Tandem-wing LSA/microlight concept and poll

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Which tandem-wing configuration would interest you the most (pick one in each of four categories).

  • A1 - High wing forward, low wing aft (Flying Flea) OR

    Votes: 18 36.7%
  • A2 - Low wing forward, high wing aft (Quickie);

    Votes: 27 55.1%
  • B1 - Two-axis controls (no rudder pedals like an Ercoupe) OR

    Votes: 9 18.4%
  • B2 - Three-axis controls (with rudder pedals like a Cessna);

    Votes: 35 71.4%
  • C1 - Conventional (taildragger) gear OR

    Votes: 23 46.9%
  • C2 - Tricycle (nosewheel) gear;

    Votes: 21 42.9%
  • D1 - Tractor engine (engine and propeller at front) OR

    Votes: 33 67.3%
  • D2 - Pusher engine (engine and propeller at rear);

    Votes: 13 26.5%

  • Total voters
    49

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
8,571
Location
World traveler
Hi, as many of you know, I have a thing for tandem-wing aircraft: Mignet, Croses, Mauboussin, Rutan, you name it. So here's a concept for an original design with tandem wings.

Since the French microlight regulations were recently updated to allow a little more weight and speed, those numbers seems like a good place to start: 500 kg (1102 lb) maximum gross weight, 80 kW (107 hp) max engine power, 70 kph (mph) or less minimum speed. This would be a light two-seater intended to eke out decent performance from something like an (ostensible) 80 hp VW conversion with up to 500 lb of people/baggage/fuel aboard so performance would be modest, likely with a cruising speed under 160 kph/99 mph. Construction would be as simple as possible, likely a pop-riveted aluminum tube-and-gusset fuselage with aluminum tubing or wood wings and tail surfaces, all covered in fabric.

Beyond these basic criteria, please explain your preferences from the poll in this thread. Thanks!

EDIT: To be clear, you should be casting four votes per person, one in each category (wing configuration, control axes, landing gear, engine/prop placement) so A1 or A2, B1 or B2, C1 or C2, D1 or D2. From the results I am seeing, some people didn't get that and I can only set the total number of votes allowed not the categories.
 
Last edited:

WonderousMountain

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
2,396
Location
Clatsop, Or
Did not know what I was getting into...

Okay, so the Dragonfly-Quicky is successful, But
A number of Box style reverse stagger airplanes
have experience control blanketing in stall/mush
flight. It's not that I don't like them.

Three Axis, again Ercoupe is a sweet ride with H stab,
and I'd fly two axis, on some days, but want the control.

Conventional gear is a little harder to explain. Something
about the ploppiness of Tricycle three point landings do
not sit right with me. There are plenty of Standard gears
that cause me to facepalm.

A little addicted to pusher engines, don't anyone cite threads!
Put the big noisy heavy smelly thing behind you & forget it.

Don't quote me on
this monstrosity of yours;
CK LuPii
 
Last edited:

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
8,571
Location
World traveler
Thanks for kicking us off, WM, so I understand that what you like is low wing forward, three-axis control, conventional gear, pusher? That could be slick, kind of a pusher Q2 or Dragonfly. I do think that conventional gear and pusher are a tough combination in terms of tailwheel placement unless you use a pylon- o r high-mounted engine like a Thurston Teal or a Kolb.
 

delta

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
2,513
Location
Brookside Utah
Why the two wing limit? I personally don't see how my latest (brain fart) could possibly be constructed simply, but tomorrows another day. mwlsa1.JPGmwlsa2.JPGmwlsa3.JPGmwlsa4.JPG

A straight wing version would be easier to build and would have to be stretched from it's current 15' x 16' to add a passenger.
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
8,571
Location
World traveler
So that would mean a tandem biplane (two wings forward, two wings aft), with 2.5-axis (or 5-axis) controls, four-wheel landing gear, and push-pull engines like a Cessna Skymaster or A Dornier Pfeil...? Sounds like a lot even for my admittedly strange tastes! ;-)

IDK I guess all of the above
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
8,571
Location
World traveler
Let’s stick with just two wings for this one. I am not opposed to joined wings if the execution is simple, though I had in mind something more straightforward.

Why the two wing limit? I personally don't see how my latest (brain fart) could possibly be constructed simply, but tomorrows another day.

A straight wing version would be easier to build and would have to be stretched from it's current 15' x 16' to add a passenger.
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
9,547
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
My votes went towards a tractor Flea configuration with ailerons and a tailwheel. This may not surprise too many people. The Flea configuration has a lot of validity, the primary thing for me personally is that it can give you decent wing area and wing loading with the smallest hangar footprint and smallest overall trailer.

The two-axis thing is nonsense as far as I'm concerned; during that time the world was flat, and lightning still came from a big angry god named Thor.
 

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,558
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
I believe in conspiracy theories. Can you combine a low wing aft with a pusher and tail wheel and have a viable configuration.

I have been struggling with that configuration for a while and would like to see some examples. (Actual photos, please. Delta please ignore this request! :))

Years ago I was working on a forward wing low tandem wing hang glider that tested well with models and had interesting ground effect aerodynamics, a bit like the Ekranoplan GEMs.
 
Last edited:

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
9,547
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
Yes, Jedi, your tinfoil hat conspiracy dreams have come true, I believe that the Lascaud Butterfly / Bifly / Romibutter is in fact a Flea style ultralight with a pusher and a tailwheel. There is an expert on such aircraft, and the unmarked Haliburton-KBR black helicopter is juuust about to drop him off here to comment... :)
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
6,781
Location
US
It looks like the French rules still specify that the stall speed (38 kts) is Vso. So, with some well designed and effective flaps, the wing area could be kept on the small side. The reg doesn't give a max allowable speed. Can we make this go fast?
The tandem wing reqmt makes it hard to get a huge payback from one well flapped wing.

Interconnected fore and aft flaps?

With the rules as written, effective flaps, and enough span, a plane meeting the rules doesn't >need< to be a "floater" (though it could be).
 
Last edited:

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,558
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
Yes, Jedi, your tinfoil hat conspiracy dreams have come true, I believe that the Lascaud Butterfly / Bifly / Romibutter is in fact a Flea style ultralight with a pusher and a tailwheel. There is an expert on such aircraft, and the unmarked Haliburton-KBR black helicopter is juuust about to drop him off here to comment... :)
Google found the following but the tail wheel photos are all tractor props and the pusher is a trigear flea.
Still looking for a "good" example.

Reference Romnibutter - Flying Flea

I hesitate to mention the prior thread that got into the defination of pusher with regard to prop versus engine versus forward or aft of the CG, etc.
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
6,781
Location
US
One of the best looking fleas I have seen. Thanks VB

Any possibility it is a 103 UL compliant craft?
The specs on the page VB linked don't give a stall speed, but with an empty weight of 106 lbs and a total wing area of 125 sq ft, I'm sure it meets the formula. The cruise speed is listed as 40 kts.

It is a cute little thing.
 

Tiger Tim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
3,925
Location
Thunder Bay
I just like airplanes that make me wish I was flying them from first sight. Any configuration can inspire that.

The real question, Matt, is what do you want? Start sketching something you’re passionate about and if you want the design to proliferate I’m sure others like you will respond.
 

mcrae0104

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
4,028
Location
KBJC
...please explain your preferences from the poll in this thread. Thanks!
Low wing forward: I generally prefer low wings for maneuvering visibility but I understand there are pros and cons to each.
Three axis: It's what I'm used to. A two-axis machine would have a significant stigma to overcome in a marketplace of nearly-exclusively three-axis pilots.
Taildragger: Because.
Tractor: It goes with the taildragger thing, barring a high-mounted nacelle.
 
Top