+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 58

Thread: twin boom pusher plans

  1. #31
    Registered User Mac790's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Poznan, Poland
    Posts
    1,570

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimace View Post
    Oh I don't know that they won't find some buyers. To my eye, that's just about the prettiest LSA I've ever seen... and I don't even like twin booms...
    It wasn't irony, I really wish them luck but for that money I would rather buy unfinished Berkut kit (pic 1) or maybe even new Zodiac 650 (pic2).

    that's just about the prettiest LSA I've ever seen
    In my opinion Gray's project looks much better but of course it's only project at the moment.

    Seb
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails twin boom pusher plans-pods154.jpg   twin boom pusher plans-n601wd-2.jpg  
    Last edited by Mac790; January 17th, 2009 at 04:12 PM. Reason: edit
    Amor Patriae Nostra Lex

    "Time, training, training, training and more training is the key to any success."
    Francis "Gabby" Gabreski

  2. #32
    Super Moderator orion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Western Washington
    Posts
    5,945

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    This aircraft has an interesting history, including being almost bought by the Chinese in order for it to be put into kit production. But for some reason everyone who was interested in developing it for retail sales either in kit or certified form, seemed to think it was covered in gold (the prices were downright ridiculous).

    The current configuration certainly has appeal (although it could use a bit of aesthetic work to make it less bulbous) but since the proportions have never really changed from the original, I'd have significant reservations regarding its yaw stability and ability to recover from a spin. Low aspect ratio tails tend to be relatively ineffective, even with significant areas so to me, this somewhat enlarged version of the original just seems to be a bit on the marginal side.

    Then, add to that the effect of the windmilling prop (blanketed horizontal) and the pilot just might be in for an interesting time, just when he needs to have everything working just right.
    "To live is to learn; to learn is to live" (author unknown)

  3. #33
    Registered User bmcj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Fresno, California
    Posts
    6,491

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Here's a couple:

    This was one builder's solution to the BD-5 engine dilemma




    and this is someone's version of a self launch sailplane and a shortwing version of the same (Aircraft, www.ReactionResearch.com)






    Quote Originally Posted by cheetah650 View Post
    because i need a non-canard pusher design that leaves me either twin boom pusher or mid engine pusher. issues with mid engine configuration has scared me away (difficulty with engine installation and cooling, pitch sensitivity). single boom pusher can also do but they are very rare as i can see it.

    It doesn't have to have twin booms to be a pusher. Have you seen the Woody Pusher or the Mini-Imp?





    PS - sorry about the size of the pictures.

    Bruce


    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails twin boom pusher plans-wil-1.jpg   twin boom pusher plans-kminiimp.gif   twin boom pusher plans-aria2.jpg  

    twin boom pusher plans-acapella.jpg   twin boom pusher plans-aria.jpg  

  4. #34
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    416

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Orion,
    How far forward of the horizontal tail does the propeller have to be on a plane like the Vampire to keep the disturbed air coming from the windmilling propeller from disrupting the airflow on the tail?
    If a pusher propeller is close to the trailing edge of the wing will it disturb the air forward of the prop when windmilling?
    I am starting to see why tractor type engine installations are so common.

  5. #35
    Moderator Dana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    5,052

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    The original ultralight Vampire was as cool looking as an ultralight can get... LSA is a whole different ballgame, not only are there a lot of sleek, attractive LSA's (not that I'd care to shell out the kind of cash they cost), the LSA Vampire somehow loses the attractive lines of the ultralight.

    -Dana

    Why is it called tourist season if we can't shoot at them?

  6. #36
    Super Moderator orion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Western Washington
    Posts
    5,945

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Quote Originally Posted by plncraze View Post
    How far forward of the horizontal tail does the propeller have to be on a plane like the Vampire to keep the disturbed air coming from the windmilling propeller from disrupting the airflow on the tail?
    Actually, quite a ways. This is why many airplanes that use this configuration end up with rather sizable tails or learn to live with the limitations. I remember when Powers and Bashforth were developing the MiniMaster - it was discovered that with the aft engine windmilling the airplane had to come in quite fast to land otherwise it didn't have sufficient elevator to flare. Given that that particular airplane was initially somewhat nose heavy, this resulted in a relatively high landing speed. The standard procedure became to either stop the prop or keep a bit of power on into the flare.

    And the same holds true for the full sized 337 as well as virtually all the airplanes that utilize this configuration.

    The trick then is to come up with a combination of distance and position to minimize this effect. Personally, I like putting the horizontal on top of the verticals, preferably above the prop disk. While that does not necessarily totally alleviate the problem (at high aoa you still get a bit of blanketing), it does tend to be much better than putting it directly aft.

    Putting it below the prop disk is generally considered to be a better approach but rarely does that deliver an attractive configuration (at least to my eye).

    Quote Originally Posted by plncraze View Post
    If a pusher propeller is close to the trailing edge of the wing will it disturb the air forward of the prop when windmilling?
    I've never seen any evidence of this phenomenon but it might be argued that due to the flow's compressibility (things can be felt upstream), the windmilling prop might (heavy emphasis on the "might") trigger a slight level of boundary layer instability on one side of the wing, causing early and non-symmetrical separation. But as I said, I have not seen any direct evidence of this behavior.
    "To live is to learn; to learn is to live" (author unknown)

  7. #37
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    9

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Quote Originally Posted by bmcj View Post
    It doesn't have to have twin booms to be a pusher. Have you seen the Woody Pusher or the Mini-Imp?
    I fell in love with MiniImp when i first saw it. Those people need to understand that market for single place aircraft is very limited. It's against human nature. One of the most fundemental human instincts is sharing good moments and excitement with a loved one.

  8. #38
    Registered User Blackhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    70

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Plans and plane still for sale. US$19,000

    The drawing is what we had intended to redesign the fuselage to, if we had kept the project.

    The wings are swept back 16 degrees.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails twin boom pusher plans-kingfisher-superimposing-5.jpg   twin boom pusher plans-kingfisher-2x.jpg   twin boom pusher plans-kingfisher-11x.jpg  


  9. #39
    Registered User bmcj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Fresno, California
    Posts
    6,491

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Quote Originally Posted by cheetah650 View Post
    I fell in love with MiniImp when i first saw it. Those people need to understand that market for single place aircraft is very limited. It's against human nature. One of the most fundemental human instincts is sharing good moments and excitement with a loved one.

    I absolutely agree! I think that is one of the reasons that the EAA Young Eagles program has been so successful.

    Bruce

  10. #40
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    271

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Quote Originally Posted by bmcj View Post
    I absolutely agree! I think that is one of the reasons that the EAA Young Eagles program has been so successful.

    Bruce
    Most definitely. But you also have to keep in mind that there are experimental airplanes... and then there are EXPERIMENTAL airplanes. From the looks, it seems as though the Mini-Imp was of the latter category. Some planes should be kept single place.. at least until the kinks are worked out of some of the more difficult areas. Curtis didn't start with the Pitts S2. Van didnt start with the RV6. Rand Robinson didn't start with the KR2. And all for good reason!

    I think it makes a lot of sense to start with single seat planes. If the demand is there for a single seat, you can be very confident that a two seater will garner even more attention... not a bad position to be in... much better than having a marginal unproven 2-seater to start out with... the Lancair excepted of course...
    Great minds discuss ideas
    and mediocre minds speak of events
    While small minds talk about people.

  11. #41
    Moderator addaon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    1,628

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Yep. There's a reason I'm doing my flying wing single seat for the first version... I wouldn't be terribly comfortable asking anyone else to get in it with me. But I'm designing, constantly, with the idea towards a second version with a second seat.

  12. #42
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    9

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackhawk View Post
    Plans and plane still for sale. US$19,000

    The drawing is what we had intended to redesign the fuselage to, if we had kept the project.

    The wings are swept back 16 degrees.
    Blackhawk, can you elaborate on design details? structures specifications etc.

    Canopy looks like cold folded rather than blown.

  13. #43
    Formerly Unknown Target Inverted Vantage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,042

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Most definitely. But you also have to keep in mind that there are experimental airplanes... and then there are EXPERIMENTAL airplanes. From the looks, it seems as though the Mini-Imp was of the latter category. Some planes should be kept single place.. at least until the kinks are worked out of some of the more difficult areas. Curtis didn't start with the Pitts S2. Van didnt start with the RV6. Rand Robinson didn't start with the KR2. And all for good reason!

    I think it makes a lot of sense to start with single seat planes. If the demand is there for a single seat, you can be very confident that a two seater will garner even more attention... not a bad position to be in... much better than having a marginal unproven 2-seater to start out with... the Lancair excepted of course...
    Easier said than done when it comes to extremely limited funds As someone who's taken a huge awesome super duper airplane and simplified it into quite literally a box with wings, the one thing I would not want to sacrifice is the two seater capacity...if it ever does fly, I'd want to share it with someone else, and I might not have the funds for a good while to build another plane.

  14. #44
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    271

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Quote Originally Posted by Unknown Target View Post
    Easier said than done when it comes to extremely limited funds As someone who's taken a huge awesome super duper airplane and simplified it into quite literally a box with wings, the one thing I would not want to sacrifice is the two seater capacity...if it ever does fly, I'd want to share it with someone else, and I might not have the funds for a good while to build another plane.
    Well, are you pushing the envelope, or are you building within the norm? For instance, no doubt, someone could build a Cub-type airplane as a two-seater. A flying wing is a different beast. Also, the presence of two seats doesn't require you to have someone with you...

    But it does complicate the process.. and it does lead to temptation. I ride motorcycles and when I started, that was the toughest thing. There was a cute girl.. and I had two seats... but I was a new rider. I knew I shouldn't... but dang... she was cute... odds are, nothing was going to happen... I'd take it slow... Temptation arises.

    Nothing wrong with starting out two place, but you do have to appreciate the complication it adds to the design... and the risks of human factors (such as horny-ness, for example) creeping in...

    I'm just saying...
    Great minds discuss ideas
    and mediocre minds speak of events
    While small minds talk about people.

  15. #45
    Registered User etterre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    327

    Re: twin boom pusher plans

    Quote Originally Posted by MalcolmW View Post
    It was an aircraft by the name of 'SkyMaxx' made in Germany, and I believe the US sales representative was Oxford Aviation. For a picture of this craft, see: Artikel drucken - Sky-Maxx. A very special aircraft There were other sites, but most have been taken down.
    Interesting... My first thought was "hmm, a Metal Airaile" More info here: RANS Aircraft Page It's a kit, but Ran's is one of the few manufacturer's that I'd be willing to bet will stay open for the next 10 years.

    I must admit, this thread has covered quite a few aircraft that have interested me at one time or another (Edgely Optika, Sadler Vampire, Laminaire, etc.), so I'll throw out three more: the Snark http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/fo...html#post21985, Janowski's J1-B Janowski Aircraft Page, and the ORKA EM-11 Orka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    None of them is terribly practical for you - the Snark was essentially a one-off design with a few copies in Australia and New Zealand. The J1-B is a one-seater and it isn't officially available anymore. The Orka is a twin and it was intended for production (no kits or plans).

    But one of them might give you more ideas to pursue...

    Last thoughts: If you're really serious about "speed doesn't matter" then take a real hard look at the various "2-seat ultralight trainers" like the RANS Airaile or the Challenger II or the Kolb Mk III or the .... Almost all of them would have the visibility you're looking for. But they would have to be purchased as either a kit from the manufacturer, a completed used airframe, or a partially completed kit. If your goal with plans-building is to save money by spending more time, then wander over to Airplanes & Aircraft Parts For Sale - Free Classified Ads - Ultralights to Airliners - Used Aircraft and Helicopter Sales and Classifieds including Cessna, Beechcraft, Piper, de Havilland, Boeing, Airbus and Lockheed planes and do a search with your price range I just found this Challenger II http://www.barnstormers.com/listing.php?id=303504 that may be a good buy for you at $9500 (if it has an N number). I have seen partially completed kits pop up there from time to time as well.
    Roy Etter

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Suggestions on a replica Plans built
    By DanielLogan in forum Warbirds / Warbird Replicas
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: December 17th, 2012, 02:39 AM
  2. plans thread?...
    By xj35s in forum Hangar Flying
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 5th, 2008, 02:20 PM
  3. PLANS, PLANS, PLANS For Sale!
    By Mkinser3 in forum For Sale / Wanted
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: May 18th, 2007, 07:33 AM
  4. lookin at a set of plans and material and need some addvice
    By Trent in forum General Experimental Aviation Questions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: July 17th, 2004, 09:33 AM
  5. plans are harder than kits, NOT
    By Dust in forum General Experimental Aviation Questions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: April 6th, 2004, 07:09 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts