Cessna 1961 puzzle: roadable? possible?

[Tophe]

A long time ago, dear Jemiba posted this picture. Does somebody know if it would have been roadable or not?
(I prepare a second question about the propeller diameter)

 

[Tophe]

According to my calculations, modelisation, the propeller rotating would break the booms apart. How could this be?

 

[Matej]

A bit cheap, but generally correct answer: how could *this* be?

The keyword is "drawing". It seems that it is the drawing that represents the general idea, not all the details and technical solutions. Also note that at least I cant see there any shaft from the engine to the rotor.

 

[Tophe]

Thanks Matej, I had not noticed the window at the rear of the cockpit, with no shaft there nor below the rotor.
Well, I imagine a solution: in fact the engine and propeller axis were one or two feet higher, with a direct (almost horizontal) link to the rotor, and just the blade tips needed a hole to rotate freely thus lateral booms. The artist made it wrong, but maybe more pretty, this is art... No?

 

[martinbayer]

As an autogyro, it wouldn't need a shaft to power the rotor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autogyro

Martin

 

[Tophe]

Yes, you are right, thanks Martin, only the propeller circle remains as mystery

 

[Stargazer]

Though it would be a bit corny, there is another possibility: the propeller at the back tilts underneath the fuselage when in the air, working as an counter-rotating rotor. When landing, it stops and tilts back between the booms...

 

[Tophe]

Your idea is fascinating, yes! ???
While... I doubt the length is big enough for the blade above to go down without breaking the tailplane, or even the boom/tail contact if the blade is set at 45° (or 60°) before the moving occurs.
But this looks like brainstorming for us. Very pleasant, thanks a lot! ;D