The Business of Innovation

The senior editor of General Aviation News, Thomas Norton, has a column in the February 6th, 2009 edition of that magazine called "What Business Are You In?". He makes these points:

What should we do when our comfortable niche either vanishes or becomes so small that it no longer supports our business? That's exactly what is happening at many companies, not all of them small, in the aviation community.

If we are to adapt to our circumstances, we need to be thinking more like the Wright brothers, James Watt, Alexander Graham Bell and and number of genuine innovators.

I could not agree more with Mr. Norton. I have felt for some time that general aviation, depending as it does on long take off and landing (LTOL) aircraft, is not offering product with maximum appeal. So long as airports are needed for both ends of a flight, takeoff points and destinations are limited. It's true that many GA pilots in the past and present fly for recreational reasons; but the cost of part time use of airplanes is high, and with there being increased concern about environmental impacts of carbon based fuels, it is not likely that recreational flying will provide a larger and larger market in the future. Airplane manufacturers could have products with increasing appeal if those airplanes were not dependent on airports, and thereby could provide much more convenient air transportation.

Those who have read my blog before know that I am a big fan of vertical take off and landing aircraft (VTOL). Although helicopters are VTOL, they are not ideal from my perspective. They have limited horizontal speed and require frequent maintenance. My company, Aeromobile Inc., has spent a number of years in developing a fixed wing airplane that takes off and lands vertically. We call it the Arc Wing VTOL Airplane. A sketch of it is below:

To me, innovation for general aviation means developing airplanes that fly as fast as the ones we have now, are as well made and safe as the ones we have know, are as pilotable as the ones we have now, but have VTOL capability. Such airplanes could offer true point to point transportation, and air taxi type services would blossom as the beginning and the end points of a flight were almost unlimited. Many other aviation services currently the venue of rotorcraft, like search and rescue, police patrolling, ship to shore flights, fire fighting can also become the venue of fixed wing aircraft. The GA manufacturers of the past and today have accomplished much in the efficiency, safety and capabilities of fixed wing craft. I think that innovation into taking off and landing vertically is where research is most needed, and where the greatest payoff will be.

I invite all GA aircraft manufacturers to contact Aeromobile Inc. to work with us on our innovative and business expanding technology.

The Sikorsky X-2: A Half Way Solution

As reported by Aviation Week and Flight Global, Sikorsky has recently completed the first test flight of its X2 high speed, compound helicopter. Sikorsky expects this rotorcraft to have a maximum speed of 250 knots when all stages of testing are complete. The X2 has been in development this decade, and is a follow up to the Advancing Blade Concept Demonstrator of the 1970s known as the Sikorsky S-69 / XH-59. The new X2 is using fly-by-wire controls to help minimize blade vibration that created problems for the earlier S-69 / XH-59.

If the X2 can really fly at 250 knots, it will be about 100 knots faster than most helicopters today. That is a quite significant advance in rotorcraft speed, and Sikorsky should be commended for this advance. A reasonably fast vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) craft is certainly desirable.

But, at Aeromobile Inc. we think that faster helicopters are still not the ideal VTOL craft. We prefer an airplane with vertical capabilities to a helicopter that flies faster. Our reasons include:

• Airplanes are inherently safer than helicopters, requiring less maintenance and glidable to earth when power fails. All rotorcraft must have a minimum altitude usually 1500 feet to auto rotate, and it remains to be seen how well the counter-rotating rotors of the X2 auto rotate in the event of power loss.
• With the X2, the slowing of the rotors to prevent them from going supersonic and vibrating excessively has to be done with computer assistance (the"fly-by-wire" element of the control system). This adds complexity, and we will see how reliable that control system works. We feel that complexity means more expense and more risk for failure.
• The requirement of special rotorcraft training, and the high price limits the availability of helicopters to many that need vertical flight.
• Helicopters basically force themselves in the air and need constant rotor action to remain in the air. They do not have the aerodynamic efficiencies of airplanes and consume more fuel, which in periods of high fuel costs makes them even more expensive and therefore less available.
  

We have touted our Arc Wing VTOL Airplane many times in this blog and on our website. We still feel that an airplane with vertical flight capabilities is the best VTOL of all. Our Arc Wing VTOL will fly 100 knots faster than the proposed 250 knots of the X2. It is mechanically far simpler than any helicopter, especially the more complex X2. It can be flown by an airplane pilot without any computer assistance or complicated mechanisms in changing from vertical to horizontal mode and vice-versa. And, with its simpler design, it will be considerably less expensive to build and operate than a fast helicopter.

True Point to Point Aviation

DayJet of Boca Raton, Florida has been in operation since October of last year, and has recently announced service to Alabama and Georgia as well as their home state of Florida. Their business is to use Very Light Jets (VLJs) to transport passengers from and to numerous airports in its coverage area, including airports not well serviced by larger commercial airplanes. I wish them the best with their venture.

But, as I've pointed out in earlier posts, aviation passengers really would want just about any and all locations to be departure and arrival points, not just airports. VLJs, like all fixed wing airplanes, need runways and that decidedly limits where they can take off and where they can land. True point to point commuting can only happen with a fixed wing VTOL (vertical take off and landing) airplane, which not only needs very small vertipads for points of origin and points of destination, like a helicopter, but also can fly at speeds of 300 knots or more.

Dayjet currently and other companies in the next year or so provide a valuable service to anyone who finds using the larger airlines for traveling less than 1000 miles is often counterproductive and inconvenient. But, why not expand that service to its full potential? I've worked on a VTOL airplane for a number of years, called the Arc Wing VTOL airplane. It will be almost as fast as a VLJ, more economical because it uses propellers instead of jets, and will be almost unlimited in its ability to service any location. And like a VLJ, but unlike a helicopter, it is aerodynamic and therefore easier to land if engine problems arise.

The in-depth story of this airplane is provided here.