News:



  • May 09, 2025, 02:54:32 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: “Eclipse MK II”… Dennis Adamisin  (Read 1442 times)

Offline Chuck Fabo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • New Pilot
  • *
  • Posts: 6
“Eclipse MK II”… Dennis Adamisin
« on: December 05, 2024, 02:03:56 PM »
Purchased the subject plan yearsssss ago … I desire to build … some questions …

What is an appropriate engine ? (plan states 3.5 Oz. tank)

Changes you would consider/recommend?

Additional thoughts?

Thanks!








« Last Edit: December 05, 2024, 02:42:27 PM by Chuck Fabo »


Offline M Spencer

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 5220
Re: “Eclipse MK II”… Dennis Adamisin
« Reply #2 on: December 05, 2024, 08:58:30 PM »
Vaugely Relevant . And Mr Adamisins might appreciate Id seen their things in the mag back in the mid 70s . WITH THIS RESULT . and considered their High A/R  ' experiments ' in contemplateing these back then .
a quater century slips by , & Volia . . . .
What happens if you put a table top on it , and step on it . A normal plane . SPREAD IT OUT .  ;D  ( FLAPS are just between the Wiper & the Lower Intake . )Had to put them somewhere . Figure Tail width ( slipsteam ) for starters .

This was a result of the Adamisin Orange Crate / Eclipse , and other things . Having read em a dozen times .
Another One Id put the flaps a few bays longer & sweep the hingeline . It was done to establish a base line .

In a overhead eight it lifted you . And had superb ' fine control ' on tracking . in rounds .
A dud run & it was hopeless . Like Most THINGS .
Being stroppy , Hit FULL UP out of wingover , 50% by itself it came out clean & level . If you eased & flew it
through it was fine . Ya dinnae wanna buildem too light . This was 72 ounce for 630 Sq In .
Advised to' pull through ' on theengine cut , it overshot my landing point , BY A LAP .
Further , think it was 23 % , Lightning was 27 at a guess , Flew much grippyer .
Half Way for P A I think'd be ideal . Tripped over my 90 % ? 68 in from 78 P - 38 Drawings , for .25s .
As Certain turkies only want to pick holes in em , in their ignorance , leave em to gooble .

This is the same ,but with thicker airfoil & more flap . a big worry with the 21 inch spread , was wotiditdo on the outer .
Wingovers & rounds . on a OS 35 ! , WITH THE ELEVEN BY FOUR PROPS . notonanyother .

Had good support trundling around , good turn . A little Slack in the bellcrank to primary push rod was a major annoyance . MAKE SURE THERES NONE .

Id think , as the thin one liked the wind , but this had more grip , the middle ground would be middle ground , as the blunt other white mew was to grippy & had to be flown every inch .
Which it'd do . But hitting its own slipsteam would cut a wing loose and youd get rekitted . So I dont believe a ' High Wake ' is a good idea wiffem . Like thick blunt trailing edges .

The differance from three adjacent 1/8 wires across , to the wheels , in trim & drag , on the green one , compared to FAIRED legs & wheels was astronomical , on sucha cleanplane . NOTE .

Notta Lotta Frontal Area :

Next I will leave taiplane outers fixed , for a reason or three . The EARS / Aerodynamic counterbalances DO lighten & steady controls . Usefull when its bumpy . More even Handle Load . onna big one .
They were TOO undirectly affixxed , structurally . As fixed ends would give a counter force to control , id think it'd stabilise the rear  by needing more control force ! so a more stable load aft , in turns.



Threw these on primarilly as maybe they wouldnta been done , without those pesky Adamisins having shown the way . I believe BOTH have great potential . Electric in the Lightning would be Far Out
as it'd all fittin the early cowlings . Being sorta SCALE ' Aircraft ' inspired . Old Boy . Thanks Dennis & Dave & All . All thiose hours & money , and its all your fault .  ;D   S?P  well . . . . . . H^^




« Last Edit: December 05, 2024, 09:21:59 PM by Scientifiction . »

Offline Chuck Fabo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • New Pilot
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: “Eclipse MK II”… Dennis Adamisin
« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2024, 03:45:23 PM »
Ty for the links/info!

Offline Chuck Fabo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • New Pilot
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: “Eclipse MK II”… Dennis Adamisin
« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2025, 03:26:54 PM »
Hello …

@Dennis Adamisin and others … is 2.8 -2.9 Oz in the ballpark for Stab/Elevator, horn, hinges?

Also, built-up wing about 70% completed … do you have a WAG or estimate on weight for this part?

Thanks.

Kind regards, Chuck
 

Offline Gerald Arana

  • 25 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1579
Re: “Eclipse MK II”… Dennis Adamisin
« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2025, 07:31:56 PM »
Purchased the subject plan yearsssss ago … I desire to build … some questions …

What is an appropriate engine ? (plan states 3.5 Oz. tank)

Changes you would consider/recommend?

Additional thoughts?

Thanks!


Hi Chuck,

 If I were building this ship, I'd move the bulkhead back to the wing LE and make the fuse wider at the TE tapered to the stab. Depending on the wing area, I'd probably use one of my B-40's.

Cheers, Jerry

Offline M Spencer

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 5220
Re: “Eclipse MK II”… Dennis Adamisin
« Reply #6 on: March 27, 2025, 09:21:09 PM »
Yea, ya wanna look at the Fuse , hinge to hinge , as a tapered Tourque Box . TORSIONAL stiffness paramount .

the TT 36'd haul it well , perhaps . The GP 44 magnums lighter'n a FP 40 and swings a extra inch a prop . 12 Vs 11 . Ya know its there , or conversely , when it isnt , back on the 40 .


Tags: