Video: DARPA and Boeing's DiscRotor Retractable-Blade Heliplane

spend millions to make a plane that looks cool...wow GG -,,-

The precursor to the things from Avatar or the Falcons from Halo.

seems pretty legit to me...

SCIENTIFIC METHOD DICTATES THAT WE PROVE BY CONTROLLED EXPERIMENT THE EXISTENCE OF GLOBAL WARMING. THEN WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DETERMINE A CAUSE. AT PRESENT WE CANT EVEN PROVE THAT THE EARTH HAS A SICKNESS, YET WE HAVE ALREADY DETERMINED THE CAUSE OF THE ILLNESS. THIS IS NOT SCIENCE! THIS IS POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC DECEPTION. DON'T BE SHEOPLE.

Umm...V-22 anyone? You know the tilt-rotor aircraft that Boeing and Bell co-designed that already does this. Talk about government waste.

@ JGMCCORMICK I agree we keep putting money into new aircraft just to have their programs cut.After millions have been spent into the research and development of these vehicles.

So, just how fast a speed will DARPA allow to be published (I know the actual speed is classified) on this particular aircraft? Anyone out there have an idea?

Anyone remember "The 6th Day"? Those we're some sweet rides, how come those won't work?

This design does not look very complete. First of all it doesn't have a rudder or elevator for pitch and yaw stability. Secondly, it lacks a secondary trust source to counteract its inevitable rotation in helicopter mode, due to the conservation of angular momentum. Besides those issues though, I like the idea and I hope they proceed with a model.

Cool now imagine taking off like a rocket and landing like a helicopter.

I designed a Helirocket back in 2003 three that could take off like a helicopter and land like a plane. I even piggybacked one on a small rocket and launched it, after several tries and using a counter weight on the other side the last one landed like a helicopter, wished I would have videotaped that one. Here is one I designed in autocad back in 2003...

www.shineinnovations.com/6312.html

Ron Bennett

Oops the above post I posted instead of previewed before I was done editing, it should say:

Cool now imagine taking off like a rocket and landing like a helicopter.

I designed a Helirocket back in 2003 that takes off like a rocket and lands like a helicopter, I even piggybacked one on a small rocket and launched it. After several tries, using a counterweight on the other side of the last one it landed like a helicopter - wished I videotaped that one. Here's one I designed in AutoCAD back in 2003...

www.shineinnovations.com/6312.html

Ron Bennett

there has already been a plane with vertical takeoff invented

@el-tocino

as far as the tail rotor problem, you have two props on the wing that can create a counter torque to balance the main rotor

as far as the pitch and yaw is concerned they say that the top disc is used as a secondary wing when the blades are retracted - that disc will have some range motion inherent of a rotor blade mount which then can be used for pitch and yaw

in another note, as far of top speed goes
the forward propulsion is from two props on the wing being driven by i assume two jet turbines housed in the fuselage
so this craft is definitely sub-sonic and probably only slightly faster than the V-22 (310mph)

I really hope there has not been too much money dumped into this ridiculous project. The V22 went WAY over budget during development, but despite its imperfections, it has been proving itself to be worth the investment. This DiscRotor HeliPlane does not seem to provide any advantages over the Osprey, so why are we wasting money on this? Please DoD cancel this ridiculous contraption. This is a prime example of our bloated Defense budget. More Education spending (only $47 billion in '10) is needed in this country, less Defense ($664 billion in '10).

Why waste time on this when they have already reverse engineered UFO's...

@sdfskjdf
Grammar class, YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!

This is far superior to Osprey. This is more stable and faster using turbofan instead of just propeller (can't jet engine be used?) This is much better than F-35. Can F-35 pick up injured patient? No, it has no room for that. The budget in developing and producing V-22 should have been used instead in developing and manufacturing this helliplane. This is multi-role in the truest sense. Imagine what this thing could have accomplished if it would be stealth like F-22 and also have trust vectoring. Move over guys the hell of a plane is coming.

Also note Boeing may be considering this as a short haul, short takeoff landing passenger jet -- no runway needed. That's how the 707, the first large passenger jet got started through development as a military jet carrier first.

Ron Bennett

Is it possible for the circular wing on top to unfold into emergency wings like a Maple seed and whirlybird down safely? Perhaps it could even GPS down to a safe emergency landing spot.

Looks like a V-22 Osprey CRASHED into an A-10 WARTHOG !

Just a faster V-22 ... money back !

Also looks like a maint. nightmare ... K.I.S.S.

There is obviously a long way to go yet. There is only one set of blades with no tail rotor, thus making this heliplane likely impossible to fly due to the torque. The only way for this mockup to be stable would be to have one of the turbofans provide thrust in the opposite direction. But that causes more problems, most notablely not allowing for a smooth transition from helicopter to plane mode. It would take an extremely precise powering up of the second turbofan in conjunction of the slowing of the rotors for it to succeed. At this point it would seem this aircraft, or heliplane, is a huge waste of money at a time when financial resources are scarce. The CV-22 does exactly what this proposal hopes to accomplish, only slower, but still much faster than a traditional helicopter.

Why not just build a flying saucer with a blades around the perimeter it's more efficient and more neat. There is already small car sized working models of these (4 to 5 small rotors placed around the perimeter of a saucer).

Martians had it right all along!

I want one.

I want one.

wont the spinning disc make the airplane want to roll sideways due to the magnus effect?

@jgmccormick

V-22 is a totally different concept and has stability issues, especially in transition I believe. Please let the aeronautical engineers do the technical evaluation. It may be a surprise to you, but you learn a lot in engineering school and in the many years of experience that the designer of this craft I'm sure has.

@keil_fb54

Tail rotor is not necessarily required. They could be ducting exhaust from the turbines to provide the required moment to keep the craft from spinning.

@3ddraft

Those craft in "The 6th Day" are actually based on a DARPA concept called the X-50 Dragonfly. You can check out the Wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-50_Dragonfly

@4L3X

I assume you're joking, but just for the record, the futuristic aircraft from movies and video game are fantastical and do not necessarily represent the progression of technology or define where technology should go. I say this not to be a stick in the mud, but a lot of non-technical people get their ideas about engineering and science from movies, which are more concerned with the "cool" factor than whether something actually makes engineering sense. Engineers and scientists work more or less from hard numbers (scientists more so) and must justify their actions through real world physical limitations. Again, I assume you're joking, but this is something that needs to be said for the record.

As the military already has the V-22 Osprey, I'm guessing DARPA is developing this one because it Flies Faster? Hauls More Cargo? Flies Quieter? Is More Economic? Looks Cooler?

That disk up there kind of reminds me of one of those AWACS radar planes

That video looks very familar...
http://gerbinoflightsystems.com/
both garbino videos have lower graphic quality, but superior sound quality. :)

The Garbin VTOL might be less refined, but it would cost a lot less to build, and possible live up to it's reliability claims about redundancy.

This is a waste of money, we have the V22 Offsprey already.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell-Boeing_V-22_Osprey

Why can't they improve on air speed for commercial flying? it will be nice to cruise at Mach 2 on a commercial liner.

We are scientists from Russia.
We designed this type of flying vehicle on 1998... But our government doesn't interesting our project...
And USA realized this... Cool! :(
My name Vitaly. I'm coauthor of this project.
http://discolet.wordpress.com

Heliplane! Why cant they stick to one, let there be advanced choppers and the same with airplanes. They look so dirty. People might feels it great but hey everybody got their opinion and i just expressed mine.
vipchicagolimousine.com

Sad to hear Russian Government did not approve this project. You know why, they visioned that too much of advancement is not so good.

http://airportwestcoastlimo.com