Tucano Posted November 20, 2017 Posted November 20, 2017 Came across this and it is worth going to the site - will have to translate to english but this is a passable Spitfire replica thats is a real ultralight and compare the profile to a Supermarine - yeah more power but that Supermarine profile is so wrong at a lot of levels. LINK: SPITFIRE :: Létání, jachting. 4 1
ClintonB Posted November 20, 2017 Posted November 20, 2017 Looks pretty good to me. Wouldn’t mind parked in my hanger space. Big sub da woofer for gun noises would complete it. 1
Birdseye Posted November 20, 2017 Posted November 20, 2017 Great replica, but probably not the nicest aircraft to actually fly.
pylon500 Posted November 20, 2017 Posted November 20, 2017 Great replica, but probably not the nicest aircraft to actually fly. Looked through the site and the inflight photos show a lot of down elevator being held, even the landing was done with down elevator! Me-thinks a little tail heavy? (I know the real Spit flies with some down, but that's at cruise) Found a video; Interesting though.
rgmwa Posted November 20, 2017 Posted November 20, 2017 Nice... but this one looks like even more fun: provided you have a spare $330,000 or so burning a hole in your pocket. 1 1
winsor68 Posted November 20, 2017 Posted November 20, 2017 I had to mark the original post funny. He said it is a "REAL ULTRALIGHT"!!!! (sorry Tucano...no offence intended...what you say is not uncommon sadly. It is not your fault)
Tucano Posted November 20, 2017 Author Posted November 20, 2017 No offence - they will all be called ultralights, even mine at 640 kg unless there is a new name created for the expanding [weight] category. All products suffer middle age spread maybe to keep pace with the pilots
Tucano Posted November 20, 2017 Author Posted November 20, 2017 Noted the elevator - yes need more weigh in the nose and that is why this category needs the extra weight - 450kg creates a problem especially with a scale model aircraft of this size. The Tucano is very sensitive to nose weight and this is a consequence of creating a scale model for real people to fly. Cant knock the profile over a Mk25 but it needs it to be bumped up to at least 500 kg to fix issues like this and add a little more air frame options. I would strap my supercharger on it 7 kg and 40 hp - happy days but would require a redesign 1
pylon500 Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 A scale D.H. Vampire would be nice. Funny you should say that... 3 1
Birdseye Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 Funny you should say that... Assuming enough thrust, I reckon that would fly nicely.
Riley Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 Funny you should say that...[ATTACH=full]52737[/ATTACH] Tell us more. I'm drooling! 1
pylon500 Posted November 22, 2017 Posted November 22, 2017 Tell us more. I'm drooling! I had been following the other big two ducted fan projects; The Dreamer- Ассоциация Экспериментальной Авиации - Заглянул случайно в один ангарчик. The UL39- Gonzo - Kategória UL / LSA And figured a bigger fan would be better, which dictated something powered by centrifugal style jet. I had also worked building Sadler Vampires back in the 80's. Basically, was going to make a fan, mould an intake, expansion plenum, and jet-pipe, then build the aircraft around it. Airframe would be all metal. Toying with the idea of a single (maybe retracting) wheel ala glider to save weight. Only drawings... Very old photo. 3
pluessy Posted November 26, 2017 Posted November 26, 2017 I have been playing with the design for a 2/3 scale Vampy for a while. I have the plans for a 1/5 model and would use similar construction materials and techniques as the Spacek SD-1 Minisport (building one as a training exercise), Pik-26 or MC-30 Luciole (foam/carbon fibre spars, foam ribs, ply skins, wood stringer/ply skin fuselage). The 2/3 scale is just big enough to accommodate the pilot and gives 10m2 of wing area, with 300kg MTOW fits in the 95-10 category. If built really light, it should come in under 180kg empty (the SD-1 is 120-135kg empty, MTOW 240/255kg). Engine: 85kg thrust jet (PBS TJ80) or 75-100hp air-cooled 2-stroke with ducted fan (Hirth 3002/3003). The 85kg thrust jet would give the 2/3 Vampy the same thrust/weight ratio as the original (taking off like a lame duck till they accelerate to a reasonable speed). Only problem with the real jet engine is they use 80-100lph of fuel! 2
Blackhawk Posted November 26, 2017 Posted November 26, 2017 I had also worked building Sadler Vampires back in the 80's. Hi Pylon 500, Working on the Sadler Vampires in the 80's, were you working for Skywise Ultralights at Bankstown ?
pylon500 Posted November 26, 2017 Posted November 26, 2017 Hi Pylon 500,Working on the Sadler Vampires in the 80's, were you working for Skywise Ultralights at Bankstown ? Yep, started with them when they were in a furniture factory just off Milperra road, then we moved onto Bankstown proper. After that fell through, I worked in the hangar next door for the next 17 years. That's not me (I took the shot), I think it was the bosses son. 1
Blackhawk Posted November 26, 2017 Posted November 26, 2017 What can you tell me about the Vampire SV-200 they built 1
Raytol Posted November 26, 2017 Posted November 26, 2017 Hi Pylon 500/ Arthur, Ray Tolhurst here. I am building Vampires at Camden Airport. We could use your help if you were willing. Lots of small design changes and would love to hear what changes you would make. www.wedgetailaircraft.com.au 1
pylon500 Posted November 26, 2017 Posted November 26, 2017 SV-200? I'm assuming you are talking about the two seater? I think the single seaters were serial numbered SV-2, being the 447 powered version with turned down tips, as opposed to the SV-1 with a KFM-107 and flat end tips. The first two seater (pictured behind the red one above) was just a wider pod on a standard airframe, but with the wing extended an extra four feet. There was some embarrassment when CASA was invited to watch the testing of the first extended wing, only to have the dummy centre section collapse, which then damaged the test wing. A new engineer was taken on and the two seat program was basically redesigned from the ground up, having virtually no commonality with the single seater. I had moved on by this point and didn't get to see most of the lead up to a standing airframe before the company closed down. Last I heard the two seat airframe had been sold to someone who then decidied to redesign it again, but got it up to taxi stage, maybe even a test flight? All the tooling (for the single seater) has changed hands a few times, and is now with Ray Tolhurst, as above. Interesting note, I discussed l this a few years ago here; Sadler make Vampire two seater
Blackhawk Posted November 26, 2017 Posted November 26, 2017 This is the Skywise SV-200 - 2 seat Prototype
Blackhawk Posted November 27, 2017 Posted November 27, 2017 SV-200?I'm assuming you are talking about the two seater? I think the single seaters were serial numbered SV-2, being the 447 powered version with turned down tips, as opposed to the SV-1 with a KFM-107 and flat end tips. The first two seater (pictured behind the red one above) was just a wider pod on a standard airframe, but with the wing extended an extra four feet. There was some embarrassment when CASA was invited to watch the testing of the first extended wing, only to have the dummy centre section collapse, which then damaged the test wing. A new engineer was taken on and the two seat program was basically redesigned from the ground up, having virtually no commonality with the single seater. I had moved on by this point and didn't get to see most of the lead up to a standing airframe before the company closed down. Last I heard the two seat airframe had been sold to someone who then decidied to redesign it again, but got it up to taxi stage, maybe even a test flight? All the tooling (for the single seater) has changed hands a few times, and is now with Ray Tolhurst, as above. Interesting note, I discussed l this a few years ago here; Sadler make Vampire two seater Hi Pylon 500, I was looking for as much information as I could find on the SV-200, it would be great to see it flying. I know where the plane parts, moulds and all the plans are for it.
pylon500 Posted November 29, 2017 Posted November 29, 2017 You probably know more about it than I do...
Blackhawk Posted November 29, 2017 Posted November 29, 2017 You probably know more about it than I do... There's nothing better than first hand experience to get the correct history details ; what you have told me has helped. Thanks.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now