# Scrappy’s Landing Gear Wings - Yay or Nay?

### Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

#### Rik-

##### Well-Known Member
How on earth has this thread drifted to a panel of "Mental Health Professionals" who are qualified to critique someone purely because the person being critiqued is more successful, more motivated and more determined than those who choose to critique him!!

Your critique says more about your own short comings than it does about Mike's success. Point blank, what the hell have your accomplished and how many years do you have invested in an uncompleted airplane project?

Mike works like I was taught, keep going and keep going as a quitter never completes anything.

#### Pops

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
I could say a lot, but it just doesn't deserve an answer. Pops

Added-- Think I'll just go mow some grass and count the grasshoppers.

#### Toobuilder

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Just an observation here, but as someone who is not "invested" in this discussion, some of you should take a break from the computer and go build something. If we are now discussing social norms and philosophy we have strayed a long way from the value of this forum.

And personality barbs aside, the man has the means to simply write a check and have the work done for him, yet does the vast majority of the work himself, owns his failures, and oh by the way, manages to run multiple successful business ventures.

Whether the delivery of the message meshes or clashes with our own sensibilities, this guy is the epitome of a "doer" and we should ALL give him credit for that.

JMHO

Last edited:

#### don january

##### Well-Known Member
Log Member
As one of the many arm chair critics that took the time away from my own build to watch the video on the CF wings for the Cubs gear I decided to give my opinion. First off they came out beautiful and I hope builder possibly has intent to make product available for other builders. That being said I think the wings would be way more work and cost then the gain you will get from them in flight. In STOL type mission they may be a plus depending on head wind and prop blast but I would be concerned of damage in ground effect also inspecting the internal tubing looks to be impossible. Like any add on to a aircraft time in flight and on the ground will be the true critic .

#### stansusman

##### Member
I read this as it was titled Scrappy's strut /wings. but what I'm seeing is a waste of electrons.
1 guys thoughts.

HBA Supporter

#### TFF

##### Well-Known Member
$2000 a tire. They don’t last long if run on a runway. 4K in tires, probably another$2000 in brakes. What do you think custom valved shocks times 4 cost. Fancy machining. Heck, the fancy carbon is probably the cheapest part.

I see why he wants an airboat style prop. He needs clearance. His plan is to do a zero airspeed stall on the landing , has to be. Probably will zero thrust the prop over zone. I think he is going to want to hit big rocks just because. He might need the Beaver load tires if he is going to slam into stuff.

#### don january

##### Well-Known Member
Log Member
I'm seeing Mike come in on a river out crop and the tires will bounce along just fine but I also see water blasting up against the wings off the landing gear. Shouldn't effect much but sure hard on surface of wing if there is a stick or rock that got shot up ??

#### daveklingler

##### Well-Known Member
I could say a lot, but it just doesn't deserve an answer. Pops

Added-- Think I'll just go mow some grass and count the grasshoppers.
Back to work!!!

(Sorry, Pops! Should have resisted...)

#### TarDevil

##### Well-Known Member
How on earth has this thread drifted to a panel of "Mental Health Professionals" who are qualified to critique someone purely because the person being critiqued is more successful, more motivated and more determined than those who choose to critique him!!

Your critique says more about your own short comings than it does about Mike's success. Point blank, what the hell have your accomplished and how many years do you have invested in an uncompleted airplane project?

Mike works like I was taught, keep going and keep going as a quitter never completes anything.
Well, kiss my grits! For once I agree with you!

#### daveklingler

##### Well-Known Member
By the way, I realized the other day that Mike's been working on the Scrappy build nights and weekends for about a year. I suspect he's trying to keep up with his brother, who started at the same time and is building a completely conventional Carbon Cub with an IO-540.

They're both intending to compete against Steve Henry in the STOL contests, which Steve is dominating right now with Mike's heavily-modified Wilga sitting in a heap somewhere.

Mike managed to position his 500+-HP Lycoming 8-cylinder in such a way that his feet go under it, and he services the aft end by removing the control panel. He says his fuel burn at cruise won't be much different than anyone else's Carbon Cub. Should be a loud cockpit...

#### Little Scrapper

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Mike seems to be a positive force in aviation and that’s something we need. He certainly captures people’s attention and his positive emotion is contagious for the people who love to watch videos of other people working.

Just so you all know, Mike is a author and authored a book on ADHD that he was diagnosed with. ADHD people are extreme high in emotion and have trouble regulating it. There’s also defined personality types in humans. Mike scores high in extroversion, scores high in positive emotion, scores high openness and scores high in industriousness and consciousness. That is his personality and that is what makes him a unique human like everyone else.

Personality traits are extremely difficult to change, it’s in your DNA. Some people are born with high negative emotion, score low in openness and extroversion and low in industriousness. That’s a literal hell for some people. Emotion causes trouble in these people.

Regardless. I’m friends with a personal friend of Mike’s. I know that doesn’t make me much but I had a good conversation about Mike and was told first he is a incredibly good person, very giving and very genuine. He also works around the clock. The world needs more people like him. He’s a positive force in a very negative and cynical world.

I can’t help but like the guy but also understand why some don’t like his videos. Personality types either match or they don’t. It’s ok not to like him, nothing wrong that. His videos are high in emotion. I don’t follow or watch his videos but have watched a couple.

I admire him for 1 reason. His industriousness and how he gets things done. I just don’t understand it. Like him I own a business. I am married and I have kids and also love aviation. I work at all these things 7 days a week and I wake up at 4:30/5:00 and go to bed late all 7 days. I feel I’m very efficient and very fast and here I am, not yet done and flying. It’s mind blowing how he gets so much done. I personally can’t squeeze more time out of my day unless I push my wife and kids out of my life and there’s no way I’m gonna do that.

My guess is he puts most of his effort in aviation and other things in his life suffer as a result. Life is like that, it’s always a compromise it seems.

Either way I hope he succeeds because aviation needs more doers and less watchers. He seems to be a positive force regardless of his personality trait.

Last edited:

#### REVAN

##### Well-Known Member
To me, the gear on Scrappy is overkill. But, then I think that is kinda the point. Mike's Draco and now Scrappy, are what I would characterize as Monster Planes. These two planes are to airshows, what the Big Foot trucks back in 1984, were to the tractor pull. It isn't supposed to be practical or a diverse mission balanced design. It is intended to be a bit ludicrous and really good at something, though be that something of extremely limited practical use.

While I have limited interest in the finished plane, I find the build process interesting and informative. I'm an aerospace engineer and I want to design and build my own plane. Instead of gaining build experience by first building a kit plane, I have elected to go simple (for the aircraft) and work on an ultralight project from the ground up. The problem is, college taught me how to design airplanes, but didn't teach me anything about how to build them. So, making my first project a ground up aircraft that has no support or help center behind it may be somewhat unwise from a building experience standpoint. However, watching how someone experienced makes stuff can be a big help for ideas and basic confidence building.

Personally, I'd like to have a fraction of Mike's energy depicted in his videos. I often wonder how many people he has working along side and off camera. It seems he gets more done than is humanly possible, so I'm inclined to think it is a bit of a show with selective editing to keep things fast paced. But then, maybe I'm just slow and a bit jealous.

I hope that Mike goes outside the box when it comes to the wing design and does something more modern than a basic Hershey-Bar wing with slats or slots. This would be a good plane on which to incorporate a nice raked wingtip for better performance.

#### trimtab

##### Well-Known Member
Again, he has a bit of help. Nothing close to what is imagined by naysayers. I hate to put it this way, so I'll say it once.

He's the real deal. Naysayers are massively projecting their own incredulity. It's remarkable to hear criticisms and dispersions knowing this about him. Few people know people know or have met a person like him- they are too busy and focused on their stuff to even know you are there much of the time, so they tend to be hermits. He's a consumate doer. Comments about him here are simar to other places as well, and they are a hilarious window on the projections of the writer.

Said it. No more.

In terms of his project, there are deep compromised that are far from the choices most might make in his approach, and certainly wouldn't be mine. The reasons for the gear design will become evident and will still likely seem overwrought. His goal is clear in pursuing full power landings and takeoffs with a blown surface, using actuators and a four bar mechanism to effect it.

The slipstream velocity from the engine producing full power with the given prop diameter and a reasonable prop curve is around 130-142 mph. Do the math. It's significant, especially when the direction of the thrust vector (maybe 1600# at perhaps 20 degrees or more up) is taken into account...

its anyone's guess how this will turn out. I think it will be successful in several fronts even if it has some potential gotchas.

Last edited:

#### bifft

##### Well-Known Member
I doubt he'll get much lift out of those little wings, with the shocks coming out of the top like spoilers. But it will probably be more than 0, and a wing isn't a bad fairing.

Regarding his personality, he is local to me and I've met him at some EAA chapter meetings. Lots more laid back in person. (or maybe that was his brother)

#### Victor Bravo

##### Well-Known Member
Bellanca used airfoiled struts in the 30s. Why not turn a surface into something lifting?
Five or six years ago, I had the same thought. Make the struts on my old 172 into lifting surfaces! This was such genius, I couldn't believe nobody had figured it out. In the very best traditions of Ralph Kramden and Fred Flintstone, I was counting the millions already...

So I had someone cut "lifting airfoil" foam cores that were hollow and fit over the Cessna struts. The resulting airfoil shape took a 40% thick airfoil section (Cessna strut extrusion) and made it into a 20% lifting airfoil.

They covered the foam cores in nice smooth fiberglass sheet (G-10 or whatever the pretty thin stuff is). I figured out a way to attach them onto the strut with flush fasteners, not needing any holes or disturbance to the stock strut.

Took a moment to call the Lamborghini dealership, boys start building my supercar...

I had a fairly smart guy with an engineering degree fly with me in before and after configurations, on the same day, at the same airport, taking data points (so I could concentrate on flying smoothly).

My airfoil strut project reduced the rate of climb by about 150 feet a minute, and reduced the cruise speed by at least 15 MPH.

#### Tiger Tim

##### Well-Known Member
My airfoil strut project reduced the rate of climb by about 150 feet a minute, and reduced the cruise speed by at least 15 MPH.

#### TFF

##### Well-Known Member
In a 150, reducing top speed 15 is stall speed.

#### Victor Bravo

##### Well-Known Member
In a 150, reducing top speed 15 is stall speed.
This was a 1956 Cessna 172, not a 150. With two people and modest fuel aboard, the performance is actually pretty decent.

#### Pops

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
This was a 1956 Cessna 172, not a 150. With two people and modest fuel aboard, the performance is actually pretty decent.
Yes, not bad. My 1959 C-172 with full fuel and 2 people , I could go from 600' to 10K in 18 minutes. Have maybe 1500/1800 hrs of flying at 10k to 12k. Not stock, no paint, just one seat, and a very strong Cont-0-300 engine with a 76"x51" prop. Lots of hours with the doors off. Good work airplane. Very smooth engine for all the cameras.
Love the straight tail C-172's.