Jump to content

A 'not so micro' Venom


Simon Chaddock
 Share

Recommended Posts

The battery box provides support for the next two formers leaving just a small nose piece to create the full fuselage but without a skin.

All fuselage formers

A test showed it gave a bit over 4 oz thrust so hopefully even with the wing root inlets in place it will still have 4 oz.

The 950mA 2s looks rather 'lost' in the battery big box.

Battery box

Indeed four could fit quite easily so hopefully there is plenty of scope for CofG adjustment! wink 2

Wings are next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advert


A bit of research confirmed the Venom (like the Vampire) used a true symmetrical section. The incomplete guide to wing sections (here) says it used an EC1040 section which was developed by the RAE just after the war to operate in the transonic region but there is very little information about it.

A bit more digging and I found a paper published in 1951 concerning transonic wind tunnel tests and the author very kindly included the coordinates which showed it was a 10% section with its maximum thickness at 42% chord. I also found out the Vampire section was reduced to 7% by the tip (the Vampire was 14% to 9%).

Using a free graph plotting facility I was able to generate the sections for the outer panel root (10%) and tip (7%).

ribs.jpg

I would have to admit that at a micro scale the final detail of wing section makes precious little difference to its aerodynamic performance but I do get some satisfaction in 'getting it right'. smile d

The outer wing panels are a spar less and rib less construction so are ridiculously simple. Top and bottom wing skins and 3 shear webs cut to exactly the right size so when the skins are drawn together it forms a perfect symmetrical section of the correct profile - well pretty nearly. wink 2

The shear webs glued to the 2mm Depron lower skin and the trailing edge sanded down.

Shear Webs

The complete outer wing panel with a 6mm Depron leading edge.

Outer wing panel

Using UHU POR as a contact adhesive ensures the skins stay stuck down but you do have to get them exactly in position first time!

The 'rib less' section.

Ribless

Just 6 pieces of Depron and weighs only 0.32 oz (9g)!

The aileron will be cut out and the servo inserted and lie flush with the lower skin. The rib less construction makes it easy to feed the servo lead down through the wing.

Of course the inner wing panel with the inlet duct inside it will be rather more complicated to make!

Edited By Simon Chaddock on 09/03/2015 17:21:39

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That looks like a true laminar flow section Simon, seems as if you've got it spot on. Chris Golds told me that when he was flying Venoms in Germany they weren't fast enough to catch anything and were out of control at Mach 0.84. That's a lower limiting Mach No. than a Spitfire, which I think was 12% thick at the root and 6% at the tip. It seems to confirm that "laminar flow' advantages were illusory and that wing thickness was more important. Supermarine made a connected mistake when they assumed that using a laminar flow section on the Spiteful/Seafang/Attacker would allow them to use a slightly thicker section and finished up with a wing with a limiting Mach No. pretty much the same as the Venom and lower than the Spitfire wing it was designed to replace.I bet you R.J.Mitchell wouldn't have made that mistake.

Having said that, I think the Venom is a really interesting and attractive plane, it's what inspired me to convert my Pushy-Cat into the "Super Venom" which I subsequently wrecked! That's what comes of me trying to create my imagined idea of what a really sorted out Venom perhaps could have been. I think your interpretation looks more promising than mine did.

Edited By Colin Leighfield on 09/03/2015 17:39:26

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It appears from the 1951 report that the critical Mach number for the RAE1040 section was a humble 0.785 although the rise in drag and flow separation was modest up to 0.84 suggesting control would be maintained.

As you point out this does rather highlight the impressive 0.89 critical Mach of the Spitfire wing!

In some respects you could understand the thinking behind the use of laminar flow sections in that they did exhibit significantly lower drag at high cruising speeds, an important feature for the thirsty early jets. It is just that this advantage did not carry through into the transonic region!

After some thought the only way to build the wing roots was to start from the inside and work out so first the inlet ducts fixed to the fuselage.

Root Inlets

Quite tricky to ensure the duct smoothly blends with the fuselage duct. The actual inlets as scale size.

The wing root structure is then built up over the ducts.

Wingroot1

The first skin added.

Wingroot2

Both wing roots complete.

Wingroot3

As with the Vampire all the parts of the airframe are needed, along with their servo leads, before any of it can be glued together so the booms and tail are next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Colin

The wing roots came out rather better than I feared.

The simple tailplane. top and bottom 2mm Depron with a 2mm Depron shear web at 36% chord.

Tailplane1

It weighs 7.2g complete. The elevator servo lead runs inside the tailplane to pass down the boom

The elevator servo has small fairings on the top side.

Elevator servo1

It is flush with the lower surface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The booms and tail complete with the elevator servo wire running inside the boom.

Booms & tail

The ESC is mounted above the duct with its 'bare' heat sink flush with the duct inner surface for cooling.

ESC above

To save weight the motor and battery wires are soldered direct to the ESC.

The 6ch Lemon radio is below.

Receiver below

There will be a hatch to allow binding.

As I have no more model memories on my DX6i the Venom servos have been set up to work in the same sense as the Vampire so it can be bound to the same model slot - named "Venpire"? wink 2

Edited By Simon Chaddock on 15/03/2015 17:26:53

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Stephen Jones on 15/03/2015 23:52:28:
Posted by Colin Leighfield on 15/03/2015 18:01:34:

If you have them both bound in to the same channel, perhaps you will be able to fly them in formation Simon?

Now wouldn't that be entertaining .wink

Steve

But short lived I would suspect! wink

As always a blooming work of (minature) art ........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calm but chilly today.

The maiden

As always with these tiny planes it has been edited to show just the bits where there is something to see. wink 2

It flies but not particularly well although it is not short of thrust, indeed I had to throttle well back to get it under control.
It needs both more nose weight and the tailplane negative incidence reducing.
The battery can go forward but requires it box to be extended into the nose. The tailplane will have to be cut free from the boom. The mounts sanded down and then all stuck back on but all the while taking care no to damage the elevator servo wire!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...