Lifting body + prone position ?

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,097
Location
Orange County, California
Did it ever fly..?
From Aerofiles:

"Pea Pod 1963 = 1pCmwM canard; 35hp Kiekhaefer O-4-35 mounted inside the vertical fin; span: 8'0" length: 9'0" load: 220# v (est): 132/115/55 range (est): 350. This odd ship might best be described as a flying barn door with its angular wing of 1.6 aspect ratio. The pilot had a prone position, with most of his body inside the wing. The plane could be carried atop the family auto. Taxi tests were performed, but it reportedly never flew. POP: 1 [N10T]."
 

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,097
Location
Orange County, California
Did it ever fly..?
From Aerofiles:

Pea Pod 1963 = 1pCmwM canard; 35hp Kiekhaefer O-4-35 mounted inside the vertical fin; span: 8'0" length: 9'0" load: 220# v (est): 132/115/55 range (est): 350. This odd ship might best be described as a flying barn door with its angular wing of 1.6 aspect ratio. The pilot had a prone position, with most of his body inside the wing. The plane could be carried atop the family auto. Taxi tests were performed, but it reportedly never flew. POP: 1 [N10T].
As I recall, this was an attempt at "The World's Smallest Airplane".
 

Retroflyer_S

Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
411
Location
Michigan
From Aerofiles:

"Pea Pod 1963 = 1pCmwM canard; 35hp Kiekhaefer O-4-35 mounted inside the vertical fin; span: 8'0" length: 9'0" load: 220# v (est): 132/115/55 range (est): 350. This odd ship might best be described as a flying barn door with its angular wing of 1.6 aspect ratio. The pilot had a prone position, with most of his body inside the wing. The plane could be carried atop the family auto. Taxi tests were performed, but it reportedly never flew. POP: 1 [N10T]."
Looks like a canard configuration to me.
 

DangerZone

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
2,110
Location
Zagreb HR
It seems to be a direct decendant from Vincent Burnelli ideas.
Well, at least the O'Neill PeaPod taxied on a runway, this one does not seem to have done even that.

Are there any wingbody canards that actually flew in the last 50 years or so..?
 

Retroflyer_S

Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
411
Location
Michigan
Well, at least the O'Neill PeaPod taxied on a runway, this one does not seem to have done even that.

Are there any wingbody canards that actually flew in the last 50 years or so..?

Hello DangerZone there in Zagreb !

Your keen and respectfull observations warm my old heart.

BTW: What is a this one ?
 

DangerZone

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
2,110
Location
Zagreb HR
Hello DangerZone there in Zagreb !

Your keen and respectfull observations warm my old heart.

BTW: What is a this one ?
Hello, Retroflyer.

Which one? I can't see any picture after those last lines.

What I meant is that there were canards in the past like the PeaPod, Homo Avis and a few others but they never flew well and some never flew at all. Felix Baumgartner, Yves Rossy and a few other successfull flyers of the new millenium use a conventional wingbody while most wingsuits are canards. Thus my question was whether there were any good wingbody CANARDS in the new millenium?
 

Retroflyer_S

Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
411
Location
Michigan
Hello, Retroflyer.

Which one? I can't see any picture after those last lines.

What I meant is that there were canards in the past like the PeaPod, Homo Avis and a few others but they never flew well and some never flew at all. Felix Baumgartner, Yves Rossy and a few other successfull flyers of the new millenium use a conventional wingbody while most wingsuits are canards. Thus my question was whether there were any good wingbody CANARDS in the new millenium?
I don't know of but there was the Moonbat XP-67 for lifting body.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ks8mqgKEjpo

Miles 30 x was the first airliner proposal.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Doggzilla

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
2,286
Location
Everywhere USA
Otto Lilienthal would be proud. He made a little hill and could glide in place from the updraft over it.

Thats the 19th century German guy that the Wright Brothers gave credit to.
 

Retroflyer_S

Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
411
Location
Michigan
It is almost insane how the aerodynamics also work in a 1/48 scale flying model that I did of my design with lifting body fuselage and prone position for the pilot.

I looks as if the scale speed is similar to trans sonic speed at least. I added a thin steel plate as a nose weight....and some spruce to stiffen / straighten the LE....and the speed and glide ratio doubled. I think I have an under wing turbulator, which causes this almost "sick" increase in perfomance.
 

Retroflyer_S

Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
411
Location
Michigan
Glad you're getting it flying,

Hopefully you can get something a little more upscale in a few months.

LuPi
I wish. I would ban all tube fuselage carriers after this experience...this is so amazing. Just the pressurization still bothers me.

I think I was able to do to the Vincent Burnelli idea of a lifting fuselage aeroplane what B-2 was to Jack Northrop.

I actually destroyed the model today accidently it was in the back of the car and a grocery bag rolled over it.

My daughter consolidated me saying let's fix it tomorrow....and we did whole afternoon today fixing for it for few indoor flights ( longest was 27 ft ).

The fuselage with wing is intact but the tail feathers were all broken into several pieces.
 

Retroflyer_S

Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
411
Location
Michigan
And that is precisely the reason why the Burnelli designs failed! :gig:
No Burnelli designs failed because they despite the crash safety were ugly and no one wanted to fly them except Slick ( Chalmers Hubert ) Goodlin.

I fixed it today and further flight test were made.

It is the safest ac for the fuselage part imaginable.

The intented 20 m spanning model would apparently have 50:1 glideratio.
 
2
Top