New threads and interesting conversations directly in your inbox. Sign up now and get a daily summary of the latest forum activities!
Discussion in 'Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology' started by lear999wa, Mar 31, 2013.
Wasn't it originally twin engine? And so the gull would be to get the props up high?
The bent up tips work as winglets, but are way simpler to design than winglets themselves (and slightly less efficient).
Winglets I can understand, but what about those whiskers off the trailing edge where the wing and winglet meet? Is there some aerodynamic voodoo happening here or is that a stylish clip to help hold the folded wing in place?
My guess is that it's a stylized version of a trailing edge extension on a fillet, sort of like what you see on a CRJ winglet fillet.
The upturned tips aren't designed to be winglets, they keep from dragging a tip in the water. And the root of the tip has a shark fin shaped flexible ski on the trailing edge to help prevent submersion.
The anhedral at the wing root section is so that the tips are a trailerable width after folding. Works great too and the wings fold and stow easily.
Thanks Harrisonaero, it's always neat to find out what all the unusual little bits are for.
I don't think these have been shared yet; a few photos with the wings folded, found on seaplane international.
What is the width, measured at the tips with the wings stowed?
not a fan of it a all - it just isn't sexy like other rutan designs. He sure likes to design planes that are only roomy for petite people.
You would be surprised how much room it has- he literally designed it around me... 6'8" 250#. Of course it's a super tight fit
Harrisonaero, I'm a habitual patent reader, does Burt have any patents on the systems for reading up on please?
I kind of lean this way myself. Twin hulls with a single row of seating each.
I too am not very convinced about Seagull, looks apart, the folded wings position will make for a nervous ride back..
ShockMonkey, here is what I've been toying with some time ago :
How sexy can you make a seaplane? It's pretty sexy, for a seaplane, in my opinion. The vast majority of seaplanes have large pontoons hanging down three feet under the cabin, attached by 8 or 10 tubes running back and forth at all angles. This airplane is way way smoother looking than that.
Well.. taste and colors... it's good not everyone agrees to the same
I think we're past 1920 now and we should find a way of reducing/removing the unnecessary additions that made an airplane into a waterplane.
This to me is sexy :
Has the same multi-surface requirements although I will concede it has not been built for long range (810nm max)
Still very interested in the Ski-gull development of course !
I think the folding wings were for docking purposes, not trailering. I could be wrong.
This is sexy to me:
[Edit: Upon further consideration, and choosing to avoid the wrath of our excellent moderators, I have elected not to post my idea of sexy.]
I know what you mean, but it is really just a point of view. To Rutan, functional is sexy. I've never known him to incorporate appearance into his design criteria... everything is done for a purpose.
I dont say this often, but I think Im in love.
Ive always respected Rutan, but this has got to be the first home built I would describe as "gorgeous". Although the Quickie was "cute".
Good video on Burt from OSH last year...
Separate names with a comma.