Vortech G-1
John A Seymour
of just about evry magazine in existance. I was wondering if there is anyone o
ut there who has actualy built one of these or even gotten the plans. If so I
have a few questions..
1. Are there actuazly workable plans sent out or for only $129.95 you get the
rest of the info you really need?
2. is this thing a real helicopter with a powered main rotor and cyclic and
collective pitch control or is it a gyro-copter or auto-gyro type of machine?
3. anyone ever FLY one?... is it a controllable craft or a death trap?
4. can it be built with "avererage" tools or does it require a complete
machine shop (by average I mean welding set up, hand tools maybe as far as a
metal lathe...)
TIA for any info
John
/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet: john.s...@jms.com (John A Seymour)
JMS Technologies
4217C S Mellen Dr.
Mountain Home, ID 83648
FAX (208) 832-7897
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig Wall
>
>I have been seeing these adds for "the worlds smallest helicoptor" in the back
>of just about evry magazine in existance. I was wondering if there is anyone o
>ut there who has actualy built one of these or even gotten the plans. If so I
>have a few questions..
>1. Are there actuazly workable plans sent out or for only $129.95 you get the
> rest of the info you really need?
>
>2. is this thing a real helicopter with a powered main rotor and cyclic and
>collective pitch control or is it a gyro-copter or auto-gyro type of machine?
>
>3. anyone ever FLY one?... is it a controllable craft or a death trap?
>
>4. can it be built with "avererage" tools or does it require a complete
>machine shop (by average I mean welding set up, hand tools maybe as far as a
>metal lathe...)
>
>TIA for any info
>John
1) I haven't seen the plans yet, John- but I think the $20
package is all there is.
2) It a "real" helicopter, but it has NO collective- just a
throttle- and it is steered by *weight shift* and rudder pedals.
3) You haven't seen a picture of it in the air, have you?
4) Average tools? Probably; but it has THREE 2-stroke engines
coupled end-to-end on a common shaft. I'd say it requires more
blind faith than anything else.
I dunno. My instincts say "yeah, *right*..."; but then look
what they said about the Gee Bee R-1....
Craig Wall
.
David Pereira
I'm surprised that Craig Wall's reply wasn't: "Oh my god your
gonna die if you build and fly that thing!" like is usually given when
discussing such topics as ultralight helicopters. I have had the "plans"
for the G-1 for over a year. I have not built one, but was just curious
about ultralight helicopters in general, and had an extra $20.
Now that I've got some spare time, I will try to answer your
questions about the helicopter plans:
1) As far as I know, the $20 plans is all the info Vortech is
selling about the G-1. The plans completeness depends upon your
definition of complete. They do not have step by step, do this that way
first before building part xx, etc. Instead there are a series of
pictures of a pre-production version (the prototype I think) all on the
ground, some showing close ups of various stuff; a bill of materials, and
some drawings not in any particular order.
I would guess that there is enough specs and info there for you
to build it if you have high school metal shop experience. However, not
everyting is explained in detail. For example, the tail rotor uses
stanley spring hinges for their pivots (they do give a part # for this
and you can still buy these hinges at your local hardware store) but,
the plans say "the hinges are adjusted so that the spring holds the
leaves in the open position" and the hinges don't come that way. They
close doors, not open them. So I guess you would have to take the hinge
apart, drill two new holes in them and reassemble such that the spring
now opens "the leaves". Furthermore, the close up picture of the
prototype's tail rotor does not have these hinges on it. It is left for
you to figure out.
2) It's a real helicopter in the sense that the main rotor is
being driven by the engines. But as Craig pointed out, there is no
collective or cyclic. The rotor blades are attached with about 10 degrees
of pitch and the throttle is used to take off and land. This is probably
why it uses 3 go cart engines instead of 1 rotax. If you only have one
engine powering the rotor and that engine dies...............your dead.
With three engines I suppose you would still have enough power to get
safely on the ground if one failed (pure speculation on my part).
Another quirk in the design is that nylon plate is used to attach
the rotor blades to the drive hub. Now I know that nylon is good for lots
of stuff besides stockings, :-) but I also think I would need to see it work
for a couple of years before trying anything other than a hover in it.
As previously mentioned, the direction of flight is controlled by
weight shifts (since the empty weight is supposed to be 145 lbs, weight
shifting would probably turn it quickly). The tail rotor is adjusted by
a foot pedal which is connected to the spring hinges with a control cable.
3) I have no idea. Never seen one fly, never seen a video or a
picture of one fly, never hear of one fly. Perhaps someone else out there
in net land has, and would be generous enough to tell us about it.
4) As I said before, you could build this in a high school metal
shop. There is no welding in the plans, all bolt together. I personally
would choose welding the frame together, but that is just my preference.
I don't believe Vortech claims that the G-1 is flight worthy.
According to the paragraph included in the plans, the G-1 was designed by
Art Weilage, who has other helicopter designs (non ultralight). The G-1
was sold as a kit in the 1970s by Compcop, Redwood California.
Perhaps someone reading this knows about Compcop and would comment.
One thing about Vortech, they do have a catalog which I received
with the plans. Apparently they aren't just a fly by night outfit, but
also sell other plans, aluminum rotor blades, engines, kits. When I made
the call to order the plans, I was given a number to call for technical
questions regarding the G-1.
I think a ultralight helicopter would be a great way to waste a
weekend. However, upon looking into this subject about a year ago, I
concluded that there are too many nay-sayers and too many lawyers in the
world to allow anyone to sell complete plans, or the real thing. Which is
too bad since I'm sure the technology exists to build a reasonable
ultralight helicopter.
:-)
David Pereira
Craig Wall
it has at *least* a fighting chance. The nylon hub plate sounds like
an attempt at a low cost self-damping flapping hinge. If the blades
are set to a positive AOA it obviously won't autorotate, but you know,
for farting around low over a lake, wearing a life jacket, I don't
think you'd even break any bones....Craig Wall
David Pereira
On 20 Nov 1995, Craig Wall wrote:
> Oh, David- I'm actually encouraged! If Art Weilage designed it,
> it has at *least* a fighting chance.
I don't know who Art Weilage is/was, whatever; what else has he
done/designed besides the G-1? The stuff from Vortech says that the G-1
was orginally sold as kits from Compcop, no plans were offered at
that time (1970s). Vortech somehow acquired the drawings and put together
the package that they sell as plans. I would hesitate to call them plans
since there is alot of little details that the builder has to work out
him/herself.
The nylon hub plate sounds like
> an attempt at a low cost self-damping flapping hinge.
Yes, the nylon provides the necessary flapping action. I just
wouldn't want to fly something like this without knowing how long the
part will last under dynamic conditions (normal operation). While I'm
sure the nylon has the necessary strength when new, like other plastics
it probably decomposes under UV radiation. Since this is the most
important part on the aircraft, it would make sense to know as much as
possible about nylon's characteristics in such an application.
Another thing with the nylon hub is that washers are used to
adjust the blade angle, add a washer on the front bolt and subtract a
washer on the rear bolt = gain a degree of pitch on the rotor blade. This
probably works, but I not sure the most simple solution is always the
best solution :-).
If the blades
> are set to a positive AOA it obviously won't autorotate, but you know,
> for farting around low over a lake, wearing a life jacket, I don't
> think you'd even break any bones....Craig Wall
Right, no autorotations in this baby, which is why I think the
design used 3 go-cart engines for power. each engine turned a common jack
shaft running up the mast thru a centrifugal clutch. This way if one
engine died, you would still have two engines turning the rotor, and the
dead engine wouldn't be a drag on the system. Art W. must have liked
go-carts since there is a lot of go-cart parts on the design. The second
most important part, besides the nylon hub, is the main rotor drive
chain. The plans call for a single chain to connect the rotor axle with
the jack shaft. Not a good idea in my book, because if the chain breaks
in flight, and the craft won't autorotate..............your dead. I would
probably use a pair of chains in parallel to drive the main rotor, and
those would be inspected before/after each flight for wear.
If there is another design for a rotor hub (perhaps from a gyro
that has inflight collective adjustment) that would be safer if the main
rotor lost power, then I might consider trying to build an ultralight
helicopter. Chuck the thrust bearing gyros use for tilting the rotor
plane, and add the collective thru a hollow drive shaft, then perhaps
you would be able to fly around other areas besides lakes, and use one
engine instead of 3. Speaking of engines, I've never seen 2 stroke
go-cart engines for sale. The plans say to use McCulloch MC 101 14 hp
engines. I'll bet that they have been out of production for 20 years.
David Pereira
PS
I've heard of people breaking bones while waterskiing, crashing a
very open and exposed ultralight into a lake sounds like a good way to
break more than just bones to me :-).
Craig Wall
pere...@ucsu.colorado.edu says...
>
>
>
>On 20 Nov 1995, Craig Wall wrote:
>
>> Oh, David- I'm actually encouraged! If Art Weilage designed it,
>> it has at *least* a fighting chance.
>
> I don't know who Art Weilage is/was, whatever; what else has he
>done/designed besides the G-1?
Art Weilage designed the Boon Jr. helicopter- it was VW powered and
apparently very successful. Vortech also sells plans for it for $50.
I saw it originally in the 60's in Homebuilt Aircraft and always liked it,
but I never saw the plans offered. (Then next I saw it in the Vortech
catalog, in the 90's. I don't know where it was in between.)
> The nylon hub plate sounds like
>> an attempt at a low cost self-damping flapping hinge.
>
> Yes, the nylon provides the necessary flapping action. I just
>wouldn't want to fly something like this without knowing how long the
>part will last under dynamic conditions (normal operation).
Not to worry (*grin*); nylon would give you plenty of warning when
the strength was falling off- you'd get visual fatigue indications, and
the rheometric properties would be easy to monitor. This ought to be one
of the least worrisome components, because unlike an aluminum rotor hub
bar, you can see what's happening.
> Another thing with the nylon hub is that washers are used to
>adjust the blade angle, add a washer on the front bolt and subtract a
>washer on the rear bolt = gain a degree of pitch on the rotor blade. This
>probably works, but I not sure the most simple solution is always the
>best solution :-).
Well, knowing how a good designer thinks, you'd find the sweet spot and
then fabricate exact tapered shims and replace the washers. Again, I don't
see a problem.
> If the blades
>> are set to a positive AOA it obviously won't autorotate, but you know,
>> for farting around low over a lake, wearing a life jacket, I don't
>> think you'd even break any bones....Craig Wall
>
> Right, no autorotations in this baby, which is why I think the
>design used 3 go-cart engines for power. each engine turned a common jack
>shaft running up the mast thru a centrifugal clutch. This way if one
>engine died, you would still have two engines turning the rotor, and the
>dead engine wouldn't be a drag on the system. Art W. must have liked
>go-carts since there is a lot of go-cart parts on the design. The second
>most important part, besides the nylon hub, is the main rotor drive
>chain. The plans call for a single chain to connect the rotor axle with
>the jack shaft. Not a good idea in my book, because if the chain breaks
>in flight, and the craft won't autorotate..............your dead. I would
>probably use a pair of chains in parallel to drive the main rotor, and
>those would be inspected before/after each flight for wear.
>
> If there is another design for a rotor hub (perhaps from a gyro
>that has inflight collective adjustment) that would be safer if the main
>rotor lost power, then I might consider trying to build an ultralight
>helicopter.
There are some very nice looking minimum helicopters coming out; look
for an ultralight called the Mosquito. This one is more like an amusement
park ride, and ought to be flown like one. Still, if you just hover around
no higher than you're willing to fall, and don't build up a bunch of forward
speed, this could be fun. The Mosquito has a normal head and will autorotate
nicely, but on the G-1 I think I'd try setting the blades nearly flat so it
would autorotate, and then get a collective function with in-flight adjustable
trim tabs. It wouldn't have the authority that a rotor design with real
torsional hinges, but it's a proven system that's been used on several other
machines.
>Chuck the thrust bearing gyros use for tilting the rotor
>plane, and add the collective thru a hollow drive shaft,
But this means a complete rotor redesign. Still, you could.
>then perhaps
>you would be able to fly around other areas besides lakes, and use one
>engine instead of 3. Speaking of engines, I've never seen 2 stroke
>go-cart engines for sale. The plans say to use McCulloch MC 101 14 hp
>engines. I'll bet that they have been out of production for 20 years.
That's correct. McCulloch stopped when people started putting them on
aircraft. That was the early days of powered hang gliders.
>David Pereira
>
>PS
> I've heard of people breaking bones while waterskiing, crashing a
>very open and exposed ultralight into a lake sounds like a good way to
>break more than just bones to me :-).
Like I said- the key, like in the early days of hang gliders, is to not
fly any higher than you are willing to fall. Or any faster, or with more
weight, etc. I have no desire to get hurt; still; no guts, no glory. The
guys that do manage to design, fly and offer these designs to the world
deserve to be taken seriously, for better or worse. I'm going to order
a set of plans, for study if nothing else. It's the least we can do to keep
the new designs coming in.
Craig Wall
.
Darrel Hauer
helicopter. At this point I’m a enthused beginner in this
field. Design, maufacturing and diagnostics are my professional
interests.
> As I veiw it the G-1 does have some short comings. I’ve had the plans for about two months now. I’ve been working on redesign eve=
r since. While I do plan on building this craft, that will be sometime down the road. At this point it’s time to discuss and to work=
out the weak points, and to develop new concepts to do the job better. That’s what engineering is about. Back and fourth discussion=
in this news group is invaluable.
At this point I am planning on using two 340 CC blower
cooled 2 cycle engines. Redundancy for safety, since auto
rotation isn’t an option. I have located a clutch manufacturer
who provides a unit to handle the horsepower, along with
providing a 2 groove drive for B belts. I have a flapper hinge
designed to replace the nylon which is shown on the drawings.
Weight shifting is the method of direction control used. At
this time I’m planning on using a movable seat to provide
forward, backward control, and a controlled moveable weight for
right left control will be utilized. The pitch control for the
tail rotor will also need some redesign, but that problem
doesn’t look insurmountable. I am also weighing the use of two
B belts to drive the rotor assembly, instead of the chain
drive. Belt wear should be easier to monitor than chain wear.
If all goes well I hope to be working on the actual unit by
April 96.
I’m located in Minnesota, as far away from any blade
manufactures as you can get. Vortech advertises a composite
rotor blade called Sky Wheels which from the literature seems
to be a superior product . If anyone has any information where
these can be purchased it would be appreciated.
Darrel Hauer
*
Vortech currently offers a new line of outstanding all-aluminum
rotorblades of all sizes, both for helicopters (main and tail NACA
0012) and gyroplanes (8-H-12). These blades are made as a single
extrusion, without rivets are bonding, eliminating parasitic drag, and
are creating quite a sensation. (Ask Ben Showers, e.g., creator of the
SkyTwister helicopter.) Vortech also now has a partial G-1 kit (frame,
blades, engine, bearings). Also, Vortech offers occasional updates on
the G-1 plans. Contact them directly:
Vortech, PO Box 511-NC, Fallston, MD 21047. Fax: (410)692-5902