Stuka Stunt Control Line Forum
Archive, 2000–2021 · recovered from the Internet Archive
Forums › Stuka Stunt Main Forum

A look at the new plane....

Stuka Stunt Main Forum · 20 of 20 known posts recovered

DMoon · Oct 24, 2003 11:23 PM

#0 source
Here is a look at the drawing so far of my new Furias.

I thought some of you might like to see how my CAD drawing is going.

Thanks to Brad for some cool CAD tips.

Thanks to Larry C for the info and the help on how ot use Stuntrib. I drew the root foil with his program. It is not exact to the root I am using but darn close. The height and length are correct but the curve is just a tad off. This foil here is just a bit more blunted. But it works for the drawing purpose to get the side view drawn. Also I looked over his Article about fuse drawing and it helped out.

Thanks again.

Brett Buck · Oct 24, 2003 11:32 PM

#1 source
> Also I looked
>over his Article about fuse drawing and it helped out.

I wonder where the neutral point in yaw might be.

Brett

DMoon · Oct 24, 2003 11:56 PM

#2 source
>> Also I looked
>>over his Article about fuse drawing and it helped out.
>
> I wonder where the neutral point in yaw might be.
>
> Brett

What do you mean?

Brett Buck · Oct 25, 2003 12:18 AM

edited#3 source
>>> Also I looked
>>>over his Article about fuse drawing and it helped out.
>>
>> I wonder where the neutral point in yaw might be.
>>
>> Brett
>
>What do you mean?

Uh, I was wondering were the yaw neutral point was - just looks like it has a pretty deep nose, and a relatively narrow aft fuse. I'm sure it won't end up unstable - just might not handle the power as well as it might.

Brett

p.s. I guess I didn't full appreciate, on first veiwing, how incredibly far forward the wing (and hence, the CG) was relative the the rest of the fuse. Comment withdrawn...

DMoon · Oct 25, 2003 12:36 AM

#4 source
Yeah it has some pretty out there numbers. It has a 3" spinner 4" wide fuse in the forward portion. 7.75 nose and 21 tail. I dont know if it will stay there but I think I might just go for it anyway. This is for a 72. The 56 version with a 3" wide fuse and a 8.75 nose with a 17.75 tail was very nice. Had this exact looking profile but wasnt quite as deep on the bottom half of the nose section. About 5/8" overall less in the nose, top to bottom.

Ever since flying Al's BBQB it has just renforced what I have been thinking for a long time now. The 72 needs larger models. Al's was like this massive plane with a motor and it flew good. I didnt give you the feel of the motor but more of the whole plane flying along, it is hard to explain. Regular planes with 72's jammed in the nose feel like all motor. Not a bad thing but overbearing at times. Al's just flet like the plane was really the right size for the motor. I bet Gordy's feels very similar. I dont think it is really a matter of a larger wing either. Just a larger fuse with a little more dramamtic fuse numbers. Maybe with the larger motors coming into play we shall begin to see alot more scale looking fuse numbers. 20+ oz. engines in stunt still isnt a normal thing. So why would normal stunt numbers apply? Just thoghts...

We shall see.

Steve Helmick · Oct 25, 2003 02:04 AM

#5 source
I like it. But I think I would like it better with a little smaller spinner, slimmer fuselage, etc. This thing will need a long landing gear, unless it is fuselage mounted. I would also make the rudder hingeline a bit more vertical.

The Furias looked great in black, but with the larger fuselage you show here, it will look bigger and heavier. Dunno how that will affect the presentation, but the bigger fuselage, with more wood, more paint, bigger spinner, bigger bulkheads, = more weight. What this thing reminds me of is the Hawker Typhoon that Windy built...but his was too slender to bring off the brutish look. This thing will have that...how about making it into a Typhoon or P-43? (think of a P-47 Razorback only prettier). Then you could lose the big spinner and save 3 oz and about $50, and Rabe has all the technology you need. Steve

godzilla · Oct 25, 2003 09:00 AM

#7 source
>I like it. But I think I would like it better with a little
>smaller spinner, slimmer fuselage, etc.

Uh... kind of missing the point.

DMoon · Oct 25, 2003 10:30 PM

#10 source
>I like it. But I think I would like it better with a little
>smaller spinner, slimmer fuselage, etc. This thing will need
>a long landing gear, unless it is fuselage mounted. I would
>also make the rudder hingeline a bit more vertical.

Steve,

Slimmer fuse...all we see now is planes with slim fuses. I am trying for a bit of a change.

As for the gear it will be standard length. The prop dictates the length and it wont be over 14" so the gear I make should be plenty long. Look at Rabe's bbqb very long gear but they look just right.

I thought it would need a verticle hingeline also. But I made the other Furias and it had the same type of verticle fin and it worked great. It will have a Working Rabe rudder but I want it to be so subtle that is not noticable. If it were a verticale line but a slanted fin it will have to much power and cause more yaw than it corrects.

>
>The Furias looked great in black, but with the larger
>fuselage you show here, it will look bigger and heavier.
>Dunno how that will affect the presentation, but the bigger
>fuselage, with more wood, more paint, bigger spinner, bigger
>bulkheads, = more weight. What this thing reminds me of is
>the Hawker Typhoon that Windy built...but his was too
>slender to bring off the brutish look. This thing will have
>that...how about making it into a Typhoon or P-43? (think of
>a P-47 Razorback only prettier). Then you could lose the big
>spinner and save 3 oz and about $50, and Rabe has all the
>technology you need. Steve

Yes it will be heavier. I am betting I can sneak it in at 67oz. The last one I got pretty carried away on the primer. This one will be a very lightly applied filler coats. Also the wing is 700 sqrs so it will fly fine.

Typhoon, P-43? everyone has already built semi scales. I guess I am trying for something a little more original. Original in stunt is hard to come by these days so it will look a little uncommon.

Save the 50 bucks. I already did. I found a 3" spinner from a company named spinright for $11. The truturn is around 50 and the weights are similar.

I know not everyone will like it but I hope it is original looking.

Steve Helmick · Oct 26, 2003 12:38 AM

#14 source
>>I like it. But I think I would like it better with a little
>>smaller spinner, slimmer fuselage, etc. This thing will need
>>a long landing gear, unless it is fuselage mounted. I would
>>also make the rudder hingeline a bit more vertical.
>
>Steve,
>
>Slimmer fuse...all we see now is planes with slim fuses. I
>am trying for a bit of a change.
>
>As for the gear it will be standard length. The prop
>dictates the length and it wont be over 14" so the gear I
>make should be plenty long. Look at Rabe's bbqb very long
>gear but they look just right.
>
>I thought it would need a verticle hingeline also. But I
>made the other Furias and it had the same type of verticle
>fin and it worked great. It will have a Working Rabe rudder
>but I want it to be so subtle that is not noticable. If it
>were a verticale line but a slanted fin it will have to much
>power and cause more yaw than it corrects.
>
>>
>>The Furias looked great in black, but with the larger
>>fuselage you show here, it will look bigger and heavier.
>>Dunno how that will affect the presentation, but the bigger
>>fuselage, with more wood, more paint, bigger spinner, bigger
>>bulkheads, = more weight. What this thing reminds me of is
>>the Hawker Typhoon that Windy built...but his was too
>>slender to bring off the brutish look. This thing will have
>>that...how about making it into a Typhoon or P-43? (think of
>>a P-47 Razorback only prettier). Then you could lose the big
>>spinner and save 3 oz and about $50, and Rabe has all the
>>technology you need. Steve
>
>Yes it will be heavier. I am betting I can sneak it in at
>67oz. The last one I got pretty carried away on the primer.
> This one will be a very lightly applied filler coats. Also
>the wing is 700 sqrs so it will fly fine.
>
>Typhoon, P-43? everyone has already built semi scales. I
>guess I am trying for something a little more original.
>Original in stunt is hard to come by these days so it will
>look a little uncommon.
>
>Save the 50 bucks. I already did. I found a 3" spinner
>from a company named spinright for $11. The truturn is
>around 50 and the weights are similar.
>
>I know not everyone will like it but I hope it is original
>looking.

Doug, take a good look at the Spinright spinner and be sure it is the quality of a Dave Brown or TruTurn. Some of them are really bad, and not just the imports. I think it was a Spinright that I bought and found it had cracks in the backplate. I don't recall being at all happy with any part of it. And I was thinking just a little smaller, like 2.5". As for the rudder hingeline...I was thinking of narrowing the rudder chord at top by 1/4" and widening the bottom the same, net area change = zero. Even making the movable part half height of the fin, with the bottom part moving, would be good. I was also thinking about a subtle reduction in fuselage depth, maybe 3/8". As it is now, it looks almost like a shoulder wing, to me. I like the step under the wing. Making it a functional cooling air exit would make it better yet. If Semi-Scale isn't your thing, that's fine, I understand. The proportions of this Furias II are much like a Typhoon...it just says "Bad to the Bone". What do you think about the paint scheme? The Furias was your best, BY FAR. I'm just wondering if that much black on this one wouldn't look too heavy. Did it seem to cause any trouble in your heat? Steve

DMoon · Oct 26, 2003 02:26 PM

#18 source
Steve,

It is really dark blue. It really looks alot more blue in person. But you do have to keep it covered at all times. It just soaks up the heat big time!

Larry Cunningham · Oct 25, 2003 06:40 AM

#6 source
Not bad, Doug! (How's the top view coming?)

I'd like to have a copy of your engine drawing (Saito .72?), if it is available.

It's definitely a BIG airplane!

[photo not recovered: 3e69bb3870f12ad5.jpg]

"If called by a panther, don't anther." -Ogden Nash

Crist Rigotti · Oct 25, 2003 09:48 AM

#8 source
Very nice Doug. Do keep us informed to your progress with pics!

Rustler · Oct 25, 2003 04:47 PM

#9 source
The scoop on the front looks like it's doing a great job of cooling the top of the rocker box. Any provision for the rest of the engine, e.g. the cylinder fins? Proportions look great.

DMoon · Oct 25, 2003 10:33 PM

#11 source
The cowl is open in the front all the way except for the cross beam at the front of teh cowl. Like it would be if you had a venturi there. So it gets plenty of air and should saty cool.

SRiese5283 · Oct 25, 2003 10:38 PM

#12 source
Doug....Impact wing? or sim? Whats the SQ"?

DMoon · Oct 25, 2003 11:06 PM

#13 source
Scott,

Its a Geo-Bolt the sq is 700 with round tips and the span at 61"

cwmcmillin · Oct 26, 2003 12:50 AM

#15 source
I dig the big cowl, big spinner look. You have done nice job getting away from the norm. Just right I think.

Chris...

Rustler · Oct 26, 2003 05:58 PM

#19 source
O.K. Doug, you've got the cooling covered. I did not realise just how big this model is, it will look most impressive.

Randy · Oct 26, 2003 12:55 AM

#16 source
Doug,

It's interesting. Should present well. With that short of a nose moment, I hope you build light tails.

Randy Powell

John Sunderland · Oct 26, 2003 07:49 AM

#17 source
Very Nice Doug...did you get a chance to see Roger Wildmans new desing called the Davis Special. While not a wide fuse it is deep and the lines are pleasingly Classic. Finally saw it fly in Dayton a few weeks back. Very good performance and turn on a PA65 piped with a SV22 or 23 wing. I know you are using the 72 and moments are different but I really think the Geobolt wing design which is a bit more high aspect has merit due to less cord and precious litte more span equalling more area and equal lift. They look really long in span due to the narrower cord

I tend to think that even though these arent so blunt there is no sacrifice in lift and turn due to better penetration with more wing area.

I just moved and will have no time for my Meteor on 72 this winter so plan to repair the new Chevelle I lost before the Nats. The nose is to light and long for the big stroker but the danged thing really performed well despite trimming not being quite there upon impact.

Good luck with your new Furias...and thanks for your comments concerning designing around the 72 a few months back. My numbers were similar except for the extreme tail moment.