On eBay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260325125475

Item number 260325125475 if that URL doesn't work for you.

The thing I'm curious about is the wing profile. Sections like that
seem to work for the F-117 stealth fighter. But it seems a bit out of
place on this aircraft.

Thanks, Bob K.

"Bob Kuykendall" > wrote in message
...
> On eBay:
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260325125475
>
> Item number 260325125475 if that URL doesn't work for you.
>
> The thing I'm curious about is the wing profile. Sections like that
> seem to work for the F-117 stealth fighter. But it seems a bit out of
> place on this aircraft.
>


Ooooooh-K....

Empty CG in front of the wing - and will only move forward when someone
sits on the seat? It's probably a good thing that he couldn't get it off
the ground...

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

On Dec 1, 7:07�pm, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk @See My
Sig.com> wrote:
> "Bob Kuykendall" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > On eBay:
>
> >http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2603251....
>
> > Item number 260325125475 if that URL doesn't work for you.
>
> > The thing I'm curious about is the wing profile. Sections like that
> > seem to work for the F-117 stealth fighter. But it seems a bit out of
> > place on this aircraft.
>
> Ooooooh-K....
>
> Empty CG in front of the wing - and will only move forward when someone
> sits on the seat? It's probably a good thing that he couldn't get it off
> the ground...
>
> --
> Geoff
> The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
> remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
> When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

Actually, that is the proper way of setting up the aircraft. Just
about every pusher configuration aircraft is stability relaxed empty.
As soon as pilot is on board the cg moves forward and the aircraft has
a positive stability margin sufficient for safe flight (well most of
the time - LOL).

I am curious just how the cg is going to move forward other than
pilot, passengers, or cargo?

On Dec 1, 5:27*pm, Bob Kuykendall > wrote:

> The thing I'm curious about is the wing profile.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nothing especially new there. It is a faceted surface. Lots of
'interesting' characteristics with regard to lift & drag.

But what really makes my hair stand on end is the empty weight. A tad
on the chubby side, in my opinion.

-R.S.Hoover

Bob Kuykendall wrote:
> On eBay:
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260325125475
>
> Item number 260325125475 if that URL doesn't work for you.
>
> The thing I'm curious about is the wing profile. Sections like that
> seem to work for the F-117 stealth fighter. But it seems a bit out of
> place on this aircraft.
>
> Thanks, Bob K.

Why wold anyone think it flies?

On Dec 1, 8:44*pm, Richard > wrote:
> Bob Kuykendall wrote:
> > On eBay:
>
> >http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2603251....
>
> > Item number 260325125475 if that URL doesn't work for you.
>
> > The thing I'm curious about is the wing profile. Sections like that
> > seem to work for the F-117 stealth fighter. But it seems a bit out of
> > place on this aircraft.
>
> > Thanks, Bob K.
>
> Why wold anyone think it flies?

anybody got a match?

Craig

On Dec 2, 5:28*pm, " > wrote:
> On Dec 1, 5:27*pm, Bob Kuykendall > wrote:
>
> > The thing I'm curious about is the wing profile.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------
>
> Nothing especially new there. *It is a faceted surface. *Lots of
> 'interesting' characteristics with regard to lift & drag.
>
You mean not much lift for drag -right?

> But what really makes my hair stand on end is the empty weight. *A tad
> on the chubby side, in my opinion.

What did you expect from tarps for wing coverings?

Cheers

Bob Kuykendall wrote:
> On eBay:
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260325125475
>
> Item number 260325125475 if that URL doesn't work for you.
>
> The thing I'm curious about is the wing profile. Sections like that
> seem to work for the F-117 stealth fighter. But it seems a bit out of
> place on this aircraft.
>
> Thanks, Bob K.
Way to wierd to fly! Plus I can't imagine the thing would lift the nose
as the owner noted. 500# empty weight, 290 pound pilot and a 440cc
engine (which, if I recall, is about 35 HP)? That is one goofy shaped
airfoil for sub-sonic use (I'm making the assumption here that the thing
is designed to be sub-sonic!). I can't imagine getting too many bids on
that contraption...

Scott

This based on my experience with 'out of the box' models I have
designed.

1. With enough thrust, probably would get off ground if enough control
(elevator) to get a positive angle of attack. At a slow (relatively)
speed, lift might only consist primarily of "flat plate" (bottom of
airfoil).
2. Would only have normal flight characteristics with a POSITIVE angle
of attack. Drag with a positive angle of attack would of course
require more thrust.
3. As wing approached zero angle of attack, any slip stream variation
(gust, etc) would cause wing to tuck and flight would take an unknown
trajectory. (probably beyond recovery?).

Bottom line. Just an accident waiting to happen if gotten airborne.

Big John
************************************************** ******************

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 17:27:11 -0800 (PST), Bob Kuykendall
> wrote:

>On eBay:
>
>http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260325125475
>
>Item number 260325125475 if that URL doesn't work for you.
>
>The thing I'm curious about is the wing profile. Sections like that
>seem to work for the F-117 stealth fighter. But it seems a bit out of
>place on this aircraft.
>
>Thanks, Bob K.

"Richard" > wrote
>
> Why wold anyone think it flies?

It says right in the descriptions, that this is not intended to fly, but
driven in a parade, or as an advertising gimmick.

Overkill, is right.
--
Jim in NC

> wrote in message
...
>Actually, that is the proper way of setting up the aircraft. Just
>about every pusher configuration aircraft is stability relaxed empty.
>As soon as pilot is on board the cg moves forward and the aircraft has
>a positive stability margin sufficient for safe flight (well most of
>the time - LOL).

Correct.

I misread the ad - I thought it said 2" in front of the wing - not wing
_CENTER_ - my mistake.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

On Dec 2, 2:07*pm, "Morgans" > wrote:

> It says right in the descriptions, that this is not intended to fly, but
> driven in a parade, or as an advertising gimmick.

I'm pretty sure that text was not in the original item description. I
think it was added during the Dec-02-08 10:53:13 PST revision.

"Bob Kuykendall" > wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 2:07 pm, "Morgans" > wrote:

> It says right in the descriptions, that this is not intended to fly, but
> driven in a parade, or as an advertising gimmick.

I'm pretty sure that text was not in the original item description. I
think it was added during the Dec-02-08 10:53:13 PST revision.
*********************************

Morgans wrote:
That explains a good deal.

It was pretty obvious that thing would never fly. If someone paid money for
plans or sketches of that, and it was built close to specifications, it
would be an understatement to say that they had been taken, big time.

Way over built; wood too large, way too much of it. Hardware quality stuff
everywhere, it would appear. An engine that size is intended to fly
something in the 254 pound (old ultralight rules) class, not a 500 plus
pound monster with "questionable" aerodynamics. <g>

I don't know how much that engine is worth, but perhaps the value of the
engine, and the heat all that wood would supply in a fireplace or wood stove
may make it an acceptable deal! <g>
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Bob Kuykendall" > wrote in message
| ...
| On Dec 2, 2:07 pm, "Morgans" > wrote:
|
| > It says right in the descriptions, that this is not intended to fly, but
| > driven in a parade, or as an advertising gimmick.
|
| I'm pretty sure that text was not in the original item description. I
| think it was added during the Dec-02-08 10:53:13 PST revision.
| *********************************
|
| Morgans wrote:
| That explains a good deal.
|
| It was pretty obvious that thing would never fly. If someone paid money
for
| plans or sketches of that, and it was built close to specifications, it
| would be an understatement to say that they had been taken, big time.
|
| Way over built; wood too large, way too much of it. Hardware quality
stuff
| everywhere, it would appear. An engine that size is intended to fly
| something in the 254 pound (old ultralight rules) class, not a 500 plus
| pound monster with "questionable" aerodynamics. <g>
|
| I don't know how much that engine is worth, but perhaps the value of the
| engine, and the heat all that wood would supply in a fireplace or wood
stove
| may make it an acceptable deal! <g>
| --
| Jim in NC
|

Considering the price of engines these days, I emailed for details out of
curiosity. He says it's a 25 hp Mercury, and assumes it 440cc from searching
the internet. ?????????????

He did volunteer in his first sentence that the prop was not airworthy.

A clean wing, like the Mitchell, will fly very well on 25 hp. But there are
probably lighter 25 hp, two-strokes around.

> You mean not much lift for drag -right?
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear MC,

I wasn't referring specifically to this aircraft (too little data)
but to faceted wing surfaces in general.

From what I CAN see ( at least on the lower wing ), the characteristic
transition surface(s) needed to make the faceted portion work, appears
to be missing.

-R.S.Hoover

On Dec 2, 3:08*am, Scott > wrote:
> *I can't imagine getting too many bids on
> that contraption...
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Scott,

I'm willing to be surprised :-)
A closer inspection may reveal a wealth of instruments and components
-- in addition to the engine -- that may be worth salvaging.

-R.S.Hoover