courierguy,

Thanks for the great comments. Here is the anchor point as defined by the Breezy design. I presume I could move forward or aft to hit one of the main members however with this configuration the stock struts can be used. A big plus. This will get a full finite element analysis before it is built.

Yep. Not looking for a tandem. Also, goes against my grain to not build

Hi, welcome to BCP. Here's my $.02:

Without having more hours fixed wing piloting, and flying multiple types and learning why/how certain designs excel at certain things, or how they differ in feel...

I fear this is just a fun CAD project. I understand the desire to design and build, but without some foundation of flying experience, it's fruitless.

I know a guy who was test pilot was a certain kitplane startup. The design looked promising, had a nice aesthetic, cool baggage area, etc. But this test pilot said it flew like the designer had never actually flown an airplane. Sounds terrifying.


Go fly as many types as you can, then design!

I for one would use a Cessna 150 wing with a sportsman cuff, already has the Fowler flaps and less draggy struts.

The badlands traveler uses them and it’s a gorgeous plane and it is also a experimental. I think he built a second one with 172 wings.

Thank you for the information. I have now designed my own wing based on the PA18 design. The Makey kit and Backcountry's still look pretty good also. Calcs show good CG with current design.

Here is the airframe. No bending required. Modified Breezy with Piper tail and other parts (seats, controls, etc.). Designing airframe jig now.

With custom wings.

Interesting airplane. Looks similar to this: https://www.aeroplanemanufactory.com/ChinookPlus2.html

Or just buy a kit from the Airplane Manufactory - they sell a kit called the Chinook that seems to be exactly what you're trying to develop. It set a record at the VALDEZ STOL contest in 2018. You can watch the factory video here:

https://www.aeroplanemanufactory.com/index.html

and here's what the plane looked like competing at the recent Texas STOL contest

Indeed, but if the OP is a traditionalist, and wants to use/absolutely has to have, a Lycoming, he won't get anywhere near the performance that Chinook driver gets.

I should mention, that as a former ultralight pilot myself, I kinda think the Chinook pilot is cheating......though he still showed great skill for sure. What I mean by that, (and I don't mean he was being dishonest at all, just taking full advantage of what his very light but powerful aircraft could do) that he has no doubt the smallest useful load of any plane competing there. BUT, I could kick his butt with a 582 powered Pterodactyl, which would also have even less useful load and be even more "ultralightish." It's funny for this former UL pilot to say, but at some point these STOL contests may want to be limited to "real" airplanes, I can't believe I just said that I'm sure the Super Cub guys feel similar about Henry's Highlander and Stockman's S-7S!

courierguy wrote:Indeed, but if the OP is a traditionalist, and wants to use/absolutely has to have, a Lycoming, he won't get anywhere near the performance that Chinook driver gets.

I should mention, that as a former ultralight pilot myself, I kinda think the Chinook pilot is cheating......though he still showed great skill for sure. What I mean by that, (and I don't mean he was being dishonest at all, just taking full advantage of what his very light but powerful aircraft could do) that he has no doubt the smallest useful load of any plane competing there. BUT, I could kick his butt with a 582 powered Pterodactyl, which would also have even less useful load and be even more "ultralightish." It's funny for this former UL pilot to say, but at some point these STOL contests may want to be limited to "real" airplanes, I can't believe I just said that I'm sure the Super Cub guys feel similar about Henry's Highlander and Stockman's S-7S!

Don't weight classes take care of that?

Technically, the Chinook is not an ultralight. It's empty weight is almost double what is allowed under part 103 regs, and it's top speed of 105 mph is almost double the 55 knots allowed for ultralights. I get what you are saying though. The Chinook was allowed to compete at Valdez, and probably isn't much lighter than some of the other custom competitors. Weight class divisions do keep the divisions competitive, but absolute records will likely be kept by planes with lower weights and less momentum to dissipate on landing.

I remember the Chinook from the ultralight days, back in the '80's, that's a hell of a testament to the basic design, being around as long as it has.

I checked out the current specs and yes indeed, saw that it is now more "airplanelike" then ultralight, heavier and faster then I thought. Whatever...it's pilot for sure knew how to max out it's performance!

Folks,

Sorry for the delay, Mike at Yakima helped me with the single engine issue so I went ahead and twinned it. Nearly complete and working on construction drawings now. CG looks very good and stable and is coming in around 1100# dry.

Engines are offset from CL at 33" and running small props to limit yaw on one engine. This is a bit like the AirCam design and should be able to take off on one engine. Currently looking at 912si or 914s.

A couple of my critical design goals were:

* No or minimal tubing bending
* Side by side seating (wife "must" be able to dig nails into leg when uncomfortable)
* Easy to build - air frame based on Breezy so pretty straight forward
* A design to work with existing wing designs such as Dakota and Piper (currently for Piper 18) - the Breezy base air frame does so.
* Uses standard Piper parts and pieces such as seats, etc.

I am hopeful to pick up a donor Piper to scrap the tidbits needed for the build. I hope to be in the 51% but have to talk with FAA inspector to be sure. Donor air frame and unused parts will be sold or scrapped.

Front view.

BTW, those are 31 tundras on the rear.

Looking forward to the 31" wheel pants.

I would highly recommend Snorri Gudmundsson's book: General Aviation Aircraft Design: Applied Methods and Procedures.

Just imagine how much mud will collect in them after a day of playing around, couple of hundred pounds I'd say

Better there than on the prop it seems..

A "small" fender to stop spray and protect the prop yes but the larger it is the more mud it will collect and the heavier it will get and mud isn't very light !!!