• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Fairey Rotodyne

rocketeer

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Nov 23, 2006
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hi all.Im brand new here and enjoying the site 100%.
So can anyone provide any info on Rotodyne projects please?? ??? ???
Remember seeing an article in an old Flight mag about a Naval Variant but have seen nothing since!!
Help please.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,209
Reaction score
888
Welcome rocketeer !
A naval variant of the Rotodyne is unknown to me so far, sounds interesting !
The latest variant I know, is the Tyne powered Rotodyne, a 3-view from
D.Wood "Project Cancelled" is shown below. Regarding this book, this variant
should give "the services" a vertical take-off transport capability for e.g. 70 troops,
trucks, missiles or the fuselage of a fighter. Implicitly a naval use maybe mentioned
here .... To enhance performance especially in hot-and-high conditions, fitting of
an additional R.B.176 in each nacelle was proposed.
 

Attachments

  • Rotodyne_Tyne.JPG
    Rotodyne_Tyne.JPG
    15.3 KB · Views: 875

smurf

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
546
Reaction score
26
I've a vague recollection of a proposal for anti-sub use, with high speed to the action zone then hovering the advantage, but I can't remember where.
 

red admiral

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
611
Reaction score
71
Cutaway courtesy of Flight, who are currently putting all their cutaway drawings onto the web. When finished they should comprise 75% of all aircraft.
 

Attachments

  • Fairey-Rotodyne.jpg
    Fairey-Rotodyne.jpg
    158.2 KB · Views: 822

rocketeer

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Nov 23, 2006
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Thanks for the Rotodyne facts guys.As I remember it, the naval variant was going to be much as the Merlin is today,ASW etc.Just imagine trying to land a bird the big on todays carriers!!
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,820
Reaction score
189
At the time of the US Marine Corps was looking for a Medium Transport-Assault helicopter, to which it chose the Sikorsky CH-53A Stallion.
Kaman submitted a variant of the Fairey Rotodyne to the same Request for Proposals.
Does anyone have anything on Kaman`s proposal ???

Regards
Pioneer
 

red admiral

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
611
Reaction score
71
Kamov 140. Considerable heavier than the Rotodyne. There is a thread on this forum somewhere with more details, but I can't find it at the moment so heres a picture.
 

Attachments

  • Kamov 140.gif
    Kamov 140.gif
    42.6 KB · Views: 745

frank

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
617
Reaction score
13
Found this thread the other day while looking for Rotodyne info. Ever since I saw a drawing of an Army one, I've pictured USA Rotodynes being escorted by AH-56s. :) Anyway, I'm still looking for a copy of a pic from a magazine & unlike the K-140, I do recall it to be a basic Rotodyne Fairey & Kaman proposed to the US Army, (not USMC) but rather than turboprops, it appeared to be powered by some sort of turbofan. If I can round up the pic, I'll post it, but there was definitely a version intended for the USA.


rocketeer said:
Hi all.Im brand new here and enjoying the site 100%.
So can anyone provide any info on Rotodyne projects please?? ??? ???
Remember seeing an article in an old Flight mag about a Naval Variant but have seen nothing since!!
Help please.
 

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,376
Reaction score
514
The Rotodyne concept is seeing something of a resurgence in the United States. DARPA has a program with the Groen Brother Corp., for a ~400 knot, jet rotodyne. It was also considered in the Army JHL effort, but did not make initial selection.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
26,508
Reaction score
3,365
Hi,

Early studies for Rotodyne.


http://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1957/1957%20-%201867.pdf
 

Attachments

  • Rotodyne I.JPG
    Rotodyne I.JPG
    16.3 KB · Views: 522
  • Rotodyne.JPG
    Rotodyne.JPG
    21 KB · Views: 525

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,376
Reaction score
514
I have to wonder, had the UK government not killed the Rotodyne, would it have given the venerable CH-47 a run for its money on the market? One would have to remember that the CH-47 was new at that point too and was not without its mechanical and logistical challenges. I know Army Aviators who got out of the service when they found out they would have to fly the "Boeing Body Bag" as it was less than affectionately known in the early sixties.

I would love to see a "what if" of the rotordyne in RAF colors... mostly because the U.S. Army green is so uninspiring. What would a Rotodyne Mk.45 circa 2007 look like? Six bladed high efficency props and thick cord BERP rotors? Refuel probe? FLIR? Sorry I could go on.
 

frank

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
617
Reaction score
13
IIRC, they also are proposing a C-130 based a/c for firefighting.

yasotay said:
The Rotodyne concept is seeing something of a resurgence in the United States. DARPA has a program with the Groen Brother Corp., for a ~400 knot, jet rotodyne. It was also considered in the Army JHL effort, but did not make initial selection.
 

Attachments

  • armyrotodyne.jpg
    armyrotodyne.jpg
    365.8 KB · Views: 331

frank

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
617
Reaction score
13
Hmm. Strange. I sent 2 separate posts & the 2 combined! Anyway, regarding the image I posted, all I know think I recall is it's from an Air Classics, Airpower or Wings magazine from probably the 1980s. I used to be bad about copying only the portions of an article that I wanted & sometimes enlarging it at that time, so I have no ref to the image.



frank said:
IIRC, they also are proposing a C-130 based a/c for firefighting.

yasotay said:
The Rotodyne concept is seeing something of a resurgence in the United States. DARPA has a program with the Groen Brother Corp., for a ~400 knot, jet rotodyne. It was also considered in the Army JHL effort, but did not make initial selection.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
4,056
Reaction score
1,596
yasotay said:
I have to wonder, had the UK government not killed the Rotodyne, would it have given the venerable CH-47 a run for its money on the market? One would have to remember that the CH-47 was new at that point too and was not without its mechanical and logistical challenges. I know Army Aviators who got out of the service when they found out they would have to fly the "Boeing Body Bag" as it was less than affectionately known in the early sixties.

I would love to see a "what if" of the rotordyne in RAF colors... mostly because the U.S. Army green is so uninspiring. What would a Rotodyne Mk.45 circa 2007 look like? Six bladed high efficency props and thick cord BERP rotors? Refuel probe? FLIR? Sorry I could go on.

Mr Yasotay, you have to register at the whatif modelers forum. You'll find tons of interesting stuff on the Rotodyne ;D
 

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,376
Reaction score
514
Done! Well as soon as the Administrator lets me in.

Anyway, having some time last night I sat down and started tinkering with the Rotodyne and what I thought it might look like these days. The grey is where things have changed. I know it should go into another area, but I thought it silly to start a new thread just to post a 'doodle'.
 

Attachments

  • rotodyne_idea.jpg
    rotodyne_idea.jpg
    46.4 KB · Views: 517

Sentinel Chicken

American 71 Heavy, contact departure 126.47
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
590
Reaction score
57
Website
theavgeeks.com
overscan said:
A great little video of Rotodyne

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9633v6U0wo

Very cool video, Paul! Thanks for sharing that one. But one question- I had no idea that the top half of the fins were of variable geometry- it appears from the video there are three settings- flat, angled, and vertical. I suspect that the flat setting is used for blade clearance until the rotor is at full speed, but the other two angles?
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,209
Reaction score
888
In the second part of the video, about at 1 ' 20'', the Rotodyne takes-off with the
fins in the vertical position, and no changing of the angle is recognisable at all.
Perhaps this mechanism was deleted during a later modification, as it turned out
to be not necessary ? ???
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
4,056
Reaction score
1,596
yasotay said:
Done! Well as soon as the Administrator lets me in.

Anyway, having some time last night I sat down and started tinkering with the Rotodyne and what I thought it might look like these days. The grey is where things have changed. I know it should go into another area, but I thought it silly to start a new thread just to post a 'doodle'.

Cool! Do you kept using Yasotay as member name there ?
 

CJGibson

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
1,424
Reaction score
638
Rotodyne was proposed as an ASW type for the Royal Navy. However its hover performance was deemed inadequate and it was considered too noisy for operators to use sonar systems properly. Fairey thought all this was a load of rubbish.

Would BERP blades work with tip jets?

KB
 

CJGibson

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
1,424
Reaction score
638
The document is National Archives DSIR 23/26669 if anyone wants to check it out. It's a letter from GS Hislop Ch. Eng. (AC) of Fairey, replying to criticism from the Navy about Rotodyne's suitability for ASW ops. Sadly I only have scribbled notes of this document rather than a copy. The gist is:

Low hovering efficiency - Rotodyne has has good hp/lb, so criticism must refer to fuel consumption.

High Noise - mainly from powewrplant, not tip jets and since the Navy looked at a prototype without sound proofing, the noise argument wasn't relevant. The Naval version would have civil standards of sound-proofing, which would produce noise levels equivalent to a fixed wing aircraft.

Hislop concludes that the 200mph performance combined with hovering would make Rotodyne a formidable ASW platform.

KB
 

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,376
Reaction score
514
Interesting. I have to wonder how the special rotor system of the Rotodyne would have been folded for deck and under deck storage.
 

Kadija_Man

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
2,016
Reaction score
102
Might the RN's criticism of excessive noise be based on the ability of a submerged submarine to hear propeller driven aircraft when submerged? It was always one of the arguments put forward in favour of the Nimrod over the P-3 - the P-3's propellers were quite noisy apparently and gave warning of the aircraft's approach, whereas the Nimrod's turbines were much quieter. Personally, I've always believed its bullshit but perhaps they knew/understood something Fairy didn't want to accept.
 

frank

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
617
Reaction score
13
My gosh, if the P-3's props were bad, how much worse could the ASW versions of the various Soviet Bears have been?


rickshaw said:
Might the RN's criticism of excessive noise be based on the ability of a submerged submarine to hear propeller driven aircraft when submerged? It was always one of the arguments put forward in favour of the Nimrod over the P-3 - the P-3's propellers were quite noisy apparently and gave warning of the aircraft's approach, whereas the Nimrod's turbines were much quieter. Personally, I've always believed its bullshit but perhaps they knew/understood something Fairy didn't want to accept.
 

starviking

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,054
Reaction score
141
rickshaw said:
Might the RN's criticism of excessive noise be based on the ability of a submerged submarine to hear propeller driven aircraft when submerged? It was always one of the arguments put forward in favour of the Nimrod over the P-3 - the P-3's propellers were quite noisy apparently and gave warning of the aircraft's approach, whereas the Nimrod's turbines were much quieter. Personally, I've always believed its bullshit but perhaps they knew/understood something Fairy didn't want to accept.

I think it's out of the Rotodyne's timeframe, but in the Nimrod 'era' there was talk of fitting SAMs in the conning towers of subs. Shorts' Blowpipe was trialled on HMS Aeneas in the 70's with the Submarine Launched Airflight Missile (SLAM). It was a pack of 4 Blowpipes on an extendable mount. They could be launched at periscope depth.

IIRC ASW aircraft have to go pretty low and slow to drop ASW torpedos. A system like SLAM could ruin their day. Good enough reason for going with a Nimrod if excessive noise is a factor.

Starviking

Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Aeneas_(P427) (Yup, wiki, but I do remember this from a book in the distant past)
 

TinWing

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
888
Reaction score
49
starviking said:
rickshaw said:
Might the RN's criticism of excessive noise be based on the ability of a submerged submarine to hear propeller driven aircraft when submerged? It was always one of the arguments put forward in favour of the Nimrod over the P-3 - the P-3's propellers were quite noisy apparently and gave warning of the aircraft's approach, whereas the Nimrod's turbines were much quieter. Personally, I've always believed its bullshit but perhaps they knew/understood something Fairy didn't want to accept.

I think it's out of the Rotodyne's timeframe, but in the Nimrod 'era' there was talk of fitting SAMs in the conning towers of subs. Shorts' Blowpipe was trialled on HMS Aeneas in the 70's with the Submarine Launched Airflight Missile (SLAM). It was a pack of 4 Blowpipes on an extendable mount. They could be launched at periscope depth.

IIRC ASW aircraft have to go pretty low and slow to drop ASW torpedos. A system like SLAM could ruin their day. Good enough reason for going with a Nimrod if excessive noise is a factor.

Starviking

Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Aeneas_(P427) (Yup, wiki, but I do remember this from a book in the distant past)

I have taken the liberty of creating of splitting this thread:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2214.0.html

The SLAM system is entirely worthy of its own thread.
 

starviking

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,054
Reaction score
141
TinWing said:
I have taken the liberty of creating of splitting this thread:

[ur]http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2214.0.html[/url]

The SLAM system is entirely worthy of its own thread.

I couldn't agree more.

Thanks
 

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,376
Reaction score
514
Thanks for getting back on track. :)

I could not find the other thread where the picture below was first posted. Was this a Fairey concept or was it from another organization?
 

Attachments

  • First%20Image.jpg
    First%20Image.jpg
    15.5 KB · Views: 300

yasotay

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
2,376
Reaction score
514
Ah, I thought as much. Thanks Jemiba.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,209
Reaction score
888
Looks like the early design for 20 pax, powered by two Dart engines
 

Attachments

  • Rotodyne_dart.GIF
    Rotodyne_dart.GIF
    57.8 KB · Views: 316

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,882
Reaction score
222
i've been wondering, if, instead of the noisy, thirsty tip-jet system, the rotodyne would have been more sucessful if it had used a mechanically driven rotor, de-clutched for cruise flight, torque compensation being by means of the propellors, like the original gyrodyne.

cheers,
Robin.
 

alertken

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 20, 2007
Messages
595
Reaction score
159
Rotodyne's origin was military: battlefield insertion less vulnerably than Hamilcar-type (powered) gliders - that's how (GAL) Beverley began. By 1950 MoS had settled on Westland-licences and Bristol Sycamore for close-in lift (no rotory combat then contemplated), and Bristol 173 as basis for heavier work, inc. ASW. Fairey, out in cold, came up with tip-jet as its raison to insure that work. Funding continued even after US agreed in 1952 to give us tandem-rotor Bell XSL-1 (which failed). Noise didn't matter/wasn't perceived. If by, say, 1956 Fairey had derided their own Selling Proposition, Westland S.56 (Westminster) would have been favoured. The civil notion was desperation as military prospects evaporated, and Fairey sought some basis to value the Helicopter business for Sandys' industrial consolidation. Kaman took a licence, but operating economics did for it (not noise, in those less PC days).
 

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,882
Reaction score
222
Rotodyne's origin was military

another mis-conception on my part corrected, i thought that thr Rotodyne was primarily civilian in nature.

cheers,
Robin.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,209
Reaction score
888
"1. The cargo hold of the Rotodyne has a constant cross section
of 2,13m x 2,84m along the whole lenght. Volume is 92 cbm.
2. Troop transport: 70 fully equipped soldiers with a total mass of 7,94 t.
The seat arrangement with two aisles allows for quick unloading
3. Casualty transport: 24 stretchers. 25 seats, total mass of 4,72t,
3 ambulance men, or 44 stretchers, 3 ambulance men, total mass of (?)
4. Fuel transport: 612caniters with 18 litres each, total mass of 9,1 t,
or 9 rollable fuel tanks with 1136 litres each, total mass of8,6 t
5. and 6. Vehicles (?) with a total mass of of 5,44 t. Number of vehicles
depends on size and weight.
7. Airfield equipment: 3 fully equipped soldiers, 1 bulldozer, weight 8,17 t
1 roller
8. Steel planks for airfield or street construction: 280 planks, total mass
8,17t, installation of rolls in the cargo floor is possible to ease losading/unloading "
 

Barrington Bond

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
929
Reaction score
80
Some more stuff...
 

Attachments

  • scan0021 (2).jpg
    scan0021 (2).jpg
    78.8 KB · Views: 253
  • scan0022 (2).jpg
    scan0022 (2).jpg
    138.2 KB · Views: 260
  • scan0024 (2).jpg
    scan0024 (2).jpg
    216.2 KB · Views: 148

Similar threads

Top