Flying wing as cheap and simple option for basic fun flying.

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Mike W

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
103
Location
Doncaster Yorkshire UK
Lovely, Mike, thanks for sharing. Will you be offering plans anytime soon?

And here is the video Mike mentioned.


The MW9 was built from sketches and developed as it progressed, so plans don't really exist.
I just decided in my 70's to build one last project and went for a more challenging minimum aircraft.
Thanks for displaying the YouTube video, I always have trouble with IT stuff.
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
9,734
Location
World traveler
The MW9 was built from sketches and developed as it progressed, so plans don't really exist.
I just decided in my 70's to build one last project and went for a more challenging minimum aircraft.
Thanks for displaying the YouTube video, I always have trouble with IT stuff.

It seems like a wonderful little plane and it would be a shame if it were to end up as a one-off not available for others to build and enjoy in the future. I know it's a *lot* of work to put together a proper set of plans and builder's notes, but maybe there is someone in this group willing to lend a hand converting your sketches and notes into plans? I would certainly volunteer if I had the skills, but sadly I don't.

PS--That is to say that I don't have the skills for the drawings on paper or CAD. I do have quite a bit of writing and editing experience and I would be happy to volunteer as the editor of a builder's handbook.
 
Last edited:

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
11,419
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
It seems like a wonderful little plane and it would be a shame if it were to end up as a one-off not available for others to build and enjoy in the future. I know it's a *lot* of work to put together a proper set of plans and builder's notes, but maybe there is someone in this group willing to lend a hand converting your sketches and notes into plans?

See, now THAT is something you kinda need to discuss with addicted2climbing when you meet him in October!

Then, the two of you just sort of shuffle over and show up at Mr. Whitaker's home with a neat idea to discuss.......
 

rotax618

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2005
Messages
1,670
Location
Evans Head Australia
Mike’s planks and many of the other low powered or glider planks (Pelican, Marske, Fauvel etc) exhibit more than acceptable pitch stability. The Opal was built to break records and I believe the pitch became more divergent as speed increased and small control inputs at speed could cause abrupt changes in AoT, leading to excessive airframe loads. If you wish to build a copy of the Opel, with the same or greater performance, I suggest you build it a lot stronger and improve your reflexes and flying skills.
 

WINGITIS

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2020
Messages
762
Location
Wellington, New Zealand

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
3,501
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
But the bird of Mike seams to have docile characters, how do you explain your arguments?

Quick answer - Mike did a good job,

I was answering the question "What are the major drawbacks of the plank....." not arguing against it.

All these issues can be dealt with in a "proper design". Lower aspect ratio is one of the solutions. There are other ways to address the issues. Some of the possible solutions are eliminated when the designer is locked into the "plank". Another example of "all design is a compromise".

You might also ask "What are the major drawbacks of a high aspect ratio?" and wonder why modern sailplanes have such outstanding L/D performance. You might also ask the question in reverse. What are the advantages of a low aspect ratio? All of these are good questions.
 
Last edited:

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
3,501
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
I can see a common engineering problem poking out of the bag here. The Facet Opal is a good example and there are many, many others.

Someone designs and builds a high performance aircraft for a specific purpose, call it a single design point. The design is a success and makes it into public knowledge. Someone looks at the design and says "That was a great .... whatever". Let's use that and add this ........ to make it do something else.

The object does not even need to be built, just somehow become popular perhaps in a book or movie show. The Chitty Chitty Bang Bang story is an other example. In the story Caractacus Potts restores an old successful racing automobile and adds a few of his inventions to make it better. In fiction this works well because friction, gravity, weight, cost etc. are not real constraints. In the real world the additions add weight, cost, fuel requirements, etc. and reduce performance, speed, range, useful load, etc. I call this the Chitty Chitty Bang Bang Solution. In the real world you may need to subtract to make it better. Who on this list says if it not there it will work better, cost less and never fail?

In military speak "We really like that rocket you have been building for us. We want you to make a rocket to this new revised specification." The management goes to the engineer and says "revise this rocket meet the new specification." The engineer says "If you want it to go 10% further it will need to be 20% longer." Management says you can't make it longer it won't fit in the launcher. The engineers says "Ok, we can increase the diameter 10%." Management responds, "No you can't do that it can't be any larger than the standard torpedo diameter and fit in the submarine. I don't want you to change the rocket, just make it go further."

This comes down to the refrain "It works 90% of the time, don't change anything just make it work 100% of the time."

You can't add
airplane wings, a propeller and lifting rotors to the old car and make a flying car that will do everything all the time. At some point you need to break with the old way and make a new clean sheet and design of a concept to break with the old way and create a new system that meets the new specification.
 
Last edited:

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
3,501
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
BJC,

Do two wings make the tumble twice the thrill? I think I would rather be able able to see the world as it goes around.

Did you ever turn to watch the tail in a spin. I find it much more interesting when the engine is not blocking the view. Ask any first time rider how thrilling a spin in a Breezy can be. Now there is the ultimate thrill ride. Whoever it was who invented the seatbelt was brilliant.
 
Last edited:

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
3,501
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
The BKB1-A is a good example of a “Flying wing as cheap and simple option for basic fun flying.” It was designed as a post WWII trainer as a simple build for flying club students to have a good performing glider for
solo students to build time. The surplus WWII gliders we’re all to big and heavy.

There are reasons to believe that the longer span of the BEKAS was a step in the wrong direction.

Plans may be available if anyone were interested enough to look into it.
 

henryk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
7,412
Location
krakow,poland
The BKB1-A is a good example of a “Flying wing as cheap and simple option for basic fun flying.”

-same little correction="BKB1"...

"BKB1-A" =modyfied (wingtips) into Aerobatic tailless glider=permission for full manouvers at any altitude !

"BEKAS-N"=exclusive property=thanks ellastic wings=possibility in exerting
energy from horisontal gusts =soaring in Athermic weather !!!



=more...
 

Attachments

  • Wypadek B. Mrozka 17.11.2013(1).mov
    619.6 KB
Top