Besler Steam Plane

[kgwilson]

The Besler Steam Plane was the most successful of all of the attempts to use steam to power an aircraft. It was installed in a Travel Air 2000 Biplane in 1933 and was a double expansion V twin producing 150 HP but weighed in at 500 lbs (230 Kg). It's most notable feature was being able to almost instantly reverse run and gave the aircraft STOL capability.

 

[onetrack]

You'd think they could've done a little better than exhausting the steam at a level that was near the pilots head, wouldn't you?

 

One wonders what the potential would be, to build a similar unit now, using todays technology and materials, that would likely result in a sizeable weight saving.

 

There's a good "write-up" about the engine and aircraft in the link below. The ability to reverse the engine immediately upon landing, gave an amazing braking ability, that eliminated any potential for nose-over.

 

https://www.456fis.org/BESLER_STEAM_AIRPLANE.htm

[pmccarthy]

He would be wiping his goggles frequently, and that steam exhaust would be oily. An example of what can be done today with steam is in:

[Bruce Tuncks]

Electric should be able to do a prop reversal, but I don't think they do. I wonder why not? Maybe its because reversal might be a step too far and frighten off the certifiers? But they shouldn't be such stupid people surely... the certifiers I mean.

[spacesailor]

That air bike should have a Double acting plston.

Twice the power for same outlay and weight.

spacesailor

[facthunter]

Reversing the engine is OK for ships Trains and cars but a plane ? Too slow. The prop's already in fine so just reverse it a bit.. Nev

[old man emu]

Would you class the Bessler as a "Gotta light?" aircraft?

[Flightrite]

Reverse pitch in a small light A/C wouldn't be worth it, cost, weight complexicity and operator error all means no real benifit.

[skippydiesel]

Wow ! love the steam bike. have always had a passing interest in steam - in my dreams, would love to have a steam launch.

[Geoff_H]

Electric should be able to do a prop reversal, but I don't think they do. I wonder why not? Maybe its because reversal might be a step too far and frighten off the certifiers? But they shouldn't be such stupid people surely... the certifiers I mean.

I expect that the current would double when the prop would go in reverse. Possible large current carrying cables and extra weight

[Bruce Tuncks]

A variable pitch prop is too heavy and expensive, but you can easily reverse an electric motor. With a 3 phase motor, you only need to swap 2 of the 3 feed wires. And you could easily limit the current to be less than the take-off power. What you would be left with is the capacity to do reverse thrust on a small plane. That sure would help to shorten the landing roll.

You could also do some interesting aerobatics I reckon.

[Bruce Tuncks]

I just looked it up for models. They have vids of electric reverse thrust being used in the air and yes it does make for interesting aerobatics.

A spin is much "better" if you use all the reverse thrust you have.

I don't think I would be brave enough to use reverse thrust in the air, but I would like it for landing on a real short strip.

[Geoff_H]

Actually there is no need to reverse polarity! If you load up the propeller and electronically change the frequency to be smaller than the frequency of the motor you will generate power in a multiphase motor. But I expect that there will be an increase in the weight of the electronic control.

[Geoff_H]

if you run a 3-phase motor faster than it's maximum frequency i.e. 3000rpm or 1500rpm depending on the number of Poles you will generate electricity back into the mains. All you have to do in this case is have a variable speed controller for the power going to the motor and you can recharge a battery and use it as a brake

[facthunter]

Reverse thrust on a prop after landing doesn't help your rudder to work at it's best. You've got a 45 Knt stall speed so lets be real. It's academic having reverse thrust. Nice to ponder these things but some of the most enjoyed planes I've flown had no brakes.. You don't use then for quick trips though. Nev

[planedriver]

He would be wiping his goggles frequently, and that steam exhaust would be oily. An example of what can be done today with steam is in:

 

I found that fascinating. Thanks for posting that PMC

[Flightrite]

Another thing to remember there maybe some issues where some light A/C engines aren't designed for neg thrust on the crankshaft.

[Geoff_H]

I was privileged some years ago to see the csiro' lightweight engine that was used for the solar race cars. It is essentially very strong magnets that were in a case that rotated around a field of wires in a pattern, these wires were fixed to the frame. Rotating around these wires that were stationery the casing was attached to the load this case be the propeller, the casing spun.

[facthunter]

The original ROTARIES were like that. Not the later Wankels. Nev

[old man emu]

It is essentially very strong magnets that were in a case that rotated around a field of wires in a pattern, these wires were fixed to the frame. Rotating around these wires that were stationery the casing was attached to the load this case be the propeller, the casing spun.

 

Does that remind you of an early IC engine?

80 hp Le Rhône Model 9C

[Marty_d]

He would be wiping his goggles frequently, and that steam exhaust would be oily. An example of what can be done today with steam is in:

Superheated steam at 300 degrees right between your legs. What could possibly go wrong?

[Bruce Tuncks]

Good fun topic. Today I was asked why you wouldn't do an electric plane as a 2 or 4 or more engines.

With an engine or more on each wing you could have lots of control, look at the quadcopters. And with a lot of engines along the front of the wing, you can have airflow to lift without forward speed. The mind boggles at the aerobatic possibilities.

Well I couldn't answer the question.

[Marty_d]

Good fun topic. Today I was asked why you wouldn't do an electric plane as a 2 or 4 or more engines.

With an engine or more on each wing you could have lots of control, look at the quadcopters. And with a lot of engines along the front of the wing, you can have airflow to lift without forward speed. The mind boggles at the aerobatic possibilities.

Well I couldn't answer the question.

You would. There's absolutely no reason why you couldn't have multiple engines along the LE, and in fact I've seen a few concepts (at least 1 actually flying) that have that.

[Geoff_H]

What about the configuration in my avatar??

[spacesailor]

Bureaucratic Rules.

RAA say one engine AND one propeller.

spacesailor