Suitable airframes for industrial engines?

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

pilot103

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 13, 2003
Messages
108
There has been a lot of discussion about off the shelf or lightly modified industrial engines. In my google and utube searches most of the aircraft using these motors seem to be trikes and powered parachutes. I am more interested in fixed wing. Are there any existing and suitable airframes out there? What kind of useful load would we be looking at? I'm thinking something in the light sport class.
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
5,879
Location
US
I think the Spacek SD-1 Minisport and the Colomban MC-30 Luciole are the two conventional planes most frequently fitted with these engines in direct drive mode.
Both are light single seat aircraft that are aerodynamically clean.
Also, some slow draggy light aircraft use industrial engines, typically with a PSRU. See the old Valley Engineering Big Twin web pages for examples. That 993cc engine with a PSRU could put out up to 50 HP briefly at high RPM (for takeoff and climbout), but continuous power was limited to 32hp.
 
Last edited:

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
8,072
Location
Fort Walton Beach, Florida, USA
I would also look at historic designs proven to have flown on low power for a reality check on what you can expect. The Aeronca C-2 and C-3 are well-documented and give you a very clear idea of wing area required, realistic gross weight, and the modest performance to expect with less than 40 hp.

 

Tiger Tim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
3,621
Location
Thunder Bay
Since HP and operating RPM are so darn close, I’d think anything that worked with a small displacement VW ought to work, but I’m also not willing to stand behind that claim.
 

karmarepair

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jan 13, 2011
Messages
337
Location
United States
Since HP and operating RPM are so darn close, I’d think anything that worked with a small displacement VW ought to work, but I’m also not willing to stand behind that claim.
"Small displacement VW" to me means the 1192cc version. Think Druine Turbulent and Jodel D-9/Falconar F-9. They flew with these teeny (by modern standards) VW engines.

Druine Turbulent - Wikipedia Turbulent - Aircraft - Blueprints | Plans | Manna Aviation plans

Jodel D.9 Bébé - Wikipedia and http://www.pfa.org.uk/S Mac Website/Specification Sheets 2007/Jodel-D9.pdf

Falconar F9A - Wikipedia http://mannaaviation.com/F-9A-plans Jodel purists DO NOT consider Chris Falconar's "improvements" to be such.

R.S. Hoover ("Veeduber") flew an Aeronca C-2 with such an engine in the late 1950's. When they got rear-ended, it would knock the cast-in generator stand off, and you could get a complete engine for free. Patch the stub of the generator stand with sheet metal, rid up a magneto drive and a prop hub, and go.

Hugh CantRemberHisName flew "Tinkerbelle", a Taylor Monoplane, with a small displacement VW pretty early in their history as airplane engines in the US.

In the UK, the Currie Wot and the Luton Minor also flew reasonably well with relatively anemic VWs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currie_Wot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luton_Minor

LAA in the UK has plans on CD for the Wot and the Turbulent. LAA Heritage Plans now available on CD | Light Aircraft Association

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We KNOW from the Russian example that the Heath Parasol will fly behind a direct drive Lifan with electric start, originally designed for an inline Henderson motorcycle engine. OTHER planes of the period that flew behind that engine include the Long Longster. Other designs from the Flying and Glider Manuals worth looking at, and that have relatively complete plans in that source, include the Pietpenol Scout, and the Gere Sport.

I THINK a Legal Eagle or an TEAM Airbike will work, given careful attention to the CG. Hummelbird, but probably NOT the Ultracruiser due to differences in the engine mount.
 

Tiger Tim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
3,621
Location
Thunder Bay
Yeah I’d lean pretty hard into the post-war French stuff because it’s so much cleaner aerodynamically than anything found in the FGM. Don’t forget that a 35hp engine directly driving a prop at 3600rpm calls for a small prop and the inefficiencies that come with it.
 

David L. Downey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2019
Messages
98
The post war french designs are elegant and fly very well...but you need to be similar in size to the post war emaciated pilots! The Turbulent has a pair of re-design details available from the LAA that raise the knee line of the panel and move the seat back ~4".
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
8,072
Location
Fort Walton Beach, Florida, USA
The original single-seat le Pelican was an elegantly simple design reminiscent of the Aeronca C-2. It's too bad that no one seems to have kept the design alive and it is now only found on some Russian-owned pirate site. Something similar designed from the ground up for the weight and power of an industrial V-twin with an Ace redrive would be a great little fun machine.

pelican.jpg
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
8,072
Location
Fort Walton Beach, Florida, USA
Very interesting...could you explain that rear wing arrangement? Are the inboard leading edges incorporated into strakes that are not shown? Are the rear wings free to pivot in incidence for roll control?
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
12,704
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
I would love to see a new all metal basic airplane, fashioned after the T-18, with a T-18 style landing gear and a low, cantilever wing. Like the T-18, it could be open cockpit or enclosed. I would have a flying vertical to match the flying horizontal. The spar would need solid rivets, but everything else could be tied together with pull rivets.

The plans could have options for repositioning the wing to accommodate several different engines.

I think that a kit approach to this concept would be better in composite, but for a plans built, I think that it would be more popular as an all metal.


BJC
 

Deuelly

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
268
Location
Marshall, MN
Very interesting...could you explain that rear wing arrangement? Are the inboard leading edges incorporated into strakes that are not shown? Are the rear wings free to pivot in incidence for roll control?
It's basically the same design used by the EZ family of canards. There will be strakes that hold fuel on the yellow main spar going through the fuselage. The outer wing panels attach with three bolts just like on the EZ.

Brandon
 

slociviccoupe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
366
Location
Palm Bay Fl.
Id love to see an ultralight canard design. Only problem i see rear pusher will be cooling on a stripped down industrial engine.
 

Hot Wings

Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
7,579
Location
Rocky Mountains
Id love to see an ultralight canard design. Only problem i see rear pusher will be cooling on a stripped down industrial engine.
I kind of like the idea but I also remember way back when the Quickie was developed a Mini-EZ was one of the options that was considered and rejected.
That was when the Onan was rated at only 16 Hp so there is a little more power available with the modern V-twins. That might just make the idea viable today.

Debreyer Pelican
We must be having the same dreams?
I haven't got room right now to build the Pelicans daddy but I may be able to squeeze in a mini version after the my B+S is running. Unfortunately Mr. Debreyer isn't interested in producing plans so it would have to be a clean sheet project. A B+S will fly an AV-36 but would be a tight fit in a Pelican - and way more power than really needed.
 

don january

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
3,032
Location
Midwest
I think the PDQ would be a good candidate for the industrial engine
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
5,879
Location
US
I wonder if Mark Calder's Robin motorglider design would be a candidate for a B&S 810? It has been on the back burner for awhile. He changed his engine idea a couple of times, from a 30hp 2 stroke to a 1/2 VW. Maybe this affordable approx 77 lbs 30 HP B&S engine would do the trick. Heads-down would probably be best for that design.
In a motorglider the small direct drive prop would minimize drag with the engine off. Or, probably better, just let the engine loaf at the stock idle RPM and enjoy very long endurance with minimal fuel burn. Might need spoliers, high deflection flaps, or a simple speed brake to descend with the motor running.
 
Last edited:
Top