Homebuilt Aerobatic Aircraft

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Careca

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
52
Location
Portugal
Hi everybody

Thanks for your inputs, they are all very helpful.
Just to get things straight, the glider tug ability is NOT an obligation but just another way to capitalize the aircraft.

I’m more inclined towards something like a Laser Z2300 or DR-109 because:
-Monoplanes (still flexible on this item)
-Two seats
-Tandem (makes precision aerobatics easier)
-Taildraggers
-Proven designs with plenty of suppliers
-They look really good!

Right now I’m trying to gather all the information I can get my hands in to. So if you have any articles or pilot reports feel free to send me.

PS: For djschwartz:
Check this link ( One Design Airfoil Analysis ) about the DR-107 One Design wing profile. I think you will find it quite revealing.

Thanks again
Best regards
 

Mac790

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,529
Location
Poznan, Poland
Careca

I'm afraid that you still have too many requirements, special this one "Proven designs with plenty of suppliers", at the moment I think that the Dr-109 is a better choice than Laser Z2300, for a few reasons:

-it can be build with a 0-360 engine (means cheaper to build and maintenance)
-it will be easier to sell (a few months ago there was one Dr-109 at barnstormers, it was sold for 120.000$ in a short time)
-the Laser Z2300 with a wooden wing have not flown yet (I'm not 100% sure about it), original Raven 2300 with a carbon wing wasn't a very successful airplane, mostly due to the troubles with the carbon wing, so it's hard to judge.

btw I know that you have seen it already, but just in case there is a really nice manual for Dr-109 http://www.ashcraftaeroworks.com/DR109_samplemanuals.html for 300$. It's probably a good idea to get one before purchasing plans.

Seb
 

djschwartz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
982
Location
Portland, Oregon

PS: For djschwartz:
Check this link ( One Design Airfoil Analysis ) about the DR-107 One Design wing profile. I think you will find it quite revealing.

Thanks again
Best regards
Obrigado Careca. I already have a copy of this but I appreciate you thinking of me. If you ever come across any accurate technical data on the airfoils of the Extra or Sukhoi let me know. I've done extensive web searching and have found the airfoil designation for the Extra but cannot find any details about its exact shape.

Dave
 

Careca

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
52
Location
Portugal
Hi Dave (djschwartz)

Aerobatic wing profiles depend on what you intend to do with your aircraft, although they all must comply with the following characteristics:
-Sharp, predictable and well defined stall
-Quick airflow reattachment
-Low Moment coefficient CM (low or zero camber)
-Good inverted capabilities (symmetrical or semi-symmetrical)

There are a lot of wing profiles that comply with these characteristics, so now it’s time to check your objectives:
-Cross country with occasional aerobatics >> semi-symmetrical, ex. NACA 230XX family
-intermediate level aerobatics >> symmetrical or semi-symmetrical, ex. NACA 210XX family or NACA 00XX family
-Some serious aerobatics >> custom built wing profiles with 15% to 18% root thickness “Ice-cream” shaped

For some comparisons and profile data see the following links:
http://agert.homelinux.org/~fredrik/flyg/aircraft.html
http://www.ae.uiuc.edu/m-selig/ads/coord_database.html

Just remember that changing your Stephens wing will change the aerodynamic balance and you will probably need to readjust the tail feathers… it’s no job for the weak minded nor the ham handed! Good luck and let me know if you need something.

Vitor
 

vortilon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
453
Location
Marana AZ USA
I still vote for the T Craft. Duane Cole won the US National Aerobatics Championship in it. How much better does it need to be? And it will tow a glider to boot. A Chipmunk will do the same thing.
 

bmcj

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
13,395
Location
Fresno, California
I still vote for the T Craft. Duane Cole won the US National Aerobatics Championship in it. How much better does it need to be? And it will tow a glider to boot. A Chipmunk will do the same thing.
I got to fly Margaret Richie's clipped wing T-craft for about 10 or 12 hours (a lifetime ago). It was the one she won the national championship with before Clay Stephens designed the Stephens Akro for her. The T-craft was fun to fly and would do lots of "stuff", but I think the competition and judging of today is looking for something different than the old-school planes like this.
 

vortilon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
453
Location
Marana AZ USA
I got to fly Margaret Richie's clipped wing T-craft for about 10 or 12 hours (a lifetime ago). It was the one she won the national championship with before Clay Stephens designed the Stephens Akro for her. The T-craft was fun to fly and would do lots of "stuff", but I think the competition and judging of today is looking for something different than the old-school planes like this.
Ya it's all about roll rate and head banging into the canopy stuff. I miss the graceful stuff a la Scholl and Cole. The old stuff required rudder and lots of it. I guess I'm just a fuddy duddy :ponder: Kinda like Rap music they can keep it.
 

Attachments

joesr

New Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
3
Location
glen mills pa in the usa
i have a myers eaa biplane single seat 150 hp lyc 164.3 smoh 177tt on airframe inverted fuel and oil fully aerobatic built to perfection by danny myers its a 10 in and out shines like a new penny,wing span 20`length 17`selling for 22,000 call if interested 610-721-0732
 

djschwartz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
982
Location
Portland, Oregon
I got to fly Margaret Richie's clipped wing T-craft for about 10 or 12 hours (a lifetime ago). It was the one she won the national championship with before Clay Stephens designed the Stephens Akro for her. The T-craft was fun to fly and would do lots of "stuff", but I think the competition and judging of today is looking for something different than the old-school planes like this.
Good point.

Vitor, you might want to clarify for the forum if your interest in "intermediate level" aerobatics is just for fun or if you're interested in IAC Intermediate Level competition. There are lots of older aerobatic aircraft and homebuilts that can safely do the intermediate level maneuvers. But competition is about doing them with extreme precision, not just getting through it safely. That requires an aircraft with considerably more capability. The ones you've listed at the beginning of this thread are all good candidates for competition.
 

vortilon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
453
Location
Marana AZ USA
I am not sure about the airfoil of the Sukio but the Extra is a bit of an anomaly for me. Now I am not looking at one this instant but as I recall you can take a straight edge from the spar to the TE and it is flat, almost a board the horizontal has a nice symmetrical airfoil. This is from memory.
 

Careca

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
52
Location
Portugal
My interest in “intermediate level aerobatics” is fun, instruction, displays and national competition (if the opportunity shows up).
After reading all your inputs I’m now looking with some friends how to share the costs burden and if we should go for a used or the homebuild aircraft.
 

MLAbraham

New Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
1
Location
Philadelphia
I am looking for an aerobatic kit (or plans bilt) plane. I am looking for something with inverted oil and fuel, +6-5g or better, roll faster than a Decathlon, snap rolls tail slides and other intermediate IAC stuff. I want low weight. Would like to be able to take my wife with. Would like low wing. Prefer metal and composite. With a io360.

Looking for a lightweight version of the Cap 10B, Giles 202 (do not need unlimited aerobatics)
suggestions and thoughts?
Thanks!
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
13,055
Location
Memphis, TN
I know Jim Kimball sold his interest in the DR109. I believe the guy supplying the wing kits handles it all now. When it comes to real aerobatics and homebuilts, it is either biplane with 2 seats or high end single seat. Just not enough buyers; the DR 109 proved it. If you need more capability than a RV8, your not in a realistic market for a 2 seat. Biplanes like M12, Skybolt, Eagle, and the rare S2E rule the category because they are more fun just to fly around when not grunting and groaning.
 

djschwartz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
982
Location
Portland, Oregon
FWIW, the Z2300 sold as a kit by York Enterprises will fly fine for your needs on an IO360 or IO390 even though most folks put a bigger 6 cylinder engine in it. That's probably your only option today. As TFF said, the market for two seat real aerobatic ships is extremely limited and the biggest part of that market is training, where they can't use, and wouldn't want anyway, an amateur built category aircraft.

I would not recommend the RV-8 for IAC intermediate level flying. The -8 is an excellent fun sport plane but does not have the design margins to be flown at that level. It's not just main spar g-limit, it's all the other aspects of being a true aerobatic mount as well.

Dave
 

Chris Young

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
90
Location
France
I've flown the CR100 quite a bit, I can only recommend it. It a marvelous airplane to fly, I like it a lot more than the Cap 10 (more roll rate, sharper controls, no secondary effects on the controls, good snap rolls). The one I fly has a IO-390-EXP so is a bit more powerful (around 210 hp). A friend of mine flew it this year in Advanced, and finished the French Cup around the middle of the pack.

Problem is I don't think it is still marketed. Dyn'aero went through a bankrupcy a few yeas ago and was purchased by another company than was only interested in the MCR family.
 
Top