Quantcast

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

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Urquiola

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
98
Location
Madrid, Spain
About structures, I found some interesting patents: F E Best, US2294359; H A Berliner, US2228253; and an Stipa remake: CF Johnson, US1864912.
btw: any suggestion for an airfoil fitting the Roy B Scroggs pat US1848578?
Basically, it has the same leading edge sweptback in Delta as Handley-Page HP-115, where the Concorde wingplan concept was tested at low speeds. The Scroggs machine was reported flying at 10 feet with an OX-5, 90 HP, before an incident with soil, I ignore if this is flying or 'ground-effect', but a mockup of one of 'Caspian Sea monsters' actually went airborne. Thanks. Blessings +
 

Urquiola

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
98
Location
Madrid, Spain
Heres the DM1 in action, it doesnt look great at low speed to me....with only tip vortices even at a high AOA...


They later put sharp edges on to get a proper vortice going across the wing but who is going to do that in practice..


Heres the nose PIC and relevant studies: One of which L6K20 is to large for this board(PIC)
View attachment 99887

View attachment 99883:View attachment 99884View attachment 99885
The NACA research on Alexander Lippisch DM-1 had a recent use in the Sagitta, a machine from Airbus, that if the Covid-19Lippisch L-13  cromo Nestlé.jpg crisis had no put a brake on them, they'll have attempted a monopoly even in aeromodels market. 'La grandeur de la France', des francs, or franken. Anyone having info about the machine in the image? Already posted in Aviation Stack Exchange. Blessings +
 

Aerowerx

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
5,602
Location
Marion, Ohio
Wow, I've never seent hat derivative of the Pelican, thanks for posting that link!
That's ok, but it puts pressure on your abdomen and chest, making it harder to breath. Also, don't have a big meal just before flying!

Great for landing, but it makes it harder to look around and watch for traffic.
 

Tiger Tim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
3,310
Location
Thunder Bay
While not the purest form of a flying wing, how would a human-carrying Sig Wonder work out? One wouldn’t easily fit in a container but you could probably pack a whole bunch of them in a club hangar
 

Riggerrob

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
1,492
Location
Canada
That's ok, but it puts pressure on your abdomen and chest, making it harder to breath. Also, don't have a big meal just before flying!

Great for landing, but it makes it harder to look around and watch for traffic.
I agree that laying prone makes breathing more difficult.
I used to fall asleep while laying in ambush ... FN C1A1 rifle .... steel helmet .... back when I was young and beautiful ....

What if your shoulders lay on a pair of straps or foam rollers?
... may be "X" configuration straps to relieve the load on your diaphram?

What if your thighs rest on cushion(s)?
You will probably still need some form of chin rest for long flights.
... or perhaps a complex strap connecting your flying helmet with the cockpit ceiling?
 

Aerowerx

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
5,602
Location
Marion, Ohio
I agree that laying prone makes breathing more difficult.
I used to fall asleep while laying in ambush ... FN C1A1 rifle .... steel helmet .... back when I was young and beautiful ....

What if your shoulders lay on a pair of straps or foam rollers?
... may be "X" configuration straps to relieve the load on your diaphram?

What if your thighs rest on cushion(s)?
You will probably still need some form of chin rest for long flights.
... or perhaps a complex strap connecting your flying helmet with the cockpit ceiling?
I think for a long flight the most comfortable and natural position would be semi-reclined, like in high performance sailplanes.

Laying on your front with just a few support ports makes me ache just thinking about it. The human spine is not designed to bend that way.
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
7,563
Location
World traveler
[NOTE: I started a new Sig Wonder planform thread for this post.]

For those like me that had to look up the Sig Wonder:

wonder plan.jpgwonder 1.jpgwonder 2.jpgwonder 3.jpg

It's a very interesting design. From the point of view of a homebuilt aircraft project, it could be easily broken down into a number of smaller parts for easy assembly, transport, and storage. Imagine a fuselage pod with engine and landing gear that ends at the projected trailing edge of the the ailerons, a long-chord wing center section mounting the elevator, fins, and rudders, and two outer wing panels. The canopy would actually be mounted on the center section which in turn sits on top of the pod.

Thinking of the planform as four squares arranged in a T, if those outer panels were 7' chord and 7' span each, and the center section 7' span and 14' chord, you'd have 196 ft of wing area on 21 ft span for an aspect ratio of 2.25. That's a lot of wing area in a small package so you can use low wing loading to make up for high induced drag. At 750 lb gross weight with a basic 55 hp VW conversion I get 33 mph stall, 82 mph 75% cruise, 91 mph 100% max, 1100 fpm climb, and 700 fpm power off sink rate.

Take the exact same exterior shape and crank it up to full LSA gross weight of 1320 lb and you have a stall speed of under 44 mph but you need a lot more power to make it work. 100 hp gives you 111 mph max and 100 mph cruise and a climb rate over 900 fpm but a power off sink rate also over 900 fpm.

Keep in mind that all these numbers assume a max CL of 1.4 and do not properly account for special behavior of low aspect ratios. Still, my takeaway is that something like this could make a great single-seat fun flyer but is less attractive once you move up to LSA weights.

While not the purest form of a flying wing, how would a human-carrying Sig Wonder work out? One wouldn’t easily fit in a container but you could probably pack a whole bunch of them in a club hangar
 
Last edited:

Sockmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Messages
1,915
Location
Flint, Mi, USA
I've been kicking around a notion like this. If the center bit is a continuous airfoil shape, then it's just thick enough to house the pilot with a little visibility bubble on top. Might be able to shorten the nose a bit or even eliminate it entirely.
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
7,563
Location
World traveler
I've been kicking around a notion like this. If the center bit is a continuous airfoil shape, then it's just thick enough to house the pilot with a little visibility bubble on top. Might be able to shorten the nose a bit or even eliminate it entirely.
See my new thread, Sockmonkey!
 

erkki67

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2010
Messages
2,188
Location
Romont / Fribourg / Switzerland
For the twin, having the engines installed behind the pilot on two pylons, like on some birds of the vanished Topspeed100!

or an engine on the vertical fin, like the Swedish Glider Windex 1200 or one of the Seaplanes!
 

Mike W

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
76
Location
Doncaster Yorkshire UK
For the twin, having the engines installed behind the pilot on two pylons, like on some birds of the vanished Topspeed100!

or an engine on the vertical fin, like the Swedish Glider Windex 1200 or one of the Seaplanes!
Erkki

Anything is possible within reason. If you shorten the nose of the tractor aircraft you may want to leave room under the engine to take your feet.

By wingtip spoilers, do you mean the double flap type as on the Spirit bomber? If so it may become unstable with say Dutch roll. The MW9 model had a tendency to DR at low speed. This was thought to be caused by the rudders above the wing giving a dihedral effect. The rudders were increased in area aft and below the wing which cured the problem. The Backstrom super plank had split tip drag rudders, but also a large central fin on the fuselage. My fin mounted drag rudders were not very effective. The opening angle has now been doubled so we will see soon. Jim Marske says his similar rudders were not good. He fitted a large central rudder. Not easy to do on a pusher. I cannot comment on Pelican type inboard rudders.

The propeller thrust line needs to be within the limits specified by AL Backstrom, mentioned in a previous post, so pylon or fin mounted engines will have to take account of this. Also the CG location if the engines are behind the pilot.

Mike
 

Mike W

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
76
Location
Doncaster Yorkshire UK
For the twin, having the engines installed behind the pilot on two pylons, like on some birds of the vanished Topspeed100!

or an engine on the vertical fin, like the Swedish Glider Windex 1200 or one of the Seaplanes!
Erkki

You could take the tractor scheme and fit a shorter nose cone and put the twin engines on arms like the Cri Cri.
 
Top