News:




  • May 19, 2019, 07:39:11 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Heinkel 219  (Read 2030 times)

Offline ash

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
    • I build guitars to pay for CL models!
Heinkel 219
« on: February 27, 2006, 08:27:54 PM »
I guess this is as good a place as any for this one...

I've been wanting to do a profile HE219 for Profile scale, but a Sea Fury will fill that role and I found this plan for an He219: http://www.myunclewillies.com/about5.html2.html (halfway down).
Walter Musciano, American Modeller - 11/12 1964

http://d94132.u23.simplenet.com/images/HEINKLE%20He%20219%2061ws/Heinkel%20219%2080.JPG

The joy of this one is that its the same scale as the Sea Fury, would make a fair standoff scale ship with servo throttle control, and is classic legal if I can get it to stunt passably (with disconnected throttles).

It seems somewhat bizarre to me that the plan calls for a pair of Fox .59s on a 61" craft, but there it is. I'm sure my pair of 25FPs would do just fine at a stuntable weight.

I haven't studied the plan thoroughly yet, but the main issue will probably be the assymetric airfoil section if I want the best of a classic pattern. There's a certain leeway to change that, but not by much. Weight is going to be the killer.

For now its firmly in the 'Maybe' list subject to mysterious Stunt Machine info becoming available.

If any of you have any experience with this He219 design or any thoughts to offer, I'm all ears.

Adrian Hamilton - Auckland, NZ.


Offline ash

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
    • I build guitars to pay for CL models!
Re: Heinkel 219
« Reply #1 on: February 27, 2006, 10:56:40 PM »
Yep, weight is going to kill it. Further examination reveals only about 533 Sq inches of high AR wing. With two engines, two fuel systems, big scale wheels etc. 44 ounces seems a tall order. Looks like this one goes to the back of the 'maybe' list for the forseeable future. I need to get out of the habit of thinking its a good idea to make models that can enter in multiple events. One properly designed and built model to excel in one event.
Adrian Hamilton - Auckland, NZ.

Offline Russell Shaffer

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1334
Re: Heinkel 219
« Reply #2 on: February 28, 2006, 08:33:57 PM »
The two Fox .59's might be just about right for a fast, level flight.  Should keep the lines tight, at least.  Russell
Russell Shaffer
Klamath Falls, Oregon
Just North of the California border

Offline Ted Fancher

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1746
Re: Heinkel 219
« Reply #3 on: March 02, 2006, 05:25:31 PM »
Yep, weight is going to kill it. Further examination reveals only about 533 Sq inches of high AR wing. With two engines, two fuel systems, big scale wheels etc. 44 ounces seems a tall order. Looks like this one goes to the back of the 'maybe' list for the forseeable future. I need to get out of the habit of thinking its a good idea to make models that can enter in multiple events. One properly designed and built model to excel in one event.

Don't be too quick on that decision, Ash.  533 squares  on a high aspect ration planform with two engines isn't necessarily undoable unless you get carried away with the scale details and/or use too much plywood.

One of my current "mind" projects is a twin Imitation which is about 620 square inches and I'd be perfectly happy if it came in at a bit under 60 oz with a couple of .20s  or .19s.  One of the neat things about twins is the large area of the combined prop disks.  They seem much more willing to haul the freight and can live with a higher wing loading than you might think.

If you could build it light and power it with a couple of OS .15 FPs you might be surprised.

Ted

Offline ash

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
    • I build guitars to pay for CL models!
Re: Heinkel 219
« Reply #4 on: March 02, 2006, 08:37:43 PM »
Thanks for the input. The high aspect ratio would be a help, but one of the pre-requisites for any twin I build is that it use the two nice 25FPs I have already. My biggest problem is that I have too many "mind" projects as you put it... especially for classic stunt. Matching engines/plans/classes is a nightmare when there is only room to build one at a time!!

I'll definetly build an He 219 for the two 25s one day, but the question will be whether to build it pretty for F4B or profile scale or build it super light for classic stunt. Leading odds are with the original plan of doing a profile scale He219 and going with the little Hooptee for classic. There's a Rabe Bearcat plan yanking at my chain for classic though... If I had a spare ST46/60 lying around it would be a done deal ;D
Adrian Hamilton - Auckland, NZ.

Offline Trostle

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2455
Re: Heinkel 219
« Reply #5 on: March 05, 2006, 12:49:15 AM »
Thanks for the input. The high aspect ratio would be a help, but one of the pre-requisites for any twin I build is that it use the two nice 25FPs I have already. My biggest problem is that I have too many "mind" projects as you put it... especially for classic stunt. Matching engines/plans/classes is a nightmare when there is only room to build one at a time!!

I'll definetly build an He 219 for the two 25s one day, but the question will be whether to build it pretty for F4B or profile scale or build it super light for classic stunt. Leading odds are with the original plan of doing a profile scale He219 and going with the little Hooptee for classic. There's a Rabe Bearcat plan yanking at my chain for classic though... If I had a spare ST46/60 lying around it would be a done deal ;D

Let me offer a couple of ideas.

1.† If you are only interested in profile scale but with limited maneuverability, you might want to look at the article on the He 219 by Joe DeMarco in the May 74 issue of Flying Models.† This is a profile for two .15 engines.† 38.5 inch span. and measures just less than 200 sq in.† Thin airfoil, no flaps.† It captures the look of the He 219, but the wing planform is "simplified" somewhat and does not have the taper ratio of the outboard panels.† This model appears to be more for "sport flying" than a serious profile scale entry.† It might be capable of some basic maneuvers, but would not be any serious airplane for doing the full pattern.

If you want a semi-scale profile He 219 for competition stunt, it would make more sense to draw up your own and make the trade-offs you are comfortable with on how much scale you want it to be.† †If you are using two .25 engines, a comfortagle wing area would be somewhere with something less than 600 and 650 sq in.† You could go bigger, but to no real advantage.† †In fact, with the .25's, 575 to 600 with a decent weight (less than 55 oz) would probably work surprisingly well.† (As Ted Fancher suggested, the extra propeller contributes significantly to the performance of a stunt ship.)† If you do your own, you might want to look very closely at the work that Al Rabe does with his semi scale designs.

2.† Regarding your comment about the Al Rabe Bearcat.† Al's design from March 1970 American Aircraft Modeler is Classic legal.† He flew this airplane to a 2nd placeat the 69 Nats and another 2nd at the 70 Nats.† With the right power plant, this is one of the better flying classic ships you can find .† And Al could probably help you with an improved version of his Bearcat that is still classic legal with a slightly different airfoil and lighter construction.† Keep the weight within reason. (60 oz would be at the upper end.)† The ST .46 is a good engine and has been used successfully in this airplane.† However, there are now better choices.† A PA 51, or a Jett 50 or a ROJett 50 would give this design the extra boost that it needs.† A .60 also works.† I have successfully campaigned my Gulfhawk Bearcat with a Jett 50 for 5 years in classic. (VSC 1st† and Nats 2nd in 2005 classic events.)† † †I use it for the Open events as well and it has performed well even against the "modern" designs and the tuned pipes.† (Finished 20th in Open stunt at the 2004 Nats.)

Offline ash

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
    • I build guitars to pay for CL models!
Re: Heinkel 219
« Reply #6 on: March 05, 2006, 03:25:53 PM »
Hi Keith. I have the DeMarco plan. Unfortunately, not old enough for classic, not scale enough for scale and not aerobatic enough for aerobatics. I just so fussy ;D

I thin kyour suggestion of drawing my own is where I'll go with this one. Its the way I usually do things, unless rules require a documented design. Aside from the few points noted, the Musicano plan looks like a pretty good place to start. Profilise it, a tiny bit more chord and maybe a NACA0018 section would take care of business.

As you say, the Bearcat would benefit from a boost over the ST46. Unfortunately PAs and Jetts are out of my league for the time being. I also tend to complicate my Classic requirements by favouring period appropriate powerplants. Not for any better reason that that it just seems 'proper' for what is supposed to be a fun event. As it happens I have a lead on a strong 60 that might be just the thing.

 
Adrian Hamilton - Auckland, NZ.

Willis Swindell

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Heinkel 219
« Reply #7 on: March 07, 2006, 09:13:32 PM »
I have built two Heinkel 219 The green one is about 500 sq. in. with two OS 20's   the gray one is about 680 sq. in. with two Saito 30's
Willis
« Last Edit: January 31, 2007, 06:36:08 PM by Willis Swindell »

Offline ash

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
    • I build guitars to pay for CL models!
Re: Heinkel 219
« Reply #8 on: March 08, 2006, 06:25:06 PM »
Nice, Willis. They look like scaled DeMarco plan He219s. Flaps, or are the flaps fixed?
Adrian Hamilton - Auckland, NZ.

Willis Swindell

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Heinkel 219
« Reply #9 on: March 08, 2006, 07:20:54 PM »
Both have flaps the gray one has a Time machine wing. The green one has a Brodak ME109 wing stretched two inches. Both have two push rods for the V tails. The only thing I didnít like was the rudders turned out larger then I liked, because of the width of the elevators. I have won a couple advanced stunt contest with the Gray. The WOW factor I guess.
Willis
« Last Edit: March 09, 2006, 07:39:46 AM by Willis Swindell »

Offline ash

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
    • I build guitars to pay for CL models!
Re: Heinkel 219
« Reply #10 on: March 10, 2006, 02:11:21 AM »
There's nothing like a winning model for WOW factor!

Adrian Hamilton - Auckland, NZ.


Tags: