There really isn't an answer to that.Here is a question.... how difficult is it to insure a home built?
You are right VB, what I drew that day was me screwing around at work, I have been studying different designs, I have been giving thought to an elliptical wing with flaperons.... I know the stall characteristics run with the wing and start at the trailing edge. Using flaperons might off set that seeing that they are lower and in clean air. Might work.... I know the British put a slight twist in the spitfires wing I don't think it helped with stall speeds, but it did make the airplane shake a bit or did something to let the pilot know she was going to stall. Also I do t know what effect VG's would have on an elliptical wing.Arkan, even the world's best, most educated, most famous airplane designers usually start by putting a bunch of known components together, then they calculate and test and determine if and why and how any of those components need to be modified.
And like Senator Lloyd Bentsen said to Dan Quayle... Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.
So whatever the hell you do, start with a known, proven, predictable wing airfoil. The one you drew will not fly well at all, I'm sorry.
Designing an airplane as a mental exercise is a perfectly good pursuit, but it doesn't mean you also have to design a new airfoil, design new tires, design a new type of plastic for the windshield, design new bolts, etc.
Well could base my design off the Stinson, make the cab a little wider, lengthen the chord of the wings, if I built a tube chassis with chrome moly tubing, I could lighten the airplane considerably... something to be said for modern materials. I am thinking on using areomomentum engines. So building around that, and using the Stinson design or at least shape. I could be on to a winner. Maybe round the edges a bit to reduce some drag.... dunno, my ideas are all over the place right now I guess.Stinson 108 had 165hp Franklin engine ... underpowered ... they work well with more powerful engines around 220hp. There are STC's for bigger Franklin 220hp or Continental O-470. Trouble is heavier engine = less useful load and higher fuel consumption so less range. They look cool. You will have more fun in something else I think.
It’s unlikely that you’ll save weight by making a steel tube fuselage to replace a steel tube fuselage, but I’ve been wrong before.Well could base my design off the Stinson... if I built a tube chassis with chrome moly tubing, I could lighten the airplane considerably...
I don't know, the alloys we have today are way lighter than in 1947. Using the Stinson as a base design and incorporating modern build techniques and materials should produce a lighter aircraft at the end of the day.It’s unlikely that you’ll save weight by making a steel tube fuselage to replace a steel tube fuselage, but I’ve been wrong before.
Some glues with the carbon fiber corrode the aluminum, so chose carefully. Aluminum immediately bonds with oxygen when a fresh surface is exposed to air, this means the glue is attached to a oxide instead of pure aluminum weakening the bond. There are ways to minimize, less $, and ways to put a coating on the aluminum that is molecularly bonded and to glue to that, more $.I had a thought, would there be anything wrong with using carbon fiber for the wing ribs, having a chunk of aluminum precision cut for the outer shape. (Got this idea from Mike Patty's slat design). Then laser cut foam board and cover in the carbon material and use heavy weights to press it into the mold. This could produce a strong wing rib and be light on weight. Only problems I see are, from what I understand, carbon fiber interferes with radio communications?
I think airplane design in general is a trade-off. I look through everything I can get my hands on. I found a site with a lot of downloadable PDF's Plans for Everything - Aircraft PlansThe whole J-3 cub empty might way around 600lbs. It hadn't enough hp to do work wanted so more hp and more weight were added eventually we have 1400lb with mods and bells and whistles PA-18's. You can have a nice simple experimental cub clone no electric with 160hp engine for around 900lbs and 900lb useful load. It is the useful load/hp part that is important. The aircraft has to support the weight of the work you want to do and the hp drags it out of the bushes. There is not a free lunch here.