Ford Flivver (again?)

Discussion in 'Classics' started by ironnerd, Nov 28, 2016.

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

  1. Nov 28, 2016 #1

    ironnerd

    ironnerd

    ironnerd

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    25
    Location:
    Smyrna, GA, USA
    I didn't want to necro-post, so I started anew.

    Original thread: [LINK]

    One of the originals Flivvers (268) is on display near my in-law's house in Detroit at the Henry Ford Museum (I have never had the opportunity to see it, but will try yo make time in my next trip up).
    While I was off in the Army, some guys at the EAA chapter in my home town (Midland, MI)built a replica of the 268, but used a different engine, it is in the EAA museum.
    Another variant of the same plane (3218) is (I think) on display at the Florida Air Museum. It is the 3218 variant, powered by a 2-cylinder 40 hp engine (with which it dragged the 500 lb airframe, pilot, and 50 gallons of fuel into the air).

    According to Wikipedia, Charles Lindbergh said it was one of the worst airplanes he ever flew... And the guys in Midland only seem to have flown it for about a year or two before handing it over the the EAA museum.

    I'm just wondering if anyone has any idea as to how well the crazy thing flew.

    We get a few hints from articles about what Henry had in mind: [LINK] [LINK] [LINK] [LINK]

    This video gives some interesting details:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 20, 2019
  2. Nov 28, 2016 #2

    Dana

    Dana

    Dana

    Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    8,674
    Likes Received:
    3,051
    Location:
    CT, USA
    One wonders about the engine: 40HP two cylinder opposed, same as the 40HP Mosler in my Fisher, but the Ford is 143 cu. in. vs. 66 cu. in. for my Mosler. I wonder what the engine weighed? Certainly it would be much slower turning, so it could swing a larger more efficient prop.

    Dana
     
  3. Nov 28, 2016 #3

    choppergirl

    choppergirl

    choppergirl

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,577
    Likes Received:
    560
    Location:
    AIR-WAR.ORG ★★☠★★
    The Flivver may have been a Flop, but the Ford Trimotor... not really a Ford, more a Stout / Junkers... iconic plane

    Well, that's how you fund an aircraft design...


    Hmm..... *raises eyebrows* abandoned on the tundra... my kind of price
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2016
  4. Nov 28, 2016 #4

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,704
    Likes Received:
    6,493
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    The replica in Florida used a Franklin 2 cylinder, of, IIRC, 60 HP. Some friends researched the Flivver design and built it, and another friend from many years ago flew it, but I don't recall what he said about it. The tubing in the fuselage was much larger that one would expect, but correspondence with Ford's engineer confirmed it to be the authentic size, so it probably was a good deal heavier than it could have been.


    BJC
     
  5. Nov 28, 2016 #5

    Turd Ferguson

    Turd Ferguson

    Turd Ferguson

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    4,827
    Likes Received:
    1,744
    Location:
    Upper midwest in a house
    Regardless of how it flew, there are better alternatives today.
     
    Victor Bravo likes this.
  6. Nov 28, 2016 #6

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,704
    Likes Received:
    6,493
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    Are you suggesting that the state of the art has progressed over the past 89 years?


    BJC
     
    Battler Britton likes this.
  7. Nov 28, 2016 #7

    TFF

    TFF

    TFF

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,718
    Likes Received:
    3,317
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    I think the best description is not sporty. For the time it was very small and short coupled. Add 3 ft to the fuselage and 50 more horsepower and it would have been a different airplane.
     
  8. Nov 28, 2016 #8

    Aerowerx

    Aerowerx

    Aerowerx

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Messages:
    5,078
    Likes Received:
    1,387
    Location:
    Marion, Ohio
    Flying Flivver???
    419066.jpg
     
    ironnerd likes this.
  9. Nov 28, 2016 #9

    ironnerd

    ironnerd

    ironnerd

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    25
    Location:
    Smyrna, GA, USA
    You're super gifted...

    If it flew well and went 100 mph on 40 hp while sucking down 2 gph, what's better?

    Yeah, the state of the art has progressed in 89 years. Now I can drop $42k on a kit and engine for an RV-12 and dedicate the next five years of my life to bucking rivets. I can buck rivets at work, thank-you... I'll pass.
    There are still people building Flying Fleas, Sopwith Camels, and even Volksplanes and Flybabies, all can be outperformed by a slew of aircraft (homebuilt and certified).

    Better alternatives...
     
    Battler Britton and FritzW like this.
  10. Nov 28, 2016 #10

    TFF

    TFF

    TFF

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,718
    Likes Received:
    3,317
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    I think he means the Flybabys and VPs are better alternatives. A Camel is at least a noble build. A Fliver is more like the flatulence of airplanes.
     
  11. Nov 28, 2016 #11

    Turd Ferguson

    Turd Ferguson

    Turd Ferguson

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    4,827
    Likes Received:
    1,744
    Location:
    Upper midwest in a house
    A plane with good handling qualities. The C-172 is not the most popular airplane in the world because it's economical.

    I recall Dr. Otto Koppen said in a magazine interview once that the only design criteria for the Flivver was that it would fit in his bosses office. So he measured Henry Ford's office and made the plane to comply with that mandate, even if it meant sacrificing in other areas.
     
  12. Nov 28, 2016 #12

    Battler Britton

    Battler Britton

    Battler Britton

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Messages:
    509
    Likes Received:
    345
    Location:
    Montpellier,LFNG (Candillargues)
    building again a Flivver, is just a matter historic minded way to fly slow plane . be part of airshow...try to cross country , the old way . I find it cute
    it could be interesting with a Werner!

    I love this iconic american airplane

    Fliver31-550x318.jpg
     
    ironnerd likes this.
  13. Nov 28, 2016 #13

    ironnerd

    ironnerd

    ironnerd

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    25
    Location:
    Smyrna, GA, USA
    Define "Better".
    Is an RV-9 better than an Aircamper? Is a CH-750 better than a Kitfox? Is a Rans S-7 Courier better than a J-3 Cub? Is and Osprey 2 better than a EAA Biplane? Is a C-177Rg better than a PA-28R-180? It all depends upon what you are looking for in a plane. Long Cross Country - Not an Aircamper. Puttering around local grass strips - NOT the C-400.

    Define "Flatulence of Airplanes".
    Personally I find a lot of better planes (New Mooney... anything by Rutan or Heintz) to be butt ugly.

    Turd's point was that no matter how well it flies, there is something better out there. He's correct, but the same can be said of every airplane ever built (ever).

    Right now, I am looking at a Hi-Max, but I think the Flivver could be a really cool (second) project. It's a good looking little plane, has nice classic lines, and acceptable performance - could use a bit more power or a bit less weight, but what plane can't? It even has an open cockpit for flights on those sultry Georgia evenings.
     
  14. Nov 28, 2016 #14

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,704
    Likes Received:
    6,493
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    Yes, no, yes, no, no, no.

    There is nothing that flies better than an S-1S.

    YMMV.


    BJC
     
  15. Nov 28, 2016 #15

    Victor Bravo

    Victor Bravo

    Victor Bravo

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Messages:
    6,210
    Likes Received:
    4,990
    Location:
    KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA

    RV-3.

    I have no S-1 time, so I absolutely cannot say from direct experience, but I'll still bet the house on the RV-3 winning a comprehensive competitive analysis by qualified test pilots as the better overall flying airplane, all things considered.
     
  16. Nov 28, 2016 #16

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,704
    Likes Received:
    6,493
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    Can you be out by the end of next week? Just leave the key to the front door under the Welcome mat.


    BJC
     
  17. Nov 28, 2016 #17

    Victor Bravo

    Victor Bravo

    Victor Bravo

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Messages:
    6,210
    Likes Received:
    4,990
    Location:
    KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
    Ground handling characteristics and control sensitivity on takeoff and landing, groundloop resistance, ability to be safely operated by a pilot of average skill, flight stability when used for short VFR "$100 hamburger" cross country flights, cruise speed per unit horsepower, service ceiling on a given installed power, ability to operate from short fields......... those are a part of "overall best flying airplane" every bit as much as roll rate.
     
  18. Nov 29, 2016 #18

    Topaz

    Topaz

    Topaz

    Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    13,833
    Likes Received:
    5,465
    Location:
    Orange County, California
    Don.jpeg

    Tally ho!
     
    Battler Britton likes this.
  19. Nov 29, 2016 #19

    ironnerd

    ironnerd

    ironnerd

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    25
    Location:
    Smyrna, GA, USA
    So... you guys would use an S-1S or RV-3 for flying passengers into rough gravel strips?

    If nothing flies better than an S-1S or RV-3, why did Randy and Dick build all the other planes in their fleets?
     
  20. Nov 29, 2016 #20

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,704
    Likes Received:
    6,493
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    'Cause sometimes you need a pickup truck, even though it handles like a pickup truck.


    BJC
     

Share This Page



arrow_white