Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Results 91 to 105 of 105

Thread: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

  1. #91
    Registered User addicted2climbing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Glendale, CA
    Posts
    869
    Likes (Given)
    51
    Likes (Received)
    243

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    Quote Originally Posted by GeeZee View Post
    I like the 404 and have looked long and hard at that option. I’ve done a fair amount of woodworking so I believe I could build one ,no problem. This may sound crazy but I’m deliberately picking a fabrication method I don’t have any experience with. I want to learn to weld and cut/fit tubing. I helped a friend cover/ribstitch his kitfox so have an inkling of that process.
    I’ve bought a TIG welder and have been running beads on scrap. I have recently discovered a local welding supplier that offers a 20hr “hobbyist” TIG class. I’m hoping 20 hrs of instruction will get me off to a good start.
    I am doing the same. I found a welding related makerspace where the owner gives all sorts of classes. I have a Gas welding set and the mini torch that the buttercup builders recommend, but my welds leave a lot to be desired. Albeit I am trying to learn on my own. I plan to also take the TIG class and see how I do. I may also take a gas class with this guy then make the decision on what I go with. The plus with gas is the tubes / welds normalize since they heat a large area and cool slowly. Tig is more concentrated and many say its best to heat the joint with a gas weld kit to get the same normalization. Yet many dont bother and seem to do just fine. Even Stinsons, Kitfox and I think Cubcrafters as well Mig weld which according to most is a no no...
    Cloudbase Engineering LLC
    http://www.cloudbaseengineering.com
    Gopro Camera Mounts for Aircraft.

    Cloudbase Aviation LLC

    https://cloudbaseaviation.com/
    Aircraft plans for Raceair Skylite & Lil' Bitts

  2. Likes cluttonfred, GeeZee liked this post
  3. #92
    Registered User Joe Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Galesburg, KS South east Kansas
    Posts
    1,390
    Likes (Given)
    5708
    Likes (Received)
    374

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    I like this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_W-11_Boredom_Fighter
    https://www.google.com/search?q=bore...w=1058&bih=625

    I would paint mine with a red fuselage and white stripe and silver wings call it Roaring 20s Like barnstormer stile.
    Last edited by Joe Fisher; March 10th, 2019 at 03:36 PM.

  4. Likes cluttonfred liked this post
  5. #93
    Registered User Himat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    2,735
    Likes (Given)
    1710
    Likes (Received)
    636

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    Quote Originally Posted by cluttonfred View Post
    Bof, if I wanted modern why go with a biplane? Id much rather have something like that Colobri. Different strokes..... ;-)
    When there is a large number of old designs, why make yet another old design?

    As Toobuilder states, there are working proved designs that fit the request. They can be had finished or part finished at a fraction of the cost of designing and building yet another.

  6. #94
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    12
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    5

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    I’ve got a little oxy set (the genrac brand in the blow molded carrying case) and took a gas welding sportair workshop when it came to town. The skill set for both Gas and TIG is somewhat similar so I’m thinking if I learn TIG I’ll be 3/4 the way to being able to gas weld. I know the debate about normalizing or not will go on forever but after my own research I don’t think it matters for what we do with tube aircraft frames. From what I’ve read true normalizing involves putting the welded assy into a heat treat oven to a certain temp then stepping it down over the course of about 8 hours. And after all that it only increases the ductility of the joint around 6% ( working from memory here so the numbers might not be quite correct). I guess the takeaway for me was that heating a cluster to cherry red then allowing it to cool over the course of several minutes does virtually nothing. As you said several certificated aircraft have been MIG welding tubes for a long time and have had no problems. I think MIG results in about a 6-8% more brittle weld than gas welding.

  7. #95
    Registered User addicted2climbing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Glendale, CA
    Posts
    869
    Likes (Given)
    51
    Likes (Received)
    243

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    Quote Originally Posted by GeeZee View Post
    I’ve got a little oxy set (the genrac brand in the blow molded carrying case) and took a gas welding sportair workshop when it came to town. The skill set for both Gas and TIG is somewhat similar so I’m thinking if I learn TIG I’ll be 3/4 the way to being able to gas weld. I know the debate about normalizing or not will go on forever but after my own research I don’t think it matters for what we do with tube aircraft frames. From what I’ve read true normalizing involves putting the welded assy into a heat treat oven to a certain temp then stepping it down over the course of about 8 hours. And after all that it only increases the ductility of the joint around 6% ( working from memory here so the numbers might not be quite correct). I guess the takeaway for me was that heating a cluster to cherry red then allowing it to cool over the course of several minutes does virtually nothing. As you said several certificated aircraft have been MIG welding tubes for a long time and have had no problems. I think MIG results in about a 6-8% more brittle weld than gas welding.
    If you have not seen the videos by tinmantech than have a look here: https://www.tinmantech.com/products/...raft-aviation/

    I rented the 4130 videos and they were very helpful. He recommends the meco midget torch and I found one on ebay and its quite nice. Would work well on the small tubes of the Lil Bitts. Here is link to torch on his site: https://www.tinmantech.com/products/...dget-torch.php

    Marc
    Cloudbase Engineering LLC
    http://www.cloudbaseengineering.com
    Gopro Camera Mounts for Aircraft.

    Cloudbase Aviation LLC

    https://cloudbaseaviation.com/
    Aircraft plans for Raceair Skylite & Lil' Bitts

  8. Likes GeeZee liked this post
  9. #96
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    12
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    5

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    Thanks, those look very interesting. I’ll be renting them as well. I’ve heard of the midget and would consider one if I could also find a deal. Right now I’m still planning to TIG weld everything I can and use the torch to heat/bend tubing (like the lower longerons).

    Edit: Well after checking out that site some more I think there’s definitely a place in my workshop for a meco midget! You can’t have too many tools, right?
    Our sportair gas welding instructor found some aluminum flux and a couple of scraps of aluminum sheet so demonstrated aluminum welding for the class. It turned out beautifully but man you have to move quickly. He welded about a 12” long butt joint in about 3 seconds.
    Last edited by GeeZee; March 10th, 2019 at 09:13 PM. Reason: Add comment

  10. #97
    Registered User Little Scrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,037
    Likes (Given)
    2525
    Likes (Received)
    2983

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    Speaking from many years of experience.

    Practice. There's just no way around it. Welding, regardless of type, is an art form. Every single day you should be welding even if it's only for 5 minutes. There's just no substitute, ya gotta suit up and lay bead.

  11. Likes GeeZee liked this post
  12. #98
    Registered User cluttonfred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    World traveler
    Posts
    6,210
    Likes (Given)
    1925
    Likes (Received)
    2153

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    Quote Originally Posted by Himat View Post
    When there is a large number of old designs, why make yet another “old” design?
    Honestly, the pickings are slim in the size/weight/power range that interests me, meaning two seats, ~1000 lb gross, 60-80 hp. Fisher Classic is too light, Celebrity too heavy, Sherwood Ranger quite expensive, not many other options out there.
    *******
    Matthew Long, Editor
    cluttonfred.info
    A site for builders, owners and fans of Eric Clutton's FRED and other safe, simple, affordable homebuilt aircraft

    Voici ce que j'ai fait...vous pouvez en faire autant!
    "This is what I have done...you can do the same!"
    --Henri Mignet (1893-1965)

  13. #99
    Registered User Toobuilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Mojave, Ca
    Posts
    4,156
    Likes (Given)
    416
    Likes (Received)
    2891

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    There is a reason the pickings are slim. A 2 place Biplane with 80 HP is going to be a dog with a capital "D".

  14. #100
    Registered User cluttonfred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    World traveler
    Posts
    6,210
    Likes (Given)
    1925
    Likes (Received)
    2153

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    That depends on the kind of flying you do. If you’re used to a 65 hp J-3 Cub then an 80 hp biplane weighing substantially less than the Cub might seem pretty sporty.
    *******
    Matthew Long, Editor
    cluttonfred.info
    A site for builders, owners and fans of Eric Clutton's FRED and other safe, simple, affordable homebuilt aircraft

    Voici ce que j'ai fait...vous pouvez en faire autant!
    "This is what I have done...you can do the same!"
    --Henri Mignet (1893-1965)

  15. #101
    Registered User Himat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    2,735
    Likes (Given)
    1710
    Likes (Received)
    636

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    Quote Originally Posted by cluttonfred View Post
    Honestly, the pickings are slim in the size/weight/power range that interests me, meaning two seats, ~1000 lb gross, 60-80 hp. Fisher Classic is too light, Celebrity too heavy, Sherwood Ranger quite expensive, not many other options out there.
    Ok, both a 450kg and 600kg max take-off weight requirement I do understand as that is the European two seat microlight and LSA regulatory limits. A sport pilot licence weight limit I understand too. A price point is another as I see valid requirement. Still, buying second hand negate part of this.

    But an installed horsepower requirement? Yes, for a part 103 flying vehicle, but less that I do not know about some regulation on installed power. Neither do I know of a country that taxes airplanes by the engine size. Then, why a horsepower limit?

  16. Likes Dana liked this post
  17. #102
    Registered User cluttonfred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    World traveler
    Posts
    6,210
    Likes (Given)
    1925
    Likes (Received)
    2153

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    In Europe I know the French microlight category better than others, and there the limits for Class 3 (multi-axis) are 60 kW (80 hp) single-seat, 75 kW (100 hp) two-seat. I chose the lower of the two because Rotax four-strokes dominate this engine segment and the 80 hp 912 is the cheapest by far.
    *******
    Matthew Long, Editor
    cluttonfred.info
    A site for builders, owners and fans of Eric Clutton's FRED and other safe, simple, affordable homebuilt aircraft

    Voici ce que j'ai fait...vous pouvez en faire autant!
    "This is what I have done...you can do the same!"
    --Henri Mignet (1893-1965)

  18. #103
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    10,738
    Likes (Given)
    26
    Likes (Received)
    2849

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    The two place biplane with 60-80 hp is really an almost impossible plane to build in traditional materials. At best you would end up with a plane with 10-15 mph speed range of stall to top, wind would make it hover, and the cockpit would be so narrow people would think it’s a single seater anyway. People have forced these parameters and essentially built throw away airplanes. That are not good airplanes. Some composite dream ship maybe. At best you are building a fat guy single seater.

  19. #104
    Registered User Toobuilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Mojave, Ca
    Posts
    4,156
    Likes (Given)
    416
    Likes (Received)
    2891

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    Quote Originally Posted by cluttonfred View Post
    That depends on the kind of flying you do. If you’re used to a 65 hp J-3 Cub then an 80 hp biplane weighing substantially less than the Cub might seem pretty sporty.
    Even if through some kind of alternate reality you manage to build a 2 place airplane "substantially" lighter than a Cub (good luck), you still have the high drag Biplane configuration to deal with. The term "sporty" will apply only in the context of trying to outclimb gently rising terrain or landing with more than a breath of crosswind.

  20. #105
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Arusha
    Posts
    55
    Likes (Given)
    12
    Likes (Received)
    14

    Re: Thoughts on a new biplane design?

    Being fair to the requirements given, the early moth series aircraft had 60 horsepower, the Hawker Cygnet and others of the Lympne trials 2 seat competition even less than that.

    I doubt the result of the limits here would challenge a pitts but as a putt about 2 seater it should work ok and have acceptable performance for this weight class.

    Care and attention in the design to keep weight down with acceptable strength will be important and the easy build tricks like tube spars would likely be unacceptably heavy for the strength. As many here have said before doing this will require starting from the beginning with a full definition of the requirements in the same way Topaz has shown in his motorglider thread.

Similar Threads

  1. Biplane design
    By steve-lima in forum Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: August 15th, 2011, 10:01 PM
  2. undercarriage after thoughts often the demise of a good design
    By c p skeates in forum Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: February 18th, 2011, 08:58 PM
  3. Engine design/comments/thoughts
    By DLrocket89 in forum Firewall Forward / Props / Fuel system
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: May 27th, 2010, 11:35 AM
  4. Your thoughts on tenets of safe design.
    By yankeeclipper in forum Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: August 20th, 2009, 03:38 PM
  5. UL biplane in the design stage
    By radioinred in forum The light stuff area
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: April 23rd, 2009, 10:34 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
  •