CGT-100 Gyroplane & CHT-100 Heliplane Transports
Carter has done some preliminary design on a transport aircraft with a 100' diameter rotor and wingspan. The aircraft is being designed for two variants - a gyroplane version capable of jump takeoffs and vertical landings, and a heliplane version with full hover capability. Most parts would be common between the two variants, except for the rotor gearbox. Due to the increased power to the rotor necessary for hovering, the heavier gearbox would increase the empty weight of the aircraft from 61,416 lbs to 75,172 lbs, and decrease the useful load by that difference. Both variants will be powered by two P&W F135 engines. In the heliplane version, the jet exhaust will be vectored to counter rotor torque, and the aircraft will have the ability to hover at 145,000 lbs gross weight. Performance for each variant is given in the tables below.
3-View:
Note: Click on any image on this page to see a larger view. Note that these images still reflect an older revision powered by two smaller engines, compared to the latest revision powered by a single larger engine.
Gyroplane Variant, CGT-100
|
Carter Gyroplane High Speed CGT-100
|
|
Wingspan (ft)
|
100
|
|
Rotorspan (ft)
|
100
|
|
Engine
|
1 x 29,000 hp & 18,000 lbs thrust P&W F135
|
|
Empty Weight (lbs)
|
61,416
|
|
Cruise Speed (kts)
|
400+
|
|
Cruise Altitude (ft)
|
35,000
|
|
TOL Mode
|
VTOL/SSTOVL
|
|
VTOL TOGW (lbs @ 4k ft DA)
|
105,000
|
|
Max TOGW (lbs)
|
145,000
|
Heliplane Variant, CGT-100
|
Carter Heliplane Heavy Lift CHT-100
|
|
Wingspan (ft)
|
100
|
|
Rotorspan (ft)
|
100
|
|
Engine
|
1 x 29,000 hp & 18,000 lbs thrust P&W F135
|
|
Empty Weight (lbs)
|
75,172
|
|
Cruise Speed (kts)
|
400 +
|
|
Cruise Altitude (ft)
|
35,000
|
|
TOL Mode
|
SSTOVL and VTOL (w/hover at 7,500 ft DA)
|
|
TOGW (lbs)
|
145,000
|
Flapping Summary
| Altitude (ft) |
V (kts) |
Flapping @ 2g turn (60º bank) |
Flapping @ 1.16g turn (30º bank) |
Max Roll Rate @ 12º Flapping |
| 45 rpm |
22.5 rpm |
45 rpm |
22.5 rpm |
45 rpm |
22.5 rpm |
| sea level |
220 |
-3.58 |
-7.16 |
-0.69 |
-1.37 |
25 |
12.5 |
| 10,000 |
256 |
-4.18 |
-8.36 |
-0.8 |
-1.6 |
18.5 |
9.23 |
| 25,000 |
328 |
-5.33 |
-10.7 |
-1.02 |
-2.04 |
11.2 |
5.6 |
| 40,000 |
443 |
-7.2 |
-14.4 |
-1.38 |
-2.76 |
6.18 |
3.09 |
Note: Greyed out boxes indicate tip speed higher than Mach 0.95
A 60º bank yields 3x higher turn rate than a 30º bank & 1/3 turn radius of a 30º bank
|
Weight Analysis
This analysis was performed for the non-hovering gyroplane version, where the rotor transmission only needs to provide limited power to pre-rotate the rotor and improve take-off capabilities. For a hovering version, all weights given below would be the same, other than the rotor transmission & drive, which would need to be 13,756 lbs heavier to handle the increased power. This would increase the empty weight from 61,416 lbs to 75,172 lbs, and decrease the useful load by that difference.
| Aircraft Empty Weight Estimation for CGT-100* (non-hovering version) |
| Structures Group** |
Weight (lbs) |
| Wing (simple hinged flap) |
5,829.2 |
| Horizontal Tail |
554.3 |
| Vertical Tail |
656.2 |
| Fuselage |
8,893.7 |
| Gear Sponsons |
1,176.9 |
| Main Landing Gear*** |
4,601.0 |
| Nose Gear*** |
1,150.0 |
| Total Structural |
22,861.2 |
| |
| Propulsion Group |
Weight (lbs) |
| Engines & Mounts |
6,385.8 |
| Engine Controls |
30.9 |
| Starter (pneumatic) |
111.0 |
| Fuel System |
422.6 |
| Rotor**** |
6,230.0 |
| Complete Rotor & Prop Transmission & Shafts**** |
5,454.0 |
| Total Propulsion |
18,634.2 |
| |
| Equipment Group |
Weight (lbs) |
| Flight Controls |
1,575.5 |
| APU |
1,100.0 |
| Instruments |
98.7 |
| Hydraulics |
230.2 |
| Electrical |
596.5 |
| Avionics |
2,141.4 |
| Furnishings |
1,895.5 |
| Air Conditioning |
1,254.0 |
| Anti-Ice |
290.0 |
| Handling Gear |
43.5 |
| Cargo Handling System |
459.1 |
| Total Equipment |
9,684.4 |
| |
| Total Weight |
Weight (lbs) |
| Structures |
22,861.2 |
| Propulsion |
18,634.2 |
| Equipment |
9,684.4 |
| Total Empty Weight |
51,179.8 |
| 20% Growth Factor |
10,236.0 |
| Assumed Empty Weight |
61,415.8 |
*-Method based on Chapter 15 of Raymer, Daniel P: Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, Third Edition. Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.
**-Structure weight based on 50% weight savings due to carbon composite construction.
***-Landing Gear based on a calculation by Carter, not Raymer's method. The Carter calculation, because of its extreme energy absorbing capability, weighs slightly more.
****-Rotor and transmission weights based on calculations by Carter & consultants, as these are not addressed in Raymer's method. Part of drive train weight duplicated in Propulsion Group calculations; does not reflect the weight savings of the CAT Prop.
|
|
Home
