F3A Biplanes have a future!

[Del Rykert]

I would guess they whys would be of great interest so others could avoid repeating the premature demise of a plane. The how it fly's are largely subjective opinion anyway. What is ones treasure is another's nightmare.
 
     Del K. Rykert
     AMA - 8928 
     NSRCA - 473
     Kb2joi - General 


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jerry Budd 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 8:33 AM
  Subject: RE: F3A Biplanes have a future!


  Re: the flying wires, I'm pretty sure it didn't have any.

  Eric, I agree the "how it flew" should be of more interest but I 
  don't think you're going to get much (if any) information of 
  substance from a 45 second flight (regardless of what the pilot may 
  tell you).

  Jerry

  >My data source says that wing mount sides were primarily balsa and 
  >needed a simple lite ply plate to remedy the situation.
  >
  >I am not sure why we are so interested in the failure aspect when 
  >the "how it flew" is what peaks my interest. I am tracking the 
  >Bi-plane "adventure" and so far it seems they snap recover better, 
  >roll much better, circles etc. this is because they transition 
  >between wing lift and fuselage lift much better than the current 
  >mono's..
  >
  >Eric.
  >
  >-----Original Message-----
  >From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
  >[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Derek Koopowitz
  >Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 9:17 AM
  >To: discussion at nsrca.org
  >Subject: RE: F3A Biplanes have a future!
  >
  >
  >Well, you may want to add that it failed because he was supposed to install
  >the flying wires and didn't... Or so I heard.
  >
  >-----Original Message-----
  >From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On
  >Behalf Of Jerry Budd
  >Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 11:31 PM
  >To: discussion at nsrca.org
  >Subject: RE: F3A Biplanes have a future!
  >
  >
  >Chip Hyde's crashed about a minute into the first flight due to a
  >structural failure of the wing(s).
  >
  >>What other biplane has crashed due to wing failure besides the one I
  >>reported?
  >>
  >>Peter
  >>
  >>-----Original Message-----
  >>From: Jerry Budd [mailto:jbudd at QNET.COM]
  >>Sent: Wednesday, 14 May 2003 12:16 AM
  >>To: discussion at nsrca.org
  >>Subject: Re: F3A Biplanes have a future!
  >>
  >>
  >>>That makes three (publically known) biplane projects going on right
  >>>now. Just when you think you've got the best.... ;>  Time to spend
  >>>more money.
  >>
  >>Two of which crashed on their first flight due to structural failure of
  >>the wings.
  >>
  >>More money is right.
  >>
  >>>
  >>>I'm rather torn on this biplane issue.  Should FAI add a new rule that
  >>>outlaws them?  On one hand, I'm sure they will improve our flights,
  >>>but on the other I don't want them to be advantage over the planes we
  >>>have now. Kind of like changing the 2m size limit to 2.5m.  The guys
  >>>with the big factories behind them will have an advantage, while the
  >>>rest of us will be alienated.  Going to biplanes might be no different
  >>>than going to 2.5m,
  >>only
  >>>it isn't against the rules.  Or, it might be like the switch to 2m
  >>>planes from the .60 planes.  I would hate to go back to a 0.60 after
  >>>flying a 2m.
  >>
  >>Pattern will die before we go back to 0.60 sized airplanes. Pandora's
  >>box was opened a long time ago.
  >>
  >>>
  >>>That said, I want a biplane.  I do expect they will fly better, which
  >>>is certainly a good thing, and someone has to develop them before I
  >>>get to fly it.
  >>
  >>When someone can properly define what "flying better" is, then we have
  >>something that can be debated.  Until then this is just marketing.
  >>
  >>Jerry
  >>--
  >>___________
  >>Jerry Budd
  >>Budd Engineering
  >>http://www.buddengineering.com =====================================
  >># To be removed from this list, send a message to
  >># discussion-request at nsrca.org
  >># and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
  >>#
  >>
  >>***************************** Disclaimer *****************************
  >>
  >>The contents of this electronic message and any attachments are
  >>intended only for the addressee and may contain privileged or
  >>confidential information. They may only be used for the purposes for
  >>which they were supplied. If you are not the addressee, you are
  >>notified that any transmission, distribution, downloading, printing or
  >>photocopying of the contents of this message or attachments is strictly
  >>prohibited. The privilege of confidentiality attached to this message
  >>and attachments is not waived, lost or destroyed by reason of mistaken
  >>delivery to you. If you receive this message in error please notify the
  >>sender by return e-mail or telephone.
  >  >
  >>Thank you.
  >>
  >>
  >>=====================================
  >># To be removed from this list, send a message to
  >># discussion-request at nsrca.org
  >># and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
  >>#
  >
  >
  >--
  >___________
  >Jerry Budd
  >mailto:jbudd at qnet.com
  >=====================================
  ># To be removed from this list, send a message to
  ># discussion-request at nsrca.org
  ># and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
  >#
  >
  >
  >
  >=====================================
  ># To be removed from this list, send a message to
  ># discussion-request at nsrca.org
  ># and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
  >#
  >
  ># To be removed from this list, send a message to
  ># discussion-request at nsrca.org
  ># and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
  >#


  -- 
  ___________
  Jerry Budd
  mailto:jbudd at qnet.com
  =====================================
  # To be removed from this list, send a message to 
  # discussion-request at nsrca.org
  # and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
  #
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20030515/f458f133/attachment.html