I started a rebuild last year and got sidetracked. I decided that a rebuild was necessary as I didn't like some of the airplane's detail features. The control system needed to be updated and some repairs made. The engine installations were never finished, the retracts would be eliminated, and some wiring changes were needed. I got hung up on glow plug wiring. I will be using a Deans plug in the outboard tip which will light both plugs. I was awaiting volunteered help with the wiring to get the set up technologically optimum and we never manage to get together. Meanwhile, I started a new Snaggletooth Cavalier Mustang which is getting painted now.
I decided to eliminate the retracts. The systems worked fine as installed but promised to be a continuing problem of maintenance and adjustment. They were intended for a full "no holds bared" effort to compete without concern for the dedication necessary to keep them functional and reliable. Basically, I don't compete and, in that scenario, the retracts won't be worth the effort. Practically speaking, I doubt there would have been much difference in performance anyway. The difference would have been in the perception of judges. Retracts would have enough visual impact to make them worthwhile only at the NATs and World Championship level of competition. But, of course, that is exactly what the Hornet was designed for, performance without compromise.
There are minor problems with the engines. I pretty much have to use OS 30/35s because the hand carved aluminum exhaust manifolds only fit that case. Also, there is the possibility of upgrading the engines to modern metallurgical technology with AAC piston and sleeve sets. I'm afraid to ask the cost, in fact, I did ask the cost but didn't get an answer. Its probably one of those situations of "If you have to ask, then you can't afford it". It is probably more money than I want to spend now on a neat but likely little to be used airplane. The exhaust systems were completed but tanks were never made.
Perhaps the most overlooked feature of the hornet is its aerodynamic characteristics which offer the promise of outstanding performance as a competition stunt ship. The design wasn't chosen for its semi-scale appearance even though the Hornet was an attractive fighter version of the Mosquito and had really nice lines which would translate nicely to a semi-scale competition stunt ship.
The engines were as large as the rules of the time permitted and offered the possibly of the pair of them being able to produce more thrust than a single engine of similar total displacement. Also the engines are opposite rotating which eliminates undesirable effects of Gyroscopic Precession, and P-effects. No movable rudder would be required as there is no propeller induced yaw to be compensated. The sound of two of stunt engines singing in pair should also create a favorable perception.
One pair of new engines was reworked by Don Jelik to improve the characteristics of a motor optimized for stunt. Another pair was reworked by art Adamissin for the same purpose. I intended to run whichever pair worked best.
The nose was very short which gives a low moment of inertia. The Hornet should be able to turn sharply for excellent square corners and stop turning easily for controllable bottoms.
The tail moment is long for a good tail volume and stability with reasonable sized horizontal surfaces. The elevators are increased in size and effect by aerodynamic balances.
The side area is small which should help when competing in strong winds.
Shock gears certainly improve the likelihood of high scores for takeoffs and landings.
The wing loading was not only low but more than half of the wing volume (width and thickness) is in the direct prop blast of the engines. This should also contribute to the lift and corners attainable.
The flaps are wide, full span and torsionally stiff to provide flap lift for competitive corners.
The wing and nacelles are removable which facilitates maintenance, repair, updating modifications and shipping by air to remote locations to compete.
Finally, getting the gear up should create a desirable perception, reduce drag and minimize crosswind effects. When built in, specifically designed, and installed for this application, and batteries used for tipweight, there was little negative effect of retract weight.
In short, I thought this could be a better stunt ship than any that I was likely to compete against. If flying a NObler would have made me a World Champion, I would have flown a Nobler. The Hornet, I thought , would be my best chance of accomplishing that goal.
It will surely be finished someday, but...
Al
Topic: Al Rabes D.H Hornet (Read 3291 times)
