PDA

View Full Version : ** moved ** Bumble Bee II got company !



First time Juke
01-23-2009, 01:56 PM
Retro aviation is back !

Does anyone know how BB II was to fly ? Did anyone else but the designer Robert Starr fly it ?

http://thelongestlistofthelongeststuffatthelongestdomainn ameatlonglast.com/smallest34.html

On paper the enclosed kite is smaller and can be flown by 6 ft 4 in pilot.

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

You may wonder how come I am so keenly here nowadays. Well I am shut from practically all aviation sites in Finland except one model flying site. One dude who is a trustee for a statefunds handing out organization dared to call me an idiot. Also the local FAA people are peeing on me. ( I know some of them are reading this soon ! ).

Here is to ya ! :2thumbsdo

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

And all the rest...enjoy ! :thumbsup:

I would seriously like to know if this is OK in theory..or is a small pusher harder to maintain level than BB II for instance ?

This plane design was a by product when squeezing a more sporty pusher into Bede-5B size.


rgds,

Juke

:beerchug:

PS: This fits now wings detached into a closet as a whole..no need to take tail or nose section apart. Easy to maintain that is. PM me if interested to make this reel !

AirDOGGe
01-23-2009, 03:23 PM
Geez! BB II looks like it would fly more like a brick than an airplane if the engine ever failed.

Expect Space Shuttle-type steep approaches if such ever happened in flight. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

RMB
01-23-2009, 06:46 PM
[

Does anyone know how BB II was to fly ? Did anyone else but the designer Robert Starr fly it ?



STARR got hurt pretty bad in the crash of BUMBLE BEE II as I recall.

MMPerk
01-23-2009, 06:51 PM
I would get into just about anything with wings, but I would have to draw the line at something that would fit into my closet and has a glade ratio of a brick, or the shuttle.

LP

Skyracer
01-23-2009, 10:24 PM
Link to more info: http://members.cox.net/robinstarr/

First time Juke
01-24-2009, 01:17 AM
I would get into just about anything with wings, but I would have to draw the line at something that would fit into my closet and has a glade ratio of a brick, or the shuttle.

LP


Don't worry this has better gliding charasteristics when ready. I am worried about the torque effects at take off.

But like Bumble Bee this also need engine to work fluently at all situations to be overall safe. BEDE-5B was not that safe in records either...due to engine variety and optimism of experimental builders.

rgds,

Juke

AirDOGGe
01-24-2009, 11:04 AM
Link to more info: http://members.cox.net/robinstarr/


"On the last flight of the Bumble Bee II, the engine quit on the downwind leg of the flight. The impact totally destroyed the Bumble Bee II. Mr. Starr sustained extremely serious injuries."


Well , that was predictable, wasn't it? ;) Bricks don't have much of a glide ratio. I hope scoring the record was worth it.


.

First time Juke
01-25-2009, 04:34 AM
Yup,

Also that stagger wing is not very good if engine quits...the upper wing is sorta in shadow.

I wonder if 150 lbs lighter plane with some more wing and opposite layout in wings would do better.

Seems that the lenght of the fuse determines the smallness..in this respect the presented pusher is 5 in shorter ( 7.9 ft long ). The wings now are 4 in longer, but could be even 2 feet longer ( for testing the plane and then for record using shorter wings for one flight ).

Plane shorter than 2.5 meters would be a show stopper even if it just taxieed for few years before flights ..right ? With under 10 000 dollar price it could also attract some customers.

rgds,

Juke

http://www.ar-5.com/sportav93.html compared to several remarkable planes it is alot smaller.

MMPerk
01-25-2009, 06:31 AM
Who is going to be the test pilot?

I say build an RC version of it...prove it can fly...or even X-Plane it as a first step. I never did get my hands on 3D Solid Works, not that I haven't tried...

LP

First time Juke
01-25-2009, 10:43 PM
Who is going to be the test pilot?

I say build an RC version of it...prove it can fly...or even X-Plane it as a first step. I never did get my hands on 3D Solid Works, not that I haven't tried...

LP

Think about it; 1/2 scale model is only 122,5 cm long and 1/12 scale model that I have flown a lot would be 8 in long ( 20 cm ) spanning 6 in ( 15 cm ). I would have have a Faberge egg builder accuracy in that small scale. All servos, wheels, prop, engine + tank is possible to get under 2oz. That 0.01 Cox is outstanding for testing since it revs both directions.

Plane would be a taildagger...good idea MMPerk.

I could be the test pilot for the 1:1 scale if the plane empty weight is under 70 kilos with fuel...I think that is possible...needs no pilot lisence nor certification what so ever. Could be hazardous though. :eek13: But if the wingloading is ok then I see no reason why it wouldn't be swell to fly....and if it flies ok it would open new doors in aviation...that small plane if STOL could be used as a moped or a small motorcycle with pretty good mileage but not really intercontinental or IFR class yet and it could be landable on any road that has no cars or other vehicles on it too much....with nose wheel that could be roadable since it takes just a one lane to drive. In theory at least.

The nose wheel version has a slight drawback...it stays on tailwheel unless pilot is in the cockpit. This is due to the really small size and weight...taildagger could be lighter.

First time Juke
01-26-2009, 03:53 AM
Bricks don't have much of a glide ratio. I hope scoring the record was worth it.



This landed pretty good:

http://military.discovery.com/videos/strange-planes-shorts-goblin-release.html


Also Jimmy Doolittle knew how to fly'em good:

http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/speed-freaks-jimmy-doolittle.html

laminar
01-27-2009, 09:55 AM
Saw a video of the bumble bee flying, it was so cool, clearly needed alot of airspeed, and looked like a handful, but oh boy was it cool.

First time Juke
01-28-2009, 12:30 AM
Cool....the video on Robin Starr site does not work....where was the vid ?


I was wondering if the gyroscopic forces of the tailmounted prop would prevent PIOs from occuring. That could be a problem in small nose mounted prop plane of that size.

I am not happy with the top view right now. I think the engine will be outa fresh airflow.

I'll also let you see a glance at a 500 ccm 50 hp powered pusher idea where this tiny biplane derived from.

Here; http://www.aafo.com/hangartalk/attachment.php?attachmentid=12385 from the Dyna Cam eigine thread. It has also developed into a 4000x5000 mm sized record speedster. Unfortunately the local aviation engineers seem to be very nonchalant about it when it comes to realizing it or giving comments.

I also have a trasport/passenger version design of MAX III with 8 ( incl 2 pilots ) seat and 15,5 ft shorter than LearFan 2100. Flyweight under 1500 kilos ( 3333 lbs ) due to some regulations of avionics. Plane has no lavatory and aisle is pretty narrow, but manageable.

First time Juke
01-29-2009, 12:23 AM
There is a new way to increase lift by suction from upper end of the wing surface.

http://www.frotor.fs.cvut.cz/doc/37.pdf

Wonder if this and the fact that fusemounted engine needs to suck air to breathe and cool itself could be put together.

?

Edson Gallaudet had engine in a good spot. Lotsa holes too.

First time Juke
02-16-2009, 02:21 AM
Now I think I finally discoved AC that will be a sales success.

World smallest AC a 32% replica of F8F-2.

I think this would be fabulous..just 1/6 of an inch smaller in lenght that the Bumble Bee II.

Equipped with powerful and lite 2-stroke this would be also a low cost AC.

Wing area is 2,3 m2 if scale, but could be easily lifted to 3 m2..then the loading would be normal with 60-80 kg/m2 ( 1/3 of WW II planes ).

First time Juke
04-25-2009, 01:04 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKdR68KswSQ