Curmudgeon in Training (CIT)
- Apr 13, 2009
- Warren, VT USA
Yup, but you got a big fan to idle to slow you down on the downline plus I have big flaps to big angles to provide glide slope control.For aerobatics, low drag may help you on the up line, but may be a detriment on the down line. Do you have a deployable drag board?
Nope, no RC yet, but that is coming. I am torn between doing something like this and doing a motor glider. But I am currently clearing out projects in the shop to do one or the other.It loos like a nice well thought out design to me. Have you done the RC yet? I'll bet she flies good if you have.
Longer tail booms, a different airfoil and less HP and I think yeah it could be. I originally thought that. But this one is going to be stressed to very high Gs so I really don't think in the end that it is in the structural efficiency category that I think a glider should be. I guess it boils down to what your definition of a motor glider is. I went after my motor glider concept to explore that possibility and that one can be scaled down with removable wing tips or something to jump into this category.Isn't this already both? With sufficient rudder authority (you already have in it), it's no more complex than making new outer wing panels is it?
Hee hee, the gap between the tip fins has been debated to almost fisticuffs My reasoning is one of all flying surfaces back there so not wanting to join the moving tips. The compromises while debated to death are really not that earth shattering.Hi Jay,
A few quick ones for you. How long have you been working on this and is there a reason you have a gap between the fin tips? Roughly what capacity is calculated for fuel storage?
That is the best looking design I have seen for a while, I'll be watching this one closely - keep up the work.
Yup, I always thought of this as a Sadler Vampire on steroids. Or a Sadler Vampire if you didn't try to get it into the ultralight category.I like the layout. I've always been a fan of the Sadler Vampire. The separated tail though... hahaha I'm sure you've had enough "opinions" by now.
The transition of the lower fin is for a direct load path against a tail strike putting the boom in bending only. Small planes with forward pilots do not stay on their nose wheels when the pilot is out. Tail dragger is the better compromise. And the added benefit of the tail dragger is that it is less gear doors to seal and there are no gear doors on the most critical part of the laminar flow portion of the fuselage in this configuration. I do have a tri gear version drawn. In a tri gear version I would not have the vertical portion of the tails.I really like this style of airplane. I am very curious why you have the break in the tail surface -- why not have it be a straight 45 degree angle? I suppose that would require it be a nosedragger...but you seem to be going to extreme lengths to get the gear far enough forward to be a taildragger already.
Also, there was a formula 1 race-plane design called "First Class Trash" back in the mid-'80's that was a very similar concept -- have you seen that? I confess I only saw it on a tshirt....but it made an impression!
ETEC is the best of the choices. And turbocharging is good too. What's the problem with cooling. It's just a flow rate and a heat flux to match a radiator to? Waterpumps are trivial accessories to add. I hear that cooling thing all the time but the engine meters the cooling flow even when it is being delivered unlimited potential supply. The cooling channels in the head and block are no more severe than any similar engine at say 100/liter.Jay I like your thinking on the 2-stroke outboard engine...these are amazing engines...especially with the direct injection...
Every bit as fuel efficient as a 4-stroke but with 2-stroke lightness and simplicity...
I particularly like the Evinrudes with the ETEC or wahtever it's called...also used on skidoo engines...
Only problem with outboards is the cooling...