StealthKoala
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2022
- Messages
- 31
There is a guy who built a very light ultralight around here. He himself calls it d'Fuglyone, joining in the populist opinion as to its aesthetics– with "d' " added because it has an Italian (Simonini) engine.
I wouldn't trade my Koala, but in my opinion it has a few fine points.
It's fully enclosed, with belly panels and those in front of the pilot made of aluminum it’s still a legitimate 20 pounds under the weight limit with a real "dope" paint job. It's strong, being made of welded 4130– mostly in triangles like Aeronca used to, but without the wood formers and stringers to make it pretty.
Being light and strong it performs, but people here don't seem to like it. The builder was part of an EAA group before he had a falling out with them. They are of the opinion that his "not a legal airplane" is a hazard to the public.
Usually when "everybody in the marching band" says you are out of step you should at least take a look at your feet. But today I got a glimpse of the situation from a different point of view. One of the EAA guys who "actually built a real FAA registered airplane, in the Experimental Category,” don'cha know, was talking to someone I was waiting to talk to.
He was saying how he told the guy who built d'Fuglyone, "that he couldn't just use a backpack pusher engine on an ultralight."
Being bored I asked him why.
In total seriousness he explained how the CWW rotation in a tractor configuration will tend to loosen those CW threaded bolts on the prop.
I started to say something… He shook his head slowly and looked at me like I had just missed the "short bus" for school. Then he explained, slowly so I would understand... That, in a pusher configuration that prop is turning CW so it tends to tighten the CW threaded bolts.
AND, "(I) could be excused for not knowing this, but ‘the idiot’ was using a fiberglass prop, meaning it would 'flex even more' when used to pull an airplane instead of push it. Causing the bolts to work themselves out faster–” he had just taken off in front of us– “maybe before he lands."
Biting my tongue I smiled and went about my business.
I didn't scream, IT’S THE SAME FRIGGIN’ ENGINE, and it is going to be spinning in the same direction whether it is in front, in back, or inverted. And oh, wise one, please explain how come it's harder to "pull" an airplane than it is to "push" one through the same air.
John
I wouldn't trade my Koala, but in my opinion it has a few fine points.
It's fully enclosed, with belly panels and those in front of the pilot made of aluminum it’s still a legitimate 20 pounds under the weight limit with a real "dope" paint job. It's strong, being made of welded 4130– mostly in triangles like Aeronca used to, but without the wood formers and stringers to make it pretty.
Being light and strong it performs, but people here don't seem to like it. The builder was part of an EAA group before he had a falling out with them. They are of the opinion that his "not a legal airplane" is a hazard to the public.
Usually when "everybody in the marching band" says you are out of step you should at least take a look at your feet. But today I got a glimpse of the situation from a different point of view. One of the EAA guys who "actually built a real FAA registered airplane, in the Experimental Category,” don'cha know, was talking to someone I was waiting to talk to.
He was saying how he told the guy who built d'Fuglyone, "that he couldn't just use a backpack pusher engine on an ultralight."
Being bored I asked him why.
In total seriousness he explained how the CWW rotation in a tractor configuration will tend to loosen those CW threaded bolts on the prop.
I started to say something… He shook his head slowly and looked at me like I had just missed the "short bus" for school. Then he explained, slowly so I would understand... That, in a pusher configuration that prop is turning CW so it tends to tighten the CW threaded bolts.
AND, "(I) could be excused for not knowing this, but ‘the idiot’ was using a fiberglass prop, meaning it would 'flex even more' when used to pull an airplane instead of push it. Causing the bolts to work themselves out faster–” he had just taken off in front of us– “maybe before he lands."
Biting my tongue I smiled and went about my business.
I didn't scream, IT’S THE SAME FRIGGIN’ ENGINE, and it is going to be spinning in the same direction whether it is in front, in back, or inverted. And oh, wise one, please explain how come it's harder to "pull" an airplane than it is to "push" one through the same air.
John
Last edited:
