Flywhale Amphibian certified as European UL

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

don january

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
2,754
Location
Midwest
Nice looking aircraft. I have always been partial to the Coot myself. Must be the Marine in me.:)
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
6,753
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
OMG, here it goes again, the overly hyper-dramatic music, and the endlessly repeated fade-out to black video meme. I just couldn't watch more than a minute of it without that !(#*% meme becoming an oppressive distration. Is that some sort of a pre-programmed function in all the video editing program instruction mannuals?
 

davidb

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
1,701
Location
Vacaville, CA
I like the look but...is it available for purchase now, and does it perform better and cost less than a Searey?
 

choppergirl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2015
Messages
1,671
Location
Choppergirl's Flying Circus ★★☠★★ AIR-WAR.ORG
I want a t-shirt that says "Volmer Jensen did it first".

Not that he did, but you know, just to annoy flying boat startups, motor glider people, Sandlin Goat people, Star Wars Millennium Falcon People, just about all ultralight people. I'll be golden until I'm upstaged by someone with a "Lienthal did it first" or ""Doctor Who did it first" or "Jules Vern did it first" or ""Icarus did it first" t-shirt, or half a dozen other names off the top of my head...

Still pondering what I'm going to do first. Wing suit surf a tornado? Might also be what I do last. I've seen video footage of a flying helicopter sucked it one. Must of been one hell of a ride if your out to get your kicks in something flying. Just that pesky matter of debris doing the dance with you. Things like... telephone poles... grouchy old women on bicycles... most of Kansas's topsoil...

I have yet to see someone pop the canopy on one of these flying boats and cast a fishing line from their rod and reel. I thought that was the whole point of a flying boat...

Can you imagine having a bucket of live fishy smelling fish with you in an enclosed cockpit after a long day of fishing and headed back home and then... turbulence? Or the co-pilot does a victory roll because he... "caught the big one".
 
Last edited:

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
6,753
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
That photograph in Cheapracer's post raises a concern to me. I know that the angle the photo was taken from is not directly form the side... but there still doesn't seem to be enough vertical tail volume for the amount of side area on the cabion and forward hull.

Did that jump out at anyone else besides me?
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
7,009
Location
World traveler
That photograph in Cheapracer's post raises a concern to me. I know that the angle the photo was taken from is not directly form the side... but there still doesn't seem to be enough vertical tail volume for the amount of side area on the cabion and forward hull.

Did that jump out at anyone else besides me?
It's just the angle of the photo, tail looks plenty big.

IMG_0646_001.jpg
 

Riggerrob

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
1,298
Location
Canada
It's just the angle of the photo, tail looks plenty big.

View attachment 63878

------------------------------------------------------------------

That vertical fin looks too small to me as well. Notice how they added extra vertical fins to the ends of the horizontal stabilizer (like float-equipped Beavers, Caravans and Twin Otters).
I suspect that the Skywhale Mark 2 will have a more vertical leading edge to increase Center fin area and yaw stability.
Too little vertical fin is a common weakness on new airplanes. Perhaps unforeseen turbulence reduces effective area?

I also hope that the Skywhale Mark 2 moves the engine slightly farther aft and the pilots' seats 30cm (1 foot) to reduce the risk of a thrown propeller blade hitting a pilot.

Skywhale looks like a well thought-out design and more durable than Dornier's S-Ray. Hopefully the high wing is high enough to lay atop most docks. That large aft fuselage provides plenty of volume to stretch out a pair of sleeping bags ..... reducing the risk of get-home-itis.
 

autoreply

Moderator
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
10,733
Location
Rotterdam, Netherlands
------------------------------------------------------------------

That vertical fin looks too small to me as well. Notice how they added extra vertical fins to the ends of the horizontal stabilizer (like float-equipped Beavers, Caravans and Twin Otters).
I suspect that the Skywhale Mark 2 will have a more vertical leading edge to increase Center fin area and yaw stability.
Too little vertical fin is a common weakness on new airplanes. Perhaps unforeseen turbulence reduces effective area?

I also hope that the Skywhale Mark 2 moves the engine slightly farther aft and the pilots' seats 30cm (1 foot) to reduce the risk of a thrown propeller blade hitting a pilot.

Skywhale looks like a well thought-out design and more durable than Dornier's S-Ray. Hopefully the high wing is high enough to lay atop most docks. That large aft fuselage provides plenty of volume to stretch out a pair of sleeping bags ..... reducing the risk of get-home-itis.
Here are some close-up pictures (halfway down the page):
http://www.nieuwenhuize.com/blog/aero-friedrichshafen-2017-report-1/

If the prop detaches it probably shatters on the bulkhead there. Tip spacing is so tiny that I wouldn't be too bothered by it.

Plenty of volume behind the seats, though it'd need some adjustment for proper sleeping; main LG partly retracts up into the fuselage.
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
7,676
Location
USA.
I don't like high thrust lines. Causes huge trim change with power changes, with the resulting large trim drag, etc, etc.
 

davidb

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
1,701
Location
Vacaville, CA
I don't like high thrust lines. Causes huge trim change with power changes, with the resulting large trim drag, etc, etc.
It's a necessary evil to keep the prop out of the water spray. With electric trim, it's not a problem as one quickly learns the coordination of power/trim changes.
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
7,676
Location
USA.
It's a necessary evil to keep the prop out of the water spray. With electric trim, it's not a problem as one quickly learns the coordination of power/trim changes.

Wasn't talking about flying the aircraft, talking about aircraft efficiently. Lots of negatives.
 

davidb

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
1,701
Location
Vacaville, CA
Wasn't talking about flying the aircraft, talking about aircraft efficiently. Lots of negatives.
Roger. Lots of negatives in addition to the high thrust line. But, being able to operate on water and land is such a positive, it makes up for the negatives. Compromise.
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
6,753
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
Roger. Lots of negatives in addition to the high thrust line. But, being able to operate on water and land is such a positive, it makes up for the negatives. Compromise.
Plenty of high thrust line airplanes have been operated safely and successfully. As I see it, there are only two OTHER ways to get the thrust line on a seaplane down closer tot he center of mass, without putting the propellers in the water. Putting the entire airplane up high on floats (95% of the market) or putting smaller propellers out on the wing leading edges (all large flying boats).

Single engine flying boat designers have all gone to the pylon mounted engine, which brings with it the obvious high thrust line problems.

My take on it would be to mount a single engine in the wing center section, and have the engine belt drive a spanwise cross shaft carried behind the spar, driving two 90 degree gearboxes at mid span, which drive propeller shafts to leading edge mounted propeller shaft bearings.

There are of course advantages and disadvantages to this, but I believe the advantages win:

No heavy engine mounting structure out in the wings, only propeller mounting loads to deal with
Engine mass on roll axis
No fuel, hydraulcs, or control runs to wing mounted engines
Engine failure results in no assymetric thrust
Far less drag or flow disturbance on wing surface compared to engine nacelles
Engine mounting simplified, wing center section is already naturally strong (no cantilever beam engine mounts)
Reduced total aircraft drag compared to pylon mounted engine
Belt drive (and tensioners) between engine and drive shaft can be designed to reduce or assist with TV issues
 
Last edited:

Riggerrob

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
1,298
Location
Canada
Victor Bravo,
Sounds like you want a Spencer Larsen SL-12 amphibian (circa 1940). It had a Menasco engine buried in the Center fuselage with the pusher propeller mojntex atop a pylon. The propeller drive shaft vibrated violently during the first flight. A variety of problems with innovations (engine cooling, tricycle undercarriage, floats only at mid-span, etc.) limited to 10 flying hours before it was grounded by World War 2.
Designer Percival Spencer went on to design the Republic Seabee, one of the best small amphibians.

Since drive shafts are so prone to vibration, I suspect that your configuration will only be practical after electric motors are perfected .... within the next decade.
 

cheapracer

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2013
Messages
5,948
Location
Australian
Designer Percival Spencer went on to design the Republic Seabee, one of the best small amphibians.
I grew up as a kid with a Seebee patrolling our beaches for sharks every weekend and holiday period in Melbourne Australia. "The Flying Tadpole" sponsored by a local radio station.

Was great fun, when a shark was spotted the plane would circle, then we would all swim out and beat the crap out of the shark, but tell the kids of today ....

flying tadpole.jpg

[video=youtube;1ido1x1PWJQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ido1x1PWJQ[/video]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
6,753
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
Since drive shafts are so prone to vibration, I suspect that your configuration will only be practical after electric motors are perfected
There was a report that one or two internal combustion engine powered cars are driving on the roads using a driveshaft, and one or two boats are in the water with a shaft between the engine and propeller, and one or two piston powered helicopters buzzing around where the rotors and tailbooms are operated by driveshafts :)

I have no intention whatsoever of claiming that driveshafts have no need for proper engineering. They obviously do. But those problems are manageable, trained engineers design them so the damaging types of TV occur at RPM ranges above or below the intended operating range.
 
2
Group Builder
Top