Author Topic: Arch Adamisin's Tri-Canard (Read 4378 times)

Dennis Adamisin · « **on:** January 19, 2008, 07:52:09 PM »

My brother Arch has had a lot of questions about this bird - and posted some comments in one of the other threads. His scanner is down - I am posting these pix on his behalf.

Arch will be chiming in with the tale of the tape & such. I got to fly it once - it had the darndest combination of rock solid stability and razor sharp cornering I have ever seen.

THIS ONE ought to provoke some discussion!!!

John Paris · « **Reply #1 on:** January 19, 2008, 08:29:07 PM »

Denny and Arch,
Nice airplane. I have often wondered if it would not be better to leave the flaps off of an airplane, provided that there was sufficient lift, and use a canard to help make the airplane turn. I am looking forward to the discussion and input on this particular subject.
John

Arch Adamisin · « **Reply #2 on:** January 20, 2008, 06:31:12 AM »

Denny,
Thanks for posting the pictures. I knew we had some somewhere. Those were taken at the Nat's where it was picked as one of the ten best designs of that Nat's and it also received the Jack Sheeks innovation award. Both awards that I still proudly dust, Thanks Jack. I do wish we'd have done more with it but with our returning to stunt, maybe more people will get a chance to see the concept in action. Maybe someone besides me might want to fly it.
Using the glass fuse my son Archie made for his Gemini will make for a much better looking model.
John, disconnecting the flaps was one of the options we'd discussed trying on the second generation model. Those provisions were not built into this first model but thanks for reminding me to make that option possible this time around.

Arch

EddyR · « **Reply #3 on:** January 20, 2008, 06:59:08 AM »

Arch I saw your answer under "classic planes". If I understand what you are saying and now seeing the picture, when the elevator goes up and the flaps go down the moving part of the canard goes down. Is this correct? I have been planning for several years to build a similar design but I was not sure which way to move the canard. With out flaps it is easy to set the two surfaces go in opposite directions. But adding flaps had me stopped. I also had thought of letting the canard surface be fixed not move or even letting it be free to move as it wants ,no controls to it. I have seen a stunt plane fly with the flaps disconnected to move as they want and it flew very well,better than fixed flaps. I have a Brodak Legacy set aside for this conversion.
Ed

Will Hinton · « **Reply #4 on:** January 21, 2008, 11:48:53 AM »

Arch & Denny,
That is one FABULOUS ship! I can't wait to see one fly. Only problem is, that canard would look wonderful on my Ephesian and I had promosed myself this would be the last twin boomer I will build.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm - maybe not.
Blessings,
Will

Randy Powell · « **Reply #5 on:** January 21, 2008, 01:35:47 PM »

I do like the high aspect wing. I would imagine you could do without the flaps. I am interested in how you did the control hookup. Must have been challenging. I would be temped to do something really wild with this sort of layout, but that's me. I foresee a sort of X-Wing fighter with the forward stab in an anhedral configuration and the rear one in a dihedral set. Or possible a straight front stab, and anhedral wing and and dihedral rear stab. Man, I may have to dig out my plans for just such a plane. What fun.

Arch Adamisin · « **Reply #6 on:** January 21, 2008, 08:30:15 PM »

Randy,
The linkage on this one was really simple. With the canard on top, the rearward motion of the elevator pushrod was the same motion I needed for the canard so it is a simple connecting pushrod from the flap horn to the control horn on the canard.
On the Gemini that my son built, the canard was mounted on the cowl line and all the linkage had to go through the tank compartment. There is where we had trouble. After struggling with it for quite some time and needing to get the model finished to fly at the Nat's, we just tossed the canard on the bench for another time.
After we came home from the Nats, I assembled a test unit on the bench and worked out how to get the right motion with the canard on the fuse bottom. Archie's canard really looked sweet, it had about an inch of anhedral and being mounted so low on the fuse, it looked like the pectoral fins of a shark on the prowl. I had just let him down by not getting the mechanics worked out in time. We do have some photos of it in this configuration and the look is awesome. I'll post these as soon as I can find them. His original configuration is what I'll be finishing to fly as my first new model in a long time. I'm even going to use the glass fuse and wheel pants that he made for the Gemini II.
He is building one of my designs from 1968 to fly in Classic and I'm building his design from 1990 to fly in CLPA. It's going to be a really fun year.
The high aspect ratio wing that is a carry over of something that we started a very long time ago. I personally really like the long wing and have not ever experienced anything thatwould cause me to change back. I know there have been some that have had some issues with them but we've never experienced any problems with them.
Thanks to you, John, Will and Ed for the kind words about the design. It is an idea that had not been fully explored but one that will get considerable attention from us over the coming year.

Arch

Randy Powell · « **Reply #7 on:** January 21, 2008, 09:59:19 PM »

Arch,

I loved the high aspect planes when the air was clean. The only problems I really had, once I worked things out, was in really turbulent air. I live in the Northwest and it is not uncommon for our flying sites to be surrounded by very tall trees. Makes for some very dirty air. High aspect designs, while they have some very cool traits, are usually more susceptible to turbulence. I got tired of seeing the top and bottom of the wing on every pullout. Sigh ... But what a corner. In clean air, it was just awesome

Just to make your day, here's a plane I designed and built from about 1982

Arch Adamisin · « **Reply #8 on:** January 21, 2008, 11:19:58 PM »

Randy,
It's really too bad we live so far apart, we seem to share some common ideas. That's a great looking model. Like I said before, you can build for me anytime.

Arch

Will Hinton · « **Reply #9 on:** January 22, 2008, 03:24:31 PM »

Okay Arch & Randy, how 'bout the canard with the aft tail section being a V tail and the forward (canard) with anhedral? Now THAT would look cool!

Sorry if I caused you to toss the current project aside to start three of these, but I hadda ask!
Will

Mark Scarborough · « **Reply #10 on:** January 22, 2008, 03:54:49 PM »

Ok now heres another thought,, if it were electric, then the motor could hang out there farther, allowing the canards to hang out farther,, battery over wing. NOw you can really get some effectivness from the canard. hm how about a semiscale Kfir?

Jim Pollock · « **Reply #11 on:** January 24, 2008, 01:30:32 PM »

Hi Archie,

Nice to see you posting here. I remember your sort of short lived stint as the engine guru in Stunt News.
I was wondering at what percentage did you hinge the front canard wing and how much area did you
cut off the stab/elevator combo?

Thanks in advance

Jim Pollock, Audacter et strenue

Arch Adamisin · « **Reply #12 on:** January 24, 2008, 02:43:29 PM »

Jim,
My brother Dave did the engine column for Stunt News. He wasn't a PAMPA member and he was told that in order to continue to write the column, he'd have to pay PAMPA dues. Needless to say, since he was writing that piece for nothing, he declined to pay dues in order to have the privilege of writing a monthly column.
The percentage of the canard/stab area is about the same total as a normal CLPA ship, between 18% and 23%. The model shown has the hingeline at about 50%, This is going to be different on the new one, I'm moving the hingeline back. I've had thoughts of making the canard full-flying but the articulated one is more efficient so I'm sticking with that for the next one.

Arch

Randy Powell · « **Reply #13 on:** January 24, 2008, 06:20:12 PM »

Arch,

Hmm, I'm thinking a semi-scale YF-16 with the working dorsal fins (forward canard) and side mounted engine (to maintain the wicked profile). Add the slight dihedral to the tailplane and you have it. What a concept!! And you got it for free!!

Arch Adamisin · « **Reply #14 on:** January 24, 2008, 09:12:55 PM »

Randy,
You certainly build well enough to pull it off. I'm just a hack, so I'll have to keep with the simple designs we've used for years. All of our new stuff will be special and I'm sure there will be some highlights ahown here. Right now, our focus is getting all our ducks in a row to fly at the Nat's. My father, my brother and my sons all flying at the same Nat's. It's going to be a good year.

Arch

Mike Gretz · « **Reply #15 on:** January 25, 2008, 06:17:24 AM »

Arch,

Don't forget the son-in-law! Make him go (and fly) too!

Mike G

Arch Adamisin · « **Reply #16 on:** January 25, 2008, 09:09:56 AM »

Mike,
Todd's going through the same things the rest of us have. Real life getting in the way. He has several models in various stages of completion but there just isn't enough time to play with the models, between his job and the babies. He and Ami have also finished major renovations in their home during this time . He'll be back as soon as possible, I know he does miss flying.

Arch

Randy Powell · « **Reply #17 on:** January 25, 2008, 11:01:37 AM »

Arch,

And browbeat Pete into flying. The boy has been slacking too long.

RandySmith · « **Reply #18 on:** January 27, 2008, 12:45:07 PM »

Quote from: Randy Powell on January 25, 2008, 11:01:37 AM

Arch,

And browbeat Pete into flying. The boy has been slacking too long.

Pete is getting motivated

Archie Adamisin · « **Reply #19 on:** January 28, 2008, 10:31:17 AM »

Will,

As Dad said, the original Gemini MkI which he brought to FCM this past year had an anhedral canard built onto the cowl. There are some picture of it in this configuration taken @ Gramps (Big Art's) house in front of the old pine tree. It really looked cool!! When we designed the Gemini, Dad also drew up a Machi racer looking fuse with mid canopy and turtle deck that had the canard on it and it looked even better.

Back to the Starship, it was an airplane that I won't soon forget. It was the most stable level flight airplane I have ever flown. So stable, it seemed like it wouldn't do anything but fly level, but then you moved your hand and watch out, it came alive like nobodys buisness. I have also never been able to design an aircraft that had a 3" CG range like that one did and never loose the level flight stability.

The original airplane still exsists and I have been practically begging dad to get it out and refinish it to fly again. It was very light and had a polyester resin & fiberglass finish that should last forever.

If you guys want a real laugh, just ask dad about how that airplane came to life including painting the base yellow in a tornado warning on the second craftsman compressor that he bought because the first one exploded. The second one blew a fan blade while painting. The trim color was put on in our hotel room @ the Best Western and the the clear applied as well. I am sure that room has never recovered!!!

Not only was it a cool airplane, it has one heck of a story!!!

Archie Adamisin (The Kid)
Muncie, Indiana

Will Hinton · « **Reply #20 on:** February 03, 2008, 11:29:04 AM »

Archie,
I'm just now back online after a computer crash spent some of my time and money! How in the world did I miss that airplane at the FCM? It's especially scary since Allen and I looked all the ships over to choose the concourse award! It is now your assignment to remind Allen to keep me awake this year!!
Blessings,
Will

Shultzie · « **Reply #21 on:** February 04, 2008, 07:08:50 PM »

ARCHIE....
STOP TEASING ME...AND SHOW ME AN ENLARGED PHOTO OF THAT GREAT LOOKIN' RED WHITE N BLUE STUNTER THAT IS ATTACHED TO YOUR POSTS..

Awesome model!!!

Archie Adamisin · « **Reply #22 on:** February 05, 2008, 07:26:27 PM »

Well, here is the Gemini mkIII. I flew this model in 1992 in Chicopee, MA and won Advanced and placed 2nd in Senior. It has a fiberglass fuselage & plug in foam wings with glassed balsa skins. The airplane was offered in a prefabbed kit form. This airplane was heavily influenced from the success of the Gemini Mk1, the Starship, & Uncle Dennis' Eclipse. It finished out @ 75 ounces because the young man holding the airplane decided it needed to many coats of primer and didn't sand them out. It flew amazingly well with the monstrous Big Art FP-40. The wing was 67" long with 670 sq. in. And I am not that skinny anymore!!!

Enjoy!

Archie Adamisin

Muncie, Indiana

Randy Powell · « **Reply #23 on:** February 05, 2008, 10:27:47 PM »

>>And I am not that skinny anymore!!!<<

Or that blond, I imagine.

James Lee · « **Reply #24 on:** February 06, 2008, 09:42:38 AM »

Arch and Archie
I remember seeing that hobby shop/ plane factory/motel room...

!! planes, stuff and people everywhere!! If I remember right, that was the year Archie and Todd were markers on your flight

Todd and I had some quality time in his shop last month when we stopped by. Several cold adult beverages and talking about planes to build.
He is still working on his OTS eligible house with another house project in planning stage.
But, there is a lot of desire to get back to doing some model flying. Wants to get the whole family out to continue the tradition

We are looking forward to seeing all the Adamisins at VSC

Later

Jim

Shultzie · « **Reply #25 on:** February 06, 2008, 12:51:23 PM »

ARCHIE...THANKS...THE EYE CANDY SHOT...THAT IS ONE BEAUTIFUL PAINT JOB.
(However...after looking at that rudder antenna...reminds me of how many coat sleeves n' shirt tails that I IMPAILED with that sharp little thingeee on my first Sting Ray...however, after sticking JOE DILL my helpers rain coat on take-off during a practice session...IT NEVER WAS A PROBLEMO after that.

ANY ONE GOT SIMILAR HELPER'S GONE WILD RELATED STORIES???

Archie Adamisin · « **Reply #26 on:** February 07, 2008, 06:45:21 AM »

Randy,

Still that blonde, but the greys are coming in on the Goe Ti

Archie Adamisin

Muncie, Indiana

don Burke · « **Reply #27 on:** February 07, 2008, 09:29:11 AM »

Are any of those fiberglass fuselages, or kits, still around and available?

Archie Adamisin · « **Reply #28 on:** February 07, 2008, 11:57:20 AM »

Don,

The molds and templates are still around. Availability would depend on demand. There are a few pieces hanging around, but nothing that I would sell. Dad plans on using a fuse from the Gemini III for his new Starship stunter and uncle Dennis has plans on using one on his new full blown stunter. I am currently designing a new Gemini IV purpose built electric 650 sq in bird 7:1 AR bird.

Thanks for the interest.

Archie Adamisin

Muncie, Indiana

Will Hinton · « **Reply #29 on:** February 10, 2008, 01:25:52 PM »

There is just no way a good red, white, and blue scheme gets old or tiresome is there? I remember the airplane but not the shirt!
Blessings,
Will

rustler · « **Reply #30 on:** February 11, 2008, 02:04:37 PM »

[quote The molds and templates are still around. Availability would depend on demand.
Archie Adamisin[/quote]

Hi Archie. I realise this is a bit difficult for you, it's a bit chicken and egg situation. Demand could depend on price, and vice-versa. However, good to see there is now a little more interest in this great design. If you do get to the point where you can hazard a price on it, remember there is one guy here who is v. interested in principle. I'd be happy to pass on the info if you get to that stage.

Roger Ladds · « **Reply #31 on:** February 21, 2008, 08:07:08 AM »

Just to add to Rustlers comments I am also interested, I still think the GEMINI II is one of the best looking models ever!! my attempts to replicate it have stopped at the self cut foam wing and tail surfaces, more time needed.

rustler · « **Reply #32 on:** February 21, 2008, 02:37:46 PM »

Quote from: Roger Ladds on February 21, 2008, 08:07:08 AM

Just to add to Rustlers comments I am also interested

G'day Roger. You are the guy in mind in my message. I'll leave you to liaise with Archie from now on?