Incredible. 3 day design, 10 day build time shows that they have a great team. Doing stuff like this is an engineers dream job. I hope the professional managers at Boeing give these people enough freedom to explore/create, 'cause that's where "Holy Sh*t!!" tech comes from.
Question for you guys, why aren't you using counter rotating props in the body and at the wing tips? It would cancel out the torque on the aircraft. I don't know if you have experimented with multirotors, but they typically control the yaw of the aircraft in hover by shifting the power of the clockwise vs. counter clockwise motors. I like the shape and idea. I'd love to see it transition to forward flight. If you need an experienced R/C pilot, I volunteer.
The stability is due to right yaw. Boeing knows this but with the short build cycle they had you don't always have time to trim an aircraft before the camera crew shows up.
I'd bet the smaller tip props are rotating opposite the direction of the main props. But, since the main props provide most of the thrust, there is still a net torque. It looks like they rely purely on differential duct tilt to control yaw, but it doesn't seem to be very easy to fly. You won't be able to fly this like a normal quad with 4 identical props because the thrust-torque relationship will never be equal between the prop pairs (yaw moments are not decoupled from pitch and roll).
Hey Boeing, I'm a big fan.. When you guys set out to start these projects do you, particularly scale models, do you consider a base platform of avionics electronics for stability? For example one or more 6 axis gyros, motion sensors and cameras facing the ground that provide navigational data? Similar to that of hobby remote controlled planes and helicopters. It would be great to have a division who work in parallel with the air frame design teams yeah?
XGamingPro Carry 10,000 - 12,000 pounds where..? Fans fans everywhere. A C17 can carry more and does not have as many moving parts/ transmission etc. This plane is like Taylor Swift, sexy with red lipstick but you know shes not blowing you anytime soon. Its a fail in my book.
I'm a 15 yr/ol not an engineer for aircraft mechanics but this is great I know it's a scale prototype and all but for a rotor propulsion system seems a bit primitive ther are a couple of vertical takeoff aircraft that are jet propulesed and you had said your intentions are to make capable of carrying a max of 1200 pounds is there going to be a cargo hatch for this is it going to be an unmanned aircraft there are plenty of questions to be awnsered but other than that I hope to see this in action soon
Quadcopter derived quadplane may be a neat idea to get best of both technologies. But highly impractical for carrying any personnel, cargo or unmanned UAF electronics! Those massive center props bog down all the precious space that may be utilized otherwise in more classic designs. Prototypes are only good for fun!
Would the payload bay be in between the fuselage mounted fans or maybe within side mounted pods? That's a lot of dead room inside the fuselage section. Great Prototype though! I can't wait to see a full scale prototype :)
Look to the RC World for idea's...it's already being done. Slap a 6-Axis gyro in that sucker and there'll be a huge improvement in flyability and stability.
Nice idea, but the energy to lift ratio might be to much for sustainable long flight. I would go with the gravity plane idea... ya build a gravity plane prototype, a large plane.
This is how they fool you. How much money did it cost these guys to build this? Hobbyists from the RC world have done this again and again for more then 10 years. I even recognize the tune the ESC (electric speed controller) play when he plugged it in.
looks neat but I think it needs a new design with bench marked goals . like that it can hover and fly straight and looks neat. 1) if we think it we can build it set goals then design to it . 1)first plane with a led surface that is like a chemleon (invisible ) 2)plane that can hover for four days 3 ) crash proof plane that can withstand a full on crash with no damage . 3) first Solar plane that can run 24 /7 for one year. 4) decoy planes make a shell of a craft that acts as a decoy destraction 5) FIRST PLANE THAT HAS ON BOARD COMPUTER THAT TALKS TO YOU IN A HUMAN VOICE . example It will tell you your eta, weather ,possible threats tech etc( siri for a plane but with real Ai) I built many Submarines and see that the if we can think it we can build it works with any concept or idea
Commenting on previous comments...removing the wing ducts would be foolish on this prototype; they'd be replacing props every 30 mins. while they're learning to fly it. Given that this model was rapidly prototyped with some of the best aerodynamic simulation software in the business, I suspect most of the other criticisms regarding its design are also pointless. What IS important is not the design itself, but the rapd turn around time. This used to take 3 years MINIMUM. Just imagine if this technology had been used in the early development of the Joint Strike Fighter? The damn thing might actually on time and on budget. In short: this is AMAZING!
VTOL projects like that are generally multiple systems, requiring elements of aero engineering, electrical engineering, and, depending on the scope of the project, systems engineering. Unless you had significant mechanical complexity in your VTOL system, a VTOL project would be more often seen in an Aero or systems curriculum. Profs are looking for new things, not things everyone's already done. Think outside the box.
I also had this imagination design, I thought it was impossible to make it but boeing did make it possible by making a prototype. My prototype design is called the boeing 898. The only thing my design is different from this phantom swift is that the rotor blades is placed at the center of the wing.
Take the ducts off of the outer fan blades... Your machine will be much more efficient. Also, don't use the cheap Hobbyking flight control board you got on there... Use DJI NAZA or Ardupilot 2.5. Put a video transmitter (don't forget CPA's) on there with some cameras along with an LRS system and sell this"1/17" version as a surveillance drone. Easy money and should be an easy military/law enforcement contract.
should have thrown an APM 2.x in there for stability and then a really stable show-off flight. but i guess they wouldn't know what it is that could make their project look 1000 times better when flown.
Exactly what I thought. This doesn't seem as professional as I'd have thought. I've seen better VTOLs made by individuals that seem to work better (tom Stanton's in particular). I particularly liked how his used differential thrust instead of just using torque like a standard quad. However, I may be like ignoring the fact that this must be scaled up.
+RC BOSS it may have a cheap transmitter but the flight controller that changed from multirotor flight to fixed wing is pretty damn decent. would not be surprised if its custom made.
I too had designs of my own for a VTOL I planned to make . built and flew my own custom Quad , and when thought to make a VTOL for my Colleges project , being a student of Mechanical Engg. they said that I needed to make a more ' Mechanical ' like project , thus ruining my dreams ... Wish I had people who encouraged me in what I was doing ...
And for all the others complaining about how it's a simple rc plane they said clearly in the video it is a scale prototype this takes time and money it most likely wont be usable fully until 2016 or later it will be larger it will be more inovative they may have used a rotor propelled system or rc as u call it to get a more complex design they said a swift prototype so don't hate on a billion dollar company for trying to think and help improve future combat
Wouldn't there be a lot of drag across the body since the main rotors ducting is just wide open. Just seems a little oversimplified like More Weight = More Rotors A Triangular setup would be better. With rotating wings and the two front rotors set integrally within the wings, (which actuate horizontal shift) rotors also being more central to the load it could be carrying allowing for lighter wing materials and the aerodynamics of the nose and wings would envelope the cargo and rotors without catching much air in the rotor housings. Also the third rotor ( With vertical and main-thrust being the most powerful of the three) could be placed at the rear. If this comment got me a job that would be a great way to start out when coming from Itt tech.
Those wings look clippable, it seems to be kinda of wobbley, I would thicken the span out a good ten degrees and give it a 15 percent added length index, if it became too heavy to ride, then i'd increase the radius cuff for the propellers.
Did you hear the Pixhawk flight controller startup tones? It's a big Quadrotor with a body made by Boeing and a wee bit of a yaw problem. Hey, I can fix that problem for you for far less than you'd charge Boeing.
Those are the same parts I use in my RC aircraft. I can identify the motors as NTM Aerodrive and the ESC's as Turnigy plush from HobbyKing.com. Also a Spektrum DX8 for control. I was wondering why Boeing is using those parts instead of E-Flite or GreatPlanes parts. Much better quality (as any RC enthusiast would know) just my 2c. Nice prototype, though :D
I know...average of a week to NY from WA?! Luckily they worked also. I just pulled a Turnigy 100amp ESC from my 72" MX2 that crashed---due to a burned out ESC. Figures, the nice planes always crash before their time. :(
Yup..many of us are sitting here watching the video counting all the HK parts. Notice the XT60 connects..Wouldn't be surprised if at least some of that money, is an example of our tax dollars...at work. Wonder which flight controller they are using..?
DARPA wasted $9 Million on this ROFLCopter??? This looks like a horrible design. Where does the payload go if you have two gigantic fans through the middle of it? Those fans have to be incredibly heavy and the amount of dead weight that's gonna be in forward flight is insane. Why not have 4 ducted fans on the sides and have them all rotate forward?
Random Videos Correct, my thoughts exactly. A VTOL aircraft is just not very good at payload, just like a hello does not carry a heavy payload. The Osprey is a maintenance hog due to its transmission issues etc. Just never will be practical in my opinion. But waste money while you can, just like Electric planes.
thats why DARPA is so great - they use off the shelf parts as much as possible and can do it on the cheap yet high-tech
Incredible. 3 day design, 10 day build time shows that they have a great team. Doing stuff like this is an engineers dream job. I hope the professional managers at Boeing give these people enough freedom to explore/create, 'cause that's where "Holy Sh*t!!" tech comes from.
peter from flite test wouldnt have any problem building this lol
3 Day design
10 Day build
6 months to learn how to fly it.
Yep that's a bunch of engineers alright.
reminds me of a Gub'mint web site that was recently unveiled,
sure looks purdy but try using it...
That's crazy that they only used 3 days to design. I can't even finish a game in 3 days.
i don't see you working for boeing frogsoda
Question for you guys, why aren't you using counter rotating props in the body and at the wing tips? It would cancel out the torque on the aircraft. I don't know if you have experimented with multirotors, but they typically control the yaw of the aircraft in hover by shifting the power of the clockwise vs. counter clockwise motors. I like the shape and idea. I'd love to see it transition to forward flight. If you need an experienced R/C pilot, I volunteer.
THAT is elegance and strategic efficiency.
Uygg
／／＿
The stability is due to right yaw. Boeing knows this but with the short build cycle they had you don't always have time to trim an aircraft before the camera crew shows up.
This product has blockbuster coolness over it.
I'd bet the smaller tip props are rotating opposite the direction of the main props. But, since the main props provide most of the thrust, there is still a net torque. It looks like they rely purely on differential duct tilt to control yaw, but it doesn't seem to be very easy to fly. You won't be able to fly this like a normal quad with 4 identical props because the thrust-torque relationship will never be equal between the prop pairs (yaw moments are not decoupled from pitch and roll).
This is what you call the future of aviation. :)
yeah this can be turned into a full size plane this would be crazy no runways take off .this could go far .
If not installed already,try individually rotating propellers on the wings
I can see 2 drawbacks of this design: 1) two center rotors are dead weight in air plane mode. 2) odd shape fuselage will limit the payload capacity.
I think Boeing knows a little bit about airplanes. This is only the beginning prototype.
question is..can i ride the plane like a hoverboard?
What about using in body fans for hover cars?
So, it's a +quad with no flight controller. Hobbyists can do better.
I love to have the one assault chopper that has two propellers and looks like is smiling goes perfect with "The last smile you will see"
Terminator wow! I totally get that. Awesome technology. I would love to have that job.
I've been doing these kind of experiments in my garage, I wish I could have the opportunities these lads have and do the real things!
Does it go forwards?
Hey Boeing, I'm a big fan.. When you guys set out to start these projects do you, particularly scale models, do you consider a base platform of avionics electronics for stability?
For example one or more 6 axis gyros, motion sensors and cameras facing the ground that provide navigational data? Similar to that of hobby remote controlled planes and helicopters. It would be great to have a division who work in parallel with the air frame design teams yeah?
im sorry, but did they say that thing can carry 10,000 - 12,000 pounds?
Idk but you can replay tHe episode and see for yourself I can't find the weight
Nvm I saw it rit after I posted the coment
XGamingPro Carry 10,000 - 12,000 pounds where..? Fans fans everywhere. A C17 can carry more and does not have as many moving parts/ transmission etc. This plane is like Taylor Swift, sexy with red lipstick but you know shes not blowing you anytime soon. Its a fail in my book.
Homemadetinycoffee adfggxuchb! /qaewz2a (!!;!);)*! Lclvlcls
Lc
Sslc
Dd!do?
FgtggghhaXXffcvgxft yyfrdytr4yy6t1yhktkjt mmjok
Mlml
Lsl!l!! Cf JDF cfsfcn
Homemadetinycoffee its only 17 percent scale.... But still
I'm a 15 yr/ol not an engineer for aircraft mechanics but this is great I know it's a scale prototype and all but for a rotor propulsion system seems a bit primitive ther are a couple of vertical takeoff aircraft that are jet propulesed and you had said your intentions are to make capable of carrying a max of 1200 pounds is there going to be a cargo hatch for this is it going to be an unmanned aircraft there are plenty of questions to be awnsered but other than that I hope to see this in action soon
Quadcopter derived quadplane may be a neat idea to get best of both technologies. But highly impractical for carrying any personnel, cargo or unmanned UAF electronics! Those massive center props bog down all the precious space that may be utilized otherwise in more classic designs. Prototypes are only good for fun!
Gosh I wish when I was younger I could have realized the possibilities.
I all see is a quick assembly of a quad. What's the fuss all about?
Would the payload bay be in between the fuselage mounted fans or maybe within side mounted pods? That's a lot of dead room inside the fuselage section. Great Prototype though! I can't wait to see a full scale prototype :)
Look to the RC World for idea's...it's already being done. Slap a 6-Axis gyro in that sucker and there'll be a huge improvement in flyability and stability.
Nice idea, but the energy to lift ratio might be to much for sustainable long flight. I would go with the gravity plane idea... ya build a gravity plane prototype, a large plane.
Where can i get mine?? Prolly a 100k model!
sounds like DARPA is looking to replace the Apache.
What would it be used for?
Skynet.
This is how they fool you. How much money did it cost these guys to build this? Hobbyists from the RC world have done this again and again for more then 10 years. I even recognize the tune the ESC (electric speed controller) play when he plugged it in.
Might be a great design for futurecombat helicopter or a coast guard utility helicopter with great capacity
looks neat but I think it needs a new design with bench marked goals .
like that it can hover and fly straight and looks neat.
1) if we think it we can build it
set goals then design to it .
1)first plane with a led surface that is like a chemleon (invisible )
2)plane that can hover for four days
3 ) crash proof plane that can withstand a full on crash with no damage .
3) first Solar plane that can run 24 /7 for one year.
4) decoy planes
make a shell of a craft that acts as a decoy destraction
5) FIRST PLANE THAT HAS ON BOARD COMPUTER THAT TALKS TO YOU IN A HUMAN VOICE .
example It will tell you your eta, weather ,possible threats tech etc( siri for a plane but with real Ai)
I built many Submarines and see that the if we can think it we can build it works with any concept or idea
My left ear enjoyed this
Do you mean that your headphones broke like mine and you can only hear out of the left ear? :^)
The first thing i thought was Terminator 3
Commenting on previous comments...removing the wing ducts would be foolish on this prototype; they'd be replacing props every 30 mins. while they're learning to fly it. Given that this model was rapidly prototyped with some of the best aerodynamic simulation software in the business, I suspect most of the other criticisms regarding its design are also pointless. What IS important is not the design itself, but the rapd turn around time. This used to take 3 years MINIMUM. Just imagine if this technology had been used in the early development of the Joint Strike Fighter? The damn thing might actually on time and on budget. In short: this is AMAZING!
This is just incredible technology, I'm so proud to be an American. USA is the greatest nation in the world, Brilliant!!
VTOL projects like that are generally multiple systems, requiring elements of aero engineering, electrical engineering, and, depending on the scope of the project, systems engineering. Unless you had significant mechanical complexity in your VTOL system, a VTOL project would be more often seen in an Aero or systems curriculum. Profs are looking for new things, not things everyone's already done. Think outside the box.
I also had this imagination design, I thought it was impossible to make it but boeing did make it possible by making a prototype. My prototype design is called the boeing 898. The only thing my design is different from this phantom swift is that the rotor blades is placed at the center of the wing.
Take the ducts off of the outer fan blades... Your machine will be much more efficient. Also, don't use the cheap Hobbyking flight control board you got on there... Use DJI NAZA or Ardupilot 2.5. Put a video transmitter (don't forget CPA's) on there with some cameras along with an LRS system and sell this"1/17" version as a surveillance drone. Easy money and should be an easy military/law enforcement contract.
I kinda want one of those, you guys should market that
should have thrown an APM 2.x in there for stability and then a really stable show-off flight. but i guess they wouldn't know what it is that could make their project look 1000 times better when flown.
dx 8? id expect a dx 18.
Exactly what I thought. This doesn't seem as professional as I'd have thought. I've seen better VTOLs made by individuals that seem to work better (tom Stanton's in particular). I particularly liked how his used differential thrust instead of just using torque like a standard quad. However, I may be like ignoring the fact that this must be scaled up.
right? he even used cheap electrifly ESC's. it seems he could've used a better flight controller, too.
+RC BOSS it may have a cheap transmitter but the flight controller that changed from multirotor flight to fixed wing is pretty damn decent. would not be surprised if its custom made.
Check out Flite Test Chimera. It uses a custom kk2 board.
you can get the same thing at the RC shop in white ! same thing !
Looks good. Interested in seeing where this goes.
I too had designs of my own for a VTOL I planned to make . built and flew my own custom Quad , and when thought to make a VTOL for my Colleges project , being a student of Mechanical Engg. they said that I needed to make a more ' Mechanical ' like project , thus ruining my dreams ... Wish I had people who encouraged me in what I was doing ...
And for all the others complaining about how it's a simple rc plane they said clearly in the video it is a scale prototype this takes time and money it most likely wont be usable fully until 2016 or later it will be larger it will be more inovative they may have used a rotor propelled system or rc as u call it to get a more complex design they said a swift prototype so don't hate on a billion dollar company for trying to think and help improve future combat
Anyone getting terminator flashbacks
cod black ups 4 I think will have it as a uav I think
Why does this remind me of Terminator?
Edsternoble
Edsternoble Quantum Computers"...now go look that up an there is your SkyNet...your welcome....
Wouldn't there be a lot of drag across the body since the main rotors ducting is just wide open.
Just seems a little oversimplified like More Weight = More Rotors
A Triangular setup would be better. With rotating wings and the two front rotors set integrally within the wings, (which actuate horizontal shift) rotors also being more central to the load it could be carrying allowing for lighter wing materials and the aerodynamics of the nose and wings would envelope the cargo and rotors without catching much air in the rotor housings.
Also the third rotor ( With vertical and main-thrust being the most powerful of the three) could be placed at the rear.
If this comment got me a job that would be a great way to start out when coming from Itt tech.
Those wings look clippable, it seems to be kinda of wobbley, I would thicken the span out a good ten degrees and give it a 15 percent added length index, if it became too heavy to ride, then i'd increase the radius cuff for the propellers.
i think i seen some one flying some thing that look like this last week ,i think he was 16 or 17 year old
This reminded me of the vtol from bo2 anyone else?
bo2 is bad becuz it's a killing people game
Did you hear the Pixhawk flight controller startup tones? It's a big Quadrotor with a body made by Boeing and a wee bit of a yaw problem. Hey, I can fix that problem for you for far less than you'd charge Boeing.
Any of this reminds you guys of terminator?
my stomach feel werid.. everytime i swe it land like that!! nicely done guys.. keep the good work and hold your eggs upp!
We can see that these young guys need a lot to learn!!!!!!!!!! but good start keep trying that is most important :)
That's what i like, we need new thinkers to push new designs we need that sort of things!
Needs more CowBell...!! And a few more FANS...!!
11Q0q
Wow so many negative comments.
This would be good for apocalypse situation because it can carry 10 thousand pound if I heard him right.
Drone+V-22=This
id like to see the full scale drone its going to be
I feel like I saw something like this flying around New York.
This thing looks awfully similiar to the HK (Hunter Killer) from the Terminator movies
Kid: daddy, i want one in my bedroom! Dad: buys it and stuffs it in bedroom.
dude that looks like an rc plane
It is a RC plane!
+lxAIRBORNExl sex xx
Unstable, wings are almost unless, main body is dead weight, cowlings not only adds weight but loses power .... Apart from that, great design :P
They built a quadrotor and are talking about it like it's revolutionary.
Hey attach a camera/mount and ill buy it
can it lift a cat?
Let's pursue your technology see where it goes
Those are the same parts I use in my RC aircraft. I can identify the motors as NTM Aerodrive and the ESC's as Turnigy plush from HobbyKing.com. Also a Spektrum DX8 for control.
I was wondering why Boeing is using those parts instead of E-Flite or GreatPlanes parts. Much better quality (as any RC enthusiast would know)
just my 2c. Nice prototype, though :D
They were quite lucky that the HK ESCs were delivered in time ;-)
I know...average of a week to NY from WA?! Luckily they worked also. I just pulled a Turnigy 100amp ESC from my 72" MX2 that crashed---due to a burned out ESC. Figures, the nice planes always crash before their time. :(
Yup..many of us are sitting here watching the video counting all the HK parts. Notice the XT60 connects..Wouldn't be surprised if at least some of that money, is an example of our tax dollars...at work.
Wonder which flight controller they are using..?
Cool, I live near Philadelphia.
Looks like the planes on Terminator
Looks like a TERMINATOR-Hunter/Killer :-)
seams unstable, drones are alot stable to fly.
for a model you can make a foam lawnmower fly, his doesn't really show off anything.
At least they could have installed a pixhawk autopilot for when the press was there.
So they could have seen it fly a little better.
rise of the machines?
nice work
put a DJI wookong or A2 solves the stability problem.or using APM 2.6
Incorporate the 777x wing tech with this thing's propellers
rpm whine constant, lift not so much? ;-) get that thing outside let's see what she'll do!
:-)
phantom=phantom menace, x-plane=x-wing
I am your daddy
Hunter killer from Terminator.....
three days wow!! hope i can get my flying car soon..
so Terminator 3 is gonna happen!
Its a RC plane, what terminator future are you living in?
DARPA wasted $9 Million on this ROFLCopter??? This looks like a horrible design. Where does the payload go if you have two gigantic fans through the middle of it? Those fans have to be incredibly heavy and the amount of dead weight that's gonna be in forward flight is insane. Why not have 4 ducted fans on the sides and have them all rotate forward?
Did you design it? No? Then shut up
Epic Joshua hell no I wouldn't design such a worthless aircraft.
Random Videos Correct, my thoughts exactly. A VTOL aircraft is just not very good at payload, just like a hello does not carry a heavy payload. The Osprey is a maintenance hog due to its transmission issues etc. Just never will be practical in my opinion. But waste money while you can, just like Electric planes.
Xcx cvv xd
Yeah, and it's using a DX8, no custom controller WTF??
Stop building sky net! Just kidding but, seriously that is pretty cool.
I came here for a new SIM airplane for X-Plane 11 :-)
How about a floating city...How about a sea city that is high tec. A challenge to create the best floating sea cities.
Can find one at a local Hobbie shop?
I SEE NOTHING ORIGINAL HERE. NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER OVER ANY EXISTING DESIGNS.
+MrTtrn001 10/4 roger that stinky skunk works !!! What happened to creativity oh playing video games ! I see no real world changer !!
Awesome! You guys rock!
Hey DARPA...how about hiring me?
Dimension X multirotors lol...
I am very interested in this kind of work especially know that my son is in to stuff like that
good prototype :D
Looks like a hunter killer from terminator