Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

    OK, since I managed to sneak into Hank's drawing box and hit on an idea he had already been working on, let's see just how many common aviaiton pipe dreams and hare-brained design schemes we all have in common -

    Since I learned about the Graphlite carbon rod material and how it can make previously marginal designs into more safe structures, I had several daydreams to re-do or update interesting but unsuccessful designs from the past:

    My most recent idea is to revisit the classic Hovey Whing Ding UL biplane, using the carbon to create a much more robust structure, and one of the UL engines that actually creates some thrust. The geometry of a wire braced biplane allows a very light and stiff structure, which would be even more so using the carbon reinforcements or composite structures instead of the original "lumberyard" approach. Additional upgrades envisioned are actual three-axis control and some sort of real-world airfoil.

    Another big idea I had was to do a SEMI-Horten style flying wing along the lines of his last HXc, the 15 meter span foot launch glider with a potential glide ratio of 30. However, Reimar Horten was on an aerodynamic Jihad for a pure flying wing with no vertical surfaces and "proverse" yaw coupling... a textbook two-control elevon setup. Al Bowers, a NASA aero guy who is the de facto world expert on this aircraft, calculated that achieving proverse yaw with elevon only controls required so much washout (twist) that the L/D of the entire aircraft was reduced by 16%. As a former national soaring competitor, the thought of losing 16% of the glider's performance for any reason was ludicrous to me. So that's where SEMI comes in. I want to reduce the washout back to the needed level for pitch stability, and add tip rudders or drag/yaw tip spoilers for three-axis yaw control. Building this airframe using the carbon rod material would allow a 75 pound glider to be built with far greater strength and most importantly stiffness than Spruce/plywood. Goal is to rewrite the record book for foot launched gliders.

    The Emmett Tally TL-1A "Birdman" ultralight was a tremendous achievement in slow speed flight. It opened up the possibility of true low altitude, slow, controlled flight to give the pilot an extremely personal view of the terrain. The pilot used his legs to assist in takeoff and landing, then reclined himself into a low drag supine position. It had the potential to exploit "micro-lift" which is all the rage in the soaring world right now. However, the Birdman was built too lightly, out of a million pieces of 1/4" square wood, and suffered a few inflight breakups. This concept revisited with a stronger, lighter structure and a better 20 or 25 HP engine could be very interesting.

    One of the most interesting concepts in affordable, fun-only flight has been addressed by Mike Sandlin and his BUG and GOAT gliders. Rolling off of existing hang glider launches and landing with the safety of a wheel and crash structure provides a safer experience. The vehicle is essentially a 1920's-30's primary glider executed from Home Depot materials, tubes, pop rivets and ripstrop nylon from the fabric store. The gliders are easy to build and apparently strong, however the parts count is high and there is far more drag than is necessary from flying wires. My idea is to use the carbon rod material to make a 21st Century primary glider (to use Sandlin's idea of rolling down an existing HG launch ramp) but with a cantilever wing, lower parts count, and still car-toppable.

    My dearest long term project is to build a quasi replica of a 1930's British light racer (King's Cup and similar races) that channels the spirits of (and evokes) the Miles M.5 Sparrowhawk, the Chilton Monoplane and perhaps the lighter Edgar Percival racers... but lighter, smaller, and using the Geo metro car engine conversion. This idea started out because I'm too !($*% fat to fly a real Chilton Monoplane and too !(#$*% cheap to buy a Gipsy Major engine for a full size Mew Gull or whatever. The idea is to build something that's a combination of those classic light racers, with all the styling cues of the era, but underneath the exterior it would be an inexpensive and easily shaped composite airplane with a very inexpensive and fuel-efficient powerplant. Basically I dreamed of doing a "fake" light racer from the 30's in much the same way as Lynn Willaims' brilliant "Staaken Flitzer" evokes a fake between the wars biplane.

    SO.... have any of you daydreamers conjured up anything similar to any of these pipe dreams?
    Last edited by VictorBravo; 08-02-2009, 23:33.
    Taylorcraft : Making Better Aviators for 75 Years... and Counting

    Bill Berle
    TF#693

    http://www.ezflaphandle.com
    http://www.grantstar.net
    N26451 (1940 BL(C)-65) 1988-90
    N47DN (Auster Autocrat) 1992-93
    N96121 (1946 BC-12D-85) 1998-99
    N29544 (1940 BL(C)-85) 2005-08

  • #2
    Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

    I camp with a group at Oshkosh each year. We have for some years been aiming at a new aviation goal, somewhat prompted by the Voyager flight, of designing, building & flying the world's first single-place non-refuelled, circumnavigating, ultralight, supersonic, X-swing-wing, ducted-fan, afterburning biplane. Around the world supersonically on 40 gallons of Jet-A1 and one afterburning fuel source.

    Now this might sound a bit odd, but we are further along than might at first appear, as several Taylorcraft forum members who have attended our group can attest.

    Firstly we have the engine, designed by Vern Newbold, one of our group. It's a three-cylinder, rotating-block radial rotary two-stroke diesel, fully patent-protected.

    Unlike the rather dismal failure of the BD-5 of the seventies and eighties, we got the engine to suit the mission profile early on in the design. Further details on Vern's engine here.

    Secondly, we have the wing design. Each wing is a stiffened cantilever two-spar fabric-covered high-aspect-ratio semi-symmetrical airfoil designed by the EAA. Both the wing and aileron ribs (mostly already constructed) are of close-spaced truss-type geodetic gusseted spruce (for light weight), glued using two-part epoxy wood adhesive.
    Each wing is to be mounted to a central lightweight monobloc phosphor-bronze bearing mounted approximately amidships, allowing a greater cg range than initially supposed. The upper wing is above the fuselage, the lower wing below. Each rotates asymmetrically about the pivot, so generating the X-wing profile required.

    Wing spar tests were performed less than three weeks ago on the new ribs.

    Thirdly, the fuselage will be essentially a monocoque low-aspect ratio spruce & white ash tubular design with intake at the front, and accommodating the pilot in a semi-raised semi-supine reclined position ahead of the wing pivot, with the engine & ducted fan mounted concentrically within the fuselage just aft of the pivot, and a tailpipe containing the afterburning titanium lining heat shield. An all-moving tailplane design (shamelessly "borrowed" from the X-1 drawings) and comprising both ventral and dorsal fins with separate and independant rudders completing the aft section.

    Take-off will be performed from a jettisoned dolly, with the landing being on cast oilon skids cunningly designed into the fuselage, with miniature twin-row-tapered-bearing wheels aerodynamically designed into the lower wing-tips for the final roll-out.

    Afterburning is conducted by a simple lightweight carbon-fibre and Kevlar propane cylinder, feeding directly aft of the ducted fan using a proprietary "fire ring" attachment to convert additional thrust to the fuselage frame. Afterburning ignition is by a single inverter-operated spark plug.


    Fuselage loftings and overall aerodynamics is overseen by a Lockheed aerodynamicist, ably supported by two of the top aeronautical engineers in the UK.

    Entry to the group is by presentation of one of the wordworking shop's wing ribs, since the close-spacing for mach-buffet and wing-loading prevention requires a large number of them.

    We had a pilot in our group back in the mid-eighties who offered his services, but we haven't heard from him since we showed the schematics to him.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

      Now that's funny... I think I was able to visualize most everything, but now I have a headache.
      Mike
      NC29624
      1940 BC65

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

        How much front money to buy in? George
        TF# 702 Don't be afraid to try something new. Remember amatuers built the ark, professionals built the titanic!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

          Actually this is not new! Back in 1960 , we designed a craft at Alliance High School that would go into orbit and recover back at the Mansfield airport in Ohio. We basically used a Vultee BT-13 seat and tail clipped to half its original width.use used roller skate metal wheels.
          We contacted Art Arfons of "Green Monster" fame to come up with the rocket motors to accelerate us to about 17,000 + MPH . I was to be the Pilot ( only weighed 172 lbs.) We made a prototype Model and flew it from the old Model field.
          This was done on a cool Autumn evening with a original heading of 111 degrees, the ship was last seen over Sebring, Oh climbing past approx. 18,000 ft and went out of sight...... Oh well , I took one look at that ship and promptly resigned as Test pilot.... the project went down hill from there I understand that Goodyear used some of our ideas on their "space plane" project. Project Dyna-Soar ....
          Taylorcraft Foundation, Inc
          Forrest A Barber 330-495-5447
          TF#1
          www.BarberAircraft.com
          [email protected]

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

            I currently have a 75% completed Heath Baby
            Bullet that will be powered by an 042 engine.
            (Flat two cylinder, 28 HP@3200RPM, 79 Lb
            all up weight). That' four horses less, but about half
            the 32 HP Bristol Cherub that was in the original.
            Brie

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

              I tried to edit my last post, but only half of what I retyped was changed,
              so, it is a replica, the engine of which is the same flat twin layout as the
              original Bristol Cherub, but weighs a LOT less. I am using a 23012 airfoil
              instead of the original. Brie

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

                Something I was thinking about just before I started reading this thread: Use stock (read cheap) turbochargers coupled to the exhaust, one to each side, of a Taylorcraft four banger. The compressed air from the chargers go out to a jet-type burner mounted slightly outboard on the lift struts. Augmented turbo compounding. Use for take-off and climb. What a mental picture: shock diamonds exiting the cans on either side.

                Better: same setup in back end of engines on an older Cessna 310 twin. They tried to get some thrust out of the exhaust on those as I remember.

                Increases thrust without messing with engine design/function/reliability.

                Next: Has anyone made a modern version of the Whitman Tailwind. I am thinking of a tube frame from the engine back to the end of the passenger compartment with everything else made of the lightest weight modern materials available.
                Then engine would be a Fontana aluminium block 4 cylinder based on the "Ironduke" design that uses many small block Chevy components. It is 200 cu and will produce 450 hp without really trying. Up to 750 in some versions.
                Use a very short, multi-bladed prop, no gearing, and really turn it up or use a turbine type gearbox mounted forward for a long, tapered (read streamlined) nose.
                Darryl
                Last edited by flyguy; 08-04-2009, 21:01.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

                  OK, I was afraid you guys would think I'm a "little nuts" for messing with designing WW-I replicas (I'm NOT a little nuts, I'm a LOT nuts, playing with everything from pre-Wright designs to some Aerospace applications that could take us to other planets).
                  But SOME OF YOU GUYS! I started reading this as if we were serious and actually GOT SCARED (OK, engineers are often the last to get the joke). I think I get the jokes now and my heart rate is dropping to normal and the chest pains are going away.
                  Does anyone want to talk about what they are actually building? Like Piets, or non-Taylorcrafts, or interesting old cars and bikes? (Maybe even a boat or two?)
                  Hank

                  Not that the idea of strapping that F-1 rocket engine to a skate board and seeing if "Warp Drive" speeds isn't actually possible hasn't crossed my mind. I have a guy that worked for me at NASA I would like to nominate for test pilot!

                  P.S.
                  What was confusing about Roberts message? Reads just like a NASA request for proposal to me. Just because they ask, doesn't mean it can be done.

                  GO JUPITER 130! If any of the tribe get that, let me know. I'm still in "the underground" but thinking it might be time to come out of the closet.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

                    Originally posted by Hank Jarrett View Post
                    But SOME OF YOU GUYS! I started reading this as if we were serious and actually GOT SCARED

                    Does anyone want to talk about what they are actually building?
                    Well I can only speak for myself... I was serious about playing with the stuff that was mentioned to start the thread. None of it has actually been built, but I worked for years scheming on the foot launch design details and have a foot-high stack of paper in storage somewhere to show for it.

                    The faux British light racer will be built for sure if life circumstance allows it. Looking at unemployment checks dwindling down very soon does not create the environment at present, but like the lady said "I will survive".

                    The Whng Ding re-do and the Birdman ultralight re-do are daydreams that someone should pursue but I'm not sure it would or would not be me.

                    The rolling launch primary glider is actually looming large in potential reality at this moment. The Lancair crash that killed two friends of mine has resulted in the establishment of a youth aviation foundation "to foster youth education and interest in aviation" etc. A primary glider construction project for teenage student pilots is as valid now as it was in the 1920's and 30's. It's just not as obvious or as easy to sell the idea to kids as it once was... but the skills and confidence it teaches are even more desperately needed than ever before. The big idea is to provide some of the critical fabricated components and allow young builders to buy aluminum tube, rivets, hardware and wood at "Aerospace Depot" or equivalent.

                    In this thread or privately through e-mail, I am interested in discussing these ideas with anyone who is interested.

                    Bill victorbravo (at) sbcglobal {dot] net
                    Taylorcraft : Making Better Aviators for 75 Years... and Counting

                    Bill Berle
                    TF#693

                    http://www.ezflaphandle.com
                    http://www.grantstar.net
                    N26451 (1940 BL(C)-65) 1988-90
                    N47DN (Auster Autocrat) 1992-93
                    N96121 (1946 BC-12D-85) 1998-99
                    N29544 (1940 BL(C)-85) 2005-08

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

                      Originally posted by flybikefarm View Post
                      How much front money to buy in? George
                      Contact investment representative Harry Ingram for payment options!
                      Taylorcraft : Making Better Aviators for 75 Years... and Counting

                      Bill Berle
                      TF#693

                      http://www.ezflaphandle.com
                      http://www.grantstar.net
                      N26451 (1940 BL(C)-65) 1988-90
                      N47DN (Auster Autocrat) 1992-93
                      N96121 (1946 BC-12D-85) 1998-99
                      N29544 (1940 BL(C)-85) 2005-08

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

                        As soon as I get into my new place with the 3 car garage I'm going to put aftermarket Vortec heads, that I have ported, on my 74 Z28 camaro. Ought to bring it up to 420 plus HP. That should be fun with the manual transmission.

                        The latest paper design (this is for Hank, I guess) is for what I think is an usable optimized design from various test designs done by NASA of a atmospheric ion thruster.
                        They did lots of test on pretty elementary designs with multiple configurations. Their data made it possible for me to pick and choose methods of optimizing a design for maximum thrust.
                        The trick is using completely different shaped electrodes for the ion and "ground" electrodes.
                        Small, non-optimized, amateur built versions of these devices will actually pump enough air to lift their own weight (with external electrical power supplies.)
                        I'm thinking tandem thrusters for use on UAV's at very high altitudes, solar powered. Or perhaps just a alien-looking vehicle, big enough to be impressive, that would (hate to use this word) levitate. Something to play with in the driveway, just for FUN.
                        DC
                        Last edited by flyguy; 08-05-2009, 11:38.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

                          I guess you could call me serious, I have six aircraft, two flying, and FOUR sitting side-by-side-by-side-by-side being constructed together in my hanger.
                          Brie

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

                            Originally posted by taylorcraftbc65 View Post

                            I have six aircraft, two flying, and FOUR sitting side-by-side

                            Will you marry me?
                            Taylorcraft : Making Better Aviators for 75 Years... and Counting

                            Bill Berle
                            TF#693

                            http://www.ezflaphandle.com
                            http://www.grantstar.net
                            N26451 (1940 BL(C)-65) 1988-90
                            N47DN (Auster Autocrat) 1992-93
                            N96121 (1946 BC-12D-85) 1998-99
                            N29544 (1940 BL(C)-85) 2005-08

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Other Stuff/Ideas We are Messing With

                              Didn't you ask me that once before? Besides, you don't have a Katubah written yet. Brie

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X