Attention dear readers !

I will concentrate to make a 55-60 kilo weighing super ultra lite in order to learn to fly first.

It will be a 10-12 hp mid engine pusher, but unlike Max or Vasama II it will be looking totally different and it will be fairly slow aircraft near looks of the manpowered kites !

I will start work work on the faster pushers when I get more experience in building real ac:s and flight time.

Endless fine tuning ?

Purpose is to get better and lighter structure in the tail feather area..including sturdier tail wheel.

Elevons and flaperons are needed to fly this design perfectly.

I have discovered a small detail which will enhance the efficiency of the Vasama II by 5-6 %. It relates to the rod and prop.

The rod system BTW will be 1/10 of the cost in BD-5 ( which was nearly 10 000 € also in LH-10 aeroplane ).

Jabiru 5100 180 hp 117 kg for 10 000 € !

This must be a dream;

http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/forums/sale/2235-jabiru-5100-sale.html

I could do a 400 mph mover with just 14500 usd engine ?

Merry X-mas !

Seasons greatings to all aviation interested folks !

New very low cost aviation engine for Max and Vasama II

This looks like its going to be the number one candidate for this design.

http://www.sonexaircraft.com/engines/engines.html

Under 5000 euros ( 4542 € ) it is very competetive.


It is VW zero time brand new conversion;

http://www.skycontrol.net/air-sports/aeroconversions-introduces-aerovee-21/

80 hp and 161 lbs ( 72,5 kilos all included ).

This could propel Vasama II at 230-250 mph and Max 300-320 mph.

This engin ewill also allow to make the exhaust run inside the prop shaft. Thus making the plane extremely quiet.

Also the plane will be quiet inside the cockpit and warm in the wintertime since the muffler is fully inside.

JB-1 topspeed ?

Does anyone know the rest of the specs of this aircraft; http://www.wmof.com/Serria%20Sue.html ?
-----


Ok no sweat...I found it...200 mph ( at 85 hp 2-seater ).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acme_Sierra

Jabiru 5100 powered Vasama II

This engine fits this the best !
With one pilot and half the fuel this can go after FAI 300-500 kg C-1a speed record.

Correction to FPEA figure and consumption estimate

I once calculated the MAX III flat plate area equivalent area to be 0.336 sq ft. My latest study for the two seater with a small engine gives me only 0.58 sq ft or less for a FPEA..maybe only 0.55 sq ft ( this does not include the tailwheel ).

This leads to interesting assumption hypotesis of the best possible fuel consumtion with Jabiru 5100.

Lars Giertz had NASA data of his VmaxProbe having 0.45 fpea and being able to reach 300 mph at 80 hp. http://www.webcamsue.nl/vmax.html#shedo

I think we could assume Vasama II could do 300 mph at 100 hp if fpea is .55.

Jabiru burns 26 l/h at 75% ( 135 hp ).

Other options;

Comparison between o-200 ja ULS 912:sta; http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Fuel_Consumption_of_a_Continental_0-200

O-200 consumes 6 gal/h http://www.mail-archive.com/coupers@topica.com/msg14611.html

O-360 burns 38 l / h ( 10 gal/h or less ).

Let us assume Vasama II according to NASA via Giertz link could go 350 mph at 135 hp and uses 26 l/h. This would mean 2.3 l/ 100km /person using Jabiru 5100 engine at 563 km/h speed.

This would not only mean very fast travelling but economy 45% better than a LearFan 2100 which already beats Smart Jet by 30%.

So I think there is a good reason to go on with this assumption that 2-seater is more economical by than a single seater and if Giertz was right this will be a true sensation when correctly build and designed.

I also assume that at full burn at 180 hp ( Jabiru 5100 max power ) Vasama II could go 380 mph. Being by far the fastest ac in its class. Giertz plane was estimated to go 240 mph at 50 hp. ( 30 hp increase gave 61 mph increase in speed ). I assume 50 hp increase could yield 30 mph increase ( seriously I am very moderate here ).

I don't thin this can go 412 mph like TIO-540 powered NXT; http://www.pilotfriend.com/experimental/acft5/1.htm

All in all possibly better mileage at 250 mph ( 75% power) using a ULS 912 could be obtained.

If we assume that ( regarding the FPEA ) that Rotax uls 912 at 100 hp uses 19 l/h can go 300 mph the consumption would be just under 2 liters per person/ 100 km.

So I get the feeling not only endurance record but also speed record could be obtained with this two seater; http://records.fai.org/general_aviation/current.asp?id1=17&id2=1

Jabiru 5100 in a Vasama II

Next I will study how a 180 hp 117 kilo flat 8 engine will improve changes of makin FAI record in under 500 kg class. It is 20 cm les wide and under 1 meter long.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jabiru_5100


STAY TUNED !

Structure/Material on Vasama II ( 2-seater )

I have had visions about the structure.

Since the plywood is relatively cheap here and epoxies are great glues. I see no reason why not to make a very cheap yet strong structure outa wood and enhanced with fiberclass and possibly some carbon here and there.

Metal ( steel/aluminium ) ) is vital in landing gear and rods, pedal some joints etc.

With the lightest 50 hp engine I think this could weigh 125-140 kg. Rotax ULS 912 powered version would have to be 175-190 kg at least. Jabiru 2200 povered perhaps 150-160 kg.

I have been thinking about shelled structure of very thin plywood and using ribs of thicker plywood. Sheets can be up to 4 meters long. Generally some ribs could be sandwich ply-foam-ply and other even metal-ply-metal...see the difference ?

Certainly these weights sound optimistic, but Colombani Cri cri proto only weighed 63kilos. I think the whole point in economical design is first to make it small and then create lite structure on it. To me seems like the fiberglass planes are not the lightest. Cri Cri was metal, but I assume since human powered planes are only around 30 kilos that some other ways are to reach low weight.

Wazama Racer

Since I seem to be obsessed about racers; here is the IO-720 powered 400 hp racer version of the Vasama II.
















This possibly could be enhanced to to 800-1000 hp using nitrous and ADI.


Here are the specs of the engine;

http://www.lycoming.com/engines/series/pdfs/Specialty%20insert.pdf

What is the objective, why a pusher of this kind ?

I think the Keltiäinen FAI record ( HK-1 ) 2844 km being the last real aviation record by finns has to be broken.

Next locigal step is to go for the Vari-Ez distance record by Hertzler 3653 km.

Do you think a pusher like Vasama II ( max III ) could do it ? Needs a good stamina to stay awake that long.

Rutan has flown Long -Ez 14 hour legs while around the world trip.

A flight of 4000 km without refuelling with a plane under 500 kg would be phenomenal and certainly prove the capabilities of a pusher as an ecological mean of transportation.

Every day I try to refine this. Now there are normal i5 and a wedge in the luggage. Main wheels a tad more forward.

Alustavaa speksiä pukkaa...SPECS

Here are the specs...the neighboorhood is correct..not all details ( they vary ).

Empty weight goal is 175-190 kg.

Due to the tailwheel configuration and retractable landing gear the specs differ greatly from LH-10 specs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LH-10_Ellipse

ventilation, muffler, rear view mirror

Might be slightly premature to think about these.

Here is illustrated the small Limbach 50 hp engine.

Size adjustment

Cutting down the drag and weight is the easiest at this stage I presume....:)

Small mods...

I got some feedback about the exhausts via prop.

I have an alternate version here. Luggage room is bigger and fuel tank added rear of wheel well. This could have positive affect when flying either one or two onboard regarding to the CG management. In other words the plane could be flown when the pilot is in front alone...when his/her luggage is on the rear seat alone. Fully loaded with 2 people the luggage can be loaded too in the luggage compartment. For a flying model this is nasty because the radios alone cannot get the CG right. Maybe it is not a big problem after all. Fuel can be brought forward and accus.

New tail skid/wheel system.

This ought to work better. The Jery Holcombe Perigee shows that this rodsystem is heavy..+ prop..but the CG, if forward swept wing is needed, will be a tad more forward.