Re: Alternatives
RE: Stoneshop
Yes, a mini-Harrier. It would have a greater chance of flying because:
- It's a proven technology that has worked at human scale with all of the cleaver stuff like thrust & energy requirements already worked out.
- Props get more complicated the larger they get. When something is only the size of a sheet of paper you don't need to think of efficiencies gained from the blades rake angle and tilt, vortex interaction with the plexi-glass windscreen or safety margins for power requirements.
- Down force for 2 tons of a quadcopter will be the same as 2 tons of jet-taxi. Those flagstones will fly up for either. Moving the thrust further away from the surface by raising the thrust points higher on the chassis and angling them outward during take-off and landing would distribute the force of the thrust but not prevent it.
- Heat maybe the only differing issue. Again this can be mitigated by increasing the distance of the thrust exhaust from the ground.
- Jet engines don't like being stopped then started but by comparison to props they are mile for mile, flight hour for flight hour almost maintenance free and incredibly fuel efficient.