UFO- Useless Flying Object

Discussion in 'Hangar Flying' started by litespeed, Sep 27, 2016.

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

  1. Dec 22, 2016 #101

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    8,868
    Likes Received:
    5,727
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    A la the F-8, and its baby brother, the A-7.

    BTW, slotted flaps can be used to effectively increase the AoA more than plain flaps, thus improving the pilot's forward vision on approach. Two other advantages, from my point of view; they increase Clmax, and the wing is rigidly attached to the thing the pilot sits in.


    BJC
     
  2. Dec 23, 2016 #102

    FritzW

    FritzW

    FritzW

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,227
    Likes Received:
    2,851
    Location:
    Las Cruces, NM
    Nemeth used two different flap/aileron configurations. There must have been something on the first wing that he thought was worth improving.

    Nem_Parasol_SM-850x454.jpg Nemeth-Parasol_3.jpg
     
  3. Dec 23, 2016 #103

    rotax618

    rotax618

    rotax618

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Messages:
    640
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    Evans Head Australia
    Hoffman found that the elevator on the later Arup lost effectiveness because it was in turbulent air being behind a very wide chord wing, his cure was to place a small tailplane/elevator high on the fin.

    There is a modification to the Dyke Delta to place a small pitch control surface up on the fin.

    Zimmerman had horizontal tail surfaces projecting from the sides of the Fuselage/wing on the Flapjack.

    Note the very large elevators/elevons on both the UFO and the Verhees Delta, these are necessary because the control surfaces are operating in turbulent "dead" air, because of their size and weight they would be prone to oscillations in turbulent air.

    The answer for this problem in low aspect flying wings is to use "Junkers" elevons (hanging below the wing they would be prone to damage), or place a pitch control surface on the fin (as per Arup3 and Dyke Delta) or place the control surfaces at the wingtips (per Zimmerman)
     
  4. Jun 24, 2017 #104

    FritzW

    FritzW

    FritzW

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2011
    Messages:
    3,227
    Likes Received:
    2,851
    Location:
    Las Cruces, NM
    Thunderchook,

    Are you still in touch with David Rowe? I'd sure like to know what airfoil he's using on his UFO's.

    Looking at the videos I'm not seeing much, if any, reflex.

    Thanks,
    Fritz
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  5. Jun 24, 2017 #105

    Angusnofangus

    Angusnofangus

    Angusnofangus

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    132
    Location:
    Victoria, Canada
    Just to set the record straight, while the F-8 had a variable incidence wing, the A-7 did not.
     
  6. Jun 24, 2017 #106

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    8,868
    Likes Received:
    5,727
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    Yes, you are correct.

    Am I correct in thinking that the A-7 used the same wing attach method, with a rigid link tying the forward attach to the fuselage, rather than an actuator, and having an aft attachment that was capable of pivoting?

    Did you work on them or fly them?


    BJC
     
  7. Jul 3, 2017 #107

    Angusnofangus

    Angusnofangus

    Angusnofangus

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    132
    Location:
    Victoria, Canada
    I don't know how the A-7 wing attached, but I suspect it was conventional. Didn't work on either airplane, but worked around them. The only real similarities between the two was the basic layout. A-7 was a flying dump truck, carried a lot of bombs, F-8 had provisions to attach pylons and carry bombs, but I don't think they were ever used in combat. If I am wrong on that, someone please correct me.
     
  8. Jul 5, 2017 #108

    mcrae0104

    mcrae0104

    mcrae0104

    Armchair Mafia Conspirator HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Messages:
    2,858
    Likes Received:
    1,882
    Location:
    BDU, BJC
    [video=youtube_share;gJV16xYPVtA]https://youtu.be/gJV16xYPVtA[/video]
     
  9. May 10, 2019 #109

    billyvray

    billyvray

    billyvray

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2005
    Messages:
    690
    Likes Received:
    212
    Location:
    Newnan, GA
    I cropped this pic from an Australian magazine Australian Sport Pilot, on Issuu.com. Check it out.

    I have long wanted to see how Mr. Rowe had constructed his UFOs. It is easy enough to conceive but I just like to see the particulars. Anyway, I hope it brings some enjoyment and education...

    rowe ufo sport pilot mag.png
     
    VP1 and kiwi like this.
  10. May 10, 2019 #110

    Aesquire

    Aesquire

    Aesquire

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2014
    Messages:
    2,239
    Likes Received:
    883
    Location:
    Rochester, NY, USA
    The A-7U wings were "simply" bolted on.

    The F-8U did carry bombs, up to 2000 lbs. Plus 5" Zuni missiles, and was used as a bomber. Arguably long predating the F/ A -18 as a dual purpose fighter bomber... But so was the Corsair. And the Wikdcat. And...
     
  11. May 10, 2019 #111

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    8,868
    Likes Received:
    5,727
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    Photo of A-7 forward wing attach fuselage fitting. There is a dog bone shaped link between this fitting and a fitting on the LE of the wing center section. There is room for jackscrew to replace the link.
    IMG_1033.JPG
    Here is the rear fuselage attach fitting. The attach pin would allow the LE of the wing to rotate up, even though the A-7 does not use that feature. I believe that the F-8 uses the exact same main wing attach.
    IMG_1034.JPG


    BJC
     
  12. May 21, 2019 #112

    RCBinChicken

    RCBinChicken

    RCBinChicken

    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2019
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks so much for finding and posting this, it's a gold-mine for me... Another few hours on this forum and I find ANOTHER design I never knew existed, that makes my own pipe-dream low-AR aircraft seem so much more plausible than I dared expect! The shot of the wooden interior construction is beautiful. What's even more beautiful IMO is the name, and the "screw it, this is the plane I WANTED to build" attitude of the designer.

    I hurriedly googled it for more info, here's a couple of other links if anyone here hasn't already seen them:
    http://atsconsultancy.com.au/demo/Aeropidia_info/rowe-ufo/
    https://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled/Rowe-UFO-Useless-Flying-Object/2811274

    Alright, a 4m wingspan, (pi*d^2)/4 gives around 12.56m^2 wing area... The second link quotes 145kg dry weight, of which around 35-42kg presumably is the Rotax 503 and its exhaust system. So around 100-110kg for the airframe sans powerplant. Even if we assume Mr. Rowe is a heavily-built chap, that's looking like a pretty low wing loading. Not bad for an aircraft you could fit, fully assembled, in an average living-room.

    Now I just need to figure out (from my vast, entirely nonexistant personal expertise!) how to build a similar craft with closer to 17m^2 WA, HALF that airframe weight figure and shaped like a triangle instead of a circle. :p
     
  13. May 23, 2019 #113

    PagoBay

    PagoBay

    PagoBay

    Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2019
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    US Territory of Guam
    Last edited: May 23, 2019

Share This Page

arrow_white