How does it fly?

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Rockiedog2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
2,334
That other turbine twin by Rockwell did the same thing.....the Turbo Commander.
I expect most all the turbine wing mounted planes would have that characteristic but to a much lesser degree. I flew the G1 for a while and don't remember it having the dramatic braking/sink associated with flat pitch..but we hardly ever snatched the power back like we did in the OV10; constant full throttle to idle power changes were the norm in that environment. And the OV10 was so draggy even when clean...with the combat load we carried it was grossly underpowered...both weight and drag. 230G centerline external tank, two 19 rocket pods with HE 2 3/4 rockets, two 7 rocket pods with white phosphorous marking rockets, 2200 rounds 7.62 strafe. It was a dog and when the pilot pulled the power back with all that weight and drag and the props blanking part of the wing it would really come down. Even so, with the nose well down, the props and external stores acted like a drag brake and it would hang there in a 70-80 degree dive while the pilot lined up for his shot. Pretty nice plane; perfect for the mission.
I been bored ever since.
Sorry, got nostalgic again
 

ARP

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
309
Location
Darenth, Kent / England
Oh my goodness ARP... is that a Platz Sail-wing glider in your avatar??? It sure looks like one, except modified for a typical hang glider harness instead of the solid keel of the original. I built a free flight model of the Sail-wing (laminated curved balsa keel and all)and it flew reasonably well with a small electric setup.

WOW... I really hope someone built one of those and demonstrated the hand-control system !!! PLEASE tell us the story behind whatever that is in the avatar :)
A model of the Platz:- http://www.inter-ex.com/deutsch/interex18/bild303.htm

Original film of Platz glider unmanned flight:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LVtc8l3Z5o
 
Last edited:

Rockiedog2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
2,334
I'm already running towards it to scavenge instruments and parts. Insurance company has already written it off.

Altimeters don't grow on trees. Your choice of fire gods, doesn't need an altimeter. I need an altimeter.

What? Too soon?
ChopperGirl
why do you need an altimeter? just more weight on an U/L...
 

VAPORTRAIL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
150
Location
HUDSON, FL
Saw the link to a Goldwing ultralight kit for sale. I've always been intrigued by the design, but never have met anyone who has flown one. Also thinking about Rockeydog2's comments about how the OV-10 Bronco flew, especially the effect that the propellers have on lift when power is reduced.

This thread is intended to be one where anyone can ask, "How does a bug-smasher fly?"

So, how does a Goldwing ultralight fly?

Thanks,


BJC
Where is the link you saw? Would like to check it out. Had one since 1986. Haven't flown it lately , it is hanging up in my workshop with the engine removed.

Very easy to fly, a bit touchy in pitch. You are truly out in the wind from the chest up without any rollover protection though. I have a floor in mine, but some were open on the bottom and had "Flintstone" brakes. Not much rudder authority, the verticals have outboard drag rudders with bungie returns.

Fixed incidence of canard is changed with shims (washers) on the 4 though-bolts that hold it on. CG needs to be right on. Have to point it down to descend, it has ALOT of wing and likes to float. 30HP Cuyuna 430R and 3 blade Ultraprop will top 80 if you aren't paying attention. But still lands a tick under 30.

The first few (about 20 if I recall) had a questionable main spar and some early failures. The newer spar fixed that.

I agree with the picture looking staged. You would have to work at holding it in a "mush" for it to drop in and make contact in that attitude and snap the nose straight down.

Met Mr. Catto at Oshkosh a couple of years ago, He almost fell over when I told him I am a Goldwing owner and loved his design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BJC

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
11,217
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
Thanks Vaportrail. That is the kind of information that I was looking for. I had forgotten about the early spar problem.

The link was in the thread that lists airplanes for sale on eBay.


BJC
 

Mark Z

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Messages
623
Location
Granbury, Texas USA 0TX0
I had a friend back in he early '80s building a Goldwing and got cold feet as everyone who flew one had problems keeping them from breaking something every time they tried to fly. I think the gear was the first issue that needed attention. He never flew his and think he sold in his early stages of cutting and glassing foam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BJC

don january

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
2,805
Location
Midwest
I'm already running towards it to scavenge instruments and parts. Insurance company has already written it off.

Altimeters don't grow on trees. Your choice of fire gods, doesn't need an altimeter. I need an altimeter.

What? Too soon?
No not too soon. never too soon to find part's
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
11,217
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
Time to comment on the much-maligned C150 / C152. Commenting here so as not to hijack the threads where the Cessna has been referred to as boring, etc.

No flight in any airplane needs to be boring if the pilot takes the opportunity to fly with maximum precision and maximum accuracy while maneuvering to the corners of the envelope and flying with the controls at the stop. No, it is not a glider, unless you make it one, no it is not a fast cross country airplane, but it is infinitely better than not flying anything, and no, not even the Aerobats are very aerobatic, but they do better than thousands of others.

CR has this in his signature line:
Quote Originally Posted by BoKu
The vast majority of engineering failures are the results of failure of imagination rather than failure of calculation.
To extrapolate from BoKu's fine statement: The vast majority of boring flights are the results of failures of imagination than a shortcoming of the airplane.


BJC
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
7,406
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
Agreed for the most part, I have a reasonable amount of fun and adventure in an old 1956 C-172 with a whopping 145 HP. The only thing I don't do routinely or purposefully is throw the controls over to the stop at anything other than slow speeds. 60 year old airframe, parts of which have never been seen since Eisenhower was in office.

I took the rear seat out (30+ pounds), installed some experimental !*#&$%^% REDACTED (#*%% in order to increase control authority at low speed, and I have a lot of fun doing STOL off-airport landings on dirt roads and dry lake beds in the desert. Nap of the Earth flying, terrain following, and looking around for challenging places to land. No reason whatsoever you couldn't do the same with a 150/152, just a little different performance numbers.

In keeping with BJC's comment, I humbly advise all y'all to read "The Dream Fly-In", a short story by Richard Bach. If this title goes with the story I'm thinking of, it centers around a gathering of pilots with "normal" GA airplanes who compete against each other in flying these otherwise modest airplanes with precision and panache.
 

Wayne

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
432
Location
Chicago, IL
Time to comment on the much-maligned C150 / C152. Commenting here so as not to hijack the threads where the Cessna has been referred to as boring, etc.

No flight in any airplane needs to be boring if the pilot takes the opportunity to fly with maximum precision and maximum accuracy while maneuvering to the corners of the envelope and flying with the controls at the stop. No, it is not a glider, unless you make it one, no it is not a fast cross country airplane, but it is infinitely better than not flying anything, and no, not even the Aerobats are very aerobatic, but they do better than thousands of others.

CR has this in his signature line:


To extrapolate from BoKu's fine statement: The vast majority of boring flights are the results of failures of imagination than a shortcoming of the airplane.


BJC
I LOVE the C150 and C152 and while they are boring to some they are ride giving machines par excellence to me. I love flying people in them - ours didn't even have a GPS.
It helps I'm only 5'4" tall so I fit nicely, but regardless I have never had a ridealong that didn't have a huge grin on their face when we landed. On second thoughts maybe they are so happy to be back safely on the ground - LOL!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BJC

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,110
Location
Orange County, California
... No flight in any airplane needs to be boring if the pilot takes the opportunity to fly with maximum precision and maximum accuracy while maneuvering to the corners of the envelope and flying with the controls at the stop. ...
I was one of the people making the "boring" comment, but if you'll read my post, I specifically said aerobatics (however 'mild' or 'extreme') are a completely different thing. What I was talking about is the type of flying where getting from waypoint A to waypoint B at precisely the predicted amount of time, and making sure that one's pattern speed and altitude are exactly the POH (or otherwise desired) values. In other words, someone who is driving the values of the instruments to precisely desired values by means of manipulating the controls of the aircraft and, beyond getting to Point B, that's the entire goal of their flight. Not flying the airplane, just making sure the "numbers" are precise and correct. Sorry, that's a snooze-fest for me. I can do that with my thermostat at home, and it's about as exciting to me.

What I was talking about is the kind of flying, and something like a C-150 or C-172 is very frequently used for that kind of "flying." No aspersions against the airplane (excepting the thrice-danged flap system on a 150, may it rust and fall out of the airplane as quickly as possible).

... but it is infinitely better than not flying anything...
Couldn't agree more on that score.
 

Rockiedog2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
2,334
I instructed in 150s for a while and always had respect for it. It was as honest as any plane I ever flew; reliable, tough, low maintenance, decent speed...only thing was it was too small inside and it was a ground lover with 2 up in the summertime. We had a personal one for quite a while; taught my wife to fly in it(not recommended) and a couple other friends(Wilbur and Jackie) who were partners in it with us. We had a great time except for teaching my wife. But they were all 3 kinda old and they broke me of teaching. Three old pre solo students at once was a little much for me. But the little plane didn't mind at all it loved abuse. I liked to fly it down final in still air with full flaps at 45 IAS and bang it down on the very end of the runway with the brakes locked. Man it would stop short...bout a 100 feet I'd say. I like to tell the 150 story about ol Wilbur who was a big hearted Ichabod Crane type that was terrified of stalls not to mention spins. So one day I mentioned we oughta do a spin entry/recovery so he would know what to do and he started sweating and trembling. So we watered it down to me doing the very early entry and recovery with him observing. He didn't like it but agreed he should at least see that. So we go up and do the abbreviated entry and when it broke and snapped into the entry(the 150 loved to spin) ol Wilbur screamed like a woman and thrashed with his long arms and tore the headliner clean out of our 150. He was all to pieces. End of spin entry demos. LOL. There was another 150 story about mischevious 10 year old son and our young cat...son got the idea of taking Tigger for a ride in the 150 so we saddled up and took off. Tigger liked it and was was peering over the window sill from son's lap. So he puts Tigger up on top of the glare shield in the wrap around panoramic windshield and says "do a spin", grinning from ear to ear. OK so we do...and Tigger plastered himself flat on top of the glare shield gripping the thin glued on fabric and spitting and showing his teeth for as long as he could stand it then about the 2nd turn launched himself like a rocket ship between son and I and into the long baggage compartment...then jumps up on the seat back between us with what looked like a big grin on his face. A fun Sunday afternoon 150 ride...Tigger was always ready to go again but we didn't spin him anymore. LOL.
150s and dogs, cats and kids are the best kind of fun.
 

Kevin N

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2015
Messages
819
Location
Your Moms basement
Pazmany PL-4A.

Anyone here built and or flown one?

Tell me about it.

Thanks,


BJC
I know nothing about the PL4. Have you read the write up in may 2013 Experimenter ? I saw it in the EAA archives. (I don't know how to post links) Way back in my youth one of our local guys built a PL2. He always raved about Pazmany's engineering prowess, and the ability to make everything over complicated to build.
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
11,217
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
I know nothing about the PL4. Have you read the write up in may 2013 Experimenter ? I saw it in the EAA archives. (I don't know how to post links) Way back in my youth one of our local guys built a PL2. He always raved about Pazmany's engineering prowess, and the ability to make everything over complicated to build.
Yes, my hats off to those who built a PL-1 or -2 wing; way too complex. I like the concept of the -4, though; VW engine, all metal, pulled rivets, big enough cockpit for real size people. Don't care for the T-tail. Looks heavy. IIRC, it used a PSRU and swung a large diameter prop. Hopefully, someone here has flown or built one, and will share his assessment with us.

Steve probably likes having all the fuel in the PL-1 and -2 in wing tip tanks. Not good if you like to maneuver or do aerobatics. Where are you, Steve?


BJC
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
11,217
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
Paging Ron W:

The Fly Baby Biplane has been mentioned in another thread. I have heard comments about how it flies compared to the monoplane version, but would appreciate a first-hand report. Can you tell us how the biplane flies, and contrast it to the monoplane?

Thanks,


BJC
 
Top