Author Topic: EXPERIMENTAL STUNT WING (Read 13619 times)

riley wooten · « **on:** February 02, 2012, 06:03:06 PM »

I need someone who would like to build a prototype stunt wing from plans. 52" span, 565 sq. in. Take off from an old combat plane. Should be fun!!

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #1 on:** February 02, 2012, 08:22:21 PM »

Im done with experimental wings.

5 years ago I built a Stunter which was designed from the ground up to do the tightest radii corner imaginable.

It was a complete radical departure from the know design planform. Bob Hunt saw it and promptly said I should stop taking drugs. - The wing was designed to handle extreme high amounts of lift - 700SQ wing at 51" Span... think about it... 32 " Tail 7" nose moment 9 " Tail moment. One of the design elements I wanted to experiment with was having the thickest section of the wing in the middle , not at the root. It was a Quad Taper wing. Thin tip 1" , to thick centre section 3", back to 2" root. Featured swept back wing Hingeline. Stalker .81 power.

Overall the design worked - It acheived my goal of flying close to the unimaginable 5ft radii.. however the biggest issue was despite repeated attempts to trim it - the corner was too sensitive for pitch, level flight would lock in but it was uncontrolable.. not so much unflyable but you had no consistency to the turn.

So precsion was quite difficult. I continued with the trim for over 300 flights in an attempt to fly a reasonable pattern - although several patterns were flown, non were considered good by my standard - ultimatly the project was abandoned and the plane destroyed for the Control hardware.

I still remember fondely the very first flight... Started it, took off applying a small amount of Up elevator.. Once in the air I had close to NO control, as if I had broken the line. The pitch sensitivty was uncontrolable and that 7 minutes was so stressful I questioned the point of the project at the time. Landing was just shear luck... Second flight made some trim changes and Handle adjustments. In the end the plane had to be detuned so far the point of the incredible turn performance was lost.

So I will not say "Dont try to re-invent the wheel" I will say goodluck with the project and look forward to reading your adventure.

$:-\$

Wynn Robins · « **Reply #2 on:** February 02, 2012, 08:45:37 PM »

I'll build it and "fly it"

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #3 on:** February 02, 2012, 08:50:07 PM »

I only have 1 photo of it.

For now.. Im done with experiements - good luck and I look foward to your development.

I dont wish to Hijack your thread - I posted this not to discourage, but to explain what my experiment with "thinking outside the box" was..

I felt not only was I "outside the box", but I was in a straitjacket in a padded room...

Now convention and practice take place of bizarre ideas and concepts.

riley wooten · « **Reply #4 on:** February 02, 2012, 09:00:55 PM »

Actually PJ, it's pretty straight forward, no re invent the wheel. We even flew a simular design in RC in late 70's
Fooled a lot of people with it's performance. We also flew Vampires with K&B 40 no less. Fins on top of booms.. Talk about speed....and almost out of sight vertical rolls and loops. I will try to take a pic and post if I can figure out how to do it.

Elwyn Aud · « **Reply #5 on:** February 02, 2012, 09:03:07 PM »

Richard Porter tried something similar using a large lightweight wing and a small high revving engine. His "Ridiculous" design was published in Model Aviation quite a few years ago. I think it had around 500 square inches of wing area and was powered by an .049

RC Storick · « **Reply #6 on:** February 02, 2012, 09:04:20 PM »

Quote from: riley wooten on February 02, 2012, 09:00:55 PM

Actually PJ, it's pretty straight forward, no re invent the wheel. We even flew a similar design in RC in late 70's
Fooled a lot of people with it's performance. We also flew Vampires with K&B 40 no less. Fins on top of booms.. Talk about speed....and almost out of sight vertical rolls and loops. I will try to take a pic and post if I can figure out how to do it.

Riley I don't know if you will remember me but I am a Tom Warder protege that flew at whitter narrows late 60Ty's early 70Ty's and I met you once. Of coarse I have bought lots of wood from ya. But I'll build it

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #7 on:** February 02, 2012, 09:04:48 PM »

Riley, I didnt mean it that way...

I was just making the comment that I went down a similar line of thinking " How about a combat plane / Stunt ship" Sort of a modern day Fierce Arrow..

I applaude anyone who tries different things & I hope to see your work.

jim ivey · « **Reply #8 on:** February 02, 2012, 11:23:06 PM »

Rilley.If this is for our rematch you hafta build your own!!

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #9 on:** February 03, 2012, 07:04:18 AM »

Riley,
I'd love to build it! I can make laser cut ribs with jig holes for it. This would make a great article for Stunt News. I love things that are different.

Call my Mobile phone: 469 dot 450 dot 7093

We can meet somewhere in the area, or at the "Not President's Day" contest/fun fly in Dallas Feb 25/26.

Tom Niebuhr

Avaiojet · « **Reply #10 on:** February 03, 2012, 07:42:14 AM »

PJ,

That model is creative. Lots of work in the finish.

Exactly the type of model that will develope interest in CL.

Kit?

Charles

riley wooten · « **Reply #11 on:** February 03, 2012, 08:55:36 AM »

JIM, your dreaming again, and by the way that 1956 Nats story you keep telling is great reading....
EXCEPT that was not my plane, although I did observe the event. As I remember the plane landed
in the circle from which it departed and no one caught it.... Good story though !!!!!

dale gleason · « **Reply #12 on:** February 03, 2012, 10:15:54 AM »

I recall it was a 'Sweep and Riley never had any use for 'Sweeps except to kill'em.

Edit: I thought that loose plane that returned intact was reported in one of the model plane magazines. I just went through the Nats report for 1956 M.A.N. (November)and didn't find any mention of it. Maybe Flying Models or American Modeler...

Jim Thomerson · « **Reply #13 on:** February 03, 2012, 02:04:50 PM »

Here is another example. Plans and ribs availabe from Walter Umland. The picture with me is the first iteration.

Jim Thomerson · « **Reply #14 on:** February 03, 2012, 02:06:11 PM »

OK here is the first iteration.

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #15 on:** February 03, 2012, 03:22:23 PM »

A-jet : It was a concept design only; the project has now been abandoned - It was circa 2006, no desire to "kit" it , the stunt community wouldnt' benifit from it as a design in any capacity, it would possibly only be one of those things someone might build if they wanted to have a plane in their fleet that was "different"

The design premise wasnt that - It was to acheive a higher level of performance over more conventional designs. If it worked great.. if it didnt.. no sweat we can always go back to what does work. Since then I've realised how good the StatusQuo designs are. The range of increased performance now is only limited by the fliers abilty to harness it - Engine and design are as good as they have ever been.

Lots of work in the finish? Hardly... This was only a concept design and the finish was completed in 8 days from wood to clear no need to spend any time on it, just throw something together quickly, get it in the air, if it works build a new one. If not you havent wasted anytime.

If there was serious interest in others building one - I could draw up plans, but the wing itself was quite difficult due to the copius taper. It went, thin - think - thin.

Joe Just · « **Reply #16 on:** February 03, 2012, 05:05:37 PM »

Quote from: Elwyn Aud on February 02, 2012, 09:03:07 PM

Richard Porter tried something similar using a large lightweight wing and a small high revving engine. His "Ridiculous" design was published in Model Aviation quite a few years ago. I think it had around 500 square inches of wing area and was powered by an .049

Elwyn, the "Ridiculous" was closer to 700 squares and the engine, a TD .051 used 22 degrees of offset! It also had a shutoff in the wing that deployed with full up! I once saw Richard wind fly this plane for about 4 minutes after the engine quit. The last I heard form Richard, and that was many years ago, he was fooling around with two needlevalves, one for fuel, the other for lube oil. many found Richard to be a bit difficult to be around, but I'll give him this, he always was willing to show how his stuff worked.
Joe

Serge_Krauss · « **Reply #17 on:** February 03, 2012, 08:00:24 PM »

P.J.-

Out of curiosity, where did your c.g. (fore-aft balance point) end up on the "Raptor"?

SK

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #18 on:** February 03, 2012, 08:09:03 PM »

Serge'

It was difficult to establish a percentage becasue the wing tapered in a few different directions. Specifically What would be considered the normal "root" next to the fuse wasnt the thickest part of the wing, that was closer to the middle.

Needless to say I started at 25% and just played around with it. Forward/Back.....

Stability was improved to the point of being flyable with moving the CG forward.. If I took the middle wing and balanced it, it was around 23 - 25. which meant at the fuse root, it was closer to 5%. So you couldnt really guage based on any set numbers.. . It was trial and error in the end.

I think I settled on 4oz of noseweight in the end, but it was either difficult to turn and once it did it went bang!

This was 7 years ago now, so the details are foggy. I look back on it as a gross waste of 5 months. Interesting to look back now -

Also becsaue there was very little in the way of area between flap and stab, there wasnt enough area for the air to flow between. I look it now as a novelty.

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #19 on:** February 03, 2012, 08:13:12 PM »

Let me also add : That plane and my mindset at the time was based on trying to do things outside the box.
Later that year I also decided to do something radical and put a .61 into a Nobler - We know how that went.

W.D. Roland · « **Reply #20 on:** February 04, 2012, 09:25:46 AM »

PJ
You blew it in the Elevator/Stab end of things.

With the currently accepted incorrect method of measuring moment arms there is no point in further
comment.

Riley
You gave us a clue now how bout some hints on what the design looks like?

RogerGreene · « **Reply #21 on:** February 04, 2012, 10:05:04 AM »

Riley, please put me on the list, so I can use some your balsa I bought a short time ago.

Thanks,

Roger Greene

Shultzie · « **Reply #22 on:** February 04, 2012, 10:49:28 AM »

Quote from: riley wooten on February 02, 2012, 06:03:06 PM

I need someone who would like to build a prototype stunt wing from plans. 52" span, 565 sq. in. Take off from an old combat plane. Should be fun!!

RILEY!!! GREAT TO SEE U POSTING AGAIN!!!
It's been many many many years...since some of us NW first met you in person...SUDDENLY APPEARING OUT OF A HEAVY MORNING'S FOG at one of our infamously famous combat flying circles asking us youngin's (George Lieb,Bruce Malm, Mike Potter and I standing there starting up our Fox 36XX powered BIG IRONS n VOODO'S this question!

"HEY YAAAA-ALL! ANYONE WANNA FLY COMBAT?"

Serge_Krauss · « **Reply #23 on:** February 04, 2012, 11:02:07 AM »

P.J.-

Thanks for the reply - just what I wanted to know. The reason I asked was that I could see that the a.c. of the wing was quite forward of the usual place relative to the root chord. It appears that you did the right thing. I agree that the tail arm was too short, perhaps partly because of the spacing, but also because of the conflict in pitching tendencies between the flaps and stab/elevator and perhaps higher inluence of wing downwash (opposite effects) and turbulence. Your plane's performance with fixed flaps would have been interesting - maybe good. Anyway, trying out different "stuff" is fun and challenging. 'hope it was for you.

SK

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #24 on:** February 04, 2012, 06:38:16 PM »

I hope I contributed to the discussion - back to the thread at hand - Id like to see any new attempt at an experimental wing.

Im not even sure if the wing itself could be better suited to a more conventional set of numbers. My initial aim was to make a 700sq wing into a 52 - 55" wing planform.

W.D. Roland · « **Reply #25 on:** February 04, 2012, 10:01:01 PM »

Quote from: Serge_Krauss on February 04, 2012, 11:02:07 AM

P.J.-

Thanks for the reply - just what I wanted to know. The reason I asked was that I could see that the a.c. of the wing was quite forward of the usual place relative to the root chord. It appears that you did the right thing. I agree that the tail arm was too short, perhaps partly because of the spacing, but also because of the conflict in pitching tendencies between the flaps and stab/elevator and perhaps higher inluence of wing downwash (opposite effects) and turbulence. Your plane's performance with fixed flaps would have been interesting - maybe good. Anyway, trying out different "stuff" is fun and challenging. 'hope it was for you.

SK

Bingo!
Add to that the T.E. span wise flowing node( vortex?) and the oscillating shedding of such(top to bottom)
that I would think increases at lower compared to higher speeds that close to the elevator would be a problem
and this would be happening inside of the Coanda effect(non blown) produced by the flaps deflection and inconsistent results should be expected.

jim ivey · « **Reply #26 on:** February 05, 2012, 12:20:52 AM »

Riley, I see your still bitter. I offered to slow down and let you cut some off my streamer.

jim

John Fitzgerald · « **Reply #27 on:** February 05, 2012, 10:14:53 AM »

About 10 or 11 years ago I built an experimental profile stunter designed specifically for a Fox .35. It flies surprisingly well. I am not a good enough flyer to exploit its capabilities. The fact that it flies so well may be due largely to luck, but I based it somewhat on proven designs.

riley wooten · « **Reply #28 on:** February 05, 2012, 02:33:01 PM »

Quote from: jim ivey on February 05, 2012, 12:20:52 AM

Riley, I see your still bitter. I offered to slow down and let you cut some off my streamer. jim

Jim, I have nothing to be bitter about... Don't even know where you are coming from!!!
Have you been delusional all your life or did age bring it on??

riley wooten · « **Reply #29 on:** February 05, 2012, 09:29:46 PM »

Quote from: W.D. Roland on February 04, 2012, 09:25:46 AM

PJ
You blew it in the Elevator/Stab end of things.

With the currently accepted incorrect method of measuring moment arms there is no point in further
comment.

Riley
You gave us a clue now how bout some hints on what the design looks like?

If I can I will post photo of plans.. 12" cord for center 12" - then tapers to 9" cord -52" span - full fuse
25" long.. Tom N. will build one. Might want one more before seeing if any changes need to be made..

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #30 on:** February 06, 2012, 03:03:11 PM »

I appreciate Riley letting me build one. We see each other a few times a year, so we will have no trouble conversing as needed. I am very anxious to get started.

I am having eye surgery tomorrow morning, but hope to be able to start laying out the laser ribs in a few days.

I have always loved doing something different.

I built an I-beam Stunt wing that I called "Night Owl" about 20 years ago. I still have the remains. It had a wide extended center section, but is nothing like Riley's. His airplane should build very fast with laser ribs ready to go.

I will take pictures as the build progresses.

W.D. Roland · « **Reply #31 on:** February 06, 2012, 06:09:54 PM »

Quote from: riley wooten on February 05, 2012, 09:29:46 PM

If I can I will post photo of plans.. 12" cord for center 12" - then tapers to 9" cord -52" span - full fuse
25" long.. Tom N. will build one. Might want one more before seeing if any changes need to be made..

On photos of hand drawn penciled then ball point over that had to turn into negative image for the lines to show well.
I used Microsoft 'Picture It' to do this.

Looking forward to the 'veiw'!

David

W.D. Roland · « **Reply #32 on:** February 06, 2012, 06:14:33 PM »

Quote from: riley wooten on February 05, 2012, 02:33:01 PM

Jim, I have nothing to be bitter about... Don't even know where you are coming from!!!
Have you been delusional all your life or did age bring it on??

Combat can cause this.....

So if y'all do this can I come play?

I have the Magic Sword so be fore warned!

Behold the Excalibur!

riley wooten · « **Reply #33 on:** February 08, 2012, 03:08:17 PM »

Took photo of plans, loaded on comp. I can send it to e-mail address but not to this post..
Pics loaded on Kodak easy share....... Any suggestions??

Larry Renger · « **Reply #34 on:** February 08, 2012, 03:49:44 PM »

Sometimes "different" works just fine! My Sky Streak is a delight to fly and has a number of trophies to prove it. And they were won by both myself and others to whom I loaned the model. Plenty of detail if you do a search on the 1/2A part of the forum. Also a construction article in Flying Models last November.

W.D. Roland · « **Reply #35 on:** February 08, 2012, 04:03:19 PM »

Quote from: riley wooten on February 08, 2012, 03:08:17 PM

Took photo of plans, loaded on comp. I can send it to e-mail address but not to this post..
Pics loaded on Kodak easy share....... Any suggestions??

I try to stick with JPEG format....others will work. far from expert on this.

What size are the (Kbs Mbs BBS?

?)there is a size limit on forum for up load. No memory of max size.

I use the camera and scanner wizard to download from camera to comp. I thought it was a Microsoft that came with the Computer but now looking at it might be HP for the printer scanner.

Someone who knows this stuff will hopefully pop in and deconfuse us!

jim ivey · « **Reply #36 on:** February 09, 2012, 11:57:10 PM »

Larry thats a bute! demenco master? demenco wing didn't fly that well

riley wooten · « **Reply #37 on:** February 10, 2012, 09:56:09 AM »

Reduced size and trying one more time

Shultzie · « **Reply #38 on:** February 10, 2012, 10:27:40 AM »

Riley....
BEEEUUUTEEEFUL' QUALITY PLAN-PLANE-AND PHOTO!
Thanks for sharing.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #39 on:** February 10, 2012, 11:37:49 AM »

Seeing the plans makes me want one. Did I happen to say I like it?

Larry Renger · « **Reply #40 on:** February 10, 2012, 12:52:01 PM »

The Dmeco wing was small, heavy and tried to compensate with power. The Sky Streak is 250 sq.in. and weighs 8 ounces. That is half the effective wing loading of a normal stunter. The forward sweep makes the plane well damped in pitch, keeps the tips from stalling, gives room for an engine and tank, keeps the elevator centered and fairly far to the rear, and looks KILLER in the air.

I actually derived the design over several decades from Larry Scarinzi's 1/2A Streak, as published in Model Airplane News.

Oh, not only is it published, but at least a short kit is available from rsmdistribution.com

Several people have told me of their plans to enlarge the design, one to .40 size, another to .70! One electric version has been built, but no word on how it flies yet (see the Amped-up section).

Jim Thomerson · « **Reply #41 on:** February 10, 2012, 01:53:39 PM »

The Demeco Sportwing gets a lot of bad press. I have built four of them, one well forgotten years ago, and three in recent times. The recent ones were powered with ST G20-15 diesels. I flew all three in OTS competitions; two at different VSC's. At 17 oz they will fly an easily recognizable OTS Pattern.

Garf · « **Reply #42 on:** February 10, 2012, 03:58:09 PM »

Lets get one of our kitters to make up rib sets for this thing. I'd be interested in that.

Avaiojet · « **Reply #43 on:** February 10, 2012, 04:22:31 PM »

I can make up rib sets.

Save them in a file that laser cutters can cut from.

Other parts also.

Charles

riley wooten · « **Reply #44 on:** February 12, 2012, 01:43:10 PM »

I want to thank everyone for the feedback on my stunt wing. There was a lot more interest than I expected.... A couple of guys are going to build prototypes. If it does what we want we might have plans and ribs available or maybe a short kit.

W.D. Roland · « **Reply #45 on:** February 12, 2012, 04:31:37 PM »

Riley
That's interesting design there looks like something one of the combat fliers would come up with

Appears to use a flying Stabilize hinged at 20-25%?
A real airfoil shape will make it very powerful and sharp in square turns.
Is that wing a Sneeker airfoil?

If anyone has compilations, oversensitivity, flutter the cure is weight added to the L.E. of Stab to balance it
at the hing line. Zero slack/slop in controls would also help.

If Jim Hall had realized this He would probably have won that Caesars Palace CanAm race!

David

riley wooten · « **Reply #46 on:** February 13, 2012, 10:04:54 AM »

Quote from: W.D. Roland on February 12, 2012, 04:31:37 PM

Riley
That's interesting design there looks like something one of the combat fliers would come up with
Appears to use a flying Stabilize hinged at 20-25%?
A real airfoil shape will make it very powerful and sharp in square turns.
Is that wing a Sneeker airfoil?

If anyone has compilations, oversensitivity, flutter the cure is weight added to the L.E. of Stab to balance it
at the hing line. Zero slack/slop in controls would also help.

If Jim Hall had realized this He would probably have won that Caesars Palace CanAm race!

No, not Sneeker airfoil.. The tail is something we wil probably play with to get the cg and feedback to handle the way we want it..

Jim lived down the road in Midland, Tx.....Have known him a long time...

David

Charlie Pate · « **Reply #47 on:** February 13, 2012, 10:55:54 AM »

Charlie Pate · « **Reply #48 on:** February 13, 2012, 11:01:10 AM »

Quote from: Charlie Pate on February 13, 2012, 10:55:54 AM

Try Again
Bob baron built a very nice stunt wing (was in a model mag in the mid eighties).
he told his very good friend ,Tom Dixon, that it flew as good as anything he had, but it didn,t score well.

Tom Niebuhr · « **Reply #49 on:** February 13, 2012, 03:31:44 PM »

I have completed the rib drawings, with 3/8 jig holes, for laser cutting and will do the fuselage and formers this week. These are all for my own "Swift". This will help to evaluate the stuntability of the airplane. I also like doing things that are different.

I will give Riley a set of laser components.

I would not think of selling the laser components to anyone without Riley's explicit permission.

Author Topic: EXPERIMENTAL STUNT WING (Read 13619 times)

Joe Just