-off and landing system for aerial vehicles
US11148801B2 (en) * 2017-06-27 2021-10-19 Jetoptera, Inc. Configuration for vertical take-off and landing system for aerial vehicles
US20220111957A1 (en) * 2017-06-27 2022-04-14 Jetoptera, Inc. Configuration for vertical take-off and landing system for aerial vehicles
US11724803B2 (en) * 2017-06-27 2023-08-15 Jetoptera, Inc. Configuration for vertical take-off and landing system for aerial vehicles

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US5086993A (en) Airplane with variable-incidence wing
US11634222B2 (en) Vertical take-off and landing unmanned aerial vehicle having foldable fixed wing and based on twin-ducted fan power system
US9499266B1 (en) Five-wing aircraft to permit smooth transitions between vertical and horizontal flight
CA2947974C (en) Vtol aircraft
USRE36487E (en) Airplane with variable-incidence wing
Muraoka et al. Quad tilt wing vtol uav: Aerodynamic characteristics and prototype flight
US8708273B2 (en) Three-wing, six tilt-propulsion unit, VTOL aircraft
US8800912B2 (en) Three wing, six-tilt propulsion unit, VTOL aircraft
US5145129A (en) Unmanned boom/canard propeller v/stol aircraft
Anderson Historical overview of V/STOL aircraft technology
JPH06293296A (en) Pilotless aircraft for effecting vertical take off and landing and level cruise flight
CA2195581A1 (en) Gyro stabilized triple mode aircraft
US20200262557A1 (en) Tandem Wing Aircraft With Variable Lift And Enhanced Safety
CN111315655A (en) Assembly of three composite wings for air, water, land or space vehicles
CN112955378A (en) Vertical take-off and landing aircraft
CN105905295A (en) Vertical take-off and landing fixed wing aircraft
Hitchens The encyclopedia of aerodynamics
KR20210047277A (en) Tail sitter
US2761634A (en) Verttcally rising airplane
EP2625094A1 (en) Three wing, six tilt-propulsion unit, vtol aircraft
Bramlette et al. Design and flight testing of a convertible quadcopter for maximum flight speed
US2743886A (en) Vertical climbing airplane
RU2082651C1 (en) Light flying vehicle
Ransone An overview of experimental VSTOL aircraft and their contributions
CN112722264A (en) Tail sitting type vertical take-off and landing unmanned aerial vehicle

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AS Assignment

Owner name: JOAO VERDI CARVALHO LEITE, BRAZIL

Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:ASKANASE, DAVID;REEL/FRAME:013000/0185

Effective date: 20020506