This is intended to be an offshoot of the epic 21st Century Volksplane discussion, where we had been discussing ad nauseam what the modern interpretation of the classic Evans Volksplane might be. To my surprise, it turned out that the OP in that thread was actually more concerned with a two seat basic runabout, and preferred the original VW-based engine.
The intriguing part was trying to interpolate and extrapolate what Bud Evans would have done 50+ years after the VP-1 and VP-2, trying to meet the same overall market and project goals but substituting today's engine choices and today's average skill set and today's manufacturing capabilities and today's level of technical education.
But to me personally, the single seat "personal air vehicle" is what Evans started with and focused on. It was suggested that a new thread (for my preference of a smaller single seat airplane, and with no preference for the VW engine) would be appropriate. So here it is.
The intention of this thread is to discuss, argue, design-by-committee, hash out, and beat to death the subject of a basic, enclosed, single seat, modest performance HBA that would be as affordable as reasonably possible but that did not sacrifice safety, reliability, or predictable and mild handling qualities.
This is intended to be open to discussing the following:
The intriguing part was trying to interpolate and extrapolate what Bud Evans would have done 50+ years after the VP-1 and VP-2, trying to meet the same overall market and project goals but substituting today's engine choices and today's average skill set and today's manufacturing capabilities and today's level of technical education.
But to me personally, the single seat "personal air vehicle" is what Evans started with and focused on. It was suggested that a new thread (for my preference of a smaller single seat airplane, and with no preference for the VW engine) would be appropriate. So here it is.
The intention of this thread is to discuss, argue, design-by-committee, hash out, and beat to death the subject of a basic, enclosed, single seat, modest performance HBA that would be as affordable as reasonably possible but that did not sacrifice safety, reliability, or predictable and mild handling qualities.
This is intended to be open to discussing the following:
- Fixed landing gear (nosewheel, tailwheel, one/two/three wheel) configuration.
- Conventional, canard, and flying wing airframe configuration is acceptable.
- Main wing is fixed, not pivoting or free-flying (plenty of Freewing and Flea threads already)
- Fixed wing, not rotary wing.
- Rigid wing, no "bags", "kites", inflatable dolls
- Aerodynamic controls, no weight shift or toy airplane differential thrust for primary control
- 4 stroke IC engine, max 40HP. (plenty of existing threads for electrics, batteries, Yamaha Apex, and 2-strokes)
- Engine anywhere on the airplane, no tractor or pusher preference
- Traditional propeller driven (no ducted fans or oscillating paddles)
- Commercially available traditional airplane materials (metal tubes, metal or wood sheets, but not corroplast, cardboard, or reclaimed car tires)
- Cruise speed minimum target 75 mph, ideal 95-105 MPH
- Operate safely from 1200 foot clear dirt/grass strip
- 400 feet per minute climb with 5 gallons of fuel and 200 pound payload
- Meet current US LSA weights and speeds. No need or preference for Part 103
- Pilot visibility equal or better than typical 172/Cherokee
- Standard Category G-load (gross weight 3.8G with 1.5 FOS)
- Simplified construction that minimizes or eliminates the need for advanced fabrication or tooling.
Last edited:
