Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Inspiration from here maybe?

 

Alexander Lippisch;

 

50505022.jpg.4d48113856f5cb5c9374cbebb585f539.jpg

 

Or maybe this french cartoon from the 80's,

 

'ROBOSTORY;

 

Robostory.jpg.69d8ad2ffbb42bf12ba3e68313f96e19.jpg

 

Not knocking, looks like a lot of fun. 012_thumb_up.gif.cb3bc51429685855e5e23c55d661406e.gif

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

the D.Plane, more often referred to as the Verhees Delta, has been around for some time. When I first started designing my EagleRay, I was often pointed to it., not only as a reference plane, but also as a preferable build since it's a proven design. Maybe so, but I think my design is way prettier.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
the D.Plane, more often referred to as the Verhees Delta, has been around for some time. When I first started designing my EagleRay, I was often pointed to it., not only as a reference plane, but also as a preferable build since it's a proven design. Maybe so, but I think my design is way prettier.

Hi Doug, I agree the D-Plane is better known as the Verhees Delta and there is some video on Youtube of it (aircraft) flying. How is your EagleRay coming on? I would like to see some pictures posted of progress.

Cheers

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doug do you know much about Scott Winton's Facet Opel and the similarities between it and the Verhees Delta?

 

Did you know that the original Facet Opel in which Scott was tragically killed is being rebuilt by Scott's older brother Dean?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have followed various threads about the Verhees Delta, the Facet Opel and the Rohr Fanjet. All very interesting aircraft to be sure. Dean Scott may well get the Opel back into the air, just hope he puts it back to the original design first. The Rohr is the most likely to succeed I think but not with a turbine here in Oz. The one thing I don't like about it is, the looks like tacked on fin. I'm sure it's safe but it just doesn't look right to me.

 

As for my project, sorry to say it's on the back burned at the moment. I think I bit off more than I could chew, and then over developed it some. MAYBE, if the cash is ever available, I'll go back to it, but with some outside help.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 9 years later...

That is a rarely good looking plane.

What the engine and specs. ( IF KNOWN ).

spacesailor

Edited by spacesailor
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks a tad twitchy in the air. Put a couple of streamers on a pair of them and you could have control line style dog fights.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks about as dangerous as a Flying Flea to me. I wonder what the handling is like on takeoff and landing. Looks to me like it could be very sensitive to AoA angles.

And the vision?? (or lack of it!). How are you supposed to see aircraft below you in the pattern?

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I read that advert, but saw No specifecations for the power plant, span length weight, or that " wing loading " rule, so necessary in Australia .

Blind spot !, easyfix with " car camera "

spacesailor

Edited by spacesailor
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, spacesailor said:

I read that advert, but saw No specifecations for the power plant, span length weight, or that " wing loading " rule, so necessary in Australia .

 

Did you click the specifications tab?

D1 specifications - Verhees Delta , specifications Verhees Delta 1 (verheesengineering.com)

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, onetrack said:

How are you supposed to see aircraft below you in the pattern?

fly inverted ?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fly by feel. ? You'd even have trouble with landing it seeing the ground. There's no option but to land near stall. I'd hate to fly it landing on the nosewheel only.. Nev

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, pmccarthy said:

I don't believe the Flying Flea has been dangerous since the design was fixed, I think that was about 80 years ago!

And I’ll say from the many pou du ciel aircraft I’ve flown from the original hm14 (with the pre-ww2 mods) to the hm1000 not one has been dangerous.  I have owned built a couple of them and there is one in the workshop now so I will admit I’m biased. 

  • Like 2
  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, spacesailor said:

I read that advert, but saw No specifecations for the power plant, span length weight, or that " wing loading " rule, so necessary in Australia .

Blind spot !, easyfix with " car camera "

spacesailor

http://www.verheesengineering.com
 

both the single seat and two seat versions can fit within Australian RAAus registration - the single seater with VW or Subaru engine would be in 95.55 but you could go jabiru2200 and fit it within 95.10 if you wanted.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

Still no go on D1 specifications? .

spacesailor

Aaron25 put a link direct to the specs in his post and I put a link to the homepage of the whole website for the designer ... can’t provide much more direct info without reposting copy/paste ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

I did read both Links, but coulden,t find any spec, specifically for the D1.

spacesailor

Edited by spacesailor
Wrong button
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...