larr
Well-Known Member
Well, I thought I would introduce myself by writing about what I'vebeen working on.
First, some background -
My father was in his university's gliding club, just after the warand they used war-surplus Tiger Moth's as tow planes. I had twouncles with pilot's licences, and one of them actually worked atDeHavilland Canada. I had another uncle who was in the RCAF.
You would think that would have been a good background for a lifelong interest or career in aviation.
Nope.
I couldn't have cared less.
Now, of course, with DHC long gone I am truly disappointed that Ididn't take a greater interest.
Then, a couple of years ago, it all sort of came back. I was walkingaround the local Home Depot wood section and I thought, you know,maybe I could build a small plane out of this stuff. Later, forFathers' Day my wife arranged for us to go to a vintage warbirdsairshow. It was awesome (although, I think she's beginning to regretit). There is nothing like standing behind a Lancaster as itrev's it's engines.
And then, over in a corner of the hanger, was a lovely little SopwithPup replica someone had made. And of course I thought – 'I could dothat!'
But I wanted to build a sort of S.E.5A, and I wanted it to be a 2seater.
So it got shelved again until I accidentally came across a picture ofa two seat trainer version.
At last!
Now all I had to do was figure out how to make one.
I didn't know anything about making an airplane except that there wassome kind of difference between 'aircraft' wood and regular wood. Iread that somewhere.
It seemed to me that there should be some books on aircraft designfrom that era, and of course the math would be simple. Because, well,they didn't have computers. Or calculators.
I did find that book – Ottorino Pomilio's Airplane Design andConstruction – and, as they say – I couldn't have been morewrong. The math was intense, which was a complete surprise ( Isuppose I should be looking for 'Differential equations for CompleteIdiots). I'd read, repeatedly, that early aircraft construction was'experimental' – as if you would walk through the local GeneralStore randomly collecting bailing wire and barrel staves untilpresto! An airship.
Of course, the fact that bridges and buildings had been thoroughlyengineered for centuries didn't come into the wholebuild-it-and-it-might-fly historical version of early flight.
So my intention – if there is any interest (and maybe even if thereisn't) is to apply Pomilio's book and others from that era and do aseries in Wood Construction as I try to design and build my sort-ofS.E.5A trainer replica.
First, some background -
My father was in his university's gliding club, just after the warand they used war-surplus Tiger Moth's as tow planes. I had twouncles with pilot's licences, and one of them actually worked atDeHavilland Canada. I had another uncle who was in the RCAF.
You would think that would have been a good background for a lifelong interest or career in aviation.
Nope.
I couldn't have cared less.
Now, of course, with DHC long gone I am truly disappointed that Ididn't take a greater interest.
Then, a couple of years ago, it all sort of came back. I was walkingaround the local Home Depot wood section and I thought, you know,maybe I could build a small plane out of this stuff. Later, forFathers' Day my wife arranged for us to go to a vintage warbirdsairshow. It was awesome (although, I think she's beginning to regretit). There is nothing like standing behind a Lancaster as itrev's it's engines.
And then, over in a corner of the hanger, was a lovely little SopwithPup replica someone had made. And of course I thought – 'I could dothat!'
But I wanted to build a sort of S.E.5A, and I wanted it to be a 2seater.
So it got shelved again until I accidentally came across a picture ofa two seat trainer version.
At last!
Now all I had to do was figure out how to make one.
I didn't know anything about making an airplane except that there wassome kind of difference between 'aircraft' wood and regular wood. Iread that somewhere.
It seemed to me that there should be some books on aircraft designfrom that era, and of course the math would be simple. Because, well,they didn't have computers. Or calculators.
I did find that book – Ottorino Pomilio's Airplane Design andConstruction – and, as they say – I couldn't have been morewrong. The math was intense, which was a complete surprise ( Isuppose I should be looking for 'Differential equations for CompleteIdiots). I'd read, repeatedly, that early aircraft construction was'experimental' – as if you would walk through the local GeneralStore randomly collecting bailing wire and barrel staves untilpresto! An airship.
Of course, the fact that bridges and buildings had been thoroughlyengineered for centuries didn't come into the wholebuild-it-and-it-might-fly historical version of early flight.
So my intention – if there is any interest (and maybe even if thereisn't) is to apply Pomilio's book and others from that era and do aseries in Wood Construction as I try to design and build my sort-ofS.E.5A trainer replica.
