Timeline for Helicopter, Tricopter, Quadccopter - what's really happening here? Are there generalized advantages on a small scale?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 13, 2021 at 22:09 | answer | added | Dakkaron | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 2, 2015 at 7:29 | answer | added | DanielLC | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jan 20, 2015 at 2:40 | comment | added | Mike Dunlavey | For efficiency, the longer and thinner the blades, the better. Smaller rotors are less efficient, thus less flying duration. If you have an odd number of lifting rotors, you have net torque, so you need a tail rotor. Planes with lifting rotors can hover, but planes with wings have to fly in circles if they want to stay in one place. Put all those considerations together. | |
| Jan 18, 2015 at 23:54 | comment | added | Hypnosifl | This article looks helpful. As others said, less stable and less efficient, but has the advantage of "mechanical simplicity". | |
| Jan 18, 2015 at 23:21 | comment | added | BowlOfRed | Think complexity. With a single rotor you have to have a complex mechanism like rotor disk and tail rotor. With a quad copter, you can just use differential speeds on each rotor to control. | |
| Jan 18, 2015 at 23:17 | comment | added | tox123 | a quadcopter is less stable than a helicopter due to the fact that there are more spiny things and it requires more thrust and has more inertia. It's only advantage is it's much simpler to make. | |
| Jan 18, 2015 at 23:07 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackPhysics/status/556951120422391808 | ||
| Jan 18, 2015 at 22:08 | history | edited | user1833028 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Corrected misspelling
|
| Jan 18, 2015 at 21:53 | history | edited | Danu |
edited tags
|
|
| Jan 18, 2015 at 21:47 | history | asked | user1833028 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |