replica's other than p-51 p-40

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

raymondbird

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
145
Location
Belleville, Ontario Canada
I remember that Bf-109 replica, the gear collapsed after a landing. The builder got several enquiries regarding building plans or kits, but he decided that this particular plane does not lend itself well for a scaled down replica.
The gear is notoriously bad, and the cockpit is quite cramped even in the full-size version!
I beg to differ on the cockpit, I'm a medium sized man and fit in the exact scale 3/4 sized cockpit of my 3/4 MJ109 just fine. Maybe some people like "cramped" I guess. Would Michael Schumacher have won more races if he had more room? Or Erich Hartman more kills. Doubt it, but more comfortable maybe.
Landing gear is another story of course.
 

flitzerpilot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2017
Messages
294
Location
Hirwaun, Aberdare, S.Wales, UK.
Following on from the vivacious Skoda-Kaubas, I attach a side elevation of a modified proposal which I termed an SK 267 and was intended for a 130 hp. Continental flat-four, although other recent motors motor might serve.
Not unlike the Ikarus, the other type shown here is a modified Bisnovat SK2 with the cockpit moved forward to a more acceptable location, purely as a design exercise. The solo plan view shows an increase in wing area. Possibly an inclined Aeromomentum could work...
 

Attachments

BJC

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
14,957
Location
97FL, Florida, USA

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
9,337
Location
World traveler
Boeing P-26 "Peashooter" would get my vote for a fun replica project. The original's 9-cylinder Wasp is so big (more than 4' in diameter) that the fuselage is huge and gives you room to scale it down without the challenge of scaling down the pilot. ;-) 75% scale would give you a 21' span and 141 sq ft of wing area, about perfect for a low-powered sport plane, and there are all sorts of fun historical color schemes to choose from. Given the unreliability of small radial engine supplies, it would be fine to disguise a flat four in there instead.

640px-Peashooter.arp.750pix.jpg
 
Last edited:

Wanttaja

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
2,083
Location
Seattle, WA
Boeing P-26 "Peashooter" would get my vote for a fun replica project. The original's 9-cylinder Wasp is so big (more than 4' in diameter) that the fuselage is huge and gives you room to scale it down with the challenge of scaling down the pilot. ;-) 75% scale would give you a 21' span and 141 sq ft of wing area, about perfect for a low-powered sport plane, and there are all sorts of fun historical color schemes to choose from. Given the unreliability of small radial engine supplies, it would be fine to disguise a flat four in there instead.
There was a guy doing exactly that with a Fly Baby a few years back. Stringers on the fuselage to round it out, flat-four under a radial cowling.

1616460896715.png
Project was for sale a couple of years back, don't know what happened.

Ron Wanttaja
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
9,337
Location
World traveler
I prefer the radial engines of the Macchi C.200 Saetta and FIAT G.50 Freccia and both would make great sport planes at somewhat reduced scale, ditto the FIAT CR.32 and CR.42 biplanes as well. The issue comes down to whether or not you want to fly a plane that is associated with a Fascist regime and, if you want to sell plans or kits, whether or not that design will appeal to many others as well. I am a big fan of some Japanese WWII designs, especially the Tachikawa Ki-36, but I would likely not actually build a replica because of the association with the Japanese Empire.
c200.jpg g50.jpg cr42.jpg ki36.jpg
 
Last edited:

Wanttaja

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
2,083
Location
Seattle, WA
I prefer the radial engines of the Macchi C.200 Saetta and FIAT G.50 Freccia and both would make great sport planes at somewhat reduced scale, ditto the FIAT CR.32 and CR.42 biplanes as well. The issue comes down to whether or not you want to fly a plane that is associated with a Fascist regime and, if you want to sell plans or kits, whether or not that design will appeal to many others as well. I am a big fan of some Japanese WWII designs, especially the Tachikawa Ki-36, but I would likely not actually build a replica because of the association with the Japanese Empire.
I hear you, there. I think a Fly Baby would make a nice Mitsubishi A5M ("Claude") replica, especially with the pre-war paint schemes.

But, like you, would be a bit skittish about presenting it in public. One way around that would be to apply the US star-and-dot insignia over the hinomaru... with a label stating it represented a captured aircraft undergoing performance evaluation.

When Martin Caiden restored his JU-52, he replaced the swastika on the tail with an iron cross.

Ron Wanttaja
 

Riggerrob

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
2,605
Location
Canada
Yes, Martin Caiden was wise to not paint a swastika on his Junkers tri-motor. In many European countries it is illegal to display any Nazi regalia. Just last year, a pair of Korean tourists were jailed for making Nazi salutes in Berlin.
Scale model airplane competitors get around these laws by painting backwards swastikas or incomplete swastikas or just leaving that part of the rudder blank.
While I would love to build a B&V 141 replica, I would never paint swastikas on it because some of my relatives suffered in Nazi-occupied Denmark and Holland during WW2. Perhaps I will paint four question marks on the rudder???????
Yes, I know that Bhuddists, Estonians, Finns, native Americans, etc. used swastikas for many centuries before Nazis perverted the symbol.
 

flitzerpilot

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2017
Messages
294
Location
Hirwaun, Aberdare, S.Wales, UK.
Should consider one of the first Yakovlev design: the UT-1
Small radial aerobatic design with great looking open cockpit.
Nicolas
Some members here might recall that I had already designed a UT-1 some time ago. Initially this was intended for an in-line motor (Cirrus ll) as some examples were in-line powered, but a mocked-up radial around a flat-four was considered. It flew extremely well in X-Plane sim. at about 83% scale, but the advent of the Verner radials, specifically the 83 hp. Verner 5S makes such a replica a viable proposition now. My version was intended to have the wings built as two separate panels, for practicality, with the mainspar running straight span wise, taking advantage of the maximum foil depth. The forward main undercarriage leg would attach on a forward projecting mount ahead of the spar to mimic the original pick-up position as well as providing the correct wheel location ahead of CG

So many aeroplanes.....
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
10,679
Location
USA.
The SSSC is a 75% replica of a U.S. Airforce Cub after January 5, 1947. Replica Fighters mag did a little write up in the July 2011 issue, page 30.
 

Old Koreelah

Active Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2013
Messages
35
Location
Australia
I have a partly-built Mitsubishi A6M hanging up in my shed.

My favorite historic aircraft as a kid, the Zero was so superior to Allied opponents of its time, it’s said that without it Japan would never have attacked Britain and the US.

Years ago I decided a 75% replica would be a viable personal aircraft. It was to have been powered by a Diesel engine, to give it the sort of massive range which made the original so lethal.

I spent years on it, helped by conservators from the Australian War Memorial, who shared plans and design details they used to restore the Zero hanging in their Canberra museum.
Also had mobs of help from several of this country’s best designers and engineers.

Too many projects and other interests, too little time…
Now it gathers dust in my shed.

BA65BE15-DFE4-46D1-8C14-BA6EE9D095C1.jpeg
 

Riggerrob

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
2,605
Location
Canada
I have a partly-built Mitsubishi A6M hanging up in my shed.

My favorite historic aircraft as a kid, the Zero was so superior to Allied opponents of its time, it’s said that without it Japan would never have attacked Britain and the US.

Years ago I decided a 75% replica would be a viable personal aircraft. It was to have been powered by a Diesel engine, to give it the sort of massive range which made the original so lethal.

I spent years on it, helped by conservators from the Australian War Memorial, who shared plans and design details they used to restore the Zero hanging in their Canberra museum.
Also had mobs of help from several of this country’s best designers and engineers.

Too many projects and other interests, too little time…
Now it gathers dust in my shed.

View attachment 114472
War Aircraft Replicas sold plans for a 50 percent Zero back during the 1980s. Half scale proved tight for most North American pilots. They also had difficulty keeping weight close to that of prototypes, so most ditched VW engines (maximum 85 horsepower) in favour of 100 hp. Continental O-200s.
Half scale only seems to work for small pilots, so most practical replicas (of WW2 airplanes) end up between 65 and 85 percent.
 
Top