• Welcome aboard HomebuiltAirplanes.com, your destination for connecting with a thriving community of more than 10,000 active members, all passionate about home-built aviation. Dive into our comprehensive repository of knowledge, exchange technical insights, arrange get-togethers, and trade aircrafts/parts with like-minded enthusiasts. Unearth a wide-ranging collection of general and kit plane aviation subjects, enriched with engaging imagery, in-depth technical manuals, and rare archives.

    For a nominal fee of $99.99/year or $12.99/month, you can immerse yourself in this dynamic community and unparalleled treasure-trove of aviation knowledge.

    Embark on your journey now!

    Click Here to Become a Premium Member and Experience Homebuilt Airplanes to the Fullest!

Rutan's Bommerang-like high altitude twin STOL concept?

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

gouxin

Active Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
39
Location
Chengdu, China
Hi everyone,

What's your thoughts on the conceptual design of a high altitude twin STOL airplane using the twin safety method of Rutan's bommerang? This airplane would be specifically used in Tibetan-like area for observation, search and rescue, supply and medivac. Like the old saying about bush flying:"Fly an hour or walk a week." so speed is the least concern of this airplane, but superior high altitude STOL performance would be the first priority. The performance requirement list would be like:
1. able to take off and land within 700 feet or 200 meters at 13000 feet or 4000 meters.
2. twin engine. Ignore the single and twin safety argument. When you fly at that altitude around that terrain, you want a twin. Single engine out controllability must be as good as possible. What about in-line push pull twin configuration compared with Rutan’s Boomerang?
3. three-person useful load capability.
4. 2.5 hour fuel capability is enough for the mission.
5. 100mph cruise speed is more than enough really, even 80mph is OK, considering you can only drive at 30mph on the ground--not in a direct route like in the air.
6. very tough landing gear.

We have this airplane dream because we believe all the people have the rights to have the convenience of air support no matter where he or she lives and how much he or she earns or which ethnic group he or she belongs to.
Please don’t recommend a turbine airplane model. We simply couldn’t afford to use it.

Thank you

Xin Gou
Chengdu, China
 
Back
Top