News:


  • November 28, 2020, 12:40:08 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: MARTIN BAKER .  (Read 266 times)

Online Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4069
MARTIN BAKER .
« on: December 07, 2019, 08:51:31 PM »
From Elsewhere .

"     My MB 3 had V small scale tailplane . 10 ton loading .
    Kicked in more elevator after the first session . And noseweight .



I am interested in what your MB 3 looked like.

Keith "

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not neccesarilly looking for ' advice ' . But perceptions would be welcomed anyway . And discusion . Such as Itll never work & itll never fly .

If youve any WORKS drawings of the M B 3 , we wouldnt be complaining .
Started with a plastic 1/48 self made ill fated thing in 96 . Tho had been aware of the MB series in the 70s .
The plasticad wings turned to cabbage boiling them to soften . Had been a P I A all the 18 months of sporadic development . So relieved to trash it.

Did the Flying one around 2000 / 2002 somewhere . G-51 in it , and tried a 80 K&B 40 with pumper fuel set up .
 As it was windy on the penisular .Severere buffeting and 'G's in big rotors would overwhelm the efforts at times .

The K&B with the 10 x 4 three blade had more bite , in those circumstance .
The G-51 wasnt suite to the 10 x 4 . Usually ran the 10 x 6 three blade on that . tho in the same weight 63 span ' Spitfire ' .

Have now a variety of engines . Likely Como 51 & 40 , as the short nose suits their weight , and theyre ' four inch pitch ' engines .
Have a spare new spinner to match the original flat back 3 inch dia. one from the last ship .

It never hit the deck . Tho the new one will definately be fitted with Als Rudder device ! .



I think this is someones imagining of a ' M B 4 ' . Think a recent od British Prototypes book had a authentic sketch .



Maybe this is it .

« Last Edit: December 07, 2019, 09:31:34 PM by Air Ministry . »


Advertise Here

Online Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4069
Re: MARTIN BAKER .
« Reply #1 on: December 07, 2019, 09:23:16 PM »
Heres some info on the MB 3 .



https://oldmachinepress.com/2016/06/11/martin-baker-mb3-fighter/

And a few of the ' FIVE ' , for those that way inclined .Some showing M B # empenage originally fitted .
https://hushkit.net/2019/01/02/almost-the-greatest-fighter-of-world-war-ii-the-martin-baker-mb5/



The Chief .



==============================================================================

Mine was pretty much THIS . But with Fuse. X - sections ( bulk ) at 80% of the rest . Probably 3:2 control ratio , or a touch more.
Likely 45 flap 60 deg. elevator ! Could give you grief top off the hourglass in a gale .
Run back & catch it  zero feet at 10 or 11 oclock to upwind . Then . . .
If you didnt imediately drop the nose - as in if it was fighting for airspeed the wind 'd lift itand it'd shoot 180 degrees across the circle.
Fast footwork - and ' appropriate ' FULL control imput peselected sprinting opposite the aircrafts trgectory .

 LL~ LL~

And we do this to relax . !

But again , no scapes on the paint . It was chopped to just the flying sufaces - awaiting a lighter improved fuselage . But passed on
during a house move . Unsullied & unbroken .

The G -51 output was neccesary for those conditions . Americas Cup in same area repeatedly called off / postponed , whenj 20 plus knots.
And they call themselves sailors ! Problem was the Boats would colapse . Call THEM boats ! ? . Oh Well .

You might inspire me to get it underway . Will need a plug at least for the curved three planes fuse rear underside .

Online Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4069

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 11890
Re: MARTIN BAKER .
« Reply #3 on: December 07, 2019, 11:19:57 PM »
It's unclear what you're asking.  This is the stunt design forum, so the proper answer is to design a good stunt plane and then make it look like your scale subject.  Don't wander off of stunt "numbers" to any great extent, or you'll be building a semi-stunt scale plane, not a semi-scale stunt plane.

If you've misplaced this thread and you're building a scale plane, then stick to scale outlines and deal with the aerodynamic consequences.  In this case, that means a rather narrow allowable CG range, and possibly a dicy tradeoff between enough elevator authority to land slowly (setting your forward CG limit) and an aircraft that's too responsive in the air (setting your rearward CG limit).
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Online Trostle

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2820
Re: MARTIN BAKER .
« Reply #4 on: December 08, 2019, 01:20:50 AM »
I am very familiar with the Martin Baker aircraft.  My MB 5 won Precision Scale at the 2000 US Nationals and have collected a file drawer full of documentation on these aircraft.  I am now in the process of building a semi-scale version of the MB 5, which will be a bit bigger than the two models that Frank McMillan built several years ago that were inspired by the work of Al Rabe whom we have had a close relationship over the years.   

I started on a sport scale version of the MB 3 a number of years ago, but lost interest when I found out that the MB 3 never had a bubble canopy like has been shown in some drawings and a few retouched photos.  The original MB-3 had the Napier Saber engine and the turtle deck behind the canopy as shown in one of your drawings. 

I was just wondering what your stunt version of the MB 3 looked like.

Keith

Online Trostle

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2820
Re: MARTIN BAKER .
« Reply #5 on: December 08, 2019, 01:22:01 AM »
More on the MB 5.  This model is in the AMA museum in Muncie.

Also shows Franks semi scale MB 5 from several years ago.

Online Trostle

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2820
Re: MARTIN BAKER .
« Reply #6 on: December 08, 2019, 10:36:44 AM »

Some showing M B # empenage originally fitted .


Just for the record, the MB 5 was fitted with three different vertical tail configurations, two different horizontal tails, two different propeller/spinner assemblies, and had a slightly modified canopy installation configuration during its brief existence.

Keith

Online Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4069
Re: MARTIN BAKER .
« Reply #7 on: December 08, 2019, 06:06:42 PM »
Yep ; kieth . Im pretty much got the M B 3 sussed . Have to presume the under rear fuselage is semi circular .

Theres a few photos that almost show it . But if you had DOCUMENTATION of the M B 3 in the bulkhead dept .
Particularly rear , it could be definitive .

Not sure i will persevere , as theres many other projects , let alone in the model aeroplanes .

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In fact , youve got /(had ) the only picture of My MB 3 known to humanity . !I sent over a decade or two   ago .
Was in the background of a poor quality ( disposable camera ) poor photograph of something else . Or three planes .
Looked more like a projectile - End on to wing didnt show diheadral , low slung with the 80 % ? height undercarrage .

This plane would have scored a strong  ZERO at Concours . or a weak ONE . Likely relegated to the carpark area .
Was Humbrol ( fuel proof my #** ) enamel . So scale colours .& markings . Grey undersurfaces . No Guns .

With the G-51 ( alowed to rev ) thheyre said to out ST a 60 , in grunt . This thing weighed Two Kilo . 71 Oz .
51 Span . Al's P-51 Mk V airfoil . Fully sheeted . Was built from the less better donated wood from under the rafters
in a tin shed , thatd been there for years .

COMPARISON to P.J.s Stalker 61 Gieske Noblr is inevitable . I only ( closly ) observed this two flights at Albury .
Where it was Temp in the 30s C. So Air Thin .

Highly pertinant to the fact the MB3 IMPROVED when there was say 10 Knots wind .Or More .
 But Costal. Sea Level . around 16 to 20 Deg.C. while I flew it .

Lap times past 5.2 didnt work . Realy 5.0 was the realisticly slowest. 4.5 when blowing . Itd do that itself , no need to needle.

O.K. they both , in a hard square bottom , would drag their ass for half the leg . The nobler worse / longer .

I didnt have any worries with eggy loops with this ,
Probably the Ace Fearless pilot   LL~ was the key element there . !
Had a tendency to feel like itd fall on you in the O.H. 8s , if there wasnt the airspeed .

With the weight and power , a helmet was often a recurring thought , as to sensable equipment .

Generally a well behaved responsive aircraft , operating inside its flight envelope . Flyable IF you were onto it, sharp ,
and it had your undivided attention . Good training for the High A/R 72 in Mewgull , of the same weight .
The Spinner fits THAT too .A more likely candidate for the short list .

Original Drawings below . Found a cleaner tracing further through .As I said , Scale - 80% Fuse X-section/ bulk .
Nothing changed bar airfoil. Which means wing C/L is a trifle higher . Would build at 45 Oz if you went to great lengths .

The MB 5 drg. is for the same wing , same trip . 1/2 sheet V firm flaps , etc . V secure control system .
V secure grin & bear it, hold on securely pilot . Not to be taken lightly . It would make a mess of your teeth .

« Last Edit: December 08, 2019, 07:54:38 PM by Air Ministry . »

Online Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4069
Re: MARTIN BAKER .
« Reply #8 on: December 08, 2019, 06:08:21 PM »
Madona .  :-\ ???


Online Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4069
Re: MARTIN BAKER .
« Reply #9 on: December 08, 2019, 06:10:49 PM »
M B 5 .


Online Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4069
Re: MARTIN BAKER .
« Reply #10 on: December 08, 2019, 06:13:51 PM »
Some Details . for Kieth .

You can see , maybe I ' pulled in ' the front intake of the radiator housing , a trifle . To cut down airflow disruption .
like the P 51 needs to be full fuse width , to match / fair into sides . Behind the wing .

ya never know. I may get round to building one. To me it cries out to have retracting landing gear . :P
The gear leg , bent at the right angle top , up & in - inside the wing - gets the gear up & gear down alignment right .
Using a piece of soft / welding wire iinitial to get the angle & mount/platform angle o.k.
But then of course theres a mechanism to actuate required . Which wont weigh nothing.  >:(

Underside of nose at top .
« Last Edit: December 08, 2019, 07:57:34 PM by Air Ministry . »

Online Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4069
Re: MARTIN BAKER .
« Reply #11 on: December 08, 2019, 06:18:30 PM »
A somewhat less decrepid drg. of the MB3. And a freehand sketch . Which scaled up gets bulky . And would thus require Fuse moulds .
As would the scale one .Which couled be further stretched to match . + 20% span . To 60 " . Add Infinitum . Where does it all end .  ::) :-X :-X

Online Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4069
Re: MARTIN BAKER .
« Reply #12 on: December 08, 2019, 06:36:02 PM »
Its BOTh , almost. Tim .

A bit of a general foofaraw for those with Martin Bakers on the brain .

If there was a sink the teeth into it , building & flying , fit health bloke , who can run real fast , I moght pass the paperwork on.
If he can catch me .  LL~ VD~ S?P :-\

These things can be a pain in the ass to build , Need good grunt , but are a bit of a ' tolerate no errors ' type of
full speed ahead device to pilot .

However 20 ounces lighter might alter that somewhat . Main pain is Ive got about a dozen other pressing  ??? projects .
Theres been collecting info on these for decades, now .





Wasnt a ' small field ' aeroplane .

Franks MB5 . Diferance from my MB3 was ' I didnt change anything ' I thought wasnt essential , from the full size .
Though ' free Hand ' can often capture the character of the actual plane as well .If ya get it good .

My wing tapers etc etc are to actual M B specs . I figured they might know what they were doing .
Even if they shoulda let a young hot shot test pilot the thing . He looked somewhat preoccupied .

« Last Edit: December 08, 2019, 07:52:50 PM by Air Ministry . »


Advertise Here
Tags: