Discussion in 'Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology' started by cluttonfred, Oct 3, 2015.
Matthew, you are trying to get too much out of an old Fart :devious::devious:........
The guys in the tower must have been on their coffee break. :gig:
Motorcycles usually have excellent frontal visibility and most of these have a rather large nose volume and wings which obstruct the view. Are there aircraft like the Chinook 2 Plus but tricycle, aircraft that can seat two people? That would be a real flying motorcycle, it should be able to seat two people.
If you use an inverted inline two-cylinder engine the nose would still be as narrow as that of an actual motorcycle.
Here I tweaked that earlier cool pic into something flyable.
The engine fairing also protects the legs and you have everything mounted on the main structural beam running the length of the craft under the seat.
Needs about 2X the dihedral angle in the tail IMHO.
This would be a great application for an "H" tail, or one where extended tips to the horizontal stabilizer are "bent" upwards into vertical tails. Gets the vertical stabilizer area out from the turbulent flow field tumbling off the pilot.
A lot of the "motorcycle-ish" features are styling, not engineering requirements. That's easier to get away with in a land vehicle than an aircraft, where form normally follows function, with minor corporate styling cues (e.g. the rudder shape of a De Havilland, or Mooney, or Cessna). But for "aerial motorbike" performance, a Kolb Ultrastar flown by Homer Kolb:
Nothing against John Moody, but Homer IS the father of ultralights.
Yeah, I was too lazy to shop that part as well.
Anyhow, assuming we want it compact while keeping a reasonable landing speed, it looks like we're gonna have to limit the speed and use high-lift low-speed airfoils. The exposed pilot limits the speed anyhow, and thicker airfoils are easier to make structurally strong so I see that as a win-win within the constraints of the goal.
The little ultralight scooter in Post #85 is really awful cute. Obviously very close to the ZJ Viera or whatever that thing by Marek Ivanov is called. There is actually something there which could be built and flown successfully IMHO.
All that said, the smaller version of the Pou du Ciel, the HM.16, is a contender in this discussion too. A profile fuselage version about that (small) size with a motorcycle seat.
I know, I know... I know. Problems with the HM.16 and lots of bad reputation, stuff needs to be re-designed, I can hear Koen shouting that in my head.
The post #85 pic is looking good. But best of all I like her exposed boobs. Or is that just me?
Don't be lazy now - let's see it with decent tail feathers. I think it might be a winner...
However, as a motorcycle rider I would never ever buy a bike with a front wheel spinning in front of me, we usually like the rear wheel to be spinning behind us.
Thus the idea of a pusher like the Kolb in the video Dana posted and the 'original' picture of the ladybike seems better, at least to me. If you keep the original drawing, elongate the fuselage and install the wing high as on the Kolb, it could be a great little aircraft with little modifications to do.
Maybe something with this kind of layout but with a smaller fuselage..?
Here's some more motorbike-esque open air machines....
enough for now....
It doesn't need to look like handlebars, that was a leftover from when it was a flying (real) motorcycle. I can see that this style has been made and drawn by thousands of people for hundreds of years, but it hasn't caught on so I retract my proclamation to start manufacturing them =)
You could say that ZJ Viera is like the Vespa 150 motor scooter of motorcycles of the air. Have very many of those been built? If so maybe there is a possibility ...
Just stick a 80hp engine on it and make it chunkier looking.
If something like this stands a chance of becoming popular it's going to have to look real sharp and sexy, like a 1000cc superbike !! There already are a lot of tube and wire fuddy-dud machines and they are popular enough, you want to compete with their ranks, go ahead. My daddy told me there's less competition at the top though, and that means stylin'.
Of course styling is more limited for aircraft than cars, more in the past than now since auto makers are now concerned with efficiency.
Of course all the station wagon/span can aircraft can't do much about styling, nor would they hardly care about it either.
In composite you can do a lot with styling, including adding ridges, angles, 'fish gills', etc, and if careful, you can do it and hardly affect the drag. In addition, we are giving up a bunch of efficiency already by having an exposed pilot, which is for style, and with an 80hp engine you could stand to give up a bit more efficiency for the sake of additional styling. Everyone has their own particular focus. Engineers focus on making things more efficient to the nth degree. Master artists focus on make things that people lust after. What is this thread about?
so that's where I come in
It might be useful to back up and define just what we're striving for here. Any one of a number of ultralights would meed the specs in the first post. A few, like the ZJ Viera (except for its butt ugly motor mounting) or the FlyNano (despite the fact that it's vaporware), even sport modern visual styling, and you could put motorcycle handlebars (or a Concorde styled angled yoke).
So what's missing? Performance. Ride a sport bike at even a moderate speed (e.g. 50 mph) and you have the sensation of speed. It feels much faster than an airplane doing 300 knots, unless you're flying at ground level. And at the ultralight or LSA-class performance specified at the beginning, even in a low pass you're still just floating along. People looking for the head rush of speed, or the kick-in-the-ass acceleration of a powerful motorcycle, just aren't going to get it in any airplane slow enough for open seating to be comfortable.
I rode in an open air ultralight... was impressed by the force of the wind. Its much more like riding a motorcycle than you would think.
Oh all right. Razafrazzin' picky audience...
The boobs aren't exposed. She's wearing a yellow safety thingy over the chest of her flight suit. It just stands out because she's busty.
anyhow, I did the H-tail as recommended to keep the rudders in clean air. I felt the "V" of the elevator was shallow enough to leave alone and it helps keep the rudders clear of the ground.
A pusher prop suffers a bit from eating the disrupted airflow from the fuselage unless great care is taken. With the additional turbulence from the exposed rider it would suffer a lot of lost thrust.
Oh all right. Razafrazzin' picky audience...
The boobs aren't exposed. She's wearing a yellow safety thingy over the chest of her flight suit. It just stands out because she's busty.[/QUOTE]
That / those is / are a " Mae West," in both senses of the term.
Separate names with a comma.