Something I recall about the noise problem, was that the huge size of the main rotor; coupled with the speed of rotation meant that the rotor tips were travelling supersonically. No amount of noise reduction could overcome that problem.
The blade tip speed is given in Wikipedia as 720 feet per second. At sea level, the speed of sound is 1100 feet per second. So the rotor tips were travelling at Mach 0.65 when the aircraft had zero forward speed. At 100 mph aircraft speed, the advancing blade tip would therefore be travelling at 867 ft/sec, i.e. Mach 0.79. The rotor operated in autorotation mode at higher speeds. So no, the tips were NOT travelling supersonically (the designers were not THAT stupid) - but the exhaust from the tip jets presumably was, which would indicate that the exhaust velocity relative to the rotor blades was higher than (1100 + 720) = 1820 ft/sec. That's what caused the noise.
@@dafyddllewellyn6636 Excellent comments. Yes, not the rotor tip speed, the jet engines were Ramjet type and the exhaust nozzle gas velocity was extremely high... resulting in painfully loud engine noise.
I saw her at Farnborough and was very impressed. The way that officialdom was not behind a larger version when Canada wanted it and the way it was cut up and data 'dispersed' reminds meof many innovative British products. Sadly, I saw a scrap lorry, by chance coming past my old school at Rickmansworth loaded with very recognisable chunks of Rotodyne.
There is no evidence that there were any legitimate orders at Fairey for the Rotodyne, Fairey was a deeply troubled company, and it seems its marketing staff made many claims that were never true... some Fairey literature suggests there were firm orders and that they had solved the noise problems... neither of these claims is even remotely true..
Naw, just knowledge and skill. When they went to school, they learned things pertaining to their chosen trade, not time wasting touchy feely garbage. In the 70's, 95% of my university education was trade specific. In 2012-15 I did Systems Sngineering and around 55% was trade specific. Hehehe some of the crazy credits I got were "Bad Women in Society" , "Small Cities in History" , "Witches and Witch Hunts", " People and Their Pets: The Psychology of Companion Animals". Give someone a machine with a carburetor now-a-days and they'll spend a hour or two trying to find the port to plug in their laptop/scan tool
@@GoofieNewfie69I've got a set of textbooks for mechanical engineering printed in the 1930s. The most comprehensive collection of mechanical knowledge I've ever seen, a smart guy could build anything with the stuff in those textbooks.
One of these Rotodyne built with new smaller engines (yet more powerful and reliable), components made of composites would be feasible today. I am sure the sound decibels could be lowered within an acceptable range. The gyro copter idea seems better than the Osprey's plagued twin rotors that causes more often a dangerous Vortex ring state.
There was a proposed heli design from the late 80s or early 90s with wingtip nozzles, but those only exhausted air. The system used a vertically mounted jet engine with a large precompressor to power the nozzles and the rotor basically rotated around the top of the engine. While it did not need any means against counterrotation, it had a tail nozzle for directional control. Its main advantages were the complete lack of rotor adjustments, that greatly reduced complexity and therefore construction and maintenance cost, it was said it could be build for around 10% the price of a regular heli of the same size.
There was a very similar , unfortunate and also promising prototyp in germany ! The Do 31 which also featured two Harrier engines and was piloted by a famous nasa atronaut! It regratably suffered the same fate !
It’s not easy to build a quiet helicopter in the first place, but to build one with afterburners on the rotor tips-for use in cities!-was truly a lost cause from the start.
I heard it flying as a kid. It was very,very noisy at a time when aircraft engines were very,very noisy. The combination of a 90ft power rotor,two turbines and turbo propellers was over the top.
@@sarahmanalapan8443 It will never be popular - IOW economically viable - because of the time factor. Airline profits depend on the "cheap seats", so turnover time is essential, and airships cannot deliver on that.
Imagine what could have been with 60 years of evolutionary development on that ? What a shame . How many incredible things would we have if bureaucrats weren't so short sighted.
Now that there are Helipads on top of buildings, it might be time to revisit something like this especially in the US where people still live in suburbs and work downtown. I’m hopeful the noise could be mitigated although I live near a military base and helicopters still cause conversation to stop until they are gone!
Did they really only have that one option for the behemoth rotors? That being the end mounted propulsion system? Wouldn’t a typical turbo shaft engine that could produce the same thrust necessary as the tip mounted propulsion systems have worked? Then they could have just disengaged the main rotor from the shaft when autorotation was applicable? Unless such an engine concept was not available at the time? Any way, just a thought
With that setup, the machine would also need a tail rotor to counter the reverse torque on the fuselage. The whole beauty of the tip jets was no tail rotor was needed.
@@mumbles2000 Or one propeller with forward pitch and the other in reverse pitch. Use the rotor to gain forward speed then disconnect the rotor and put the props in forward thrust. Nowadays the rotor and props could have electric drive with the engines providing the juice. A tail ramp would have be better, too.
Although definitely very impressive looking and innovative for its age, that aircraft had to be a maintenance nightmare for its engine and hydraulics crews.
I would love it if gyrodynes could be made to work, they look to be able to fill several niches in aviation, mostly currently filled by helicopters, and expand others (flying busses). However, there would still have to be some serious research to make this happen. Gyrodyne, including the Rotodyne, have more in common with autogyros than helicopters. The main thing is that the rotor shaft isn't driven by the engine(s) but rather freely rotates in the breeze. What allowed the Rotodyne to take off vertically was that (if I understand it) compressed air and fuel were pumped down the rotor blades and ignited in combustion chambers at the rotor tips. This rotated the rotor without creating the torque that requires single rotor helicopters to have tail rotors, however it also created a lot of noise. There would have to be a solution to the noise problem before gyrodynes could seriously take off (pun intended). Modern autogyros do have spin-up motors for their rotors however as far as I'm aware they are for ground use only. What might work for providing power to the rotor without causing torque might be some kind of compressor or gas generator feeding compressed gas into a turbine attached to the rotor shaft. With modern batteries it might be able to build a battery powered system with power for 15 minutes, enough for takeoff, landing and some hover time.
Flew in one of these from Penzance to the Scilly Isles in 1969. The students from Wright Robinson High School in Manchester absolutely loved the flights and these were in quite a contrast to the sea journey we took the year before or thew alternative air link using Dehavilland Dragon Rapide biplanes from St Just 'airport'. Unique memories.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Sadly after the passage of some fifty five years you are correct with the info. The Helicopter we used was a Sikorsky S-61 which was the current helicopter used in the late 1960s as part of the service which lasted into this century and made it the longest running public service to be based on the use of helicopters..
I was thinking similarly. It would seem the English came up with this idea, and a lot of other 'ideas' first but just didn't have the money available to develop it. Ahead of its time; arguably too far ahead. Like the B-58 Hustler, the technology wasn't available yet to make it successful.
The Osprey is a Tilt-Rotor craft- using the same engines and propellers for both vertical and horizontal flight. The Rotordyne had two separate rotor systems essentially powered by the same engines. It was a Technological dead end- kind of like Autogyros in general. It's too bad- it's a cool looking design that had a lot of Potential...
@@Dbusdriver71 Pan Am briefly tried using a Commercial version of the Boeing Chinook helicopter to ferry passengers to and from Downtown NYC to LaGuardia and other Metro Airports- but they ran into the same noise pollution issue as the Rotordyne...
This machine was approved by the U.S. Army and Japan which are very strict , the Noise thing was Bullshit! Every Country should display and capatalize on there key engineering!
No it wasn't, the Fairey Rotodyne was plagued with all sorts of development issues and there were never any confirmed buyers as the program never progressed beyond the prototype stage
Ivan put it on the Chopper. But Demetriy it's to much of load for the helicopter. I've got this cousin in aerodynamics department. He make us bus that Flys like plane and is helicopter. Your a mad man Demetriy
It was a victim of the Airline "consolidation" of socialist England and the fear it would make air travel accessible for working folk. The aristocracy didn't want Mr. and Mrs. Sweeny to be able to commute with them and soil their experience.
The engines are not connected to the main rotor, so there is no opposite torque reaction trying the spin the helicopter in the opposite direction, it flys like an autogyro which also have no tail rotor system.
1957 ! with the massive advance in technology made in just 30 years it's easy to see why they thought we would be living out in space by the year 2000.
This would have been good business for airports. People could board the Rotodyne at interurban helipads, fly to the main airport, then transfer to their airline flight. Then, the airport could sell fuel and ramp charges to the Rotodyne commuter company. The Rotodyne was perfect for this. It was not fast enough for long-range flight.
@@rescue270 Airports would be reduced by 90% to mainly international flights, domestic flights up to 500km away could have been set up anywhere by anyone. Not good business for the airport monopolists. The rich kill innovation with a commitment few comprehend.
These Could Lift 18,000+ lb 💪 And Held The World Speed Record for Rotor Wing Air-Craft for a Few Decades 😲 Had Multiple Back-Up Safety Redundancy ✔ No Tail-Rotor ✔ Even If It Had Both Engine's Failure 😨 It Would Glide to The Ground, Safely ✔ The Huey 10 Years Later could Lift 4,500 lb Bacon-Foil Protection Against Bullets for Crew in Vietnam 😨 Wha...?
Yet again the stupidity and short sightedness of the British Government snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. How man time have I watched videos of amazing machines only for the tagline to be 'Cancelled by the UK Government', these developments would have put us and kept us ahead of the world on so many fronts and lots of the British inventions from the 50's to the 70's are now coming back into vogue elsewhere in the world.
Its "Bee-line", an expressivon that comes from the behavior of bees, it has been observed in bee behavior that they have the navigational ability to fly in a straight line back to the hive.
Bristol Olympus should still be producing engines too, it's an absolute national disgrace how our industry was destroyed yet crooked banks and businesses bailed out, just disgusting
The UK produced inferior aircraft that operators simply refused to buy, better aircraft were available elsewhere... today there are no longer any British companies that make british commercial or british military aircraft.
With today's computer simulation and possibly and alternate rotor drive you think the noise could be overcome. Are any still alive today? Air worthy or in museums?
I know what you are saying but it wasn't ahead of its time it was of its time. And that's the real frustrating aspect to all of this in that look what we could do back then and look at what we don't now. The British government destroyed one of the best aircraft industries of its time with the 1957 Defence papepr.
@@clangerbasher The Rotodyne was a failure, one of many poorly designed, poorly thought-out British program that squandered precious resources and destroyed the failing UK aircraft industry. The British government subsidized aviation for decades but the country's aircraft industry was doomed after its defeat in WW2.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeit’s a problem large helicopters still suffer from. If they could have found a way for the rotors to attain the speed necessary to take off fully loaded without using tip jets then it might have had some success. But you’re looking at a system similar to a chinook, I.e. twin contra rotating rotors to be able to carry that load. Might be possible to reduce transit noise when in gyrocopter mode but you’re still going to need to engage the rotors to carry the weight on vertical take off and landing. And there’s where the noise will be. VTOL in any mode generates horrendous noise to get the necessary thrust for take off and landing. Shame really, great on a military base, not so great in a residential area.
The British aircraft industry was doomed to failure after the country's defeat in WW2... the Rotodyne was plagued by a fatally flawed design concept that would never be a practical or commercially viable concept.
The Rotodyne failed because Fairey took a bad idea... and just kept throwing money at it in the desperate hope that it would magically turn into a good idea.
The CH-47 is the most successful heavy lift helicopter in history, its been in production for 63 years!!! The Fairey Rotodyne was a completely hopeless and unmitigated failure.
Actually its a hybrid, it operates as an autogiro in cruise mode but switches to a tip-jet powered helicopter in the assent and decent phase of flight..
Two excellent examples of the downfall of the UK aircraft industry... the brits developed planes that were so seriously flawed that no one wanted to buy them,
2 types problem noise pollution, weight solve carbon fiber add knew electronic least weight more add reality to make don't forget appreciate place need save lacking space and need speed transit .that end vedio u see concepts helicopter have design @@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke
@@hyndriandelmundo6855 No one has ever solved the noise problem with tip jets, modern aircraft use turbofan engines for exactly this same reason. this was a prototype that had no additional weight from required avionics. In weight performance, traditional helicopters and fixed wing aircraft are inherently superior. Trying to be both only increases weight and lowers payload capacity.
They need to use something like this design instead of that death trap the Osprey. That has killed more Marines than any other aircraft in peace(relative)time.
Something I recall about the noise problem, was that the huge size of the main rotor; coupled with the speed of rotation meant that the rotor tips were travelling supersonically. No amount of noise reduction could overcome that problem.
And that is exactly why this concept was a failure... no one has ever solved the noise problem
Oh, interesting, you see, there is little talk about this problem.
The blade tip speed is given in Wikipedia as 720 feet per second. At sea level, the speed of sound is 1100 feet per second. So the rotor tips were travelling at Mach 0.65 when the aircraft had zero forward speed. At 100 mph aircraft speed, the advancing blade tip would therefore be travelling at 867 ft/sec, i.e. Mach 0.79. The rotor operated in autorotation mode at higher speeds. So no, the tips were NOT travelling supersonically (the designers were not THAT stupid) - but the exhaust from the tip jets presumably was, which would indicate that the exhaust velocity relative to the rotor blades was higher than (1100 + 720) = 1820 ft/sec. That's what caused the noise.
@@dafyddllewellyn6636 Excellent comments. Yes, not the rotor tip speed, the jet engines were Ramjet type and the exhaust nozzle gas velocity was extremely high... resulting in painfully loud engine noise.
I saw her at Farnborough and was very impressed. The way that officialdom was not behind a larger version when Canada wanted it and the way it was cut up and data 'dispersed' reminds meof many innovative British products. Sadly, I saw a scrap lorry, by chance coming past my old school at Rickmansworth loaded with very recognisable chunks of Rotodyne.
Those were the last chunks of The British Empire. 😓
Britain seems to have largely given up on innovation after World War II, with not too many exceptions.
There is no evidence that there were any legitimate orders at Fairey for the Rotodyne, Fairey was a deeply troubled company, and it seems its marketing staff made many claims that were never true... some Fairey literature suggests there were firm orders and that they had solved the noise problems... neither of these claims is even remotely true..
It's amazing how they did this without CAD/CAM
Naw, just knowledge and skill. When they went to school, they learned things pertaining to their chosen trade, not time wasting touchy feely garbage. In the 70's, 95% of my university education was trade specific. In 2012-15 I did Systems Sngineering and around 55% was trade specific. Hehehe some of the crazy credits I got were "Bad Women in Society" , "Small Cities in History" , "Witches and Witch Hunts", " People and Their Pets: The Psychology of Companion Animals". Give someone a machine with a carburetor now-a-days and they'll spend a hour or two trying to find the port to plug in their laptop/scan tool
Slide rule's and brains back then
@@GoofieNewfie69I've got a set of textbooks for mechanical engineering printed in the 1930s. The most comprehensive collection of mechanical knowledge I've ever seen, a smart guy could build anything with the stuff in those textbooks.
Remember that the SR-71 was designed with a slide rule.
It would be interesting to see if modern design tools could solve some of the problems that kept this from succeeding, like excessive noise.
One of these Rotodyne built with new smaller engines (yet more powerful and reliable), components made of composites would be feasible today. I am sure the sound decibels could be lowered within an acceptable range. The gyro copter idea seems better than the Osprey's plagued twin rotors that causes more often a dangerous Vortex ring state.
Agreed. These in a modernized version would be better than the Osprey.
Using modern electronic methods to lower the decibels would probably help alot.
There was a proposed heli design from the late 80s or early 90s with wingtip nozzles, but those only exhausted air. The system used a vertically mounted jet engine with a large precompressor to power the nozzles and the rotor basically rotated around the top of the engine. While it did not need any means against counterrotation, it had a tail nozzle for directional control.
Its main advantages were the complete lack of rotor adjustments, that greatly reduced complexity and therefore construction and maintenance cost, it was said it could be build for around 10% the price of a regular heli of the same size.
Run the rotors electrically... Put super quiet engines on the wings and modernize this is a real possibility
I really wish they'd keep working on this. Such great potential.
There was a very similar , unfortunate and also promising prototyp in germany ! The Do 31 which also featured two Harrier engines and was piloted by a famous nasa atronaut! It regratably suffered the same fate !
"And we'll add afterburners!"
"Afterburning turboprop? I like it!"
"No, we'll put them on the rotor"
"🧐"
It’s not easy to build a quiet helicopter in the first place, but to build one with afterburners on the rotor tips-for use in cities!-was truly a lost cause from the start.
I heard it flying as a kid. It was very,very noisy at a time when aircraft engines were very,very noisy. The combination of a 90ft power rotor,two turbines and turbo propellers was over the top.
I'm still waiting for the rigid airship industry to "revolutionize" passenger air transport.
Aaaany day now...
Britain's aircraft industry crashed and burned....
Like anything else money and time, currently the lacking factor money.
@@sarahmanalapan8443 It will never be popular - IOW economically viable - because of the time factor. Airline profits depend on the "cheap seats", so turnover time is essential, and airships cannot deliver on that.
I had the good fortune to fly on an airship industries one in the late 80’s….. absolutely awesome unlike any other form of flight I’ve tried.
Thx for the video!
Yeah the thing with tip jets is, they're hella loud. Not something you want in an urban environment.
Imagine what could have been with 60 years of evolutionary development on that ? What a shame . How many incredible things would we have if bureaucrats weren't so short sighted.
Yet again blame a Labour government .
@@johnreed8336- It's the Tories who run out of other people's money .
@@johnreed8336
As a Yank, I can only say "labour" type political parties are the cause of a lot of problems across the globe
unmitigated technical failure, and a hopeless dead-end concept..
Pretty sure I had an Airfix model of this in the 70's.
I recently received the 1/72 model kit of this. I'm looking forward to building it.
That will be a fun build.
“I made a model…”
🥱😴😪
Is that the Arifix or the Revell one?
I've offered the Arifix one to my father last year. Such an amazing aircraft to display.
I'm surprised that something like this didn't appear in the US future rotor craft project.
WHY? The Rotodyne was a failure.,
Now that there are Helipads on top of buildings, it might be time to revisit something like this especially in the US where people still live in suburbs and work downtown. I’m hopeful the noise could be mitigated although I live near a military base and helicopters still cause conversation to stop until they are gone!
Never going to happen, the noise problem killed this concept
Did they really only have that one option for the behemoth rotors? That being the end mounted propulsion system? Wouldn’t a typical turbo shaft engine that could produce the same thrust necessary as the tip mounted propulsion systems have worked? Then they could have just disengaged the main rotor from the shaft when autorotation was applicable? Unless such an engine concept was not available at the time? Any way, just a thought
With that setup, the machine would also need a tail rotor to counter the reverse torque on the fuselage. The whole beauty of the tip jets was no tail rotor was needed.
@@mandolinic I suspect running a single propulsion engine/prop would be sufficient to counteract the rotor torque
@@mumbles2000 Or one propeller with forward pitch and the other in reverse pitch. Use the rotor to gain forward speed then disconnect the rotor and put the props in forward thrust.
Nowadays the rotor and props could have electric drive with the engines providing the juice.
A tail ramp would have be better, too.
Although definitely very impressive looking and innovative for its age, that aircraft had to be a maintenance nightmare for its engine and hydraulics crews.
I would love it if gyrodynes could be made to work, they look to be able to fill several niches in aviation, mostly currently filled by helicopters, and expand others (flying busses). However, there would still have to be some serious research to make this happen.
Gyrodyne, including the Rotodyne, have more in common with autogyros than helicopters. The main thing is that the rotor shaft isn't driven by the engine(s) but rather freely rotates in the breeze. What allowed the Rotodyne to take off vertically was that (if I understand it) compressed air and fuel were pumped down the rotor blades and ignited in combustion chambers at the rotor tips. This rotated the rotor without creating the torque that requires single rotor helicopters to have tail rotors, however it also created a lot of noise. There would have to be a solution to the noise problem before gyrodynes could seriously take off (pun intended).
Modern autogyros do have spin-up motors for their rotors however as far as I'm aware they are for ground use only. What might work for providing power to the rotor without causing torque might be some kind of compressor or gas generator feeding compressed gas into a turbine attached to the rotor shaft. With modern batteries it might be able to build a battery powered system with power for 15 minutes, enough for takeoff, landing and some hover time.
Flew in one of these from Penzance to the Scilly Isles in 1969. The students from Wright Robinson High School in Manchester absolutely loved the flights and these were in quite a contrast to the sea journey we took the year before or thew alternative air link using Dehavilland Dragon Rapide biplanes from St Just 'airport'. Unique memories.
Faulty memories... the single protype Rotodyne never carried passengers and was scrapped in 1962... you must be confused with another aircraft type.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Sadly after the passage of some fifty five years you are correct with the info. The Helicopter we used was a Sikorsky S-61 which was the current helicopter used in the late 1960s as part of the service which lasted into this century and made it the longest running public service to be based on the use of helicopters..
That looks like a Early version of The v22 osprey
100%
Exactly what I was thinking.
I was thinking similarly. It would seem the English came up with this idea, and a lot of other 'ideas' first but just didn't have the money available to develop it. Ahead of its time; arguably too far ahead. Like the B-58 Hustler, the technology wasn't available yet to make it successful.
The Osprey is a Tilt-Rotor craft- using the same engines and propellers for both vertical and horizontal flight. The Rotordyne had two separate rotor systems essentially powered by the same engines.
It was a Technological dead end- kind of like Autogyros in general.
It's too bad- it's a cool looking design that had a lot of Potential...
@@Dbusdriver71 Pan Am briefly tried using a Commercial version of the Boeing Chinook helicopter to ferry passengers to and from Downtown NYC to LaGuardia and other Metro Airports- but they ran into the same noise pollution issue as the Rotordyne...
Bring back the rotodyne
Why? It was a terrible design.
This machine was approved by the U.S. Army and Japan which are very strict , the Noise thing was Bullshit! Every Country should display and capatalize on there key engineering!
That is completely false, the Rotodyne had no serious buyers. Unacceptable Noise levels was never resolved..
No it wasn't, the Fairey Rotodyne was plagued with all sorts of development issues and there were never any confirmed buyers as the program never progressed beyond the prototype stage
We need Noise! And dont listen to the bullshit from the bullshitters! This is why the USA has no Bullit Trains!
Guess it was not practical
Ivan put it on the Chopper. But Demetriy it's to much of load for the helicopter.
I've got this cousin in aerodynamics department. He make us bus that Flys like plane and is helicopter.
Your a mad man Demetriy
Osprey, hold my ( multiple times spilled) beer
It was a victim of the Airline "consolidation" of socialist England and the fear it would make air travel accessible for working folk. The aristocracy didn't want Mr. and Mrs. Sweeny to be able to commute with them and soil their experience.
Thats why we dont have bullet trains!
Sounds like faffery.
Blaming socialism and aristocracy at the same time? Apart from Tony Benn, not much cross over.
You're contradicting yourself there. Was it the aristocracy's fault or the "socialist" government's? Make up your mind.
Excellent introduction to an aircraft I had no idea existed !!! Thank you for your time and effort to provide us with the amazing content .
Fairey genius. What a company. Shame that the fate of such ventures lay in the hands of inept governments and financiers.
Hey! You guys put out a decent vid! 😮
Hey man i absolutely love your videos, but i think it would be amazing if you’d put clips with the actual sound of the aircraft🎶✈️
How does the aircraft work without a tail rotor to counter the torque of the main rotor?
The engines are not connected to the main rotor, so there is no opposite torque reaction trying the spin the helicopter in the opposite direction, it flys like an autogyro which also have no tail rotor system.
This helicoperic airplane is bussin!
You would think that it could be built / tested now with current technology and materials.
ah.. NO.
The bridge it was hauling, looked like the bridge had a temporary vertical fin for transport.
1957 ! with the massive advance in technology made in just 30 years it's easy to see why they thought we would be living out in space by the year 2000.
When the monopolists who own the airports realised this would be their end they got together and killed this innovative marvel.
This would have been good business for airports. People could board the Rotodyne at interurban helipads, fly to the main airport, then transfer to their airline flight. Then, the airport could sell fuel and ramp charges to the Rotodyne commuter company. The Rotodyne was perfect for this. It was not fast enough for long-range flight.
@@rescue270 Airports would be reduced by 90% to mainly international flights, domestic flights up to 500km away could have been set up anywhere by anyone. Not good business for the airport monopolists. The rich kill innovation with a commitment few comprehend.
Unmitigated failure... hopeless dead-end concept,
He, He, Remember when Pan Am would fly you from the East River to Kennedy??
These Could Lift 18,000+ lb 💪
And Held The World Speed Record for Rotor Wing Air-Craft for a Few Decades 😲
Had Multiple Back-Up Safety Redundancy ✔
No Tail-Rotor ✔
Even If It Had Both Engine's Failure 😨
It Would Glide to The Ground, Safely ✔
The Huey 10 Years Later could Lift 4,500 lb
Bacon-Foil Protection Against Bullets for Crew in Vietnam 😨 Wha...?
Epic failure... completely dead-end concept. Fairey made claims it could not deliver..
The CH-47 has a 24,000 lb payload, and a 400 mile range without any of the problems the Rotodyne had
😊😊
😊
Ty
Yet again the stupidity and short sightedness of the British Government snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. How man time have I watched videos of amazing machines only for the tagline to be 'Cancelled by the UK Government', these developments would have put us and kept us ahead of the world on so many fronts and lots of the British inventions from the 50's to the 70's are now coming back into vogue elsewhere in the world.
Is the BEA Line the origin of the term "Make a b-line" as in "I'm making a b-line to shelter"?
Its "Bee-line", an expressivon that comes from the behavior of bees, it has been observed in bee behavior that they have the navigational ability to fly in a straight line back to the hive.
I wonder if they learned stuff about stubby wings from this, and that’s why we see them on the F/A18…?
Lol... very unlikely.
Bristol Olympus should still be producing engines too, it's an absolute national disgrace how our industry was destroyed yet crooked banks and businesses bailed out, just disgusting
Britain's aircraft industry was doomed after the country's defeat in WW2,
The UK produced inferior aircraft that operators simply refused to buy, better aircraft were available elsewhere... today there are no longer any British companies that make british commercial or british military aircraft.
With today's computer simulation and possibly and alternate rotor drive you think the noise could be overcome. Are any still alive today? Air worthy or in museums?
Would genuinely love to see an aircraft manufacturer out there that’s brave enough to make this. Absolutely amazing and so far ahead of its time.
I know what you are saying but it wasn't ahead of its time it was of its time. And that's the real frustrating aspect to all of this in that look what we could do back then and look at what we don't now. The British government destroyed one of the best aircraft industries of its time with the 1957 Defence papepr.
Fairey did... and look what happened to them... It's a bad idea, which is why this dead-end concept is no longer around..
@@clangerbasher The Rotodyne was a failure, one of many poorly designed, poorly thought-out British program that squandered precious resources and destroyed the failing UK aircraft industry.
The British government subsidized aviation for decades but the country's aircraft industry was doomed after its defeat in WW2.
so it was wrong design
in a nutshell... it was never a viable concept..
GTA online multiplayer games
😊
Papa osprey 😂😂😂😂
This was a dead duck
*GREAT* idea. Too bad it screamed like a banshee...
this helo
vs
ch 47 or v 22
vs
or Russian quadblad helo😊
It only flew because it was so ugly the ground repelled it.
Gyroplane
Noise is an indicator of inefficiency.
Before it's final cancelation, they had refined the design and had much reduced the noise.
Tell that to the Super-Screech.
@@philalcoceli6328 That is entirely false rumor... the noise problem of tip jets has never been solved.,
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeit’s a problem large helicopters still suffer from. If they could have found a way for the rotors to attain the speed necessary to take off fully loaded without using tip jets then it might have had some success. But you’re looking at a system similar to a chinook, I.e. twin contra rotating rotors to be able to carry that load. Might be possible to reduce transit noise when in gyrocopter mode but you’re still going to need to engage the rotors to carry the weight on vertical take off and landing. And there’s where the noise will be. VTOL in any mode generates horrendous noise to get the necessary thrust for take off and landing. Shame really, great on a military base, not so great in a residential area.
@@jeremytoms5163 If Im not mistaken, a CH-47 Chinook can carry an even heavier load than the larger Rotodyne version that Fairey had proposed.
only a person who believes in a Queen would build such a hideous aircraft.
one wonders what modern technology could do with this design
Should have added some of the audio of what that thing sounds like.
yea I asked for it
Stuffy itchy suited bureaucrats stifled so many innovative projects back in those days. This aircraft was ahead of its time.
This aircraft was doomed by incompetent engineering and bad design that was never a viable concept..
The British aircraft industry was doomed to failure after the country's defeat in WW2... the Rotodyne was plagued by a fatally flawed design concept that would never be a practical or commercially viable concept.
it's pronounced oak - AH - noggin.
Fortnite WISHES.
Background music sucks on this one
This seems like it would be promising today, actually.
Actually... No. It was and remains today a dead-end concept.
could this project have succumbed to the supressive anglo-american "close relationship"
concorde, comet, chlorinated chicken
Britain's aircraft industry was doomed after the country's defeat in WW2
And so many others. Americans do not like it when their client states are ahead of them.
@@bobrobinson1576 Britain has never been ahead of America in aerospace technology... America invented fixed wing aircraft..
Albert Einstein once said " The surest way to failure is to be ahead of your time "
The Rotodyne failed because Fairey took a bad idea... and just kept throwing money at it in the desperate hope that it would magically turn into a good idea.
I wonder if electric motors at the wingtips powered by generators at the main engines would resolve the airtip jet problem.
No
you sabotaged it so they use your ch47?
The CH-47 is the most successful heavy lift helicopter in history, its been in production for 63 years!!! The Fairey Rotodyne was a completely hopeless and unmitigated failure.
Elon musk needs to fix it and make it work
Like that id10t fixed Twitter? You Muskrats are pathetic.
@@AlbertaGeek*Musk can put men in space... something that Britain could never achieve.*
Yey another ai channel
Lol no ,the guy just sounds like that, he's been doing these videos way way before AI became a thing.
You are wrong, however, you may feel free to leave. Or IOW,
Bye Felicia
Oh please, we tried copying the Mil V-12
It is not a helicopter it is an autogiro.
Actually its a hybrid, it operates as an autogiro in cruise mode but switches to a tip-jet powered helicopter in the assent and decent phase of flight..
Wasnt this a "Marine1" @ in the 50s ?, or ami thinking of something else ?.
third
🙄🙄🙄
Too bad it disappeared!
Not really, it was not a good design.
1960s sorry too noisy , late 60s earlt 70s let's build concorde yeah right
Two excellent examples of the downfall of the UK aircraft industry... the brits developed planes that were so seriously flawed that no one wanted to buy them,
This ideas and design more realistic to day with new upgrade bladed rotor know propeller toroidal least sound
This was a completely hopeless, dead-end concept that does not have any practical applications or commercial viability today.
2 types problem noise pollution, weight solve carbon fiber add knew electronic least weight more add reality to make don't forget appreciate place need save lacking space and need speed transit .that end vedio u see concepts helicopter have design @@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke
@@hyndriandelmundo6855 No one has ever solved the noise problem with tip jets, modern aircraft use turbofan engines for exactly this same reason.
this was a prototype that had no additional weight from required avionics.
In weight performance, traditional helicopters and fixed wing aircraft are inherently superior.
Trying to be both only increases weight and lowers payload capacity.
They need to use something like this design instead of that death trap the Osprey. That has killed more Marines than any other aircraft in peace(relative)time.
The Osprey is a successful design that remains in service, the Rotodyne was a bad design that was never a viable concept..
If it has any financial viability as technology progresses, it will not die.
Its a completely hopeless, dead-end concept