Author Topic: Swinger! (Read 7606 times)

Dennis Adamisin · « **on:** December 09, 2007, 10:57:07 AM »

I was set to do just another build thread, but when you hang out with Schultzie he brings out the uh, best(?) in ya! So, with HUGE apologies to John Anderson...

In March of 08 at the 20th VSC
We'll all meet in the desert, to honor our friend Sheeks
Some folks are building Vixens, Torinos and SC's
But as for me I knew right then just what my plane would be
Way back in 67, or was it 68?
Jack laid out a new design - the look was really great
Built as a swept I-beam, mounted way up high
Just one look is all it took I knew that's what I'd fly

I'll build a Swinger, yeah the Swinger
That Swinger is as purdy as the stars up in the sky
can hardly wait till its all built then I'm gonna fly
My Swinger, yeah the Swinger!

My frame work's all together, resting in its jigs
So now I'm sitting here, just cutting all those ribs
I'll line them up and fit them, one piece at a time
Before you know, after the snow, that's when I'll be flyin

My Swinger, yeah the Swinger
That Swinger is as purdy as the stars up in the sky
When they see how coolit be, that TROPHY will be MINE
and my Swinger!

(after being cooped up over a week I'm supposed to be allowed outside tomorrow...)

Randy Powell · « **Reply #1 on:** December 09, 2007, 12:57:17 PM »

Dennis,

Now, that's out of control.

Very good use of electric power. Makes that nose suddenly easy to construct.

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #2 on:** December 09, 2007, 02:20:38 PM »

A swinging electric.
Now that is a shock!
Would Jack allow that in his shop?

Uncle Mikey will pout
He says no pipes are allowed
But his shock is seen now
Does this mean that batteries are out?

But Santa says "Swing you Swinger"
'Cause when the snow stops
Denny will come out of his shop.
With a swing bird that shocks!

EddyR · « **Reply #3 on:** December 09, 2007, 04:30:45 PM »

Dennis The Swinger has one of the most convoluted fuselage designs ever. It looks like you have come up with some thing that will work. Are you going to add the jet pods on after the wing is built?
Ed

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #4 on:** December 09, 2007, 05:37:00 PM »

Tom:
Answering a ryhme with a rhyme? I am unworthy!

BTW how 'bout a 'Vixen update???

Ed:
You're right about the fuse, compounding it is that the pictures from the magazine article look like there's more shape than what I could see in the plan. It is also unusual in that the fuselage is WIDER than it is tall! The plans show two fuselage sides nose to tail then the jet pods with the same outline as the fuselage from the wing LE to the tail. I cut off the center fuselage sides at the wing TE. From about the high point of the wing aft the top and bottom is full width, but going forward the jet pods roll off on their own. In effect the center nose fuselage grows out of the wider rear fuselage. The trick was cutting the outlines of the jet pods and forward together, then cutting the I-Beam and LE & TE slots so they would all come together to align things. When I finally got all the pieces cut and slipped them together they all fell into alignment on the benchtop - felt GOOD! More work to describe than it was to do...

Pix #2: I combined the ply spar angle braces with the bellcrank platform then brought those platforms aft to align the jet pods. Also added fuselage bulkheads to the LE & TE so they would automatically align.

I really have always liked the Swinger, and while it will be hard for me to make it to VSC, I am using that as an excuse to finally build it!

Clint Ormosen · « **Reply #5 on:** December 09, 2007, 05:54:56 PM »

I've always liked the lines of the Swinger. But the name reminds me of a Dodge Dart.

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #6 on:** December 10, 2007, 04:03:43 AM »

Quote from: Ty Marcucci on December 09, 2007, 08:18:38 PM

Heh, heh, the name reminds me of a woman I knew in Idaho.

Ty:
Uh, which name; Swinger, Dodge, or Dart???

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #7 on:** December 10, 2007, 08:08:31 AM »

Dennis,

The "Sea Vixen" has been slowed by other priorities, including items for customers, an "All American" build for a cutomer, work, and the always prestent honey dos.

I have started the cockpit, and have even made a quasi Martin Baker ejection seat.

I am not happy with the controls. The narrow booms at the flap required using one Rocket City type ball link, and a smaller DuBro at each flap horn.
Now that it is all closed up, trhere is just too much frictioin, I will have to do surgery and widen the booms locally to get another Rocket city type horn in. This project has been a challenge, but that's what keeps me going.

Once I get the controls straightend out, it should go faster. (I hope)
I'll post some more pictures soon.

Bill Little · « **Reply #8 on:** December 10, 2007, 09:25:01 AM »

Brother Dennis,

Very nice work, so far, on that Swinger! Hmmmmm........... I have no clue as what to say about your power choice!

EddyR · « **Reply #9 on:** December 10, 2007, 05:24:00 PM »

Dennis I also have always liked the Swinger It looks a lot like the real plane. I forgot the number of it but it has swing wings and the pilots sat side by side. I can't get to VSC but If I build one you you agree to meeting me half way at some contest and we will fly them there. I live in NC. Or come down with your dad to Huntersville. He was here this year. I have known your dad for a long time. Mention my name to him.
Ed

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #10 on:** December 10, 2007, 09:35:11 PM »

Ed:
You're thinking the F-111 Aardvark. The prototypes of the F-111A (USAF) and F-111B (Navy) were brand new about the time Jack publsihed the Swinger. I have toyed with the idea of fattening up the top of the fin to make the EF-111 Raven electronic warfare bird - would look cool but it would not be Jacks Swinger...

Am hoping to tag along with Big Art to Hunterstown next year...

As for progress, I got the controls in tonight; except the leadout cables. Kinda funny, You might have seen where Ty was lamenting that he could not fit the ball joints inside the fin of his Knight because it was too narrow. Obivously that is not a problem for the Swinger but the fuselage HEIGHT is. I refuse to use control horns less than 1" tall - and these stick out of the fuselage! In the tail it should be OK but at the flap I am going to have to add a little bump to cover up the flap horn sticking out the top! Think I can close up the aft fuse top & bottom in the next day or so...

Bill Little · « **Reply #11 on:** December 10, 2007, 10:16:06 PM »

Quote

Obivously that is not a problem for the Swinger but the fuselage HEIGHT is. I refuse to use control horns less than 1" tall - and these stick out of the fuselage! In the tail it should be OK but at the flap I am going to have to add a little bump to cover up the flap horn sticking out the top! Think I can close up the aft fuse top & bottom in the next day or so...

The hump will just look like a *radome*!

dave shirley jr · « **Reply #12 on:** December 10, 2007, 11:09:34 PM »

Here is an out of the box thought, why not put a flap horn with a top arm to the elevator pushrod and run the bellcrank pushrod to a arm on the bottom ? sort of a "T" horn
it would only add a little weight for the bottom arm and would allow the top of the fuselage to be flat.
just a thought
Dave jr.

L0U CRANE · « **Reply #13 on:** December 11, 2007, 01:22:13 AM »

I think in the article, Jack mentioned the F-111 as a sorta-inspiration...

john e. holliday · « **Reply #14 on:** December 11, 2007, 10:34:46 AM »

In regards to the flap horn room in the Swinger. Why not a double bellcrank like Palmer did in his High-Boy. MERRY CHRISTMAS, DOC Holliday

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #15 on:** December 11, 2007, 10:53:00 AM »

Dave, Doc, et al:
I considered a couple of different schemes to try to get the flap horn on the bottom - they all seemed to need either extra linkages or a double throw (an arm off each side) on the bellcrank. The trouble with the double throw was to get the flap pushrod on center the elevator output would have been offset oustside the fuselage. Suppose I could have used a flap horn that was offset to one side - didn't think of that!

I finally just grinned & bore it - I'm going to use a plastic spoon to form the "radome" over the flap horn.

BTW I did use a separate pusrod off the bellcrank for the flap and the elevator. Easier to doctor the throws that way, and my 'offending" pushrod is only the one coming from the front.

DOC: I am not familiar with the HiBoy set-up; can you elaborate on that???

EddyR · « **Reply #16 on:** December 11, 2007, 02:02:55 PM »

Dennis Before I commit to a single flap horn I want to see if yours works smooth. I have a jet style stunter that I built in the early 60's hanging from the ceiling in my home office and I used two horns as Jack did. If I use two flap horns I will not drive them from the bellcrank. I will run the pushrods toward the back and connect them to the elevator pushrod that will come from the bellcrank. That gets ride of the problem of one flap moving more than the other.
Ed

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #17 on:** December 12, 2007, 12:11:21 AM »

Dennis,

It sounds like you might have already considered the "HiBoy" type bellcrank already.

The high wing layout of the HiBoy, requires that both flap and elevator horns are pointed down.

The solution was to make a cruciform bell crank.. Two pushrods go from the bellcrank to the control surfaces, but operate the surfaces in opposite directions.

Bill Little · « **Reply #18 on:** December 12, 2007, 08:11:10 AM »

Hi Tom,

This was the original set up in the Space Hound of Juri Sirotkin ('64 WC). It was made with more elevator throw, also.

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #19 on:** December 16, 2007, 10:06:54 AM »

Building rate slowed recently, as I worked on some details. Controls are now all in except for the leadouts.

Ed R:
See pix 1& 2. I installed some flattened tubing in the flaps. You can also use the K&S Rectangular tubing. Even with the single horn I get LOTs of flap throw and no slop or binding. When I install the flaps I will put a dab of silicone seal in the tube, install the flaps then wiggle the controls to redistribute the silicone. I used this same set-up on the recent Sterling Spitfire (with swept FORWARD hingeline and it works great there too.

Some guy around Cleveland

used to use single flap horns with some success. Another guy, this one a "left-coaster"

used it through several... permutations of successful designs.

Works here, but I have never tried it across a dihedral joint... but should be OK as long as it is not too steep an angle. The Swinger has more TE sweep than almost anything else out there.

Quote lifted from Tom N's Sea Vixen Cockpit thread:

"Dennis,
PLEASE don't paint the cockpit on!!!! That is like joining the non-builders. Even a little detail is better than that."

I agree with you Tom, but I'm trying to mount the battery ABOVE the wing in order to control (or at least improve) the vertical CG. The Swinger has the wing mounted OVER the thrustline. To control the vertical CG the battery thus ends up in the canopy. The flat piece of lite ply in pix 2 is the platform that the battery will be strapped too, the two angled bulckeds are the cabin section of the canopy, with the windsield still to be added.

I have all my ribs cut and have been putting off for as long as I can, but I guess its TIME!

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #20 on:** December 16, 2007, 11:08:14 AM »

Dennis,

I would have to compare the trailing edge sweep angle of the "Swinger" and the "Sea Vixen', to see which one sweeps back the most. but the "Vixen" does not have the horn problem at the center.

I wonder if the "Swinger" should have the leadouts come out foward of the wing tip, to get the CG vs leadouts proper. You will have to do the math on that one. I'll have to get a set of "Swinger" plans.

Don Hutchinson uses 1/8" x 1/4" retangular brass tubing at the flap horns in his F-86 that has both trailing edge sweep back and dihedral. It works very well.

As to the painted on canopy.. please wash your mouth out with soap, and then go to confession.

Bill Little · « **Reply #21 on:** December 16, 2007, 12:33:46 PM »

Quote from: Tom Niebuhr on December 16, 2007, 11:08:14 AM

Dennis,
(snip)
As to the painted on canopy.. please wash your mouth out with soap, and then go to confession.

Brother Dennis! I must agree with Tom here. To do otherwise will incur the wrath of the Redneck Mountain Mafia. Bad News......... first sign will be a ruptured, oily, fuel tank on your pillow when you wake up..........

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #22 on:** December 16, 2007, 04:49:42 PM »

Dennis,
I just re-read the "Swinger" article. I see that Jack originally had the the leadouts forward of the wing tip, then changed them to get them in the wing, as on the published drawing.

I think that I would still do the math.

And be careful when dealing with the Redneck Mafia... they mean business... they apparently like detailed cockpits!

EddyR · « **Reply #23 on:** December 16, 2007, 05:32:05 PM »

I just typed a long reply with pictures and it disapeared.I don't have time to do it again. But here is a sweept wing plane I built in the mid 60's with the leadouts almost the same as the Swinger.It worked perfect. The plane flew normal.
Ed

Bill Little · « **Reply #24 on:** December 16, 2007, 10:36:17 PM »

Quote

And be careful when dealing with the Redneck Mafia... they mean business... they apparently like detailed cockpits!

Brother Tom,

To further warn Denny, we're talking the *Mountain* Chapter of the Redneck Mafia..... very bad...............

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #25 on:** December 16, 2007, 10:52:59 PM »

Sheesh this is getting DANGEROUS

Well, SWINGER GOT RIBZ! I am no longer an I-Beam Virgin. Can't say it was fun, had a devil of a time getting things to fit. I think the I-beam needed to be about 1/16" shallower. I used Sigment to install the ribs - hope that appeases the "Redneck Mafia - Mountain Chapter"! I did consult with old "Wailin Willie", told him what I was building. He shook his head and said...

Beamers are easy to love but they're harder to hold
When they catch light they sparkle like stars untold.
Sanding that silkspan through 30 paint layers
Sure makes a stunt flyer frown
Remove your belt buckles, watches and rings,
hope that your pants don't fall down!

Mama, don't let your babies grow up to build I-beams
Don't let them cut strip ribs on top of your hutch
Make them build D-tubes or foamies & such!
Mama, don't let your babies grow up to build I-beams
They're off in the zone while they fit those ribs home
Even with someone they love!

Bill Little · « **Reply #26 on:** December 17, 2007, 07:38:43 AM »

Easier than foam wings to build............ in fact they are the quickest, easiest, system known to man! Come on down one weekend and we will frame up a USA-1. Don't worry, just arrive Friday, and be ready to leave Sunday afternoon. We wil get our regular sleep, eat our regular meals.................... all you need to bring is the wood.

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #27 on:** December 17, 2007, 07:53:04 AM »

Denny,

Looking good. But there is another warning. Don't count how many time you have to repair or replace ribs while you are handling the bare airframe.

Now back to the important subject:

""I used Sigment to install the ribs - hope that appeases the "Redneck Mafia - Mountain Chapter"! ""

Classics never had Painted Cockpits. You can tease these people with "Sigment" or even their preferred "Ambroid", but the RMM say that violation of the cockpit doctrine is unhealthy for ones kneecaps!

EddyR · « **Reply #28 on:** December 17, 2007, 08:00:01 AM »

Back in the mid 60's those that built a lot of I-Beam models stopped using the stock I-Beam as your plans show. The preferred method was to use a piece of 3/8" sheet for the beam with no top or bottom capping. The stock beam needs the caps slightly curved on top for good contact with the rib.I have always notched the rib if it is a interference fit. Some of Billy's very old planes use the 3/8 sheet. The USA/1 from the late 60's used 3/8"
Ed

Bill Little · « **Reply #29 on:** December 17, 2007, 10:25:22 AM »

Hi Eddie,

I found, while building my USA-1 from the available plans, that I had to add an 1/8th" cap to the spar (as drawn) to get the ribs (as drawn) to touch the spar! Next time I will just draw the spar deeper.

Bill Little · « **Reply #30 on:** December 17, 2007, 10:28:49 AM »

Quote from: Tom Niebuhr on December 17, 2007, 07:53:04 AM

Denny,

Looking good. But there is another warning. Don't count how many time you have to repair ofrreplace ribs while you are handling the bare airframe.

Now back to the important subject:

""I used Sigment to install the ribs - hope that appeases the "Redneck Mafia - Mountain Chapter"! ""

Classics never had Painted Cockpits. You can tease these people with "Sigment" or even their preferred "Ambroid", but the RMM say that violation of the cockpit doctrine is unhealthy for ones kneecaps!

Tom, my dear, and trusted friend, it seems young Denny has yet to heed the warnings.......... woe be unto the Painted Classic Canopy Man....... it is bad enough that the Jack Sheek's Swinger will be swung by electric power! I would venture a guess that there is not enough Sigment in the WORLD to make up for such egregious acts...............

Randy Powell · « **Reply #31 on:** December 17, 2007, 12:22:26 PM »

Bill,

Watch it. I painted the canopy on my Cobra.

Denny,

At least you have plenty of room aft for the elevator horn.

Bill Little · « **Reply #32 on:** December 17, 2007, 01:47:02 PM »

Quote from: Randy Powell on December 17, 2007, 12:22:26 PM

Bill,

Watch it. I painted the canopy on my Cobra.

Denny,

At least you have plenty of room aft for the elevator horn.

Randy, that is definitely something that you should not have mentioned in public...... the RNMM can get to anyone.............

Randy Powell · « **Reply #33 on:** December 17, 2007, 04:24:25 PM »

Denny,

>>Sheesh this is getting DANGEROUS<<

No, this is Dangerous. And a I-beam to boot.

And a cockpit and clear canopy.

EddyR · « **Reply #34 on:** December 17, 2007, 05:13:22 PM »

Randy do you still have that USA/1? Very nice. Bill I also had problems with the spar being to short in height so I made the ribs 3/8" tall and then sanded them to size.I always make the ribs oversize so I can sand them into the trailing edge. This allows me to notch them to the spar also.
USA/1 48 ounces ST/46
Ed

EddyR · « **Reply #35 on:** December 17, 2007, 05:28:24 PM »

Since we are talking about I/Beam construction here is my 1991 project for the 1991 nats but I didn't get to go. 3/8 spar and geo construction to the extreme. Notice stab. 44 ounces with ST/40-46 620 sq " Plane flew very well but was to light to fly in wind.Plane was based on Cobra

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #36 on:** December 17, 2007, 06:09:38 PM »

Allright Ed, fess up: that USA-1 looks like it has a PAINTED canopy!

Randy P: I stand (at least while both kneecaps are still intact) corrected, THAT is Dangerous.

I shall amend my concern to state that my situation is Treacherous (assuming you haven't built one of THOSE!)

I am still trying to figger out HOW to stuff the battery in its best location - that keeps coming in at the canopy! Would I be excused if I painted a pilot's smiley face on the battery?

I just hope the RMM leaves me alone about the Moneycote finish...

Randy Powell · « **Reply #37 on:** December 17, 2007, 10:48:19 PM »

Dennis,

That plane is only superficially like the USA-1. I did use Bill's airfoil ... mores the pity. It came out a bit porky (about 65oz on 765 squares) and didn't fly all that well initially. It was relatively underpowered for the weight, lack of lift in the wing and rather large drag coefficient. I did finally stuff a big block motor in it and it actually flies pretty well now. I will probably get back to it at some point. I peeled the bottom block off and did some work to lighten the tail (I had to carry about 3oz in the nose to balance). When I get around to it, I'll refinish the bottom block and give it another go-round.

Don't let the peanut gallery get to you. If you need to make the canopy simulated to get the battery in, go for it. Or you could do the canopy as a hatch and put the battery under it.

I've been fighting computer stuff the last few days and just got this thing back up an running, more or less. Man, I have got to stop using bleeding edge software.

Mark Scarborough · « **Reply #38 on:** December 17, 2007, 11:02:30 PM »

Randy,
"Some days it seems like a coin toss between George Orwell and Monty Python..."
where did that come from?
for me some days its more like a combination of the two!

like tonight was spent fixing the stepdaughters Karaoke microphone, and , well , staring at the 109,, sigh

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #39 on:** December 18, 2007, 12:02:18 AM »

Randy,

On the "Sea Vixen" cockpit thread you said:

"My cockpits tend to be spartan since I'm lousy at it. I suppose practice would help. But this inspires me to make greater efforts."

While it is too late for the "Cobra", I am sure that the Redneck Mountain Mafia will remember your statement in the future.

Denny,

I hope that you are not seriously considering money coat. I-beamers don't like that stuff. Your construction looks too good to do that! And.. the Redneck Mountain Mafia, will whip you with more than a wet noodle!
I hope that you know that your combined sins are worse than fooling Mother Nature!

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #40 on:** December 18, 2007, 05:58:50 AM »

Tom N
Well I did the math. First off Jack did not show a CG so I constructed the MAC and swagged where the 25% to 35% CG range should be (Jeez that's far back!) Then I did a Line-3 calc and determined that the front leadout was borderline OK for the aft CG but a little too far aft for the forward CG so I moved it forward 3/8". Then I bolted in the motor and determined that it was already pretty darned close to the CG without the batttery! My most desireable battery position may be too far forward. Thus I am going to finish off the top and install the nose gear. My packs are due soon, I will just start moving the pack around until it works, then finalize the battery position with a little room to tweak the CG.

As for the moneycote comment - figgered I was in so much trouble with the RMM already I may as well shoot the works before they did the same to me! One of those last great acts of defiance things... (no moneycote on this bird)

Mark/Randy:
I don't know about the Orwell/Python debate, but (non-politics aside) I have always considered the forum to be kind of a blended Marxism: part Karl, part Groucho.

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #41 on:** December 18, 2007, 11:00:24 AM »

Denny,

Your calculation results are interesting. Since I do not have the "Swinger" plan I could not run the numbers. I did a rough layout and you are certainly in the ball park for the "Swinger" leadouts. The "Sea Vixen" will require the leadouts further forward.

With regards to the battery location, you are probably better off having the battery closer to the actual CG.

As you know, proper location of the dead weight is the key in all aircraft. Take a look at the J3 Cub. The pilot sitting in the rear seat when solo is no mistake, it is for proper CG. This also results in a lesser CG shift with a passenger.

With the battery further aft, you might just escape the wrath of those Redneck guys!

Randy Powell · « **Reply #42 on:** December 18, 2007, 12:47:15 PM »

>>"Some days it seems like a coin toss between George Orwell and Monty Python..."<<

Clearly you guys haven't spent much time dealing with the state government. Or the "guvment" as I usually call them.

I spend a lot of time trying to get them to do what they are supposed to do and not the many things they seem to want to do that they have no business putting their noses into. It can be a hair pulling, ulcer creating thing. Thus the quote.

Mark Scarborough · « **Reply #43 on:** December 18, 2007, 03:54:48 PM »

Randy,
AH HAH!!! now it makes perfect sense,, well as much sense as ,, well um as much sense as any goverment policy would?

Bill Little · « **Reply #44 on:** December 25, 2007, 09:36:15 AM »

HI Dennis,

I know the Holiday Season slows us down slightly, but how is the Swinger coming along??

(oh yeah, don't forget the RNMM, they are everywhere!

)

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #45 on:** December 25, 2007, 08:00:54 PM »

...and a MERRY CHRISTMAS to you too Brother Big Bear!

OK, OK. Since my recent arthroscopic surgery I realized just how attached I have become to my knees. I've already upset the RNMM enough by using e-power in place of the Enya, I do not feel brave enough to also test them by using a painted canopy! I will promise to add some detail probably even a Pilots head, but I can also promise it will be NO WHERE as good as Tom N's Sea Vixen cockpit.

But at least I can keep my knee caps (can't I???)

As for progress, things got distracted by recent Christmas parties, went to the In-Laws weekend before last then hosted the OUT-laws this last weekend. In between it seems we have been setting something up or taking something down. The coming weekend my daughter and son-in-law close on a new house, guess who with the pick-em-up truck has a "date" for the weekend?

I plan on closing off the top of the fuse and installing the nose gear. Then I gotta hunker down and settle on a battery position that achieves a workable CG range. Looks like my intended high mount will not work

Bill Little · « **Reply #46 on:** December 26, 2007, 01:25:44 AM »

Yep, Brother Dennis, I knew the Holidays slow us old guys down...

I fell on June 18, 2007 and blew out my right knee, lost three ligaments completely! Knees are critical, but they would not fix mine, knee joint was too bad for ligament reconstruction! So, I have a custom NFL brace for strenuous activities. Found out I can play golf better with out it! I was waling on the knee the afternoon I did it. Couldn't let the leg muscles weaken! No cast, brace, or anything. PT helped me to learn balance in that leg all over again! You can pull my lower leg forward and swing it to the right! Not much holding it together anymore.........

That was the knee that they removed the cartilage from back in 1972. Pre-arthoscopic, so they just cut it open and pulled the whole cartilage out! I played in a college game four weeks later....... I wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer back then.......

I am confident that you will do an awesome job on the cockpit of the Swinger!
(and the RNMM just *might* let you keep your knee caps.........

)

Bill Little · « **Reply #47 on:** December 27, 2007, 08:02:02 AM »

After a summit meeting with the other Heads of the RNMM, we have decided to adopt a *wait and see* attitude towards Brother Denny's Swinger. His esteemed status in the Classic Realm was taken into consideration............ Having a Walker Trophy from the period lends special considerations.

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #48 on:** December 27, 2007, 09:34:22 AM »

Quote from: Ty Marcucci on December 26, 2007, 10:45:43 PM

How many of ya'll remember that silly C&W song, "Just a Swinging"?? Seems like a great theme song while flying this beast.

Yup,
But I'll be singin the version back in post #1

Randy Powell · « **Reply #49 on:** December 27, 2007, 09:45:21 AM »

Don't let'em shake you Denny. Hold firm. Steady, steady....

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #50 on:** December 31, 2007, 07:27:16 AM »

Some progress to show off! Most of it is built actually, the bottom is still open and I need to resolve the battery position (for balance) and mounting. Also need some scoops and ducting for motor and battery cooling.

Landing gear and fin is removable - remaining airplane will fit in a 4' sqaure box that's only 4" deep or 6" deep with an inch of foam all around; not bad for a 1-piecer.

All up weight with battery is 42 oz - so I'm in trouble there. Not a lot of cards left to play except max corner radii and sanding out - then scrimp on finish. Hoping I can downsize the battery some...

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #51 on:** December 31, 2007, 09:37:51 AM »

Denny,

Looking great!

Another solution to the nose gear installation too.

Looks like the cockpit is "in". Bill won't have to invoke the wrath of the mountain boys.

Happy New Year!

Airacobra · « **Reply #52 on:** December 31, 2007, 12:42:47 PM »

Denny, the Swinger is looking very cool. I will interested in hearing how the Swinger flies for you.

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #53 on:** January 08, 2008, 12:09:56 AM »

Denny,
We haven't had a "Swinger" undate in a while. How is it coming?

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #54 on:** January 08, 2008, 09:16:23 PM »

Well after being chastised cajoled and THREATENED with bodily harm ( at least to me kneecaps) I went ahead with a cockpit & canopy. Hope I finally earned a reprieve from the RNMM!

The bubble is a Sig Kougar and includes a neat flat windshield. No room in the cockpit for side by side F-111 aircrew, so like Jack I installed a single pilot head. Looks like the old boy is kinda cramped though...

He gets an aluminum seatback and alum dash panel. Not deep enough to install a control stick so he'll have to settle for a couple bent & glass headed pins. THen again he has no visible arms!

Other items:
* Based on running the numbers in Line 3 I decided to move the leadouts forward about 3/8" versus the plans position. Frankly I could not see any point in making them adjustable - no where to move anyway!

* I embedded a wheel collar in either side of the fuselage where the nose gear pluggs in, and I have two set screws to hold the gear in cleanly.

* The fin is also removable. By removing the fin and landing gear the remaining bird is about 3.5" high and will easily fit in a smallish box for shipping - if by some chance I can get a chance to go to VSC...

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #55 on:** January 08, 2008, 11:41:00 PM »

Denny,

The "Godfather" will probably give you a medal now! I'm afraid that the knee caps will not be repaired as a reminder to sin no more.

Hey,
The "Swinger" is really looking good. I hope we can all get our airplanes flying soon and get to VSC.

Randy Ryan · « **Reply #56 on:** January 12, 2008, 09:58:29 AM »

Quote from: Ty Marcucci on December 09, 2007, 08:18:38 PM

Heh, heh, the name reminds me of a woman I knew in Idaho.

In Idaho!!?? Must have been from the big city of Boise.

Randy Powell · « **Reply #57 on:** January 12, 2008, 12:54:32 PM »

>>Must have been from the big city of Boise<<

Boise and surrounds is 650,000 people. If you include all of Treasure Valley (Boise, Meridian, Nampa, Caldwell and surrounds), it a bit over a million.

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #58 on:** January 16, 2008, 08:55:54 PM »

Even though the progress looks slow at this point there is still progress - running out of things to add-on

* Cockpit is in and canopy on - thus getting the RNMM happy

* Leading edge strakes installed, had forgotten about these but they add a lot - even if they do trash my intended trim scheme!

* Corners of fuselage rounded, transistions to jet pods and wing roughed in.
* Instead of 1/2" ribs along fuselage I opted to plank out to the first rib.
* Cowl and battery hatch (not shone) assembled/roughed in. Needs hold downs.
* Hoping to have it RTC by the weekend - that will depend on other distractions.

I REALLY like the shape and appearance - it looks just like I always imagined it would. Have a couple military and non-military color schemes in mind - gonna have to pick one and run with it! Am still very curious about the performance of the swept wing and electric power...

Randy Powell · « **Reply #59 on:** January 16, 2008, 10:55:08 PM »

Looking very slick there Mr. Adamisin. Tell me you plan to attend VSC with this plane.

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #60 on:** January 17, 2008, 12:35:24 AM »

Denny,

It is looking better an better.

It looks soooo gooood that I heard that the Mountain Mafia is considering paying to have your knee caps repaired.

Looks like we are all up against time. I hope to have my "Sea Vixen" covered in a few days. Seems that every time I complete an item, I add another item to the check list.. and I have all those fillets to finish too.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #61 on:** January 17, 2008, 08:38:54 AM »

That Swinger is looking really cool. Too bad one of your V-Tails doesn't qualify for Classic. Later, DOC Holliday

Arch Adamisin · « **Reply #62 on:** January 17, 2008, 01:16:23 PM »

John,
Actually we do have a V-tail that is Classic legal. It's a model I built in 1968. Not only is it a V-tail, it's also a T-tail. I think Denny shared a picture of it in one of his earlier posts, possibly in another Classic thread. Those pictures are in the "Kostecky-Formuls S, Gierke-Eagle thread.

Arch

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #63 on:** January 17, 2008, 10:42:58 PM »

Randy:
Sorry to say I am 95% sure I can NOT go to VSC. Along with the obvious logistic and vacation time issues, grand-kid #1 is supposed to debut about then. Assuming I don't make it to VSC then I'll be hoping to fly the Swinger at some other meet here in the midwest wher Jack can see it.

Tom N
Yeah the RNMM "paid" for my knee repair, they sent me a roll of duct tape - postage due. You know the RNMM: if it doesn't move and it should - WD40, if it moves and it shouldn't - Duct Tape!

Keep pluggin away on the 'Vixen that bird could be the class of the Sheeks fleet!

Doc:
below there's a re-post of the pix Arch mentioned

EddyR · « **Reply #64 on:** January 18, 2008, 06:15:49 PM »

Arch Didn't you have a plane at the nats about 15 year's ago that had a canard in the front of a conventional design? If so that was so neat. What way did the canard elevator go when the flaps went down? Do you have a picture? If it was not you who was it?
Ed Ruane

john e. holliday · « **Reply #65 on:** January 18, 2008, 09:25:59 PM »

Ed, I am still playing with the canard that Dick Sarpolous designed. The moving surfaces have to work just like on a conventional plane, in other words, if the front surface goes down to pitch the nose up, the rear surface goes the opposite direction. On the Goose I have the rear surface just barely moving and have cut down the movement on the front moving surface to tame the plane down. When I get the engine set right it will do a recognizable pattern in a moderate breeze. It is fun to fly tho, DOC Holliday

Arch Adamisin · « **Reply #66 on:** January 18, 2008, 09:44:20 PM »

Ed,
Yes, that was me. Big Art and I had spent a lot of the early part of the year doing clinics and I sort of ran out of time for that Tri-plane. As such, it was actually painted it in the motel room, at the Nats. So after the 6th flight on the model, I failed to qualify by 3 points. My fault, not the design.
The model has 650 square inches of wing, 80 square inches of horizontal stab/elevator, and 40 square inches of canard. It flew with a one blade prop on an FP-40, and had a mono wheel landing gear. It's actually a very good model. It was actually a proof of concept design. My son Archie Had intended to use the tri-plane approach on his Gemini, but we had linkage problems and we deleted the canard to ease his assembly. It's a concept that I'm going to try again because some of the things it did were incredable. In level flight, it feels like it will never turn, rock solid, but the instant you input control, it just rotates. The 2 stabs at opposite ends of a 48" long fuse hold it level when you want and move it when you want.Really quite amazing. The canard moves down as the elevator moves up. We experimented with the CG and we were able to easily fly the model within a 3" CG range. How many other designs can you move the balance plus or minus 1.5 inches and still have a flyable model. It still exists and I'll try to post some pictures this weekend.I'm actually working on the next generation of that design. I'm going to use one of my son's glass fuses, actually the the glass fuse for his Gemini I . The one pictured in his published article. The canard will be mounted on the cowl separation line and will have abut 15 degrees of anhedral, sort if like the fins on a shark. The original stab/elevator will still be a V, but it will be reduced in size slightly to take the canard in account.
Thanks for asking.

Arch

Randy Powell · « **Reply #67 on:** January 19, 2008, 12:30:09 AM »

Arch,

It's always dangerous stepping out of an established envelope with a design. I've had some high aspect planes that drove me nuts. Man, I wish I could just forget the turn the last one would put in. It had other problems that I could never really get to go away completely, but boy could it turn.

Bill Little · « **Reply #68 on:** January 19, 2008, 01:07:50 AM »

Quote from: Dennis Adamisin on January 17, 2008, 10:42:58 PM

(snip)
Tom N
Yeah the RNMM "paid" for my knee repair, they sent me a roll of duct tape - postage due. You know the RNMM: if it doesn't move and it should - WD40, if it moves and it shouldn't - Duct Tape!
(snip)

Nope, if it moves and it shouldn't SHOOT IT!
Plus, a *little* stump hole works MUCH better than WD-40. Another *Mountain* satellite difference from th e *standard* RNM divisions.

Brother Denny,
When you make it down this way, I will fill you in, personally, on the ins and outs of the RNMM. Remember this is not only the RED NECK Mafia, but the *MOUNTAIN* division, very clannish and separate.

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #69 on:** January 19, 2008, 11:46:16 AM »

Quote from: Bill Little on January 19, 2008, 01:07:50 AM

Brother Denny,
When you make it down this way, I will fill you in, personally, on the ins and outs of the RNMM. Remember this is not only the RED NECK Mafia, but the *MOUNTAIN* division, very clannish and separate.

GULP!

$:-\$

john e. holliday · « **Reply #70 on:** January 19, 2008, 05:06:07 PM »

Hey Bill, is that the group the President won't send to Iraq because they would end the affair too soon and very little would be left of the country. I remember a few of what was called mountain boys in southern Missouri were not to be trifled with. DOC Holliday

Bill Little · « **Reply #71 on:** January 24, 2008, 09:16:31 AM »

Quote from: john e. holliday on January 19, 2008, 05:06:07 PM

Hey Bill, is that the group the President won't send to Iraq because they would end the affair too soon and very little would be left of the country. I remember a few of what was called mountain boys in southern Missouri were not to be trifled with. DOC Holliday

Doc, you are very perceptive. Those Southern Missouri are a splinter group.

If the RNMM was to go over there, it wouldn't be pretty, and it would probably mess up the economy since it would be over in a very short time.

To Brother Denny (not bigiron), Your status as a Walker Trophy Winner and being the son of Big Art has given you immunity in dealing with the RNMM. I got that past the rest of the high council fairly easily.