Jump to content

Supercharged Rotax


Tucano
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi Gary,

 

I have been eyeing off this kit for about a year and only came across your webpage last week, I am exteremely interested in your project and am toying with the idea of building one myself. Good luck with the build and keep us informed on progress please?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The kit is in the country - all the specialized tools are on order. The plan was to launch the aircraft at AUSFly but that is now cancelled. We had organized for a representative to attend but that is not to be so he and I will still meet at Rylstone and go through the kit in detail. The Hurricane will be discussed at the meeting at Rylstone but the company has decided the Tucano is a priority. The upgraded Rotax should give both the extra teeth they need.

 

The kits quality is first class and I hope to begin assembly as soon as the hanger is finished

 

Standby

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Way to heavy, to powerful and I am not keen to be a test pilot as it would be above my pay scale - this can be registered as a ultralight at 600 kg with the rotax. The 7 kg of the supercharger is offset by removing 14 kg of ballistic parachute.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always thought the next direction for our recreational weight ultralights was scaled warbirds.

 

Many years back I noticed that if you plan to build a scale warbird, the first thing people ask is, 'Can you make it two seat?"

 

After resisting the temptation to beat these people with their own ignorance (it's a WAR BIRD, a single seater, live with it!!) I then figured, well, why not build warbird trainers??!!

 

Really, the possibilities are endless;

 

I was actually working on full size Harvards at Bankstown, and looking at the maintenance manual, realised that it could actually be a simple aircraft.

 

Here are some of the results;

 

TxnPlns.jpg.a8454dab9424da1763d1c00cf39d435a.jpg

 

But I didn't have a Rotec (AT THE TIME !)014_spot_on.gif.1f3bdf64e5eb969e67a583c9d350cd1f.gif

 

Followed by a little photoshop;

 

harvardweb.jpg.9c4f12a966cec67d0a5d8b4b48b53334.jpg

 

That was going to be a fair project, and I wanted something a bit easier and thought, Mustang? (done to death), Spitfire? (wood, metal, glass?, and what scale would you like?), F4U Corsair? (ARE YOU MAD?), Messerschmitt 109? (already small, and available in glass), FW190? nice aircraft, would prefer a Ta152, but again a bit complex, Mitsubishi Zero? (aerodynamically a very nice plane, simple lines, but is the Australian flying community ready for it yet?), the Kittyhawk was very tempting, but eventually I settled on the Hurricane.

 

Structurally very simple, thick, lightweight and forgiving wing, light fabric covering, seemed like a good idea;

 

Hurrilite.jpg.ee9f818be4f5ac915ac19c4341730ff8.jpg

 

Then, just as I was getting these drawings underway I saw the Italian version 049_sad.gif.af5e5c0993af131d9c5bfe880fbbc2a0.gif

 

OK, so I need something different, something that has a bit of uniqueness to it, and trolling through Hawker information for the Hurricane, really started to like the Typhoon / Tempest lines.

 

Back to the computer;

 

Tinnypest.jpg.42e413665cb27989c95c2c018e487260.jpg

 

And a little photoshop to help visualise;

 

Tinypest.jpg.b6a4776f5344c11f7d63089302348d4f.jpg

 

Too many projects, not enough time or money...053_no.gif.1b075e917db98e3e6efb5417cfec8882.gif

 

Oh, and my Rotec?, a couple of years back I picked up the remains of a damaged Murphy Renegade, and was going to rebuild it with a 912, just as a Rotec became avaiable.

 

So with the extra weight up from I needed to do a bit of modifying, and ended up working towards building a scaled down Boeing Stearman.

 

Work was underway until my Lightwing got damaged..051_crying.gif.fe5d15edcc60afab3cc76b2638e7acf3.gif

 

ReneStear.jpg.c18ed0e7be255865a26dbedcb5aa104c.jpg

 

Link to Stearman here; https://plus.google.com/photos/113292981019876413104/albums/5517491041560340721?banner=pwa

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would be familiar with the W.A.R. range then Pylon? I think there were a few attempts to get them up and happening but they didn't make much traction.

 

From memory they were 50% scale.

 

I think there was an Aussie guy involved too......was designing a hurricane I think....

 

 

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the W.A.R. range were all around the 50% scale, which actually made them fairly small.

 

Interesting range; FW190, P-47 Thunderbolt, F4u Corsair, Hawker Sea fury, Mustang (killed one of the team?) and possibly a Zero.

 

They were then based somewhat on KR-1's structurally and aimed at being powered by VW or 0200, which made them a bit heavy.

 

Net result, they tended to be nasty little things!

 

Most are finding that the 70~80% range makes things a little thicker, which means can be built a bit lighter (trust me...).

 

There was a 70% Hurricane designed in America by a guy named Sindlinger, all wood, fairly light, retracts and around 100hp, better with about 150hp.

 

There have been a couple in Australia, there is one flying around in NZ with a small V-6 in the front....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there you go.....

 

After spending an hour or so composing and uploading files for my first here, I realise I forgot to add the whole reason I replied !035_doh.gif.37538967d128bb0e6085e5fccd66c98b.gif

 

While I love the Tucano, many in Australia may not know what it was, and would undoubtedly call it a PC-9 or a Roulette...

 

So, fired up the computer again (a few years back) and;

 

1028513337_PC70.jpg.98518f31506c3aceb300f3fd6cc4c305.jpg

 

Also had silly thoughts like a cardboard head profile sitting on the instrument panel, to look like a two seater.

 

I guess a 8/9ths with a 912s/914 could be a two seater.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Way to heavy, to powerful and I am not keen to be a test pilot as it would be above my pay scale - this can be registered as a ultralight at 600 kg with the rotax. The 7 kg of the supercharger is offset by removing 14 kg of ballistic parachute.

Dumb Question.. Are forced induction engines now allowed by RAA in other than 95-10?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Dumb Question.. Are forced induction engines now allowed by RAA in other than 95-10?

No problems with forced induction (turbocharge or supercharge) engines, it's Turbine engines that the authorities seem to have some sort of problem with:freaked:.

Although not practical in our size range from a fuel efficiency point of view, as most of our flying is for FUN?, I can't see what the problem is ?

 

Turbine engines are no more temperamental than two strokes, have even more power to weight (than two strokes) and accordingly an even higher fuel burn.

 

Granted, to get the best effectiveness from one, it is better to be a turboprop, which can add some complexity to the mix, but the jet engine itself is pretty simple with basically only one moving part!! 041_helmet.gif.78baac70954ea905d688a02676ee110c.gif

 

 

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...