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

[erkki67]

Of course, enclosed cockpits are more aerodynamic, and can be enclosed for rainy days flying or come led weather flying, but guys how many of you do so, to fly in cold weather?!

if been flying with trikes, all year round, including in snowing conditions, I never had cold, but this was due to my clothing and battery powered gloves.

the main advantage of the sit on top is that builder can be as big as he is and still fit the open fuselage, which is not always the case in a boxed type one.

the position of the engine, I don’t care if it’s mounted in the wing or nose, as long as it’s a tractor one.

folding wing would be a great feature.

id like to give it a try as a taildragger with the tail wheel integrated into the rudder;

 

[littlephoenix]

love the simplicity of any delta wing design, add a hanging fuse acting like a V stab, you might be on to something.

 

[Victor Bravo]

Simplicity is a relative term. LAR and delta wings may be simpler structurally, but then they require a larger amount of power, because of their fundamentally lower aerodynamic efficiency on low speed aircraft. So adding more power, more fuel, more structure, etc. can take back whatever you gained.

Very high speed aircraft may well achieve higher efficiency on a delta wing (B-58 Hustler, SR-71, hypersonics, other exotic high speed machines). But if we are talking about any "reasonable" amount of engine power and anything less than 150 MPH, speed, I believe that efficiency and performance goes up as the aircraft shape gets closer to looking like a sailplane.

The accomplished designers and experienced aero engineers here can feel free to correct me.

 

[Sockmonkey]

You can get away with it if the wing loading is light enough, which is what I'm trying to do.

 

[FritzW]

A slightly bigger Pelican would make a good "Flying wing as a cheap and simple option for basic fun flying".

Here's an old idea that I was playing a while back to see if it would fit in a 20' shipping container.



It could be made to work but I think it could be a hassle.

 

[erkki67]

Actually if it’s fit a container it’s street worthy too.

the squarish wings with a LAR of 1:2 or bigger ratio, are easier to build too, as all the ribs are of the same size.

sockmonkey’s study is a 147” deep wing, I would rather go with a 98” deep one and a span of 19,5’.

the length should remain at max of a freight containers width.

The idea of Fritz shows it neatly, how a bird fits a container.

Sockmonkey’s chicken with the engine at the leading edge at the wing, gives way to a longer cockpit section below the wing.

 

[erkki67]

Just for second, imagine a Bundle of Fritz and Sockmonkey together?!

 

[nestofdragons]

It's a sketchup model, so yeah I can show those. Added more rudder.

The wing is 3 meters by 6 meters,

If three meter long, why not place full elevons with trim surface in between? If you flip them all upwards and tilt the rudder totally sideways you might be able to place this airplane sideways on trailer without any folding wings or so.

 

[Sockmonkey]

Of course, enclosed cockpits are more aerodynamic, and can be enclosed for rainy days flying or come led weather flying, but guys how many of you do so, to fly in cold weather?!

if been flying with trikes, all year round, including in snowing conditions, I never had cold, but this was due to my clothing and battery powered gloves.

the main advantage of the sit on top is that builder can be as big as he is and still fit the open fuselage, which is not always the case in a boxed type one.

the position of the engine, I don’t care if it’s mounted in the wing or nose, as long as it’s a tractor one.

folding wing would be a great feature.

id like to give it a try as a taildragger with the tail wheel integrated into the rudder;

View attachment 99260

Ah, but if the sides are still open, you still have elbow room even if you're a bigger pilot.
As long as enough legroom is provided, (which I have made sure to do) there is no problem.
The cockpit in the angry chicken is actually quite roomy.
It just looks smaller compared to the long wing chord.
I'm a big guy myself, so everything I come up with is something I'd fit in.

If three meter long, why not place full elevons with trim surface in between? If you flip them all upwards and tilt the rudder totally sideways you might be able to place this airplane sideways on trailer without any folding wings or so.

That could work. Still wouldn't quite fit in a shipping container with the wing still attached though.
I think 2-axis is sufficient for a plane like this. With just rudder and elevator, we don't need pedals, which means trim can be done by adjusting the seat forwards or back depending on pilot weight.

 

[erkki67]

Sockmonkye this is my favorite Lay-out;


it’s for me only, i‘d like to add a rounded cockpit nose, a bit to avoid hard braking if the gear would collapse.

to simplify the mechanics, a overhead stick could be used, either for elevator only, or for the Elevons.

 

[erkki67]

Sockmonkey, Fritz came up with a wonderful integration of a v-engine into a disk wing, might his solution be also for this angry chicken?

 

[erkki67]

A slightly bigger Pelican would make a good "Flying wing as a cheap and simple option for basic fun flying".

Here's an old idea that I was playing a while back to see if it would fit in a 20' shipping container.
View attachment 99283 View attachment 99284 View attachment 99285


It could be made to work but I think it could be a hassle.
View attachment 99287

A Plank,similar to the Sockmonkey idea would match a 20er container perfectly, no?!

 

[Sockmonkey]

Sockmonkey, Fritz came up with a wonderful integration of a v-engine into a disk wing, might his solution be also for this angry chicken?

Yep, that's how it would be done. Probably do the cockpit frame that same way too.

 

[erkki67]

I prefer the wooden box type one, it’s easier to accomplish at home, bending big size tubing require shop tooling!

 

[Sockmonkey]

I prefer the wooden box type one, it’s easier to accomplish at home, bending big size tubing require shop tooling!

Either version is fine. I'm not picky about that aspect.
I'd rather not have to fold the wing, as I'm focusing on simplicity and ease of construction.

 

[Growlzler]

Hello All,

I am not sure if this has been covered previously but Ilan Kroo's Swift fulfills many of the requirements for a basic fun flying aircraft. It is the only foot-launched entry that has enough performance that it can also accomplish cross country fulfilling the dream of a low cost common class foot-launched sailplane for fun flying and competitions (Electric launch versions also exist).

Further information resources can be found here:

AIAA-00-4336, Design and Development of the Swift: A Foot-Launched Sailplane:

swiftaiaa004336 | Glider (Sailplane) | Gliding

Design of Swift

www.scribd.com

Aeriane Links:

Links & Downloads - Aeriane

aeriane.com

Swift Light | Flight Manual:

https://aeriane.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Swift-Light-Flight-Manual.pdf

-Growlzler

 

[rotax618]

The swift is a neat looking flying wing with what looks like good performance BUT simple it is NOT.

 

[mullacharjak]

The Marske monarch with Mac 101 engine did not require much power to fly.Maybe that is an obsolete aircraft so we have to invent new types of flying wings.

 

[erkki67]

forget those trapezoid or swept back wings, all to complicated to build.

cheap, means a straight wing with no twisting either

 

[mullacharjak]

. You mean this one.But I would take the monarch any time.