Flexrotor vertical take-off and landing UAV enters second phase of development

Flexrotor vertical take-off an...
The Flexrotor takes off vertically from its launch platform
The Flexrotor takes off vertically from its launch platform
View 3 Images
The Flexrotor transitions from vertical to horizontal flight be pitching over and going into a dove before leveling out
The Flexrotor transitions from vertical to horizontal flight be pitching over and going into a dove before leveling out
The Flexrotor takes off vertically from its launch platform
The Flexrotor takes off vertically from its launch platform
Aerovel president Tad McGeer with the Flexrotor
Aerovel president Tad McGeer with the Flexrotor
View gallery - 3 images

In an attempt to combine the vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) capabilities of a helicopter, with the speed, range and altitude capabilities of a fixed wing aircraft, tiltrotor aircraft, such as the AgustaWestland AW609 and the Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey rely on powered rotors mounted on rotating shafts or nacelles at the end of a fixed wing. But the tiltrotor design isn’t the only option for aircraft looking to get the best of both worlds. Like Aerovironment’s SkyTote, the Flexrotor is designed to transition from vertical to horizontal flight without any pivoting of its rotor.

Having been awarded a contract earlier this week by the Office of Naval Research (ONR), Aerovel Corporation will enter the next development phase for the Flexrotor, which is intended to deliver improved maritime surveillance capabilities. With the requirement that it launch from a ship, the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) has a wingspan of 3 m (9.84 ft) and an oversized rotor with a diameter of 1.85 m (6.07 ft).

The size of the propeller is designed to strike a balance between providing enough lift to enable the aircraft to take off vertically, while also being small enough to be efficient during horizontal flight.

Aerovel president Tad McGeer with the Flexrotor
Aerovel president Tad McGeer with the Flexrotor

Currently powered by a single-cylinder 28 cc two-stroke engine through a reduction gearbox, the Flexrotor takes off vertically like a helicopter from a portable fold-out rig that supports the wings. Once airborne, the tail is deployed and, once it reaches a high enough altitude, it transitions into horizontal flight by pitching over into a dive before leveling out. To transition back to vertical flight, the aircraft flies at about 70 knots (80 mph/130 km/h) before pulling up and entering a hover that allows it to descend vertically and land.

The aircraft completed its first successful transition from vertical to horizontal flight and back again in August 2011, which can be seen in the video below. This and subsequent test flights have been conducted in light winds, but Aerovel plans to gradually increase the aircraft’s operating envelope and expose it to windier conditions. The development of an upgraded propulsion system to allow the aircraft to cope with crosswinds and high winds will be the focus of the next development phase.

Aerovel is also creating an Automatic Servicing Platform from which the Flexrotor could launch, land, park and refuel with no human assistance. In addition to placement on a ship, the platform could also be used to remotely site the aircraft for launch.

“[The special ops personnel] like the idea of not exposing where they are when they need to launch and recover one,” said John Kinzer, ONR program officer for Air Vehicle Technology. “They could put it on a mountaintop somewhere and just leave it to do surveillance.”

At its maximum vertical take off weight of 19.2 kg (42.3 lb), the Flexrotor can climb at a rate of 1 m/s (197 ft/min). After making the transition to horizontal flight, the aircraft boasts a maximum level speed of 78 knots (90 mph/145 km/h) and can stay in the air for more than 40 hours to reach a maximum range of more than 3,000 km (1,865 miles).

Here's the video of the Flexrotor making its first successful transition from vertical to horizontal flight.

Aerovel Flexrotor UAV first transition - August 2011

Source: ONR, Aerovel

View gallery - 3 images
Interesting but not unique...
Guy Macher
Interesting, but the name is misleading.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-13_Vertijet I think this falls under the 'nothing new under the sun'. I remember something similar that was done many years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VTOL Here is one that is very similar but with counter-rotating propellers. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/31/Lockheed_XFV-1_on_ground_bw.jpg/220px-Lockheed_XFV-1_on_ground_bw.jpg
We seem to have the technology today to be able to develop and copy the way our feather friends do, which is a control stall when they come in to land. Why not go in that direction, as it will use less fuel.
The Hoff
The new part is the computer flying it and the landing station which isn't a bad idea although it is the only place this thing can land so what is the advantage of this? But saying it could land in gusty conditions with those wings on it is just a dream.
Mr Stiffy
3000K in 40 hours...... NON stop?
You guys are amazing both the Pogo and the Vertijet were total failures.
Also this little craft flies a completely different mission being small and not having an on board pilot.
I remember back in the days of the Pogo and the Vertijet one of the most common comments about either craft was that the vertical tail first landing was "terrifying"....quite a comment coming from hardened test pilots.
It seems to me that no matter what Gizmag puts up here there are a bunch of people that range in knowledge from zero to "too smart for you guys" that just want to tear the article apart. If Gizmag is so awful why do you continue to watch it? Is it so you can show us how smart you aren't?
Not bad. They should have used 2 6' props with electric motors both lift more and better high speed profile.
By doubling the prop swept area you get almost 2x's the lift/hp. Plus in crosswinds the props counter rotating to each other makes it a lot more managable as much of the torques, wind loads of crosswinds cancel out.
Another is props on the wingtips cut wing endplate drag if the prop comes up on the outside where the prop conteracts the tip vortex.
I found this out designing a WIGE and a seaplane I hope to build soon.
Here is something to weigh: Which is easier - to get under a 100 pound set of barbells and push up - or to put it on the floor and roll it? The amount of energy wasted on vertical lift is not worth the waste.