The thread "Warbirds or stockers you'd like to see" got me going on this. I know we ALL love the Unlimited class and the big iron that it runs. But, what of the future? I saw Tsunami and the Pond Racer run and was wondering if that's the future of the sport. Tsunami did very well, the Pond Racer not so much. But BOTH HAD the potential with more developement. I love the GP-5 in the Sport class. The Thunder Mustangs do pretty well too. In the "like to see" thread, I entered the Do335. The pull/push/center-line thrust concept really has me intrigued. I'm thinking a small,composite ship with two Falconer V-12's in the pull/push arrangement. Just a dream, but could it work? Merlins/Griffons/Wrights/Pratts don't grow on trees. Thought I'd ask those that KNOW and have been there/done that.
-
Last edited by V1670; 07-23-2013, 09:51 AM. -
Re: New frontier
Considering I have always figured that running a race program merely required one to be able to shovel $100 bills into the intake as fast as you could then doubling up the engines would only require 2 guys...........
Anything is feasible it's just a matter of cubic dollars.......
What about a couple of Falconer's in that Bugatti racer? -
Re: New frontier
As per the 'center-line twin' concept...John Slack and I and a few others in the brain-trust had a discussion about this several years ago. It was a concept closer to the DO-335 than a smaller 'Falconer' design--I believe we were looking at two-stage Griffon's. But the crux of the problem that we kept coming back to was fluid comsumption and just where you would put all the fuel/water/adi for two engines in a single fuselage. No matter how you slice it, you would have to have something big to accomodate all that.Originally posted by V1670 View Post
Even if you scaled it down to a Falconer-size airframe, it would still be half-again as big as say a Thunder Mustang just to accomodate the second engine.
Back in the '70's Dave Garber had a homebuilt unlimited built and actually flown that was powered by two rotary engines in a push-pull configuration, but after several years of testing he could never overcome cooling problems, and even at that the speeds he got were well below what his design criteria predicted.
Just some thoughts.Comment
-
Re: New frontier
Thanks for the replies,guys. I knew this would be a valuable resource for items I'd over-looked for didn't even consider.
The Pond was a brilliant idea, but it was the little things that hurt. I remember it's main issue seemed to be cooling. Was showing potential,and then.........well............ Back on topic, need to research Falconer engines a bit further. Do the Thunder-guys run ADI? Love the GP-5, but don't know much about onboard systems for that ship either.
Again, thanks for the responses.Comment
-
Re: New frontier
In the early days of the Thunder Mustang project, of which my Dad was very heavily involved, there was often talk among the guys; if the Thunder was successful, the next step would be the Twin Thunder Mustang. A true four place, high-performance kitplane, cross country cruising over 300, the whole bit. Would have been nice to see, and hear!
There's still a half dozen or so 'Unlimited' (would be restricted to Sport class now) projects lying around in various stages. The Gp-5 was one of them... Now, let's see some more resurrected!
With the materials my dad collected over the years, I could probably put together a book on the racers that 'could have been'...
- JosephComment
-
Re: New frontier
I know of a twin powered by 2 Lycoming 720's that is VERY slick. The goal was to race in the unlimited class. Sport class is limited to 1,000 cubic inches. I have seen a few pics of the wing and fuselage major parts complete. Last I heard the airframe was complete and delivered to its owner for engines/systems. But, who knows if or when we will ever see it.
Personally, I don't get the 2 engine thing.. It just gets so much more complicated. It is hard enough to keep 1 hand grenade from going off, let alone 2.. Then add the weight required for the additional structure, fuel, etc.Comment
-
Re: New frontier
That looks a lot like this;
Comment
-
Re: New frontier
It is similar in that they are twins, but that is about it. Plus I don't know if this design ever got past the pretty picture phase. The other I am sure was built and that is huge in my opinion. Few ideas become reality anymore it seems. Let me see if I can find another pic of it..Originally posted by Idaho_cowpony View Post
There are others, but for whatever reason there is some secrecy around this airplane, and I hate to be the one to spoil that..Comment
-
Re: New frontier
How far will the second engine take us if one quits? All the way to the scene of the crash!Comment
-
Re: New frontier
A lot of years ago, I tried crunching some numbers for a couple of different twin engine concepts.Originally posted by Big_Jim View Post
One of the biggest problems I had was predicting/estimating the prop efficiency of the rear prop in a push-pull (Do335) configuration.
I finally decided that a twinned concept - ala F-82 Twin Mustang - might work best.
But cubic dollars I don't have (and that was before the divorce!).Comment
-
Re: New frontier
Really good info here. You might have something there. I remember Miller's "Pushy Cat" had some success a while back, yet if the concept of a pusher was so good, how come more didn't adopt it? Same for military aircraft. Off the top (hope I get these right), XB-42,XP-54,XP-55 were all flops. About the only "pusher" I can think of that worked (for awhile anyways) was the B-36. On the private front, Lear Fan and Beech Starship didn't do well. Only the Skymaster had some sales.Originally posted by FlyKidChris View Post
I think the thing that intrigued me was top-end of the Do335 was "listed" as 460+, and that was in 43-44. I just was dreaming that a 3/4 scale push/pull with a couple of turbo-Falconers might do well. Power/minimal frontal area. But what do I know (this forum is a valuable teaching tool for this inquiring mind) and your thoughts on Pusher-prop effiency might just be the nail that seals the pusher coffin.Comment
-
Re: New frontier
I too think the GP-5 is an incredible airplane.
What about taking it to the next level?
Replace the V-8 with a Falconer?
sigpicComment
-
Re: New frontier
The Piaggio Avanti sold over 4x airframes than the Starship (and certainly has better performance on similar installed power), but hardly a resounding success either.Originally posted by V1670 View PostComment
-
Re: New frontier
Here is a new plane that could be a fun sport class racer, and it is more than just a pretty picture - the first example should be on the gear in 2-3 weeks. It is based on the well tested Radial Rocket airframe, with changes for utilization of a V8 engine. Much more streamlined cowl has been lofted to fit small and big block Chevy engines. Other differences are in the vertical fin and wingtip shapes. While the initial focus is on a simple, relatively low cost engine installation using a mildly built 400 cid small block, fixed pitch prop and fixed tail-dragger gear, the design can easily accommodate significantly more power as well as retract gear. Proof is in the flying, so I am looking forward to seeing how this one performs. I'll post photos once it is on the gear.
Comment
-
Re: New frontier
Good post, thanks.Originally posted by V1670 View Post
What had got me thinking hard about it was the Star Kraft 700; I was wondering what a smaller and sleeker version would be capable of on the race course. Just imagine taking the existing power train from the SK700, and putting in on a small fuselage with a much smaller wing...
Too much displacement for the Sport Class, though (darn).
Link to the Star Kraft 700:
Last edited by FlyKidChris; 07-24-2013, 09:42 PM.Comment
Comment