What a/c do you want Airdrome Aeroplanes to make?

Willi Von Klugerman · 21 January 2009, 04:16 PM

Personaly,I would like to see them make my favorite Entente aircraft,the S.E.5
I also would like to see them make the Sopwith Triplane,Hansa-Brandenburg CC sea-fighter,and the Pfalz D.III.

sobrien · 21 January 2009, 05:22 PM

It would be nice if they made a Fokker D.VI and a Fokker D.VIII that looked like the real things.

Willi Von Klugerman · 21 January 2009, 05:28 PM

Quote:

It would be nice if they made a Fokker D.VI and a Fokker D.VIII that looked like the real things.

They look crude because they are 3/4 scale,but yes,I would like to see a more better looking DVIII (its my favorite bird)

jumpinjan · 21 January 2009, 06:36 PM

In-line engine fighters seem too difficult to model because of the lack of a good 3-4 cylinder inline powerplant. The Geo 3 cyl might be promising, but no one has attempted to use one yet, that I know of. Gene Smith is busy with VW & the 40hp Vee-twin. If Smith ventures into the Geo, we might see more inline models from Robert.
I haven't seen any other D7 completed & flown besides Robert's original. Butch Witlock's D7 is the closest to be flying, sometime this fall.
Jan

jethro · 21 January 2009, 11:31 PM

SE5 would be great, but how cool would an Albatros DIII be?

Doc · 22 January 2009, 08:58 AM

Not WWI, I know, but I would like to see them make an Antoinette. To me, the most beautiful of all the pre-war birds. Doc

ECramer · 22 January 2009, 10:30 AM

Either Spad would be nice, and I agree with the person who called for the Sopwith Tripe -- also the Morane-Saulnier "N."

But I'm not greedy, honest.

Brad · 22 January 2009, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ECramer

Either Spad would be nice, and I agree with the person who called for the Sopwith Tripe -- also the Morane-Saulnier "N."

But I'm not greedy, honest.

If you wanted a Morane N, Robert has a kit that would work perfectly well... yes, it would have to be modified. His Eindecker kit with some formers and stringers, a different rudder, and different LG would work nicely. I'm sure he could draw it up and quote you a price with the additional materials required... and it wouldn't be MUCH more than the Eindecker I'm sure. You'd be paying for the stringer material, and the gigantic spun aluminum prop spinner, and that's about it.

As for the SE5a, personally I think that would be the simplest aircraft to replicate... but when you scale it down, that fuselage is NARROW! I've seen one done based on the "Texas Parasol" construction method, and it was pretty nice looking. They didn't put the "bend" in the lower wings, but it was barely noticeable. I really thought about doing exactly that (SE5a using Chuck Breeson's construction method) but the narrow fuselage is a problem, and if you widen it, it throws the shape of the cowl way off.

A SPAD works nicely in reduced scale if you have short legs... the nose is long enough to balance, the fuselage is wide enough for even a pudgy pilot... but if you have long legs there might be an issue. Although the pilot is behind the wings, (s)he isn't that far from the CG.

I'd love to see ANYBODY produce an Albatros D (I/II/III/V/Va I don't care, I'd like any of them) but the engine is the issue.

There are some other aircraft that are "do-able" in reduced scale, but in a LOT of WWI designs, especially most of the Central Powers ones, weight and balance is an issue. A Camel could be done... (pilot is close to the CG due to the large amount of wing stagger) a Halberstadt (same thing, lots of wing stagger) but most designs you are trying to balance a heavy pilot who is further from the CG than the engine, which means either a non-scale nose length, or a VERY heavy engine. (Hint: VW or Corvair either one is WAY too light! Any 2-stroke is even worse, as is the Geo!)

ECramer · 23 January 2009, 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad

If you wanted a Morane N, Robert has a kit that would work perfectly well... yes, it would have to be modified. His Eindecker kit with some formers and stringers, a different rudder, and different LG would work nicely. I'm sure he could draw it up and quote you a price with the additional materials required... and it wouldn't be MUCH more than the Eindecker I'm sure. You'd be paying for the stringer material, and the gigantic spun aluminum prop spinner, and that's about it.

As for the SE5a, personally I think that would be the simplest aircraft to replicate... but when you scale it down, that fuselage is NARROW! I've seen one done based on the "Texas Parasol" construction method, and it was pretty nice looking. They didn't put the "bend" in the lower wings, but it was barely noticeable. I really thought about doing exactly that (SE5a using Chuck Breeson's construction method) but the narrow fuselage is a problem, and if you widen it, it throws the shape of the cowl way off.

A SPAD works nicely in reduced scale if you have short legs... the nose is long enough to balance, the fuselage is wide enough for even a pudgy pilot... but if you have long legs there might be an issue. Although the pilot is behind the wings, (s)he isn't that far from the CG.

I'd love to see ANYBODY produce an Albatros D (I/II/III/V/Va I don't care, I'd like any of them) but the engine is the issue.

There are some other aircraft that are "do-able" in reduced scale, but in a LOT of WWI designs, especially most of the Central Powers ones, weight and balance is an issue. A Camel could be done... (pilot is close to the CG due to the large amount of wing stagger) a Halberstadt (same thing, lots of wing stagger) but most designs you are trying to balance a heavy pilot who is further from the CG than the engine, which means either a non-scale nose length, or a VERY heavy engine. (Hint: VW or Corvair either one is WAY too light! Any 2-stroke is even worse, as is the Geo!)

I talked to Mr. Baslee about the eindecker at the KC Dawn Patrol's "Gathering of Eagles" in Gardner, Kan., two years ago. Bottom line -- I'm too fat for the Eindecker at its current size, and my current size (he recommended the D.VI -- but I don't like the looks of the 3/4 scale version). While at around 280, I AM trying to lose weight, a larger plane is indicated.

The Eindekker appealed to me because it can, in theory, be built as a Part 103 ultralight, meaning I wouldn't have to spend additional money on a taildragger rating (actually, the problem is almost not the money -- it's finding taildragger instruction).

I think Baslee could do the SE-5, but it would have to be at 80 percent like his D.VII and his first DR.I. Probably the same is true for the SPADs -- you're right that the weight of the pilot and the lack of availability of suitable engines is a real problem in these designs. The pilot is a much more significant part of the payload than in a full-size plane, especially given the extremely lightweight aluminum tube structure of the Airdrome planes. Baslee essentially told me he can design ANY WWI plane -- if someone is willing to put up the money. He's already offering his improved version of Dick Stark's Taube, plus the new Morane Parasol. I got to see the Morane's built-up fuselage at the Gathering, and I believe it's flying now.

Sorry to have gone on at such length. I'm always a little intimidated by contributing here -- I'm just a former newspaper reporter (now working in governmental public affairs) who likes WWI airplanes, and there are machinists, designers and engineers in this forum who have forgotten more than I'll ever know.

Brad · 23 January 2009, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ECramer

I talked to Mr. Baslee about the eindecker at the KC Dawn Patrol's "Gathering of Eagles" in Gardner, Kan., two years ago. Bottom line -- I'm too fat for the Eindecker at its current size, and my current size (he recommended the D.VI -- but I don't like the looks of the 3/4 scale version). While at around 280, I AM trying to lose weight, a larger plane is indicated.

Yeah, the Eindecker (75%) has a TINY cockpit! He has done a full-scale one, and it would be plenty big... I don't know if it has flown yet. That would make a nice full-scale Morane replica. Talk to him, he could do it, but if he does one from scratch it WILL cost you!

Quote:

The Eindekker appealed to me because it can, in theory, be built as a Part 103 ultralight, meaning I wouldn't have to spend additional money on a taildragger rating (actually, the problem is almost not the money -- it's finding taildragger instruction).

Finding a taildragger and instructor that can handle your size is a problem too. I don't know how tall you are, or how "chubby," but I know when I weighed 235 I could barely fly a Citabria due to the stick being against my gut at full back stick. Of course if your legs are longer, you move the seat back, so that helps... (I'm only 5'8")

Quote:

I think Baslee could do the SE-5, but it would have to be at 80 percent like his D.VII and his first DR.I. Probably the same is true for the SPADs -- you're right that the weight of the pilot and the lack of availability of suitable engines is a real problem in these designs. The pilot is a much more significant part of the payload than in a full-size plane, especially given the extremely lightweight aluminum tube structure of the Airdrome planes.

The SPAD would probably work nicely, but you might need a Corvair up front, both for power, and for balance. The SPAD has a wide fuselage. Legroom might be an issue.

I've scaled out an SE5a to 80%... it would be too narrow for me- about as wide as Baslee's 3/4 scale Eindecker. (22" at the outside of the longerons.) I need at least about 24" like the GLee Nieuports. I thought long and hard about building an SE5a.

What I WANT is an Albatros. What I think I am going to build is a Morane AC. (Strut braced derivative of the "N" a.k.a. "Bullet.") No, it won't be done like Baslee's aircraft. Fuselage done like the "Chuckbird" or "Texas Parasol," wings "borrowed" straight from the Pietenpol Aircamper but shortened, etc.

Quote:

Baslee essentially told me he can design ANY WWI plane -- if someone is willing to put up the money. He's already offering his improved version of Dick Stark's Taube, plus the new Morane Parasol. I got to see the Morane's built-up fuselage at the Gathering, and I believe it's flying now.

It's $$$$ to have him design what YOU want, because he's gonna be involved in the build, and you're paying for their shop assistance at that point. That is a perfectly reasonable thing, since any "alterations" while in progress he is right there to design. Unfortunately it would be probably more than double the cost of the same aircraft as just a kit if he already developed it.

The Morane is flying, and they have some videos of it. Interesting little bird. Probably the LEAST "true to scale" of his designs, but stil looks good. They have a new DH2 that looks good too. It has a lot of wing area, so assuming the structure is strong enough, it shouldn't have a problem with a larger pilot- simply widen the fuselage if needed (and he will help in that area, no problem) and if needed move the engine back a hair for balance.

Also, his 100% scale Nieuport would probably suit you nicely... and they look GOOD! (Watch the movie "Flyboys" and see if you can easily spot them as opposed to the more authentic replicas. I believe 5 of the Nieuports in that movie are his- might have just been 4, I don't remember. Yes, you can tell the difference, if you know what you are looking for and care to pay that much attention... but they aren't THAT different!) The differences that are easy to spot are: Wing/cabane/strut attach fittings, the "lump" in the upper wing leading edge where it transitions to the tip bow, and a slightly greater sweep to the wings. There are some other, less noticeable differences, but they're pretty convincing replicas.

Quote:

Sorry to have gone on at such length. I'm always a little intimidated by contributing here -- I'm just a former newspaper reporter (now working in governmental public affairs) who likes WWI airplanes, and there are machinists, designers and engineers in this forum who have forgotten more than I'll ever know.

There are very few experts here (and I'm NOT one of them!) and a whole lot of enthusiasts. (I fall into that catagory)

Jump right in!