# Some fun vintage reading, light aircraft - Lympne trials...

Discussion in 'The light stuff area' started by WBNH, Sep 20, 2019.

### Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

1. Sep 20, 2019

### WBNH

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Oct 5, 2006
Messages:
305
81
Location:
Portsmouth, NH
Last edited: Sep 20, 2019
2. Sep 21, 2019

### BBerson

#### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter

Joined:
Dec 16, 2007
Messages:
12,033
2,346
Location:
Port Townsend WA
Several of Lympne designs are worth a closer look. I am fond of the Dehavilland DH-53

3. Sep 21, 2019

### Hephaestus

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 25, 2014
Messages:
1,175
255
Location:
YMM
Not to cast stones at my favorite maker of fine aircraft... And Ford cars hate me..

But the Ford flivver is the same yet nicer

4. Sep 21, 2019

### BBerson

#### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter

Joined:
Dec 16, 2007
Messages:
12,033
2,346
Location:
Port Townsend WA
The Ford Flivver wouldn't fly on the 690cc. that the DH-53 had. The DH-53 was the first practical Lightplane.

5. Sep 21, 2019

### Hephaestus

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 25, 2014
Messages:
1,175
255
Location:
YMM
I'll give you that.

But the Ford was prettier

And I'd look sexy in it with goggles and a long white scarf I'm sure!

6. Sep 21, 2019

### pictsidhe

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jul 15, 2014
Messages:
6,854
1,843
Location:
North Carolina
Of the Lympne aircraft, the Hawker Cygnet is my favourite. There is one survivor and several replicas in the UK. It was Sidney Camm's first design for Hawker. Upscaling 10-20% to take a modern pilot would be well worth looking into.

If someone were to arrange a modern Lympne, I would be really interested. Especially if one of the conditions was for entrants to be 103 legal...

Last edited: Sep 21, 2019
7. Sep 22, 2019

### BBerson

#### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter

Joined:
Dec 16, 2007
Messages:
12,033
2,346
Location:
Port Townsend WA
I think a centennial replay of the 1923 Lypmne Trials in 2023 would be a hoot. But I didn't get much interest in the idea at Airventure when I brought up the topic. I don't think they knew anything about it.

pictsidhe, Hephaestus and Topaz like this.
8. Sep 22, 2019

### plncraze

#### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter

Joined:
May 12, 2006
Messages:
1,592
332
An old Paul Poberezny story that Bob Whittier told in some article was that Poberezny asked the big three to do a folding wing design and they claimed they couldn't.

9. Sep 22, 2019

### Hephaestus

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 25, 2014
Messages:
1,175
255
Location:
YMM
2023 lympne without the British built rules... 1924 they used a specific engine didn't they - wasn't far off from that Briggs 810

Would just need prize money to throw out and a big Insurance policy lol

10. Sep 22, 2019

### BBerson

#### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter

Joined:
Dec 16, 2007
Messages:
12,033
2,346
Location:
Port Townsend WA
The 1923 original Lypmne engine rule was 750cc maximum. I think 1924 was for two seaters with bigger engine rules.

11. Sep 22, 2019

### Hephaestus

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 25, 2014
Messages:
1,175
255
Location:
YMM
Yeah 23 & 24 were 750cc/1100cc 26 was 170lbs.

It'd be great to do a modern version - but the insurance would be a killer. Chapter guys were talking an airshow, even that is insane $Prize money looks like 50-100k prizes. 2023 single seat electric 2024 2 seat Briggs 2026 2 seat electric? Must be a new design. Different classes, best l/d, timed courses, cafe style efficiency, speed and time to 10k? 12. Sep 22, 2019 ### BBerson ### BBerson #### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter Joined: Dec 16, 2007 Messages: 12,033 Likes Received: 2,346 Location: Port Townsend WA I think EAA should do it at Airventure 2023. They already have insurance. The Briggs 810 class would be single seat. 13. Sep 22, 2019 ### pictsidhe ### pictsidhe #### Well-Known Member Joined: Jul 15, 2014 Messages: 6,854 Likes Received: 1,843 Location: North Carolina Since none of us have the budget to sponsor this, how about a kickstarter? 50-100k prizes seems high. Though I'd happily compete for one! 103 makes it a lot more accessible to random crazy people on limited budgets (whistles innocently). It's not a big step up to LSA for a successful design concept. While someone could come in with a fully moulded composite class killer, a lowish prize and perhaps a budget limit would help keep the engineering accessible. Developing affordable recreational planes was the intent of Lympne, I think that that should stay the same. 14. Sep 22, 2019 ### jedi ### jedi #### Well-Known Member Joined: Aug 8, 2009 Messages: 1,776 Likes Received: 401 Location: Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA I do not think prize money is needed. A successful design will bring in the money on its own merits. Also, the design contest end date is an artificial constraint. What is needed is consensus on the design requirements. How many would agree on US part 103 legal, roadable, convert road to flight and/or flight to road with no parts left over in less than 7 minutes with a maximum road speed of not less than 25 mph. If electric, up to 30 pounds of batteries are included in the empty weight. Above 30 pounds of battery it is part of the useful load. Must be able to operate with 170 pound standard FAA pilot. 15. Sep 22, 2019 ### pictsidhe ### pictsidhe #### Well-Known Member Joined: Jul 15, 2014 Messages: 6,854 Likes Received: 1,843 Location: North Carolina Roadable 103? That's going to be an immense challenge that I for one wouldn't even attempt. Look at the all the roadable aircraft available for an idea of the challenges involved. No, no, that's tumbleweed! Simply trailerable (or truckable, like mine) seems like a good requirement. 7 minutes is tight for folding, loading onto a trailer and strapping down. It would be worth an informal chat with the FAA to see if they might give an extra 30lb of battery as useful load, these things need to be 103 legal. I'd include a bit more battery allowance in the EW, perhaps 50-60lb. Since 170lb pilots are becoming increasingly hard to find, 6'2" and 200lb or 220lb seems wiser. The last time I weighed <170lb, somebody asked if I'd been on holiday to Belsen. I'm 6'6"... My suggestions: 103 legal, safely flies with 6'2" 220lb pilot. Checked for 103 legality. Required. Trailerable or truck-able, folded width under 8' for all state legality. Meets all road laws. Required Documented sandbag test: Required Folding and loading for trailer/truck: sliding scale Trailering test. 500 miles. Anything falls off or needs repair, demerit. More would be better, but that starts getting tedious: Sliding scale Takeoff, climb, altitude, speed and landing tests: Sliding scale Flies at least 1000 miles in one week: sliding scale. Distance requirement reduced if weather intevenes. Economy and duration flights: sliding scale. Materials cost: sliding scale. It would be nice to have a build cost and time, but these will mostly be prototypes and would mostly rely on estimates, so this isn't going to be realistic. But the pile of parts you'd need to buy is the pile of parts you'd need to buy. BRS and other safety gear excluded from costs. These are expensive and should be entirely optional for the competition. Perhaps some allowance made for performance tests as they'll increase weight ~5% Judges free vote: sliding scale. Judges have X points to award on less defineable qualities. Good features, ankle breaker demerits, it's cool, etc. 16. Sep 22, 2019 ### Hephaestus ### Hephaestus #### Well-Known Member Joined: Jun 25, 2014 Messages: 1,175 Likes Received: 255 Location: YMM Lympne started as a way to push development post WW1... Which arguably could be beneficial today. The prize money would gain interest and probably some University teams. As well as some commercial projects. After all you get your investment returned if you're successful. I'd personally love to see the requirement to have plans released or be open source if you won prize$.

Don't go down the roadable route... But like the original - fold/removable wings make it through a gate or into a field gate like the original. Seems to be a common request - fit in a trailer.

Part 103 only applies to the USA. The rest of the world has much nicer and less restrictive ultralight/microlight rules. Would actually work to decrease involvement. LSA is closer to the world standards.

17. Sep 22, 2019

### mullacharjak

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Nov 5, 2010
Messages:
67
17
Location:
Peshawar Pakistan
What were the Lympne trails for.To kickstart civil aviation in UK. What should the modern Lympne trails strive to achieve?
I think to promote cheap, affordable and simple aircraft. No one who has anything to sell will be comfortable with that idea. So perhaps it would be an excercise by retired aviators to indulge in just for nostalgia and to become a part of aviation history.

18. Sep 22, 2019

### Hephaestus

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 25, 2014
Messages:
1,175
255
Location:
YMM
We haven't seen a ton of development since rutan / RAF got out... Millennials aren't into the 60s Wichita spam cans for training at 300\$/hr. People want to fly - but it's definitely turned into an elitist group, give them something new and cool and you'll get the uptake.

I think the electric power push could alone get the interest up, and push the FAA to adjust rules in that regard.

19. Sep 22, 2019

### BBerson

#### Well-Known MemberHBA Supporter

Joined:
Dec 16, 2007
Messages:
12,033
2,346
Location:
Port Townsend WA
The Lympne winner was for most miles per gallon. (87.5 mpg was the best). The result was impractical long span one offs. I suppose the Daily Mail newspaper promoted the event, made the rules and provided the 5000 pounds main prize. Another 1000 pounds from an individual.
The DH-53 wasn't intended to win but was more marketable during a slow period between wars.

20. Sep 22, 2019

### Hephaestus

#### Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 25, 2014
Messages:
1,175
255
Location:
YMM
This is why I think it'd work well for the electric push

There was an overall prize and multiple prizes for fastest etc.

23 was a powered glider contest.
24 was 2 place
26 was practical 2 seater.

If you targeted it that way you might get a battery producer to back it... Sanyo, panasonic Hitachi etc.

Getting someone like Briggs to back it would be unobtainable - since they want to distance themselves from that market. But a common battery pack for all competitors, that could work.

Efficiency Kw/h etc. That could be fun.