Hi Ted,
Never fear, landing gear is here! More like sucked up, not blown off...heh.
I have to admit, they let me fly this bird, and it was spooky flying a stunter with no gear showing after the retracts pull it up. Leaves you feel more like you are flying a combat ship...also, my vision is good enough to focus on the tail wheel still being down and found that rather incongruous to what my brain expects to see in flight. It also leaves you feeling that somehow your bottoms have gotten higher, since I guess we see the gear in our peripheral visualization of our bottoms. I also have some opinions on how the gear up affected the over all trim of the plane, but I don't want to totally hijack this thread and will leave it at that.
At it's current state of trim in this photo, I believe it was 80+ ounces... and those flaps were not helping the situation by flexing so much.
I would imagine that flap flex not only would be negative for loss of lift, but for many other reasons as well, like...
A overly flexible flap would:
1) let more air spill through an un-taped gap
2) add a springy feeling to the controls
3) allow you to be driven down in consecutive maneuvers in high winds, just like springy pushrods. Add an over-weight forward C/G plane to this mix, and splat.
4) potentially create an untrimable airplane, especially if only one of the flaps is flexible, and the other is stiff. Lesson here is make sure both are of similar wood and covering technique.
5) mess with your muscle memory when flying in varying conditions
I say overly flexible only because Howard seems to have found a way to take stiffness too far, at least thats what he posted once that Paul told him?
Maybe Howard / Paul can add more to the story and make a list of what the pitfalls of that was? My only guess is that it made them too efficient, and perhaps he didn't have adjustable controls available to dial out the ratio to suit?
EricV
Holy Cow, Eric!
Forget the flaps. The bloody wheels musta blown out the bottom of that square!
Ted