vmln8r Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 Everyone knows what the parameters are for this to work, so if you can meet them, please just do it. Or we could just discuss it ad infinitum. Quote
anton1678 Posted June 19, 2014 Author Posted June 19, 2014 The Lego lipo is underpowered. I suppose we could use 2 of them for tethered flight, but a non-lego battery should be allowed in a 'lego' plane, if non-lego wings are Quote
anton1678 Posted June 19, 2014 Author Posted June 19, 2014 Then why would you call it a "Lego" plane? Well, if it contains non-lego wing parts, or a non-lego lipo battery, i guess it isn't completely lego, is it? we are kind of setting guidlines for a challenge, aren't we? we are allowing non-lego wing parts, but not non-lego motors. or balloons. Quote
dhc6twinotter Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 IMHO, for somebody to claim they made LEGO fly, it should be 100% LEGO. No 3rd party batteries, wing coverings, or motors. Once 3rd party parts are used for motors, etc, then what we have left is an RC airplane with a heavy LEGO shell. That being said, the helium balloon blimps are pretty awesome. Quote
Tommy Styrvoky Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 what about using a small LPE to power the vehicle, it would provide sufficient torque and RPMs to fly, the only problem is the air tank, i don't know if using lego air tanks would provide enough pressure. possibly a tethered cord to a compressor or a custom air tank. Quote
locoworks Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) IMHO, for somebody to claim they made LEGO fly, it should be 100% LEGO. No 3rd party batteries, wing coverings, or motors. Once 3rd party parts are used for motors, etc, then what we have left is an RC airplane with a heavy LEGO shell. That being said, the helium balloon blimps are pretty awesome. being pedantic, would using the cardboard box, plastic bags, instruction books,and any other packaging provided by lego count as using lego???? or does lego just refer to the plastic bricks?? i dare say with enough big 'ZURG' capes or sailing boat sails a wing covering could be created. also would a lego glider count as flight?? or does it have to be able to take off from the ground under its own power?? a giant cardboard plane made from lego boxes with a lego motor spinning a big prop might be capable of free flight??? Edited June 19, 2014 by locoworks Quote
Tommy Styrvoky Posted June 19, 2014 Posted June 19, 2014 a rail system with a sled to assist the build up to a high enough speed could be used to help it get off of the ground. you could use esties rockets to propel the sled to a high enough speed. Quote
anton1678 Posted June 20, 2014 Author Posted June 20, 2014 what about using a small LPE to power the vehicle, it would provide sufficient torque and RPMs to fly, the only problem is the air tank, i don't know if using lego air tanks would provide enough pressure. possibly a tethered cord to a compressor or a custom air tank. a rail system with a sled to assist the build up to a high enough speed could be used to help it get off of the ground. you could use esties rockets to propel the sled to a high enough speed. People have tried to use LPEs before, but you need at least 4 bars of pressure A ramp jump doesn't count as flight, but a rocket is possible IMHO, for somebody to claim they made LEGO fly, it should be 100% LEGO. No 3rd party batteries, wing coverings, or motors. Once 3rd party parts are used for motors, etc, then what we have left is an RC airplane with a heavy LEGO shell. That being said, the helium balloon blimps are pretty awesome. We have already seen that 100% lego can't fly our goal is to make a lego motor fly Quote
rollermonkey Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 I'm sure an aerospace engineer could do the math, but I sincerely doubt that you can achieve the necessary HP to weight ratio necessary to achieve heavier than air flight with LEGO motors with an entirely LEGO airframe and unmodified LEGO battery pack(s). Quote
Tommy Styrvoky Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 a quadcopter might be strong enough to provide lift for a battery box, the only problem is how to get enough rpms out of a buggy motor. it also eliminates the need for airfoil. Quote
Heppeng Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 (edited) Well, I think its possible to make a 100% lego, heavier than air powered flight, that can take off from a standstill using only its own on board power. Just ditch the heavy motor and battery idea and use elastic bands, one end fixed, the other connected to the propeller, and wind it up! Just like the elastic band powered planes I had when I was a kid. Lots of lightweight power for a short time. Would probably fly just for 10-20 seconds, but flight is flight! Edited June 20, 2014 by Heppeng Quote
1974 Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 (edited) We have already seen that 100% lego can't fly our goal is to make a lego motor fly Then I have succeded! I have brought a pair of LEGO motors on a 737 flight This discussion is made of 100% useless (and the previous one and the one before, sigh) It's very easy (if you have the chops and I think Blakbird allready did) to calculate the mechanical power output of a given motor versus weight versus rpm versus blade lift versus etc to see if it's even remotely possbile to achive flight Those equations must be +100 years old now? And please none of this, 'it's only impossible if you say it is' .. Try holding your breath for four hours or maybe run naked on the moon and let me know how that worked out for you This isn't 1880. I'm quite sure back then there where smart folks who DID foresee that we'd achive powered flight WHEN the right engine came along And lastly even if you did make a LEGO motor fly with non LEGO battery, propeller, wings and whatnot, what exactly have you achived? In the grand scheme of doing cool things with LEGO this is about as silly as that giant "LEGO" pneumatic car, pointless and _not_ LEGO Futile, it's futile man Edit : spelling mistakes etc .. Edited June 20, 2014 by 1974 Quote
Sariel Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 (edited) I applaud you, sir 1974. That is a very nice 666th post ;) Edited June 20, 2014 by Sariel Quote
Rockbrick Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 ...and lego isn't going to design parts that will make kids make flying machines that at best will damage ceilings/walls and worst damage poeple and pets.... are they? Quote
1974 Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 I applaud you, sir 1974. That is a very nice 666th post ;) But you are trying to get that hamster into orbit, aren't you? Blakbird never said we could't do that, right? Fess up! Quote
Heppeng Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 Lego part No. 853240 could be useful if you can get any. http://shop.lego.com/en-US/Minifigure-Wrapping-Paper-853240 Quote
Sariel Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 But you are trying to get that hamster into orbit, aren't you? I'm more into a theory than when a hamster gets fat enough, things start to orbit him ;) Quote
Heppeng Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 ...and lego isn't going to design parts that will make kids make flying machines that at best will damage ceilings/walls and worst damage poeple and pets.... are they? Why not? They design RC cars that at best will damage walls and worst damage people and pets, so that's that argument dealt with... Quote
1974 Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 The Hamster Space Program? I believe it's on it's way out this galaxy as we speak Quote
Sariel Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 That's a very nice space program :) They design RC cars that at best will damage walls and worst damage people and pets, so that's that argument dealt with... RC car can hit your ankles, RC plane can hit your head. Quote
Heppeng Posted June 20, 2014 Posted June 20, 2014 And as an RC car is far heavier than a plane will ever be, it will do more damage to your ankle than a plane could possibly do to your head... Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.