Fairey Rotodyne.
 

Hi Folks.
A question from an enthusiast if you don't mind. I was watching a good video clip of the Rotodyne when it was out and about on sales trips, etc.
Obviously, and unfortunately, as we know, it all came to nothing. But what did occur to me was the question - when the machine was cruising in forward flight, how was the lift distributed between rotor and wing? Was the stubby wing actually producing much lift, or was it just something to keep the Elands separate?

Fairey Rotodyne.
 

The wing was taking up to half the load in flight. The rotor was auto rotating in forward flight, with all the engine power going to the propellers.

Thanks for that, Dash.

There is a good (recent) book available on the Fairey Rotodyne ..... I have it but have only glanced at a few pages so far. It has plenty of good content and pictures.

Best way to describe the machine is it has vertical lift capabilities like a helicopter .... and flies forward as a gyro-plane

Very seldom mentioned is how noisy the tip jets were. It was quite a concern and is one of the reasons it did not win immediate approval. Otherwise it was a good concept and performed well..

I am sure this aircraft has been discussed before on
Prune but it was cost and the absence of launch orders that killed it. The tip jet issue was overcome and in any case they were only on for a very short time during takeoff and landing .Engineers still admire the concept and visit the Helicopter Museum to study the dynamic system which is on display there,together with examples of the tip jets and the silencers,one complete blade and a section of the cabin.
The book mentioned is also available too.
The museum has recently been refurbishing one of the blade sections and has kept the original skins with a view to selling pieces framed with a photo and certificate of authenticity to raise funds.
So if you would like an original piece of Rotodyne on your wall,pm me or write to the museum!

Fairey Jet Gyrodyne - XJ389
 

If you go to the 'Museum of Berkshire Aviation' located on what remains of the old Woodley Airfield, nr.Reading, RG5 4UE, you will find the one remaining example of the "Fairey Jet Gyrodyne". This appears to have been a 'proof of concept' test demonstrator for the Rotordyne. Two were built, one crashed if I remember the notes correctly. Worth a visit for the other exhibits on display.
With fraternal greetings,
ambi:ok:

Rotordyne landing at London Battersea Heliport -


also the Avro Rotordyne :E


Can anyone say what would have happened if they developed a Rotordyne for North Sea operations, would the cost per unit be more than, the same as or less than the EC 225 or other modern helicopters?

Having just finished reading "Empire of the Clouds", one of the test pilots remarked that it was a stupid idea from the start to develop the worlds noisiest helicopter and then plan to use it in cities.

It's not the cost that is so much of the problem, it's the size. At 90 feet rotor diameter and 33,000 lbs AUW there are severe problems coping with anything that size offshore. Not only would you have insufficient clearance for the rotors but most helidecks are not designed for that weight.
During the days of the Chinook only certain decks could be used and some only a certain way; something that can be done in a Chinook because of its tolerance to cross and tailwinds.
Oil companies have gone off big movers; offshore trials with the EH 101 Heliliner did not come to anything, the beancounters wont risk it.

Thanks FED :ok:




North Sea discussion moved to North Sea News

SP

I was lucky enough to be taken in to the RAe Society Garden Party at White Waltham in I think 1958 when I was only 16.The Rotordyne was demonstrated and was very impressive apart from the noise.The other aircraft of interest were a row of Gannets for the German Airforce/Navy ??
Colin

Perhaps the Rotordyne design could have prevented the development of the Osprey had it gone into Production.

Rotodyne tip-jet noise
 

I have copies of all UK National Archive documents pertaining to the Rotodyne. The definitive reason for its cancellation is that the British Government would not meet BEA Chairman Sholto Douglas' demand to provide indemnification of the corporation against noise complaints. BEA was otherwise willing to put the Rotodyne into service.

Another related reason is that the US Army was prepared to place an order for 200 Rotodynes based on the prototype. Fairey's decision to direct further development to the larger Type Z model resulted in abandonment of any further procurement efforts.

In either case, had the Rotodyne entered service, the impetus to reduce tip-jet noise would have existed much as occurred with the development of the turbojet into the turbofan.

Maybe cheaper too?

I've found this stamp from Kampuchea which seems to show an image of the Rotordyne but it has also created a number of questions such as did Kampuchea ever buy a Rotordyne? The date 1987 is also a bit strange because Kampuchea was supposed to be Cambodia by then?

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-W...icopter001.jpg

Apparently if you were in Kampuchea in 1987 your letter may have had one of these Rotordyne stamps stuck on it.

http://numishow.com/images/D/1953%20...0Fen%20obv.jpg

I've discovered that its actually the Two Fen note! ;) :ok:

I should hang on to that 2 fen note. Judging by the way the Chinese Yuan is appreciating against other currencies it will be worth a bob or two in the future. I can see that it is a multiple of two because it is green. That note is dated 1953.

Just out of interest. Rather than using the tip jets, couldn't they have just driven the rotors normally and used assymetric thrust on the turboprops to counter torque? That would have kept the basic layout but cancelled the take-off/landing/hover tip-jet noise.

Robbo, that's basically what the frogs did with the X3, I think the Rotordyne team probably didn't think of it at the time. Maybe?

Robbo.....but more complex.the beauty of the Rotodyne was no gearbox or complicated transmission parts to go wrong.The X3 has a main gearbox and auxiliaries,although much more reliable perhaps than the conventional helo transmissions of the fifties.

Damn! It has been thought of. There goes my patent :-)
Maybe the control systems weren't refined enough at the time? Though I doubt that, to be honest. Maybe it was just a focus on one thing (driving the rotors 'torque free') to the exclusion of alternatives? (Never been guilty of that myself, ever :-) ) Just a little strange that someone on the team didn't think, when assaulted by the noise, "how's about we....?"

(edit) Just seen heli1's post. Probably on the money there.