Hannover CLIII

sheppo · 5 January 2010, 07:04 PM

I have started going back over a bunch of drawings and images in the computer at work while I copy them to disc.
I have a query that someone may be able to shed some light apon. The Hannover CLIII as built by the Germans and the versions built by the Norwegians seem to show a number of large variations in design.
The german frames in the parts catalogue indicate that the rear fuselage is almost rectangular (fuselage frames are curved but the longeron layout is rectangular) while Eric Knut hagens photos show a distinctive taper towards the bottom longerons, then theres the vastly different cabane arrangement, cockpit cutout etc.
I will attach a photo of this in a sec, but does anyone have decent period images of the 2 airframes that would illuminate these points? In fact, any photos or dimensions not on the baubeschreibung charts would be great...
I plan on making up a usable set of drawings for the CLIII in the future (project #2 ?), hopefully with reference to the original in Norway as a guide.
That airframe has the entire forward section, upper wing centre section extant which would go a long way towards the project. At this stage my work is a collection of skeches to be fleshed out with actual dimensions....

chris

sheppo · 5 January 2010, 07:21 PM

The differences seem to be more than perspective would dictate , yes?
I would think a 90% scale with a chev 292 combo (assuming it all works) would be a great ride.

jumpinjan · 5 January 2010, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sheppo

I would think a 90% scale with a chev 292 combo (assuming it all works) would be a great ride.

How did you arrive at that conclusion? Do you have calculations that predicted that?
Jan

sheppo · 5 January 2010, 09:33 PM

Well, the 292 should put out 20 more hp than the 160 hp required for the full size version for a start!
"I would think a 90% scale with a chev 292 combo (assuming it all works) would be a great ride." Nothing concrete stated here...Mind you, had I done the calcs it would be unlikely Id post them here anyway...

Flamingo · 5 January 2010, 11:40 PM

Hi sheppo

the machine in Norway is a Han Cl.V which is quite different from the Cl.III. Knut Hansen clearly calls it a Cl.V.

In Windsock vol 3 no2 is a conversion article using a Fok D.VII frontal radiator and Ray published a plan feature (WS 0/16).

Two photographs with different tails are in the Putnam book.

sheppo · 6 January 2010, 03:01 AM

At this stage there appears to be very little structural data that can be drawn on so any design guides that could be taken from similar types such as the hannover version in Oslo would be of use at the very least to determine how they went about basic construction. Most photos are pretty useless when it comes to copying fittings exactly but a rough idea can be drawn from them. In the Dva one soon finds a common dimension in fittings which makes things more logical, and from that-educated guesses may be made as to how certain things were done.
Understanding the dimensions of a routed fuselage member can cast a lot of light on others etc etc

Chris

jumpinjan · 17 January 2010, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sheppo

"I would think a 90% scale with a chev 292 combo (assuming it all works) would be a great ride."

Oh, you "believe" it would, but no facts then?
So, you have no "calcs", just beliefs? Oh, okay.
Jan

sheppo · 17 January 2010, 09:51 PM

"Oh, you "believe" it would, but no facts then?
So, you have no "calcs", just beliefs? Oh, okay.
Jan "

"I would think a 90% scale with a chev 292 combo (assuming it all works) would be a great ride."

yes, just like the word said...."think".... I can "do" sarcasm too....

TSJohnson · 19 January 2010, 06:16 PM

Hi Sheppo,

Interesting choice for your project. Will you be using wood or metal for construction? I have considered the German designs altogether more graceful than the British. The thing then if one decides they want a metal structure how do we replicate the fuselage curves? Just wondered what you had come up with in that regard. Good luck with your project!

sheppo · 19 January 2010, 06:49 PM

Gday

Id prefer to go with an original structure in whatever I do. Timber would be ideal but relies on having some data to proceed with. Metal would be a bit of a crapshoot as there is nothing structural to base it on other than shape.

I do like the hannover simply because it is a really different shape and rather unique. The attraction of flatter sided halberstadt types like the CLII is strong.
Im taking a liking to the phonix series at the moment but there is plenty of time to track down info to make a decision...or not.

Chris