djpacro

I saw the partly finished prototype at Avalon in 2005. The structure and detail design is certainly a lot different from a Tomahawk even if they borrowed the overall concept and configuration.

 

I wonder if one will be flying at Avalon next year.

 

 

Quote:aircraft that looks ridiculously like a Tomahawk but says that it is designed from the ground up in Aus... http://www.dwaviation.com

is the link, apart from having conventional tail set up it could be a tomahawk.. confusing...

I don't see why it is confusing or ridiculous - the website explains the Tomahawk origins. Anyone get confused between the Skipper & Tomahawk?They're having a good go at producing a local training aircraft.

 

 

aeroeng,

 

going to the National aerobatic championships at Easter?

 

any reason why you're not still working as an engineer in aerospace?

 

 

They still do quite a lot in the way of wooden aircraft work in the US

Yep, in the '90's I worked at a company in the USA which was still building wooden aircraft.Aaaah "lofts" - I haven't heard that word for ages.

 

 

I'll be wanting to have it completed soon so I can send the file away to an aeronautical engineer friend for a final analysis check before I start to cut wood

Your friend is an old guy I assume - its been a while since they taught wooden structures at uni?

I know little about the use of auto powerplants in aircraft so no comment from me.

 

 

Sorry, but I still don't like attaching main landing gear to a wooden spar. A heavy landing can overload the spar, regardless of how well it was designed. Attaching the gear to secondary structure has two advantages:

 

- less risk of catastrophic wing failure due undetected spar damage

 

- easier repair after a heavy landing

 

The two braces from the landing gear to the rear spar - I assume that there is additional bracing i.e. at the kinks?

 

I suggest that you do some research on failures of CAP 10's.

 

On a different subject - I'm interested in the structural analysis?

 

 

Another thought for you:

 

Putting landing gear impact loads into the wing main spar adds a risk of additional damage. Is it still a wooden spar? If so, ground loads can cause cracking which may not be detected and lead to in-flight failure. Have you considered attaching the main landing gear to secondary structure rather than direct to the main spar?

 

How does it compare with the Whisky http://www.homebuilt.org/kits/littner/whisky.html or Falco? http://www.seqair.com/

 

 

Why the 4-blade prop. I'd guess that there's enough diameter available to use 3 blades. Have you looked at vibration characteristics?

 

What was the original design?

 

What CAD tool are you using?

 

Looks good.

 

 

I saw the partly completed aeroplane at Avalon. Bill Whitney is a highly competent engineer and it looks like a sensible design.

 

Direct competitor is the new Alpha 120T from New Zealand.

 

The world has more good aeroplane designs than there are successful aeroplane manufacturing ventures. I wish them luck.