stunthanger.com
Speed,Combat,Scale,Racing => Scale Models => Topic started by: Thomas Wilk on November 14, 2011, 11:03:27 AM
-
this looks like it might make an interesting model. this was a German WW-2 design.
Tom Wilk
-
And I thought this Soviet WW2 time experimental was a bit strange...
-
Looks like it did fly http://www.luft46.com/misc/sackas6.html but very little is known on the paint scheam.
-
here is another German design.
Tom Wilk
-
and Messerschmidt had a few
-
Oddball, here's oddball! n~
-
here's an Italian dream.
-
the original ducted-fan aircraft
-
This one always looked to me as though the rear end of a Lancaster had been grafted on to the front end of a Lysander. Yes that is a 4 gun turret mounted at the rear (But apparently it was for ballast rather than anything else).
TTFN
John.
-
That Caproni Stipa is unusual. But it did fly!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYqr2h_xQRk
Arup S4:
-
This one always looked to me as though the rear end of a Lancaster had been grafted on to the front end of a Lysander. Yes that is a 4 gun turret mounted at the rear (But apparently it was for ballast rather than anything else).
What is it? Are you sure that it isn't exactly what you think, or at least the front half of a Lysander with that rather unfortunate appendage built for it by hand?
-
You want weird aircraft? Secret Nazi projects?
:D
Take a deep breath and try: http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/
-
What is it? Are you sure that it isn't exactly what you think, or at least the front half of a Lysander with that rather unfortunate appendage built for it by hand?
Hi Tim,
It is actually a Lysander P12 Wendover. It was designed as a "Beachcomber" to repel German troops in the event they ever reached the British beaches. The idea being it would tour up and down the beach head causing mayhem with the rear turret.
It apparently flew really well and was very stable but never went into production. The prototype was eventually broken up in 1944..
The thing I like about it is it actually flew, unlike many of the so called world beaters which just exist as a blueprint.
TTFN
John.
-
I'd thought about this designer but had forgotten the name. Got it now: Payen.
Some of the designs were actually built.
-
I'd thought about this designer but had forgotten the name. Got it now: Payen.
Some of the designs were actually built.
This one really flew so it could be modeled. Looks like it would fly ok as a control-line.
n~
-
Payen built several aircraft in this configuration. In the 1950's he also produced a nice little swallow-tailled jet delta, the PA-49, which flew something like 300 hours, and later designed an F-1 prop driven version (PA-71) as well as a two-seater, the PA 149. Later, he designed a twin-finned tailles PA-60 and 61 which flew.
'couple more comments...
I'll disagree with the AS-6 pilot, who never really was able to fly the plane, and say that the AS-6, at the specified weight, was more than adequately powered to fly and climb out with that 240 hp. I did the computations for David Myhra's book research, using Charles Zimmerman's NACA results for circular wings (TR-431 and TN-537). You'll note in one picture that they did cut a dampered slot into the wing to allow otherwise blanketed air flow to reach the stabilizers and elevator at high a.o.a. Main problems were inadequate a.o.a. and torque roll. If Sack had done some simple mathematics, he could have proportioned things better. As it happened, bandaide solutions to fundamental problems proved insufficient.
Zimmerman doubtless got his inspiration for this NACA research and his later "Flying Flapjacks" from reviewing patent applications from Dr. Snyder and R.B. Johnson whose 'Arup' (w/Raoul Hoffman) and 'Uniplane' designs, respectively, flew quite well, as mentioned in Tom's 1/2-A thread. NACA reviewed aviation patent applications in those days, and Langley, where Zimmerman worked, was the obvious choice. The Arup wing would work quite well on CL planes and would probably be more convenient for larger CL use than the Sack wing, since it's aero center is further forward, allowing more tank space. Maybe for 1/2-A the Sack circular wing might work, since light 1/2-A engines seem to need longer noses with low-A/R or short-coupled wings. A stunt wing should be large-ish though, since although the "tip" losses are not as great as lifting line theory predicts for these wings (vortices actually converge and re-stick the flow to the aft center wing), flapless high lift is only achieved at higher angles of attack, like 40-45 degrees on full sized aircraft at maximum lift coefficients of 1.5 -1.8. So if you want to stunt a scale model, too small a wing might make over-rotation pretty visible in maneuvers. An interesting sidelight is that such a slot as seen on the AS-6 or Roy Clough's FF saucer, acts to resist roll, sort of a built-in dihedral.
If you're interested in Arup configurations, you really ought to click on my link in Tom's 1/2-A thread and view motion pictures of the S-2 in flight. You'll see evidence of its 4:1+ high/low speed ratio, achieved without flaps (97/23 mph), and its steep climb out and landing approach on just 70 hp. That might encourage a CL variant, especially considering its large MAC.
I have files on unconventional configurations (mostly tailless or tandem multiplanes) by well over 300 designers. Anyone interested can e-mail me. How about Ligeti's "Stratos"?
SK
-
You want weird aircraft? Secret Nazi projects?
:D
Take a deep breath and try: http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/
Its not important but where's the airplane. I got lost here somewhere.