replica's other than p-51 p-40

[Rowdy Yates]

Not quite a warbird, but curious: Has anyone built a slightly scaled down Gee Bee? I remember hearing a guy was designing a 'lightweight' Gee Bee-ish bird for Rotax or VW power, but never heard much about it?
(Helped an elderly man out here with his Gee Bee Z replica. Put in a lot of work, but never got finished...)

Just to give an idea how my 'evil' mind works! (Not my build, but working on a similar - smaller - one in 1/72... )

 

[pylon500]

I guess that would be the Granville Brothers answer to the Boeing P26
As for scaling the GeeBee down, I find you get into a situation where the wing loading starts to go back up, and the aircraft start to become nasty little things like the WAR replica's.
Sometimes small isn't the answer, and when you look at the (original) Titan-51, it can still be light, but also impressive.
There was someone doing a slightly scaled Ryan STM, now I'm 6 foot, and have worked on a real STM, and I could barely fit in the back seat. Forget about getting in the front sear with the tank there...

 

[Riggerrob]

Not quite a warbird, but curious: Has anyone built a slightly scaled down Gee Bee? I remember hearing a guy was designing a 'lightweight' Gee Bee-ish bird for Rotax or VW power, but never heard much about it?
(Helped an elderly man out here with his Gee Bee Z replica. Put in a lot of work, but never got finished...)

Just to give an idea how my 'evil' mind works! View attachment 114560 (Not my build, but working on a similar - smaller - one... )

Rumor has it that the Granville Brothers sketched a military airplane - during the late 1930s - but it never got off the drawing board.

 

[mcrae0104]

Ultimately I respect their perspective but wouldn't follow the suggestion...

If our tiny little corner of the margin of the edge of the fringe of a hobby had any more exposure in the mainstream, displaying the stars & bars on a homebuilt would be under question too in today's world.

 

[Riggerrob]

If our tiny little corner of the margin of the edge of the fringe of a hobby had any more exposure in the mainstream, displaying the stars & bars on a homebuilt would be under question too in today's world.

Hah!
Hah!
Be careful not to offend antifa.
Those anti-fascists don't really have a clear political agenda, but they sure enjoy a good riot!
Ultimately, you want your airplane politically-boring enough that no-one vandalizes it.

 

[Mad MAC]

There is a half scale partailly finished walrus for sale in the UK.

 

[flitzerpilot]

post: 613840, member: 815"]
I guess that would be the Granville Brothers answer to the Boeing P26
As for scaling the GeeBee down, I find you get into a situation where the wing loading starts to go back up, and the aircraft start to become nasty little things like the WAR replicas.
.........
When you remove the wing fairing and examine the span-to-length ratio of, say, a GeeBee Z, it's perfectly normal, given the tail volume and the pretty static CP of the M6. I did begin drafting a plan view of an accurate, scaled GeeBee Z (my favourite) spanning some 20' and I was considering a Verner or a big-ish flat twin, The availability of a Rotec R2800 makes it even more viable with the additional weight of the Rotec. My version was well adapted to people taller than myself, (5'7" and shrinking) but I already have too many projects.

I'd be more inclined though to use an airfoil with a more aft-located CP for improved stability at Vc, and accept associated trim changes when manoeuvring. That works well with the Flitzer series, which some regard as short-coupled. With small control movements in pitch these aeroplanes are well-damped, which would be an important consideration with a GeeBee, also heavy-ing up the elevator aerodynamically could be a useful mod., ie thickening the trailing edge as a small wedge-shaped section.

 

[Riggerrob]

There is a half scale partailly finished walrus for sale in the UK.

Sounds fascinating!
Just the other day, I was ruminating on modifying a Super Petrel kitplane to resamble a Walrus, but decided that Petrels are too perfect to modify.

OTOH mating a set of DH Tiger Moth wings to a Volmer Sportsman hull and a Rotec or Verner radial would also look like a Walrus.
Doodling ... doodling ....

 

[Rowdy Yates]

Yep! Can see Jimmy Doolittle, or maybe Wild Bill Kelso flying it!

And yep, wing loading *may* be an issue with the R2. I'd be more concerned with stability?

As for the STM Replica, I think I know the one you're talking about? Wasn't there a company selling a fuul size STM kit?

I guess that would be the Granville Brothers answer to the Boeing P26
As for scaling the GeeBee down, I find you get into a situation where the wing loading starts to go back up, and the aircraft start to become nasty little things like the WAR replica's.
Sometimes small isn't the answer, and when you look at the (original) Titan-51, it can still be light, but also impressive.
There was someone doing a slightly scaled Ryan STM, now I'm 6 foot, and have worked on a real STM, and I could barely fit in the back seat. Forget about getting in the front sear with the tank there...

 

[flitzerpilot]

I think that Walrus used Currie Wot wing panels and it also had a 90 hp. 5-cylinder Salmson 5A radial engine, one of perhaps only two ever imported into the UK.

Oddly enough I had the other Salmson, a 5AQ, around which I had designed my first aerobatic biplane, the KFZ-1 Tigerfalk, a cross between a Jungmeister and a Great Lakes. Later I parted (reluctantly) with the Salmson to keep a Sopwith Pup airworthy after its Le Rhone kept throwing pots, even though a 90 hp radial is nowhere as torquey as a similarly-rated rotary. My late brother, Neil, had carried out all the testing on the restored Pup, now exhibited in the RAF Museum, Cosford, so the pressure to release the engine, by the owner, was considerable - as a flying memorial to Neil.

Eventually I gave the Tigerfalk away as by then I was deep into Flitzer developments, which started as simple, modestly-powered sports planes, the complete antithesis of the more complex, fully aerobatic Tigerfalk. The new owner meanwhile had tracked down the Walrus project I believe and acquired the 'other' Salmson. The aircraft, still only some 50% complete structurally, remains a project. Of course the Rotec and Verner radials, especially the 7U could make this a stellar performer. A 1/4 scale dynamic R/C model of this aircraft, built by the then World Champion Scale R/C modeller, Pete McDermott, demonstrated its aerobatic potential.

In his own words, 'It snaps like a Pitts: stalls like a Pussycat!' What's not to like?

 

[flitzerpilot]

Of course I was referring to the projected Tigerfalk's performance - not that of the Walrus! :0)

 

[Rowdy Yates]

I'd be interested in seeing how far you got with the plans?

When you remove the wing fairing and examine the span-to-length ratio of, say, a GeeBee Z, it's perfectly normal, given the tail volume and the pretty static CP of the M6. I did begin drafting a plan view of an accurate, scaled GeeBee Z (my favourite) spanning some 20' and I was considering a Verner or a big-ish flat twin, The availability of a Rotec R2800 makes it even more viable with the additional weight of the Rotec. My version was well adapted to people taller than myself, (5'7" and shrinking) but I already have too many projects.

I'd be more inclined though to use an airfoil with a more aft-located CP for improved stability at Vc, and accept associated trim changes when manoeuvring. That works well with the Flitzer series, which some regard as short-coupled. With small control movements in pitch these aeroplanes are well-damped, which would be an important consideration with a GeeBee, also heavy-ing up the elevator aerodynamically could be a useful mod., ie thickening the trailing edge as a small wedge-shaped section.

 

[Mad MAC]

Sounds fascinating!
Just the other day, I was ruminating on modifying a Super Petrel kitplane to resamble a Walrus, but decided that Petrels are too perfect to modify.

OTOH mating a set of DH Tiger Moth wings to a Volmer Sportsman hull and a Rotec or Verner radial would also look like a Walrus.
Doodling ... doodling ....

The a fore mentioned replica

Supermarine Walrus/Seagull

For Sale – Supermarine Walrus / Seagull Offered for Sale, a truly once in a lifetime chance to own your very own Supermarine Walrus. There are no flying examples of the Supermarine Walrus in the World, and only four non-flying Walruses remaining, three in Aircraft Museums and one aircraft in

milweb.net

 

[bifft]

For those of us interested in WWII Japanese aviation, Scale Bird Scott's P-36 wouldn't need many changes to make a great Ki-43 Hayabusa. Compare P-36 3-view to Ki-43 3-view. The wing planiform is pretty much the same. Drop the "fastback" fuselage down and put a bubble canopy on it and you'd be 90% there. Increase the tail feather aspect ratio a bit and I think you would get into the 98% or so range. About as good as you could do with scaled down and still fit a pilot in it.

As to putting a Japanese paint scheme on the plane, I did put a IJAAF inspired scheme on my RV-8A. Left off the hinomaru "meatball". Not because I was worried about the history (the hinomaru long pre and postdates the 1930-1945 atrocities period) but I didn't think an RV looked quite close enough. Based on talks with them when they were still alive I don't think my grandmother (brother died due to service in the pacific) or great uncle (spent Dec 41-Oct 45 in Japanese POW camps) would mind.

 

[ScaleBirdsScott]

Yeah! I'm all for a Ki-43/44 variant of the LiteFighter concept and agree it would be a straightforward mod. Also the Ki-61 Tony.

 

[flitzerpilot]

The GeeBee 7 started as a side view to determine pilot CG vs required a/c CG and wing CP to balance fore and aft with a relatively heavy motor. One could make some slight compromise visually with the actual cockpit location provided the nose was pushed forward to compensate, thereby appearing correct overall is side elevation.

I then drew the 1:8 plan view to see how the structure would work out, bearing in mind I was considering an all-wood replica, although the steel tube fuselage would have made more sense. It looked quite dramatic and from memory a 39" engine cowling was considered based on actual availability although 41" was more to scale. Something like a Verner 7U or a Rotec 3600 would be ideal, although a Rotec R2800 became available afterwards. I would prefer to leave a beautiful looking radial like the R2800 fully exposed, however, hence my reverting to one of my Flitzer biplane evolutions recently.

The GeeBee 7 plan view is a pencil drawing at the moment, but I will photograph it and enhance it to transmit it to the site shortly.

 

[Riggerrob]

The attachment says that the sub-scale Walrus designer started with 1930-vintage Comber Swift plans.
We are curious about empty weight, wing-loading, etc.

 

[nicknack]

Yeah! I'm all for a Ki-43/44 variant of the LiteFighter concept and agree it would be a straightforward mod. Also the Ki-61 Tony.

Cool!! with the Ki43.. one could also paint it in a couple of interesting schemes that look really nice

 

[Bill-Higdon]

Cool!! with the Ki43.. one could also paint it in a couple of interesting schemes that look really nice
View attachment 114643
View attachment 114644
View attachment 114645
View attachment 114646
View attachment 114647

How about the KI-61's brother the KI-100?

 

[PiperCruisin]

Maybe a Subsonex twin engine, move them up a bit, swap the V-tail for H-tail and voila, an A-10.