Quadrotor configuration I think is the most common configuration for drones. Why has it not been made into a full-size production aircraft? I think that it could be better than helicopters as it does not need a tail.
In: Engineering
When it comes to anything mechanical, scaling is always an issue due to the nature of physics. Think about the earliest electric cars: they were small and never went that fast. That has now changed, but they still suffer other unique issues like battery life, charging, and torque.
Now let’s explore aircraft. Airplanes need massive amounts of power and fuel as they scale in size and capability. For helicopters, they have to work harder as they cannot rely on pure speed to keep them airborne like a plane with wings. The bigger the helicopter, the bigger and more powerful engines are needed. As you add rotors, like a Chinook or Osprey, there needs to be mechanical linkages to keep them spinning under the power of one engine for safety (adding weight) and now those engines need to be even more powerful. There is no electric motor powerful enough to accomplish that which would also fit into an economical aircraft design. Plus, imagine the charging times! It’s not entirely impossible for something big enough to carry a single pilot, but adding weight adds power requirements and complexity.
Now, why not 4 rotors using ICEs? Simple answer is you don’t need that many for what we use traditional VTOL for. Small drones are omni directional as they are largely remote controlled from the ground or via a camera interface. While helicopters are capable of moving in any direction, it’s only during positioning movements close to the ground. An omni-directional helicopter would require a cockpit that also moved for the sake of the pilot. Lastly, the tails of helicopters aren’t just for mounting the tailrotor, its for aerodynamic stability, just like all other aircraft capable of flying at significant speeds.
Source: am pilot
Latest Answers