Miles Aircraft.

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
7,390
Location
World traveler
Beautiful renderings, thanks for sharing. I am a huge Miles fan and would love to see some replicas take to the skies. I do wonder, though, given the engine options out there, if a semi-scale design would be more practical. Something like the Hawk Major is quite a substantial aircraft (24 ft /7.32 m long, 33 ft/10.06 m span, 169 ft2/15.70 m2 wing area, 1,150 lb/522 kg empty, 1,850 lb/840 kg, 200 hp/149 kW). Perhaps 7/8-scale version at about 2/3 the gross weight with 100 hp or so?

I've always thought that the Miles M.18 would make a great starting point for a modern design. The wings taper only slightly, so true constant-chord wings wouldn't ruin the looks, the spin-resistant tail is a plus, a canopy could be an option, and there is even historical precedent for tricycle gear!

1390097-large.jpg 1440662-large.jpg m18-1.jpg Miles-M18.jpg
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
7,427
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
OMG Bugsy those are incredible renderings!!! Looks like magic to those of us who still remember pencils and wooden rulers.

Now, one of the neatest little airplanes in the series was the Sparrowhawk racer, which I believe (Matthew correct me) was not much more than a small or cut-down version of the Hawk trainer with a larger racing engine in it.

The significance of the Sparrowhawk, specifically for discussion amongst the HBA group, is that it's a little larger than the Chilton Monoplane, but it was a bona fide sport/racer of the same ilk and of the same era. So the possibility of building a "mostly accurate" Sparrowhawk homebuilt re-pro for one of the inline auto conversions (Geo Raven, Honda Fit, et al) starts to look pretty interesting for those of us who are larger than the FAA/CAA thinks we are :)

The only thing that the Sparrowhawk needs to bring it into the modern era IMHO is the use of a thinner, more "normal" airfoil for the wing, and whatever small adjustments that would be required in tail sizing.

Perhaps the Sparrowhawk as the next Miles aircraft that you draw up...?
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
7,390
Location
World traveler
And after that, of course, a Sparrowjet conversion! See the link below for the rest of the story.

"A few details may prove interesting. The Sparrowhawk originally appeared in 1935 to form part of that year's King's Cup team. It was developed very simply by Mrs. (Blossom) Miles and basically consisted of a standard Hawk-Major airframe, with two feet removed from the fuselage and the outer wings joined to it directly with the centre section omitted. It was converted from a two- to a single-seater and the normal Gipsy-Major I engine (still the sturdiest and most reliable light power unit in the world) gave way to a special high-compression version. The top speed then was not far short of 180 m.p.h.'

Source: https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article/march-1954/17/some-notes-private-and-sporting-flying
 

Bugsy

Active Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2012
Messages
25
Location
Melbourne Australia
Cluttonfred and Victor Bravo Thanks! they have taken some time to do and they are not quite finished yet!

For what are essentially 2 and three seat aircraft they are quite large. the Falcon which i am most familiar with has a large wing but still has reasonably cramped cockpit . Being a slightly bigger fellow myself i dont think you could scale it down to much without it being uncomfortable. Structurally they are not too complicated....very similar to the Chilton which i have a copy of the plans for. Scaling them down should be pretty straight forward if necessary.

It started as an exercise in reverse engineering a classic design. The Falcon and Hawk wing uses a Clark Y airfoil section. I suspect the sparrow hawk and Hawk 6 use the same but cant confirm. Structurally the Hawk and the Falcon are very similar....The falcon is really a hawk with the fuselage and centre section widened. The Sparrow hawk was indeed a Hawk major with the wing Centre section shortened and the fuselage shortened by removing the forward cockpit area. I think most of these aircraft would be about 80 to 90 % compliant with modern standards...certainly in the important areas like stability and control and structural strength. They mostly fall short in areas like restraints, harnesses, brakes, lack of electrics and starter. Here is the Hawk Speed 6 which is the one i would like to build at some point...

Screenshot of MMILES! _ HAWK SPEED6 ASSY1.jpg

Screenshot of MMILES! _ HAWK SPEED6 ASSY1 (1).jpg

Screenshot of MILES HAWK 6 _ HAWK 6 ASSY2 (6).jpg

Screenshot of MILES HAWK 6 _ HAWK 6 ASSY2 (5).jpg

Screenshot of MILES HAWK 6 _ HAWK 6 ASSY2 (3).jpg

Screenshot of MILES HAWK 6 _ HAWK 6 ASSY2 (2).jpg

Screenshot (1).jpg

Screenshot of MILES HAWK 6 _ HAWK 6 ASSY2.jpg
 

fly2kads

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
1,625
Location
Justin, TX
The Taylor Titch G-MISS does a passable impersonation of a Sparrowhawk, if you squint a little:
https://abpic.co.uk/pictures/view/1189930

I think the whole series of low wing, wooden Miles aircraft are some of the most attractive aircraft ever made. Not quite up to the pinnacle of the DH Comet, but way up there. :)
 

Foundationer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2016
Messages
204
Location
London
These are great! The Miles Hawk Speed 6 is my favourite interwar aeroplane - used to see it flying around at the Shuttleworth collection with all the other beautiful old 30s racers.
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
7,390
Location
World traveler
The Taylor Titch G-MISS does a passable impersonation of a Sparrowhawk, if you squint a little:
https://abpic.co.uk/pictures/view/1189930
Not all Titches I've seen have that 1930s look, but that one certainly does with the high turtledeck, what must be a side-hinged canopy, and gear fairings that are suggestive of full "trousers." I suspect that builder was going for a Percival Mew Gull look, also a classic from the period and a style i love for a single-seater.

1189930-large.jpg Percival_Mew_Gull_in_flight.jpg
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
7,427
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
Bugsy you may be right, it may be a Clark Y, and I figured out why it looked a bit too thick to my eyes. Since the original Sparrowhawk used the outer sections of regular Hawk wings (bolted to the fuselage without the normal center section), this has the effect of making a lower overall aspect ratio wing. This becomes pretty evident when you look at the top view of the M.5 compared to the "regular" Hawk two seaters.

For those of us who are not already in the business of manufacturing Hawk wing sets, being able to take the outer panels off the shelf and creating a new racer (a few weeks before the King's Cup race, don't you know) is not part of the design process. So a modernized Sparrowhawk type homebuilt should by all rights have a significantly narrower wing chord... which would eliminate that "tree trunk" look that the original Sparrowhawk wing had.... because the root chord would be a lot less.

Although I have little or no formal education to base it on, I would probably use the 23012 instead of the flat-bottom section, simply because ithat move is known to work well as a performance upgrade with little downside (Cub > Taylorcraft). The designers and trained engineers here can correct me, but using nothing more than a gut feel, I'd say that a 15-18% reduction in main wing chord would deliver a little more sporty appearance and performance, with only a 10% increase in minimum takeoff/landing speed. Especially since the weight of the new airplane would likely be lower than the original by a good bit (using a smaller auto engine conversion like the Geo).

Essentially, in my strange mind this is roughly the process of splitting the difference between the Sparrowhawk and the Chilton.
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
7,390
Location
World traveler
Keep in mind that having the spar taper in thickness has definite structural benefits for a cantilever wing. Personally, I think that the thick Miles wings are part of their distinct personality. Here are two more nominations:

For a racy single-seater to build full-size, why not a fixed-gear Miles M.13 Hobby?

ac001166047.jpg 69919_800.jpg Hobby_3V.png

For a two-seater, I've always like the elegance of the M.11 Whitney Straight even more than the later, larger M.17 Monarch. Just imagine how a smaller, lighter version of the M.11 with a Lycoming four-cylinder or a Rotax 912 would stand out among all the RVs!

8606090003_a7aa353d8e_o.jpg 177576_big.jpg Miles-Whitney-Straight.jpg
 

BoKu

Pundit
HBA Supporter
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
2,625
Location
Western US
...a modernized Sparrowhawk type homebuilt should by all rights have a significantly narrower wing chord...
That certainly sounds right to me. These are beautiful renderings of some charming aircraft, but it puts my teeth on edge when I see the relatively low aspect ratios and taper ratios. With such a shallow taper, you get relatively little of the benefit, but all the aggravation of making tapered wing spars and different-sized ribs for every station.

The guys at Reno hot rod their Mustangs by reducing the wing area to the practical minimum. Unfortunately, the easiest way to do that is to cut chunks off of the end of the wing--and that reduces the aspect ratio and increases induced drag as it reduces wetted area and parasitic drag. Somewhere in there is a crossover point where the increase in induced drag under turning G wipes out the reduction in parasitic drag, and I think most (both, that is) of the competitive Unlimited racers are about there.

If there were some sort of magic saw that would reduce wing chord without disrupting the wing profile, the Unlimited guys would be all over it.

--Bob K.
 
Last edited:

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
11,231
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
If there were some sort of magic saw that would reduce wing chord without disrupting the wing profile, the Unlimited guys would be all over it.

--Bob K.
Seems that I have heard that someone is building carbon wings to replace 13.5 percent thick short span rectangular wings in sport class. Perhaps that same someone could find a sponsor / unlimited owner who would be willing to fund a carbon wing for a P-51.


BJC
 
Top