I think the wing would have to be lowered a bunch, or the gear legs would have to be really long.The plank is awesome. Would it work with Ercoupe style landing gear under each boom?
The booms are 84" apart.My plank would have booms less than 8ft wide for trailering. The fuel tanks would be in the center section. Pop on the wings outboard of the booms and go flying.
Maybe the 'B' Model could have "coupled rudders"It would be a modern pusher Ercoupe style of plane with coupled rudders too.
No, if you sketch it out it's only "couple of clicks away".Have I assumed that something is a couple of clicks away in SolidWorks that in reality represents a lot more effort than that?
Some discussion about mono vs bi gears here Europa Aircraft | Europa XS Monowheel OverviewInnovation is a nice thing. But innovation also knows less customers. Last year i walked between the lines of the airplanes and i only saw ONE airplane with a single central wheel. I think it was a Europe (name of model). Even if they are maybe better in performance (due to less weight and less drag), people will try to avoid them because they are not what they expected. Especially not in a classic looking airplane. If you go toooootally non-conventional then it might be that the special landing gear is not something people will as being the point why not to buy it. But ...the rest of the design might be. Beware! Innovation is not always good for your own wallet.
OK, point taken. Maybe this will clarify it...Here's a good analogy:
In order to draw the airplane you need just as much information as you'd need to build the airplane. Anything less than that and your asking me to design the airplane, ...then draw it.
I'm more than happy to convert "bar napkin" sketches into working drawings and CAD models (real drawings, not just the eye candy we've been playing with) but you gotta give me something to work with.
ie. It's completely impossible to make any sort of drawing based on this information.
"The angle on the rear of the main spar caps was envisioned to be 1/8 x 3/4 or 1/8 x 7/8 standard extrusion, to be determined. For this initial model, assume that the laminations on the front of the spar cap are 1/8 x 3/4 strips, with three of the strips at the root third of the wing, reduced to two strips at mid-span, reduced to one strip at the outer third of the span. Solid AN 470-4 size rivets go through all of these laminations, and through the chear web, and through the angle. For now, use .032 sheet metal for the shear web, which can perhaps be reduced later after the "real" calculations."
Like I said at the bottom of page 53 "Post your pencil sketches, if there's enough detail to work with we can whip up a solid model of it pretty quick."
The point is to get a reasonable start, and then adjust the aerodynamics. This is the method that worked for Rutan on dozens and dozens of his successful designs. And I'm starting with much less innovative or weird basic configuration layouts than he did. I'm a simple old model builder, and all of that prized knowledge is not necessarily "gold" on all full-size airplanes, but it is a good starting point on a low and slow airplane like this. Fritz, I'll bet you a bottle of Macallan that the final 'engineer-approved' version is less than 5-6% different (flying surface areas, tail moments, outlines, thicknesses) than my sketchesAnd I'll be happy to help you with the real CAD model (where the real drawings will come from) if you give me sketches with enough detail.
But if you haven't done any stress or aerodynamic work yet, what would be the point?