• Welcome aboard HomebuiltAirplanes.com, your destination for connecting with a thriving community of more than 10,000 active members, all passionate about home-built aviation. Dive into our comprehensive repository of knowledge, exchange technical insights, arrange get-togethers, and trade aircrafts/parts with like-minded enthusiasts. Unearth a wide-ranging collection of general and kit plane aviation subjects, enriched with engaging imagery, in-depth technical manuals, and rare archives.

    For a nominal fee of $99.99/year or $12.99/month, you can immerse yourself in this dynamic community and unparalleled treasure-trove of aviation knowledge.

    Embark on your journey now!

    Click Here to Become a Premium Member and Experience Homebuilt Airplanes to the Fullest!

Simplified biplane?

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
10,724
Location
World traveler
Biplanes are cool but but there are more wings to build, struts, wires, etc. compared to even a strut-braced monoplane.

Here’s an early attempt to do simplify things, the 1928 Parnall Imp, which essentially used a reinforced cantilever bottom wing to support itself and the upper wing via a large strut on each side. It was remarkably clean for its day, especially in terms of easy access to both cockpits without gymnastics.

901CE025-FB36-44EB-A53F-0FE24605BB43.jpeg

Here’s another much more recent example, the Fisher FP-404 biplane, which used V-struts to replace flying wires and make rigging easier.

151DFDE3-8292-4818-82FE-BC2E7EF0D26D.jpeg

It occurred to me that a compromise between these two approaches could make a simplified biplane structure for a basic sport plane. Make both the upper and lower wings torsionally stiff by using diagonal wing ribs like an Ercoupe and/or a D-tube leading edge, then use a single strut (possibly an I-strut) between the wings on each side and a single lift strut (like a Cessna) to each upper wing.

Thoughts on this approach? Other ideas for simplified biplanes?

Cheers,

Matthew
 
Back
Top