So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
11-19-2002, 05:09 PM
#2
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary, AB, CANADA
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
On the board . . . .
Marutaka Cessna 310Q
Uravitch 52" OV-10 Bronco
Had started a Palmer B-25, but shelving it until I have a few months to spare, and the patience to go along with.!! (maybe in the summer)
This list could grow if I stumble across any other plans/kits that catch my attention.
Marutaka Cessna 310Q
Uravitch 52" OV-10 Bronco
Had started a Palmer B-25, but shelving it until I have a few months to spare, and the patience to go along with.!! (maybe in the summer)
This list could grow if I stumble across any other plans/kits that catch my attention.
11-19-2002, 05:15 PM
#3
My Feedback: (102)
My dream plane
I have the parts cut out and the wing cores in place to build a Junkers Ju 52/3M, the German Trimotor (the DC-3 of the Third Reich). The plans are for a airplane of about 96 inch wingspan. I plan on putting a 90 four stroke in the nose and two 40's in on the wing. Although the original builder, in the 70's, used a K&B 61 in the nose an a couple of small non throttled engines in the nacelles. He also did all of the corrugation on the fuse with individual stringers. I hope to get to this as soon as I finish a couple of other projects I have on the bench. The plans were obtained from the RCM plans guide.
Tommy
I plan on using the snow camo scheme like the one in my favorite Clint EAstwood movie, "Where EAgles Dare".
Tommy
I plan on using the snow camo scheme like the one in my favorite Clint EAstwood movie, "Where EAgles Dare".
11-20-2002, 12:19 AM
#4
On the boards
Multi's on the boards, currantly just one an eighty inch scratch built from three views, Stinson Tri motor (the high wing version) Its now up through cover but on hold till the eightyfive inch Quad Kaydet is flying which should be soon.
Also standing by to test my buddys Waco CG-4 troop glider with two .25's. Yup, there was one powered version and this is a replication of that one.
John
Also standing by to test my buddys Waco CG-4 troop glider with two .25's. Yup, there was one powered version and this is a replication of that one.
John
11-20-2002, 03:24 AM
#7
My Feedback: (32)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Garretson, SD
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
As soon as I finish a couple of minor projects I will be starting a Don Smith DH Mosquito. I have all the parts cut, retracts,cowls and spinners ready to go.
11-20-2002, 05:15 AM
#8
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Lovelock,
NV
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
Mosquito Mk 6 from Anglia Model Center. 63" wing, going to use two .32sx h from os. Will modify the wings to come off at the nacells for transportation. Will have to make my own retracts I think. Should be quite a little project.
11-20-2002, 06:55 AM
#10
11-20-2002, 07:21 AM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Anchorage,
AK
Posts: 2,565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
King Air B200
Paul Reese and I are building a 1/6th scale King Air B200, with the idea of Scale Masters and Top Gun in mind. The entire airframe, wings and tail included, will be molded, and will include an incredible amount of detail, including molded-in panel lines, rivets, hatches, etc..
It'll have a 109" wing span, 88" length, and suitable for a wide range of power systems. More info on at http://www.nextcraft.com/b200_construction01.html
Because this project is pretty "deep", we're documenting the entire process, from concept to CAD model to paper plans, plug and mold construction, and finally, the flying evaluation. Test flights are expected in spring of 2003, and I'm about 60 percent finished with the plugs now.
It'll have a 109" wing span, 88" length, and suitable for a wide range of power systems. More info on at http://www.nextcraft.com/b200_construction01.html
Because this project is pretty "deep", we're documenting the entire process, from concept to CAD model to paper plans, plug and mold construction, and finally, the flying evaluation. Test flights are expected in spring of 2003, and I'm about 60 percent finished with the plugs now.
11-20-2002, 06:40 PM
#12
Senior Member
My Feedback: (16)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Bartlett,
TN
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Northeast Aerodynamics Twin-air
I just received the twin-air from Northeast Aerodynamics last week. I haven't stared it yet, but I do have a pair of Saito .30's for it. Thinking about retracts too, but unsure about the weight. The kit is beautiful with Laser-cut parts, and a good bit of pre-fab, like beveled ailerons.
11-20-2002, 10:03 PM
#13
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
14 Posts
So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
LaCerne, I had never heard of Northeast Aerodynamics until I saw your post.
After a web search, an Email, and a phone call I have ordered one for myself. Other than the constant chord wing it looks like it's another person's version of the Duellist. BUT, it has a longer fuselage, more wing area, and it's rated two pounds lighter - should make a good flying airplane even nicer.
Anybody else want one call John, Northeast Aerodynamics, (603) 465-6508. $154.95 including Priority Mail shipping.
Don't let it slide, put an engine on each side.
Bill
After a web search, an Email, and a phone call I have ordered one for myself. Other than the constant chord wing it looks like it's another person's version of the Duellist. BUT, it has a longer fuselage, more wing area, and it's rated two pounds lighter - should make a good flying airplane even nicer.
Anybody else want one call John, Northeast Aerodynamics, (603) 465-6508. $154.95 including Priority Mail shipping.
Don't let it slide, put an engine on each side.
Bill
11-20-2002, 11:02 PM
#14
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Demotte, IN
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
What a suprise! I thought they went out of business years ago. I built their BelAir 40 and 60 bipes. Great kits and flyers. Going to order the Twin Air.
11-21-2002, 12:08 AM
#15
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
14 Posts
So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
Russ;
Spoke to John Merien. He said he bought Northeast Aerodynamics about a year and a half ago, now building the business back up.
He also said the Twin-Air was a new design, in two sizes. One for 0.20 engines, and the one I ordered for a pair of 0.40 to 0.46 engines.
I'm already thinking about a bash: tapered wings look so much better than plank, don't you think? Otherwise what I see in the picture looks as good as the Duellist. I shouldn't fuss about straight wings, though, my last twin (scratch-built) has constant chord wings. Also have thoughts about a tail dragger conversion of the Twin-Air. Make the gear retract backwards into the nacelles. (I have a pair of titanium struts looking for a new home.) A big advantage of rearward retraction, IMHO, is the CG change. Set it for good flight retracted, that'll make it a bit more gentle for landing and take off. Blast!! re-engineer the wing, convert to a draga**, adding retracts, why didn't I just scratch another? Oh, well. But ALL my current twins are my own design, why not another? I do have a Duellist under construction, so why not another kit instead?
LaCerne;
When asked, John said there was no provision for retracts, but he didn't think it would be any problem. When it gets here I'll give it a look and some thought. Let me know how yours goes, and I'll return the favor. One of the reasons I'm thinking tail dragger and nacelle mounting of the mains, the firewalls are there and already strong, I'd have to add less reinforcement there than would be needed for a normal wing mount.
Someday, someone will build a kit with no modifications. And pigs will fly.
Even with the wing a plank, if not a twin it's still rank.
Bill
Spoke to John Merien. He said he bought Northeast Aerodynamics about a year and a half ago, now building the business back up.
He also said the Twin-Air was a new design, in two sizes. One for 0.20 engines, and the one I ordered for a pair of 0.40 to 0.46 engines.
I'm already thinking about a bash: tapered wings look so much better than plank, don't you think? Otherwise what I see in the picture looks as good as the Duellist. I shouldn't fuss about straight wings, though, my last twin (scratch-built) has constant chord wings. Also have thoughts about a tail dragger conversion of the Twin-Air. Make the gear retract backwards into the nacelles. (I have a pair of titanium struts looking for a new home.) A big advantage of rearward retraction, IMHO, is the CG change. Set it for good flight retracted, that'll make it a bit more gentle for landing and take off. Blast!! re-engineer the wing, convert to a draga**, adding retracts, why didn't I just scratch another? Oh, well. But ALL my current twins are my own design, why not another? I do have a Duellist under construction, so why not another kit instead?
LaCerne;
When asked, John said there was no provision for retracts, but he didn't think it would be any problem. When it gets here I'll give it a look and some thought. Let me know how yours goes, and I'll return the favor. One of the reasons I'm thinking tail dragger and nacelle mounting of the mains, the firewalls are there and already strong, I'd have to add less reinforcement there than would be needed for a normal wing mount.
Someday, someone will build a kit with no modifications. And pigs will fly.
Even with the wing a plank, if not a twin it's still rank.
Bill
11-21-2002, 01:17 AM
#17
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
14 Posts
Twin-Air bash
LaCerne:
You have proved my point re flying swine and kit mods.
Quite familiar with the Piper Seneca, it was developed from the Apache, and is what the Apache should have been initially. IMHO there has never been an FAA certificated light twin that was more af a dog than the Apache. Have you ever seen one? You probably wont. Got my MEL in an Apache. Come to think of it, the Apache WAS a pig that coud fly.
You want plain board wings? Do it. We play with these toys to please ourselves, and if we have a warped sense of esthetics we build plank wings. (Haw!)
Looks like conversion to a semi-scale Seneca would be easy - go for it.
Two engines on a Hershey bar, you can still go far.
Bill
You have proved my point re flying swine and kit mods.
Quite familiar with the Piper Seneca, it was developed from the Apache, and is what the Apache should have been initially. IMHO there has never been an FAA certificated light twin that was more af a dog than the Apache. Have you ever seen one? You probably wont. Got my MEL in an Apache. Come to think of it, the Apache WAS a pig that coud fly.
You want plain board wings? Do it. We play with these toys to please ourselves, and if we have a warped sense of esthetics we build plank wings. (Haw!)
Looks like conversion to a semi-scale Seneca would be easy - go for it.
Two engines on a Hershey bar, you can still go far.
Bill
11-21-2002, 03:49 AM
#18
Re: Twin-Air bash
[QUOTE]Originally posted by William Robison
IMHO there has never been an FAA certificated light twin that was more af a dog than the Apache. Have you ever seen one?
Hi Bill
Just a thought: Perhaps your subsequent survival as a multiengine pilot just may in fact be due to the perceived inadequacys of the PA-23 Apache. There are a lot of pilots out there that respect the vital training that airplane provided.
In reality the Seneca (later called the Seneca 1) was not developed from the PA-23 at all. What was developed from it was the PA-23 250 Aztec a wonderful airplane highly respected to this day particularly by of all people, drug runners. The Seneca was a develpment however of the original Cherokee Six single during the mid sixtys and for a while I beleve called the Twin Six before certification.
Back to the Apache, It was not even a Piper project originally. In the late fortys it was purchased by Piper from the almost dead Stinson company and called the twin Stinson. Stinson never succeeded in bringing it to market. After the Piper purchase they reengineered it from from a steel tube/fabric airplane to all metal and dropped the original twin tails in favor of the familiar single tail. I beleve the first ones were sold possibly 53 or 54.
As far as "there has never been an FAA certificated light twin that was more of a dog than the Apache" well not really and three examples come to mind and at the top of the list was the short lived Champion Lancer which was nothing more than an early Champion Citabria (not Bellanca Citabria) bashed into a twin with a couple of hundred horse continentals in bathtub nacelles with fixed pitch props and long spindly fixed tricycle gear
The best single engine rate of climb at sea level in a standard atmosphere was a minus figure. Another 'worse' one was the twin Navion from an after market modifier almost but not quite up to the Apaches single performance. Additionally the Cessna 411 which I beleve was their first cabin class twin was a major certificated failure many years after its introduction after many fatalitys was forced to recertify twice and even on one ocassion the flight test crew managed to crash due to its lack of advertized performance. Most finished out their lives in Hollywood as crash hulks.
There are still a lot of Apaches still out there giving good service and in my retirement I still give friends recurrent training in their beloved PA-23's
John
IMHO there has never been an FAA certificated light twin that was more af a dog than the Apache. Have you ever seen one?
Hi Bill
Just a thought: Perhaps your subsequent survival as a multiengine pilot just may in fact be due to the perceived inadequacys of the PA-23 Apache. There are a lot of pilots out there that respect the vital training that airplane provided.
In reality the Seneca (later called the Seneca 1) was not developed from the PA-23 at all. What was developed from it was the PA-23 250 Aztec a wonderful airplane highly respected to this day particularly by of all people, drug runners. The Seneca was a develpment however of the original Cherokee Six single during the mid sixtys and for a while I beleve called the Twin Six before certification.
Back to the Apache, It was not even a Piper project originally. In the late fortys it was purchased by Piper from the almost dead Stinson company and called the twin Stinson. Stinson never succeeded in bringing it to market. After the Piper purchase they reengineered it from from a steel tube/fabric airplane to all metal and dropped the original twin tails in favor of the familiar single tail. I beleve the first ones were sold possibly 53 or 54.
As far as "there has never been an FAA certificated light twin that was more of a dog than the Apache" well not really and three examples come to mind and at the top of the list was the short lived Champion Lancer which was nothing more than an early Champion Citabria (not Bellanca Citabria) bashed into a twin with a couple of hundred horse continentals in bathtub nacelles with fixed pitch props and long spindly fixed tricycle gear
The best single engine rate of climb at sea level in a standard atmosphere was a minus figure. Another 'worse' one was the twin Navion from an after market modifier almost but not quite up to the Apaches single performance. Additionally the Cessna 411 which I beleve was their first cabin class twin was a major certificated failure many years after its introduction after many fatalitys was forced to recertify twice and even on one ocassion the flight test crew managed to crash due to its lack of advertized performance. Most finished out their lives in Hollywood as crash hulks.
There are still a lot of Apaches still out there giving good service and in my retirement I still give friends recurrent training in their beloved PA-23's
John
11-21-2002, 04:36 AM
#19
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
14 Posts
So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
Hello John;
You may well be right about the Apache's influence on driving skills, the power (or lack thereof) certainly kept you on your toes.
Sorry, I did think the Seneca was an Apache development, And I didn't know about Stinson's prior development of the basic airframe. But the Cherokee, A real (almost) hot rod if you're talking about the 6/300. Flown that one? Did you ever manage a hot start? Or did you just wait, like the rest of us?
My choice for the very best light twin of all time is the AeroStar. Ted Smith did it right with that one, he learned a hell of a lot with the AeroCommander, which was my choice until the AeroStar came along. (But you always thought your butt was dragging on the runway.) And my offering as the best of the best is the 601P. Piper bought the design, I'm not following them anymore, but I think they have changed the name and are still building it. Yes?
My memories of the Cessna 411 do not exist, but I just didn't think the Air-Knocker twin was certificated. Was it really?
The Navion. I had forgotten the twin Navion, but there are pleasant memories of the single engine version. I was working for Piedmont FBO at the Norfolk Va airport, we had one of the Ryan versions. (Never saw, that I knew, the original NAA Navion) It had, along with the then required flare system (for starting forest fires) that always scraped my left leg, a Lear 3-axis autopilot. In that airplane I joined the "Mile High Club." Privacy? What's that?
I'm sure it wasn't that bad, but memory tells me the Apache's VMC was about 90% of red line. Short fuselage with a small fin and rudder. Even with both fans cooling the driver the airplane's performance was lousy. The bosses told us that if we had an engine out look for an airfield. If our altitude AGL was more than the horizontal distance to the runway try for it. Otherwise put it on a road and let the lawyers sort it out - much cheaper than the passenger's med bills and the law suit following.
One final thought and I'll drop it. Could we possibly, under any possible circumstances, get any further from the original subject of this thread? Haw!
Even from Piper, twins get you hyper!
Bill
You may well be right about the Apache's influence on driving skills, the power (or lack thereof) certainly kept you on your toes.
Sorry, I did think the Seneca was an Apache development, And I didn't know about Stinson's prior development of the basic airframe. But the Cherokee, A real (almost) hot rod if you're talking about the 6/300. Flown that one? Did you ever manage a hot start? Or did you just wait, like the rest of us?
My choice for the very best light twin of all time is the AeroStar. Ted Smith did it right with that one, he learned a hell of a lot with the AeroCommander, which was my choice until the AeroStar came along. (But you always thought your butt was dragging on the runway.) And my offering as the best of the best is the 601P. Piper bought the design, I'm not following them anymore, but I think they have changed the name and are still building it. Yes?
My memories of the Cessna 411 do not exist, but I just didn't think the Air-Knocker twin was certificated. Was it really?
The Navion. I had forgotten the twin Navion, but there are pleasant memories of the single engine version. I was working for Piedmont FBO at the Norfolk Va airport, we had one of the Ryan versions. (Never saw, that I knew, the original NAA Navion) It had, along with the then required flare system (for starting forest fires) that always scraped my left leg, a Lear 3-axis autopilot. In that airplane I joined the "Mile High Club." Privacy? What's that?
I'm sure it wasn't that bad, but memory tells me the Apache's VMC was about 90% of red line. Short fuselage with a small fin and rudder. Even with both fans cooling the driver the airplane's performance was lousy. The bosses told us that if we had an engine out look for an airfield. If our altitude AGL was more than the horizontal distance to the runway try for it. Otherwise put it on a road and let the lawyers sort it out - much cheaper than the passenger's med bills and the law suit following.
One final thought and I'll drop it. Could we possibly, under any possible circumstances, get any further from the original subject of this thread? Haw!
Even from Piper, twins get you hyper!
Bill
11-21-2002, 05:30 AM
#20
So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
[QUOTE]Originally posted by William Robison
[ the Air-Knocker twin was certificated. Was it really?
Could we possibly, under any possible circumstances, get any further from the original subject of this thread? Haw!
I am afraid it was about thirty sold and I spent to many hours in the back seat of one those.
Naw we probably couldn,t get much further away and for that Minn Flyer I do apologise.
A little closer to home The Champion Lancer would make a truly unique scale project even a rather simple bash of any of the good flying Citabria ARF's or kit's out there. Bob Banka has three views and photo packets and with the unique aero commander like fixed tri gear offers good handleing along with opportunity for easy detailing also in the cockpit with a stick in the back seat and a column in the front you could have fun with the judges. Even scale size props could be used with this one and with the power/weight ratios we commonly use there would be none of the problems of the full scales and would no doubt be an excellent flying RC twin . Man I gotta stop thinking like this Bill or I,ll never finish the Quad Kaydet.
John
[ the Air-Knocker twin was certificated. Was it really?
Could we possibly, under any possible circumstances, get any further from the original subject of this thread? Haw!
I am afraid it was about thirty sold and I spent to many hours in the back seat of one those.
Naw we probably couldn,t get much further away and for that Minn Flyer I do apologise.
A little closer to home The Champion Lancer would make a truly unique scale project even a rather simple bash of any of the good flying Citabria ARF's or kit's out there. Bob Banka has three views and photo packets and with the unique aero commander like fixed tri gear offers good handleing along with opportunity for easy detailing also in the cockpit with a stick in the back seat and a column in the front you could have fun with the judges. Even scale size props could be used with this one and with the power/weight ratios we commonly use there would be none of the problems of the full scales and would no doubt be an excellent flying RC twin . Man I gotta stop thinking like this Bill or I,ll never finish the Quad Kaydet.
John
11-21-2002, 06:46 AM
#21
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
14 Posts
Quadet? What's a Quadet?
John, just shut up and finish the D****d thing. I got the impression it was all but finished anyway.
When you finish, post a pic and tell us about it. We'll be like the cat that ate some cheese and sat by the mouse hole with bated (baited) breath.
Want a twin with more? Copy John's FOUR!
Bill
When you finish, post a pic and tell us about it. We'll be like the cat that ate some cheese and sat by the mouse hole with bated (baited) breath.
Want a twin with more? Copy John's FOUR!
Bill
11-21-2002, 01:33 PM
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Franklin Park,
NJ
Posts: 1,620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
Originally posted by JohnBuckner
Could we possibly, under any possible circumstances, get any further from the original subject of this thread? Haw!
John
Could we possibly, under any possible circumstances, get any further from the original subject of this thread? Haw!
John
*Unstable runs away*
but anyway
I have three to do this winter.
one is a small aerocommander shrike (2 .061 engines)
the next is a old twinstick bough off e-bay. (.10-.30? engines)
then my own design that will probably take a while to truely bash out a working model. (going for 2 .25LAs)
11-21-2002, 04:28 PM
#23
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Tooele, UT,
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
I'm hoping that I will be able to build my tri-boom design. I'm not sure if I'll get a chance to build it this winter though. There is a lot of things to take into consideration when designing a "out of the ordinary" custom plane. Plus building the plugs and molds for it are pretty intimidating for someone, like me, who has never done that before.
11-21-2002, 05:00 PM
#24
My Feedback: (102)
Don't be intimidated....
Just think if the Wright Bros. had thought like that, someone else would have a museum in Dayton...;-)
Remember you can't steal second base with your foot on first.
Better to have tried and failed than never to have tried at all...
I could come up with some more but I think you get the picture. Besides if you render a design that well on the computer, I bet you can build it. Good luck
Tommy
Remember you can't steal second base with your foot on first.
Better to have tried and failed than never to have tried at all...
I could come up with some more but I think you get the picture. Besides if you render a design that well on the computer, I bet you can build it. Good luck
Tommy
11-22-2002, 04:34 AM
#25
My Feedback: (98)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: The Villages, Florida NJ
Posts: 4,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So... What Twins are on the building boards this winter?
Originally posted by rusgmil
What a suprise! I thought they went out of business years ago. I built their BelAir 40
What a suprise! I thought they went out of business years ago. I built their BelAir 40