What is revolutional about FNX_IX aka J1 Albatros ?

I am trying to sum up what I have been trying to investigate here for the past 4 years by now. I am by profession an architect and by background "a AF base brat" with lotsa flying relatives and buddies. I have been more concentrated in model flying. I have spent time trying to find best economical solutions to go with very little money ( both in price of the AC and MPG ) from point A to point B. Ground effect, pusher lay-out and small size has been under scrutiny. Several records by Giertz, Stits, Bede, Starr, Colomban, Staib, Wheeler foremost have made me convinced that an aeroplane does not have too be bigger than 3400 mm in lenght and 4-5 meter in span if the weight and speed is right. Wheelers Scout was unsafe...so was the BEDE 5A with short wings and unreliable engine. Most important finding is the fact that if the drag is kept minimum along with the weight a considerably smaller engine can be used. This brings about the most savings. Stits Snooky 1 used only 3 hp engine to stay level, but had to be towed into the air. None of the planes had a V-tail ( Bede tried it ) all have traditional landing gear systems. Andersson's MFI-9 Junior with forward sweep wing and side by side seating is also remarkable through its size and weight + aerodynamical and constructional simpliness...all these have inspired me a lot..as well as their followers like Airbike and Legal Eagle ( derivatives of the Stits Snooky 1 ). MFI flies faster with 80 hp than several similar seated with 200 hp. This can't be an accident. The fact that unless you have very little drag and very little weight is directly related to the fact that one can not fly fast with fixed pitched prop at lesser horsepowers. Also I found that which end ever you have the prop the landing gear has to have legs, not for the prop but for the fuselage to be aerodynamically the right shape for economical flying. Most important lesson is to remember the physical measurements of a human being and how they affect the sizing of the fuselage. I have now less than 0,96 m2 frontal area and thus something in betweeon 0,5 and 1,0 sq ft FPEA..FNX II had just 0,35 sq ft, but pusher was too complicated and heavy to be economical to build for my purposes ! I recon a 65-75 kg empty weight for my small aerobatic plane is feasible...and my fellow aerodynamist says the plane has no problem to work...I like it. I think we can now advance peacefully into the next phase !

No comments:

Post a Comment