Modern day "motorcycle of the air" aircraft class?

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

erkki67

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2010
Messages
1,983
Location
Romont / Fribourg / Switzerland
The Rebell is for sure a hotrod I dlike to call my own, but the price tag doesn’t allow me to do so.

Another point is, it’s not sit on top, and the designer is not willing to build a one of a kind fuselage.
 

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,097
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
The Rebell is for sure a hotrod I dlike to call my own, but the price tag doesn’t allow me to do so.

Another point is, it’s not sit on top, and the designer is not willing to build a one of a kind fuselage.
Looks like a good candidate for a plans built or kit. Likely would have material source issues in the US requiring a redesign. And then there is the issue of making it FAR 103 legal. Oh well another great idea shot to he!!.
 

Sockmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Messages
1,827
Location
Flint, Mi, USA
Even simpler version of the flea broomstick.

Still two-axis, but using a Spratt wing setup instead of a moving rudder.
Fixed rudder plates on the rear wing tips give directional stability. They're also outside the pilot and prop tubulence, which is nice.
The flea's moving fore wing is already most of the way to being a spratt wing parts-wise. The wing just has to be made in left and right halves.
This way we have no control runs through the fuselage at all. Just a pair of pushrods coming off the stick straight to the wing. No moving bits aft of the pilot. The rear wing can easily be taken off in one piece, and the fore wing can be folded back just by unhooking the struts. Fuselage is still a single tube. Windshield is mounted on the center A-frame that supports the wing root.
I think we're at the limit of what we can shave off and still have a decent plane.
 

Aesquire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2014
Messages
2,402
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
Major drag penalty for the gap in the wing. Four tip vortices. Then there's the rear wing.

Ailerons and a solid center section would work better. Wing fold would be similar, but you would have gap covers to apply.

Otherwise, neat!

I'll let others argue rudder configuration.
 

Sockmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Messages
1,827
Location
Flint, Mi, USA
Major drag penalty for the gap in the wing. Four tip vortices. Then there's the rear wing.

Ailerons and a solid center section would work better. Wing fold would be similar, but you would have gap covers to apply.

Otherwise, neat!

I'll let others argue rudder configuration.
Noted. I'll eliminate the gap, but I think the spratt wing would have fewer parts than separate ailerons/flaperons.
 

Sockmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Messages
1,827
Location
Flint, Mi, USA
And fixed.

I'm not fussed about the shape of the rudders. They can be whatever shape works and is easy to do as they're non-moving.
So, how else can we simplify?
 

Sockmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Messages
1,827
Location
Flint, Mi, USA
You could find a way to remove the interference between the base of the strut and the pilot's leg...
The pilot's feet don't reach that far, and the nose faring is wide enough that his feet would be behind it.
Here you can see the pilot in relation to everything else in upright and reclined position.
 
Last edited:

erkki67

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2010
Messages
1,983
Location
Romont / Fribourg / Switzerland
5836A150-B3B7-42EC-B9E7-F99486518C0B.jpeg

Next thought would be the Payen wing of Fritz, with the engine where it is at this red bird without the t tail, and the pilot pod

Like on his yellow Ranger derivative:

1D0961DA-1528-4975-A37D-4EF01363C16B.jpeg

The whole bird built with a 3 section wing, folding down ears, otherwise cantilever type and a straight axle for the landing gear, like the Skypup or the Mignet HM14 flying Flea.

The over all wing span could be somewhere between 12 and 15’

With the engine installed at the wing leading edge, a big prop could be used.
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
7,285
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
It may be a little much for this mission and not enough for a different mission. How big is your aircraft ocmpared to the Pouchel? That's about the size and area I was guessing, perhaps built a little more robustly and perhaps not quite capable of Part 103 weight and stall speed.
 

Sockmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Messages
1,827
Location
Flint, Mi, USA
It may be a little much for this mission and not enough for a different mission. How big is your aircraft ocmpared to the Pouchel? That's about the size and area I was guessing, perhaps built a little more robustly and perhaps not quite capable of Part 103 weight and stall speed.
As shown it's wingspan is six meters and the overall length is just under five meters.
I was going for about the same size/weight/stall speed, only with fewer moving parts.
 
Last edited:
2
Top