Will this prop fly ???

[Vasili Flame]

Going design a Scratch built plane , it was first proto type flown on aug 16th 1916 crashed 20th sept 1916, Due to gun synchronization being invented it was never rebuilt. I have only two small old pictures to go by & a 3d plan so i got a quite good idea how to build it.

 

Problem is i want to build it to scale but the prop looks wrong 2 be honest i think this is why full size plane crashed but what do i know hope some one could just take a peek  & give me your views

First off i will be making this in a 3D program then exporting to Cad program 

wish me luck 

 

[Myron Beaumont]

Vasili

Can I say what I think a lot of peeps are thinking ? You're trying to run before you can walk . Go down the well trodden route of a trainer first. Guess what ! It works -That is why they're called trainers . Good luck with your future persuits (I like it) but AFTER  you've had a go at something forgiving  Just my two penn'orth

[Myron Beaumont]

PS

Yes -the prop definately looks wrong . Not something to even consider replicating at your stage of the game (anybody's for that matter)

[Clive Matthews]

2 small pictures and a 3d plan! It's a wonder the ARTF industry ever got off the ground. Seriously though if you want to have a go, why not. You will at least enjoy the 'it'll never fly' comments I'm sure.

 

So what is the name of this wonder of the skies which flew for several weeks? This might unearth more information to help. 

[Myron Beaumont]

I suppose a computer programme will tell us why it didn't last too long . Shame Leonardo da Vinci  didn't have one isn't it ?

[Vasili Flame]

With all due respect Myron i didnt actually say i was going to fly it. My experiance of building things are quite good as i was a steel glazer & cladder used to working on tiny tolarance of  2mm and less & also a fully qualified motor mechanic. thats the great thing i am of the nintendo geraration using computers & design software is 2nd nature, i may have not build a rc plane before but i have completed more complicated structures that that Eg: The Millenium stadium all the cladding on that was done buy myself and four other people you should have seen them technical drawings not trying to be rude just expressing my view.

 

 

Mr Matthew It's Called a Sage type 2 fighter  i been trawling the net for a few week's before i started posting here and only found This  http://www.aviastar.org/air/england/sage-2.php

 

I did find a free flight model build but with no info accept a picture and plane name

 

 

Edited By Vasili Flame on 24/02/2010 15:44:46

[Andy Gates]

Very interesting plane by the looks of it.

 

Are you intending to make the plane flyable (by you or another nominated pilot) or just as a static exhibit?

 

If you are going for the latter, then I would say forge ahead and get those plans done.

 

If you are going for the former, then looking at it I would say that you need to gather a little more information and have some discussions with a model plane designer to discuss the incidences required.

 

2 names that spring to mind would be Peter Rake and Peter Miller, both of which have designed model aircraft of a similar era.

 

I assume the 3 view is a copy of the free flight plan?

 

Either way, I wish you the very best of luck.

[Vasili Flame]

Thanks andy for the encouragement  and contact's of right peopel to chat too, i was just going to build a free flight (rubber powered) then scale up my plan's for R/c

 

Only info i got is this, Should be enough as there i a picture of  the plane in construction in 1916.  Wish i had the free flight plan as it make it 1,000 times easier but as far as i know A R/c Version has never been done and only that one free flight.

 

Specification

WEIGHTS
Take-off weight	701 kg	1545 lb
Empty weight	404 kg	891 lb
DIMENSIONS
Wingspan	6.77 m	22 ft 3 in
Length	6.45 m	21 ft 2 in
Height	2.89 m	10 ft 6 in
Wing area	15.61 m2	168.02 sq ft
PERFORMANCE
Max. speed	180 km/h	112 mph

Edited By Vasili Flame on 24/02/2010 19:30:01

[Andy Gates]

I am even more intrigued now.

 

May I make a suggestion or two.

 

First off can I suggest that you build a model of a similar era from someone elses plan first to learn the various techniques required to build your model and to provide the insight required to create the structures needed for strength. Itr will also teach you the covering techniques.

 

This can be done cheaply, Peter Rake had a plan published for a Thomas Morse Scout in one of the magazines.

I can vouch for this machine since I built one and I have a build thread on another forum for it to assist you if required.

 

Secondly, whatever you do, try not to stick to a scale prop for your model other than for static display. A 4 blade prop will be very inefficient at the sort of rotational speeds we use in our models.

[Vasili Flame]

You know what andy you are probably right

i have done a bit of covering but no to much, i could always make two props one for flight one for the ground display structure wise i have no problems there as thy old profession was working with structual steel. some bugger probably build it before me in mean time lol  

 

You gotta admit its definatley a diffrent breed of Bi-plane :D

[Andy Gates]

I will be watching this one so please keep the thread up to date.

[Vasili Flame]

I Will do mate id rather build from scratch than a kit as you have full control of everything, this will be my first scratch build so it will go quite slow, should have enough funds by next week for materials then i will get started.

 

Thanks 

[Vasili Flame]

Havent done any 3d work for a while so i thought id have a go at a depron plan as a practice,

 

This is  a Sage Type 3 Trainer plane only spent 30 mins on it Work in progress.

Edited By Vasili Flame on 26/02/2010 00:14:44

[Myron Beaumont]

Vasili

Please accept my apologies . I seem to have got hold of the wrong end of the stick  (again) . Wished I could use computers like your good self . Enjoying your thread now!

G-umpy 

[Vasili Flame]

Not a problem mate you was just expressing your opinion :D

 

stick around u never know it may fly lol 

[Tim Hooper]

Posted by Vasili Flame on 24/02/2010 19:25:30:

Thanks andy for the encouragement  and contact's of right peopel to chat too, i was just going to build a free flight (rubber powered) then scale up my plan's for R/c

 

Vasili,

 

 This looks eminently do-able to me!

 

I wouldn't bother with a free flight version (they have specialist needs all of their very own), but go straight to RC instead.  At least that way the pilot will be able to make inputs on the maiden flight!

 

So, it's a little unusual in appearance, but nothing that hasn't been done before.

 

The fuselage is just a rectangular-section framework with circular fairings towards the front (and a conning tower fairing over the cabane struts).  No probs there.

 

I think the prop is something of an optical illusion.  If you look at the front elevation on the 3-view, it's of a fairly 'standard' size.  it's just that the spinner is disproportionately large in comparison.  I'd agree that 4-blade props can be bothersome at our scale, and would suggest a 2 blader (at least to begin with)

 

The only fly in the ointment is the apparent lack of wing area.  Despite having two wings, it's a sequiplane.  The lower wing is minimal in area, so for this reason you'd probably want to build it as light as possible - think freeflight with radio assist.

 

Now if it were me contemplating this build, I'd go a 1/7 scale, giving a span of about 38", and aim for an AUW of around 18oz or so (with 4 channel control, or add a little a little dihedral and forego the ailerons)).

 

I'd use a simple 12% Clarke Y wing section for simplicity and strength, with both wings having around 1-2° incidence.  Flat frame tailplane at 0°.  A couple of degrees side and downtrust on the  60 watt+ motor wouldn't go amiss..  CG at around 25% MAC.

 

That short little nose means that all that hardware will want to go as far forward as possible, with light-weight closed loop controls to the tail surfaces.

 

This isn't rocket science - rather a proven formula for small scale biplane models.  As others have suggested, take a peek at the works of Pete Rake, Pat Trittle, Kurt Bengston etc., to get a feel for the project.

 

Hope this helps!

 

tim

 

 

Edited By Tim Hooper on 26/02/2010 11:08:58

[Andy Gates]

Just a quick comment about your Type 3 so far.

 

The furthest former at the rear is way over size.

Most models of planes of this era have a post rather than a former which sits inside the point where the 2 fuselage side frames come together.

 

This is the sort of thing that would be learned by doing a build of someone elses plan.

[Vasili Flame]

Thank's tim a lot of infomation there i will use 90% of it no doubt , How would i calculate the 12% Clarke y wing is there an aplication for suck a thing so i can get cross section profile??

 

Andy i was just getting down the shape but i didnt notice that to be honest so i went to fix it just now  and i didnt save it only that picture so would have to redo it anyways lol :P i'll remember that former then :P

 

 

[Tim Hooper]

Vasili,

 

I use a program  called Profili to generate aerofoil sections (especiallt useful when designing a tapered wing), but a Clarke Y is a pretty standard aerofoil that a lot of models use.

 

I've just found this on Google;

 

The 12% refers to the thickness of the section as compared to its chord.

 

I normally take the easy way out and set the flat portion of the underside horizontal, and parallel with the fuselage datum.  The fact that the leading edge is rounded means that it'll automatically have a degree or two of positive incidence.  Which is good in a relatively slow-flying model.

 

There's tons of info on the net about high-performance aerofoils that can be used in models, but at our scale it really doesn't seem to be too critical at all, so don't get bogged down by all the complexities!

 

tim

 

 

[Vasili Flame]

Tim,

 

Thanks for the infomation on that profili downloaded the demo and it's really mindblowing who would think a wing would be so complex, but it's all a learning process, it's really highlight things i just never would have figured out by myself, i think i have managed to get right dimensions.

 

Sage Type 2 Fighter 1/7 conversion

Wing Span-----96.71412857142857  Inches
Length--------36.276714285714284 Inches

Height--------16.254142857142856 Inches

 

i dont know were to round it off lol

 

Also i have found  this below thats got the the type2 spec's as in incidence, dihedral,wing gaps & wing chord, do you think i can use thease mesurements to build into the plane ?

[Tim Hooper]

Vasili,

 

96" span? 

Mind you, that bottom table looks to have lots of useful diamensions that you could utilise in your drawing, although I'd stay well clear of that figure of 5° incidence for the lower wing.  It's just not necessary on a small model.

tim

[Vasili Flame]

Thanks tim,

 

i will take your advice &  start a thread on rcgroups, i have been browsing that forum but because it is an american  board i didnt sign up , so what i will do i'll crack on i'll just keep this thread updated on my progress .

Edited By Vasili Flame on 28/02/2010 21:37:22

[Andy Gates]

I would look at a 96.75" wingspan, 36.25" length and 16.25" height.

So what I have done there is scaled to the nearest 1/4" for ease of use.

 

As Tim suggests, I would ignore the incidence angles and use a tried and tested version of angles from another similar machine although I would use the 2 degree dihedral angle.