Aero Ex - Valkyrie 1 Design

[Peasant_Pilot]

I like the Atec. Nice aircraft. I actually looked a lot at the wing design as I like the high aspect ratio in the wing. 

 

 

[skippydiesel]

5 hours ago, Peasant_Pilot said:

I like the Atec. Nice aircraft. I actually looked a lot at the wing design as I like the high aspect ratio in the wing. 

 

 

They get their very low stall, in large part, from the Fowler flaps.

[facthunter]

Best flap system in GA.  (slotted and increases wing area). Nev

[Garfly]

Looks like an amazing project PP all the best with it.

 

Just for your info, there is already a "Valkyrie" on the RAAus books, registered as 19-1684.

 

It's this recently finished one-off build by Chris Weber over at Taree:

 

 

CLICK FOR FULL SIZE:

 

 

 

 

Edited March 11, 2023 by Garfly

[facthunter]

Looks as though it would fly OK. Make sure the canopy is fastened though and it would be HOT under there. Nev.

[Peasant_Pilot]

yeah funnely enough i did see that after i started the project idea

Quote

Just for your info, there is already a "Valkyrie" on the RAAus books, registered as 19-1684.

 

It's this recently finished one-off build by Chris Weber over at Taree:

 

[Peasant_Pilot]

On 11/03/2023 at 2:23 PM, facthunter said:

Looks as though it would fly OK. Make sure the canopy is fastened though and it would be HOT under there. Nev.

Yeah its my only draw back with low wings like this

[Old Koreelah]

The canopy can be a big part of the cost of building. Blowing it yourself requires lots of time, equipment and skill-

as I learned the hard way. Since there are so many similar-sized aircraft on the market, why not buy one ready-made? You might end up with a high-tech new clear plastic that’s better than the traditional soft, but unbreakable polycarbonate or hard but brittle acrylic.

[spacesailor]

Not only ,

US cost.  Carrier's cost,   then ,  

G S T 

When landed. 

Also Damage in transit.  Lose or theft .

I gave up trading from the U S as a couple of items were never received. 

Also a air hand-held txrx from England , just disappeared. 

I felt very guilty for a long time after .

spacesailor

 

Edited May 11, 2023 by spacesailor
Spelling

[marshallarts]

Good luck with it, it would be good to see something like this happen in Oz.  Immediately made me think of the DarkAero 1 - I'm sure you've seen that one.

[Peasant_Pilot]

Ok so, life does what it does and happens....just like the rest of us. Have had a bit of time off so have been working on the Foxcon Project and have made some ground finally with the Valkyrie design, i had to become more efficient at CAD to finish the bits that were holding me up.....but.....i am nearly there with the final drawings and renders, also had to teach myself how to do the render artwork aswell but i have some pics here of the progress. 

[Peasant_Pilot]

Also, the tail i have enlarged slightly and have re designed the wing and wing roots

[RFguy]

ooh ahh forward trailing edge taper wings like the low wing brumby.

[Marty_d]

Nice looking bird.  I like the paint scheme with the beige upper, but with a different colour.

[Peasant_Pilot]

5 minutes ago, Marty_d said:

Nice looking bird.  I like the paint scheme with the beige upper, but with a different colour.

Cheers mate, its my pick of the design choice too

[LoonyBob]

On 11/03/2023 at 11:24 AM, facthunter said:

Best flap system in GA.  (slotted and increases wing area). Nev

Mnk grumble, what about slotted with a 2h slot shape? Fowlers are great, but difficult to have optimally positioned throughout the extension range; and they markedly increase nose-down pitch... (so does the 2h, but not as much for the dCl...)

 

[LoonyBob]

51 minutes ago, Peasant_Pilot said:

Cheers mate, its my pick of the design choice too

Hi PP, no comment on the colour scheme...

 

Tailfin geometry gets critical when it comes to resisting/recovering from an incipient spin; in such a case, the guidelines include: (1) all VS area aft of a line projected up and back from the tailplane LE at 30deg from the vertical, is useless. Mooney took one way to address this, Thorp (PA-28) took another; check out a PC-9. Cessna singles are BAD examples, and the reason the Cessna CG range is limited to make them "unspinnable"...  I'd suggest easing your HS back 6 inches or more, to unblanket the fin and also as below.

(2) Fin area below the fuselage is worth twice as much as fin above, and four times as much as fin above the tailplane (ie the blanketted bit, 30 degrees etc); see J160. (3) A strake in front of the fin - as per your models - helps re-attach flow on the suction side of the VS in an incipient spin, if it is high enough.

Check out the Sequoia Falco.

 

Pitch stability! The propellor has a destabilising effect when it's foward of the GC, and the high thrust efficiency of the 100hp 912 makes it very destabilising.  I'd suggest that you use a bigger HS of higher aspect ratio, further aft than you think you need; I promise you won't be disappointed!

 

The canopy opening thing: Another design rule of thumb is that the engine torque pulses are carried back to the main lift truss, where they are reacted by trying to flap the wings. Any number of WW2 fighters hand the enginemount bolted to a bulkhead attached to the mainspar, for this very reason. Your model has the fuselage sides cut down from ~20cm? fowards of the LE, and the fuselage as a torque tube is voided by the hole for the crew, so the fuselage sides back to the mainspar need to be pretty beefy.

 

Rear fuselage... the rear fuselage is a torque tube, transmitting the VS -induced torsion loads fowards to the rear lift truss; the stress (shear flow) through the skin is inversely proportional to the cross-section, so the smaller the diameter (as you move aft), the thicker the skins have to be. Piper and Cessna singles normally step up one or two gauges towards the rear of the tailcone. When Petter designed the Westland Whirlwind, he chose to have a constant section rear fuselage - no taper- right back to the HS & VS spars.

 

Nice concept, I hope it progressesw well - I'd like an RAAus Falco!

[BrendAn]

31 minutes ago, LoonyBob said:

Hi PP, no comment on the colour scheme...

 

Tailfin geometry gets critical when it comes to resisting/recovering from an incipient spin; in such a case, the guidelines include: (1) all VS area aft of a line projected up and back from the tailplane LE at 30deg from the vertical, is useless. Mooney took one way to address this, Thorp (PA-28) took another; check out a PC-9. Cessna singles are BAD examples, and the reason the Cessna CG range is limited to make them "unspinnable"...  I'd suggest easing your HS back 6 inches or more, to unblanket the fin and also as below.

(2) Fin area below the fuselage is worth twice as much as fin above, and four times as much as fin above the tailplane (ie the blanketted bit, 30 degrees etc); see J160. (3) A strake in front of the fin - as per your models - helps re-attach flow on the suction side of the VS in an incipient spin, if it is high enough.

Check out the Sequoia Falco.

 

Pitch stability! The propellor has a destabilising effect when it's foward of the GC, and the high thrust efficiency of the 100hp 912 makes it very destabilising.  I'd suggest that you use a bigger HS of higher aspect ratio, further aft than you think you need; I promise you won't be disappointed!

 

The canopy opening thing: Another design rule of thumb is that the engine torque pulses are carried back to the main lift truss, where they are reacted by trying to flap the wings. Any number of WW2 fighters hand the enginemount bolted to a bulkhead attached to the mainspar, for this very reason. Your model has the fuselage sides cut down from ~20cm? fowards of the LE, and the fuselage as a torque tube is voided by the hole for the crew, so the fuselage sides back to the mainspar need to be pretty beefy.

 

Rear fuselage... the rear fuselage is a torque tube, transmitting the VS -induced torsion loads fowards to the rear lift truss; the stress (shear flow) through the skin is inversely proportional to the cross-section, so the smaller the diameter (as you move aft), the thicker the skins have to be. Piper and Cessna singles normally step up one or two gauges towards the rear of the tailcone. When Petter designed the Westland Whirlwind, he chose to have a constant section rear fuselage - no taper- right back to the HS & VS spars.

 

Nice concept, I hope it progressesw well - I'd like an RAAus Falco!

i get the feeling loony bob is not so loony.   i enjoy your explanations.

[Peasant_Pilot]

8 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

i get the feeling loony bob is not so loony.   i enjoy your explanations.

I thoroughly enjoy all the reply's, comments and explanations from everyone. good to take it all in

[Litespeed]

Bob,

 

Great comments borne from experience and the fundamentals of aircraft design.

 

That Falco just is sexy, a timeless beauty. If it looks right, it flys right.

Yes, today a better aircraft might be designed but damn it's hard to beat an Italian master. No CAD, no CATIA or fluid dynamics programs just pure design.

 

This provides an Italian lesson "form follows function, but beautiful form gives beautiful function".

 

Not only does this provide a wonderful flying machine but makes the pilot and bystander want it. It's an emotional thing when you purchase or lust after a personal aircraft. Same goes for cars and bikes for fun, you don't pay top dollar for the fugly one that lumps along. No we want a machine that attracts the eye, commands the heart and satisfaction in high engineering.

 

If you can make a baby Falco as good as the original or better, you have a winner.

[Peasant_Pilot]

46 minutes ago, Litespeed said:

Bob,

 

Great comments borne from experience and the fundamentals of aircraft design.

 

That Falco just is sexy, a timeless beauty. If it looks right, it flys right.

Yes, today a better aircraft might be designed but damn it's hard to beat an Italian master. No CAD, no CATIA or fluid dynamics programs just pure design.

 

This provides an Italian lesson "form follows function, but beautiful form gives beautiful function".

 

Not only does this provide a wonderful flying machine but makes the pilot and bystander want it. It's an emotional thing when you purchase or lust after a personal aircraft. Same goes for cars and bikes for fun, you don't pay top dollar for the fugly one that lumps along. No we want a machine that attracts the eye, commands the heart and satisfaction in high engineering.

 

If you can make a baby Falco as good as the original or better, you have a winner.

the falco was one of the inspirations for drawing up my own, love the aircraft, always have. 

[Blueadventures]

On 11/3/2023 at 1:16 PM, Garfly said:

Looks like an amazing project PP all the best with it.

 

Just for your info, there is already a "Valkyrie" on the RAAus books, registered as 19-1684.

 

It's this recently finished one-off build by Chris Weber over at Taree:

 

 

CLICK FOR FULL SIZE:

 

 

 

 

Aircraft now owned and based at Turtle Park since before December 2023.

[Peasant_Pilot]

7 hours ago, Blueadventures said:

Aircraft now owned and based at Turtle Park since before December 2023.

I might look a name/model name change, makes sense if someone has it already

[Blueadventures]

4 minutes ago, Peasant_Pilot said:

I might look a name/model name change, makes sense if someone has it already

This is its plate if any benefit to you. I did its condition report for change of ownership.

[Peasant_Pilot]

21 minutes ago, Blueadventures said:

This is its plate if any benefit to you. I did its condition report for change of ownership.

Appreciate the heads up and info mate