Tesla turbine powered helicopter !!??

[rotorque]

Hi guys,

Found this surfing the net...... as you do.... Link (http://www.frank.germano.com/germano.htm)

I am a follower of the tesla turbine concept for pumps etc, but I have to admit I think this fella is dreamin'

Cheers

Quote from Link:

HELICOPTER RETROFITS:

This system simply replaces the standard rotors on an existing helicopter with our Tesla-type disks. These disks are contained underneath and inside of a specially designed "Frisbee" shaped, lightweight unit. The incredible thrust developed by the Tesla bladeless disk system is re-directed by the "Frisbee" shaped shroud, and is forced downward. At the same time, the incoming air from above, is sucked so violently into the system that a vacuum is created above the craft, enabling an almost amazing amount of lifting forces to be generated. The advantages of this type of system are obvious - the helicopter with no other modifications than those mentioned above, now has approximately 10 times the lift capacity, and is now capable of almost any forward velocity (dependant on its thrust capability - it can easily go to MACH speeds, if so designed!).
Honestly, I truly wish a government representative or military official would contact us for more details on this amazing application. This system will radically alter the way helicopters could be used in the modern warfare arena. The advantage of this type of system is quite obvious vs. conventional bladed technology. Without any further modifications, the new "X-Plane" from Lockheed (or the losing prototype from Boeing) could easily be outfitted with a Tesla-type BDT. What would this do? In relatively the same physical space now occupied by the conventional bladed lift (thrust) impellor, almost five times the lift would be realized by switching to our type of system. Not too bad...if only one of these companies would listen.

[NickLappos]

This is a thought-provoking web site, but the authors seem to be mixing many different concepts without explaining how they interact. Is it free energy for the third world, high efficiency engines, or new and different ways to build mechanical systems?

The one real thing they have built can be made with paper disks and scotch tape. The Tesla Turbine is an old design that has no blades, but instead uses a disk pack that spins through the viscosity of the working fluid (steam, for example) as a way to transmit the work to the engine shaft. It explained much better at this site:

http://www.animatedsoftware.com/pumpglos/teslapum.htm

How this relates to a semi-shrouded frisbee to move great quantities of air to replace a helicopter's rotors is quite unexplained.
That these designers can't produce a commercial product (water pump? Train engine?) in 10 years is explained by either:

1) the "Paranoid Theory of Physics" where the car that burns water is parked next to the Tesla Turbine that runs on banana peels at 100% efficiency, suppressed by the awful forces of evil.

2) It works, sort of, but has flaws that make it unattractive, facts that Frank Germano will tell you only under torture!

Which is correct? Test your belief, imagine you had $1000 to invest in either philosophy, where would you put your money?

[Graviman]

I just had a walkaround Concorde G-BOAA, and a good look at the Olympus 593 engines (prototype and production) on diplay at East-Fortune (Edinburgh). Now that is engineering, and beautifully executed too! Great shame to see the bird laid-up, but nice to get the chance to be a "passenger"!

Regarding your surf trawl, Rotorque:
This looks too much like a concept where the guy has become convinced about a single principle of physics/engineering, and has built up a whole future around it without doing the homework! A lot of work was done on "disk craft" in the 60s, based initially on the coanda effect (but later moved more towards the initial Mollercar concept). My guess is that the payload/structure performance never got near a rotorcraft. The best work was done by John Frost of Avro Canada, where they were trying to combine hover and high speed flight - albeit for a single reconnaisance pilot. With composites, there is perhaps some small justification in reevaluating the embedded rotor approach (mainly since airflow is turned by stators to avoid retreating blades).

Regarding the Tesla turbine: It is a clever concept but so is a centrifugal impeller. I can see a lot of power wastage in the viscosity, either from torque transfer into the fluid or from the radial flow of the fluid itself. If the guy had spent as much time doing CFD as building his CAD models, i might be more interested.

I live 1 mile from a wind farm, and agree with renewable energy. These are Bonus 2.3MW 3 blade rigid rotors, with disk diam of 100m! They look far more practical than the BDT...

Mart

[Hilico]

They should slap this device on an R22 and make their fortune. Ten times more rotor thrust! Wow! Indeed, I look forward to my first trip in such a beast. There are still a couple of questions I have though.

1. Where are the other 18 people going to sit?

2. At what point will the mast snap while I am lifting the collective during the take-off? At 48" MAP? At 72"? More than that?

[Graviman]

Yeah, but consider you get that great spiral staircase thrown in... ;)

:} :} :} :} :} :} :} :} :} :}

Mart

[Windy Pants]

I'd like to see it try an autorotation:uhoh: