PDA

View Full Version : Microlight Me-109



stalkervision
09-19-2008, 10:48 AM
Outstandingly cool! Lets watch!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfaOFh8PeXk

buzzsaw1939
09-19-2008, 12:03 PM
Yep cool!... but if your older generation, you might want to mute the sound,....kids! geeezzz! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

triad773
09-19-2008, 12:32 PM
Interesting, but the over all geometry of the design I find off just enough to be annoying.

It's nice, but it's just not my cuppa tea.

stalkervision
09-19-2008, 12:43 PM
Originally posted by triad773:
Interesting, but the over all geometry of the design I find off just enough to be annoying.

It's nice, but it's just not my cuppa tea.

well it is an ultralight without that nice long v12 sticking out front. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

See how quick it took off! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

The funny thing is I catch little tiny glimpses of the way the 109's all fly which you wouldn't think would be there whatsoever.

Jaws2002
09-19-2008, 12:47 PM
Cool clip. Thx.

I have to agree that it looks nothing like a 109. Why would they even call it a 109 replica?
Honestly if someone likes the 109 enough to justify buying a replica knows exactly the shape of the 109.
This is a cool plane but 109 is not, no matter how I stretch my imagination. Just doesn't look right.

They actually look a lot like the wooden dummy 109's we have in game. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

stalkervision
09-19-2008, 01:02 PM
Picky.. picky... picky.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

If someone gave one to me I wouldn't turn it down.

Actually it flies much better then the 109! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

squareusr
09-19-2008, 02:16 PM
Why would they even call it a 109 replica?


Because, despite of all the obvious differences, it does look more like a 109, than like, say, a 190, or a spit, or an A380...

For a flying toy that's lighter than an average motorcycle the visual similarity with the original (which is more than ten times as heavy) is higher than i would have expected.


Actually it flies much better then the 109! not if you take mass*climb per horsepower as your benchmark rating (but it's close - couldn't think of a better comparison for aircraft that differ in power by a factor of more than 20) http://squadhost.de/mul/?download=tpme109.pdf

stalkervision
09-19-2008, 02:23 PM
believe it or not it looks as if it uses the same 109's elevator trim adjustment! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

stalkervision
09-19-2008, 02:28 PM
well picky picky's. I found a different 109 UL you will like a bit better for obvious reasons. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfJbcDgrklw&feature=related

JG52Uther
09-19-2008, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by stalkervision:
well picky picky's. I found a different 109 UL you will like a bit better for obvious reasons. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfJbcDgrklw&feature=related

This looks much better I think!
And he has installed the prop mod. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

luftluuver
09-19-2008, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by JG52Uther:
This looks much better I think!
And he has installed the prop mod. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Airplane flies forward even though the prop is turning as a pusher. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Most certainly an uber airplane.http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

M_Gunz
09-19-2008, 03:36 PM
That's camera frame synch, LL.

I'm a bit amazed, UL with retractable gear!
VERY good over all!

If it was me however... a high visibility paint job would be a MUST, including a few lights.
It only takes on little collision to ruin your whole day.

GOOD FIND STALKER!

luftluuver
09-19-2008, 03:40 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
That's camera frame synch, LL.
I know it is. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif It is not even turning at one point.

stalkervision
09-19-2008, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
That's camera frame synch, LL.

I'm a bit amazed, UL with retractable gear!
VERY good over all!

If it was me however... a high visibility paint job would be a MUST, including a few lights.
It only takes on little collision to ruin your whole day.

GOOD FIND STALKER!

Thanks buddy. Pretty neat huh? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

buzzsaw1939
09-19-2008, 04:03 PM
Just a small tech note.. UL's can't have retractable gear, only the experimental class.

Stalker, I was trying to find the yutube of the scaled down 190 with the v twin motor cycle engine, he was doing erobatics and I thought it sounded good, it was in here a few months ago, do you have it by any chance?

stalkervision
09-19-2008, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
Just a small tech note.. UL's can't have retractable gear, only the experimental class.

Stalker, I was trying to find the yutube of the scaled down 190 with the v twin motor cycle engine, he was doing erobatics and I thought it sounded good, it was in here a few months ago, do you have it by any chance?

sorry buddy. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif I'd like to see that one too! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

ElAurens
09-19-2008, 05:09 PM
I see he wired his slats shut.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Buzzsaw-
09-19-2008, 10:04 PM
Salute

In my opinion the best warbird replica, light aircraft, is the Supermarine Mk-26, which is a 90% scale all aluminum Spitfire, powered by a 250 hp V6.

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/3/2/9/1020923.jpg

They originally made the aircraft as a 80% scale version, as seen below, but it didn't quite look right. Still sell this model, but I think I'd go for the 90% version.

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/5/5/0/1131055.jpg

It has performance very similar to an early Spit I, VNE of 264 mph, and rated to 6 G's for acrobatics.

Even sounds good:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXX3gcT2okI&feature=related

Will cost you some serious change though, approx. $150,000.00 US for all the bells and whistles.

Website:

http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/About.htm

M_Gunz
09-20-2008, 04:40 AM
I could afford this kit-Spit (http://www.hobbymasters.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=12015)

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I've looked at low-grade kitplanes on the web years ago, 3/4 and 7/8 scale with much less
motor (60-80 HP range) and top speeds around 100 mph or so but -much- less than $100,000.

And I wonder if features like elliptical wings are an advantage in such planes?
Or if you could upgrade or overbuild (reinforce with carbon, etc), without getting in trouble
just by flying faster than design speed.

LOL, other direction, how about a 1 seater scale Beaver for lake country flying?
Probably go all of 50 mph!

squareusr
09-20-2008, 08:58 AM
That 80% Spit has a cute propeller, reminds me of the me163 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Buzzsaw-
09-20-2008, 05:41 PM
Salute

An intermediate price light replica which won't cost as much as the Supermarine Mk-26 is the Titan Mustang T-51, which is an approx. 75% replica.

http://www.titanaircraft.com/aircraft_pics/t51flight.jpg

It starts around $55,000 and has aluminum wings and core with a steel tube frame. It has a 115 hp 4 cylinder engine, and a VNE of 197 mph.

It is rated for 6 g's acrobatics too.

Difference is a cruise speed of approx. 200 mph, and a climbrate of 2500 ft per minute for the Spit replica and a cruise of 150mph and climbrate of 1320 ft per minute for the Mustang.

Both the Supermarine Mk 26 and the Titan are kit builds, although the major parts are already assembled. You still have to do the riveting etc, a lot of work is involved. Or you could pay the factory to do it for you.

Re. the question about wing profile etc. The Titan has a high lift aerofoil to make flying it easy, not a laminar flow design for more speed. I believe the Spitfire has an aerofoil modelled very closely on the original aircraft, historically that wing profile, when used with low wingloading, was very forgiving, with lots of stall warning.

An ex-military pilot with many hours tested the Mk26 90% version and wrote a report: (he had previously tested the 80% version)

>>>

PILOTS REPORT

March 22nd 2007. Watts Bridge Queensland Australia.

Pilot, Richard Lea. Weight 87 kgs plus 8kg parachute. Campbell Aero Classics Helmet worn.80 litres fuel.

Weather, fine, 4/8 Cumulus. Base 3000, tops 5500. Wind 12 knots along dry (dusty) runway.

Start/Taxi/Cockpit Overview.

Cockpit was noticeably larger with more head and shoulder room.View through front quarter panels much improved in front of wing and along fuselage for taxi. The higher seating position also gives a more natural lean from the waist to view along the left side of fuselage when taxiing. Brakes very good, distinct improvement in feel and braking.

Take Off.

Aircraft acceleration rapid to 65 knots, tail lifted easily with no tendancy to swing. There was no need to pull to get airbourne and aircraft flown off at around 65 knots. Climb rate 2500 ft/min at 85 knots with 4300 rpm and prop full fine.

Cruise.

Aircraft accelerated at 7500 ft with fully course pitch to 168 knots. All temps and pressures fine.

Stalling.(Conducted with calibrated Instruments)

Aircraft stalled clean and with flaps and U/C down.

Nose dropped at 42 knots in landing configuration and 48 knots clean.

8 stalls completed all straight ahead. All easily recovered, max height loss 100-150 ft Good feel in all control axis throughout these stalls. We have found with further testing that the stalls are neutral but wing drops can be induced if controls not central. Even with a slight wing drop it is fully recoverable almost immediately.

Spins. (Conducted with calibrated instruments)

Spins conducted, clean aircraft, one and a half turns each. Entry, full rear stick, throttle closed, full in spin rudder, ailerons central. A/cs nose dropped after 1/2 rotation. Spin slightly faster to right and tending to increase rate when starting recovery. Yaw stopped instantly when opposite rudder applied. Aircraft normal safe recovery, speed builds quickly after roll and yaw stops.

Aeros.

The Mk26b has excellent directional stability and steep 90 deg turns at 3G with full throttle at 135 knots were flown coinsecutively left and right. Barrel rolls, wing overs and loops were conducted using a maximum of 4G and 160 knots at entry. The Mk26b was delightful to fly, with excellent visibility all round. The larger cockpit developement of the Mk26b does not detract from the earlier Mks feeling of 'oneness' with the aircraft.The bigger wider bubble canopy gives ample headroom for the taller pilots up to 6ft 4inches with hard helmet fitted. The Mk26b is as agile as its smaller sibling and gives the pilot a much more comfortable environment to fly in.

Early flights are showing the Mk26b to be as docile and as stable in the landing phase as the Mk26 with the improved visibility outwards and downwards making the 3 point roundout and landing even easier.

Circuit and Landing.

Mk26 speeds flown, full flap used. Approach, 70 knots, 65knots over threshold. Very good visibility over nose on finals with excellent height assessment to point of round out. Aircraft has no tendancy to balloon up at roundout and settles easily in 3 point attitude. Distinct improvement in vision compared to smaller Mk26.

Summing up.

The Mk26b is a welcome improvement in space and grace to the Supermarine stable. The bigger aircraft has lost none of its agility or excitement in handling. Indeed it has demonstrated a more directionally stable tendancy with a more positive action with little overswing when centreing the ball in hard manouvers. The larger cockpit now easily accomodates two large adults making long distant flights even more comfortable and the improvement in visibility makes the Mk26b even easier to land and taxi.

<<<

The Mk26 Supermarine is supposed to be upgraded with a V8 engine soon. That should give it performance in the 300 mph range. First video of a V8 test flight:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNJIDHdvHWQ&feature=related

Buzzsaw-
09-20-2008, 06:22 PM
Salute

If you have even more cash on hand, and you want a full size Mustang, a company called ThunderMustang used to build an aluminum and carbon fibre replica which is claimed to outperform the original.

http://www.thundermustang.com/Images02/R06formation.jpg

It was powered by this 640 HP V12 engine:

http://www.falconerengines.com/images/splash/main.jpg

Only $300,000.000.

Of course, if you are rich like Tom Cruise, you can also spend approx. $3,000,000.00 and get an original. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I hate Tom Cruise films, but would pay double the usual admission for him to make a film about the Battle of Germany, just to see real footage with Mustangs and 190's. I think he'd probably insist on having real aircraft, maybe we'd see some of the new 100% scale Focke-Wulfs. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif (though I thank God he decided to drop the BoB project which would have had an American winning the battle on his own)

STENKA_69.GIAP
09-22-2008, 09:34 AM
Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
Just a small tech note.. UL's can't have retractable gear, only the experimental class.


That's merely US legislation. Over here we can have retractible gear. I share a hanger with a Pioneer, it's a two seater that will do 270 Kmh. Very nice little plane.

http://www.alp-valence.com/P300.html

M_Gunz
09-22-2008, 10:38 AM
US legislation won't allow ultralights to go faster than 60 mph, IIRC.
Yes, cars on the highway have to be able to go faster or everyone would clutter the skies.
It's not a bad call really, the majority would not learn more than they have to just to get
airborne and we'd have ultralights falling out of the sky all over the place.

buzzsaw1939
09-22-2008, 11:24 AM
It may happen anyway, I've noticed on youtube a lot of loose canons up there that think planes are toys!

M_Gunz
09-22-2008, 11:40 AM
A lot to worry about then. I worked in a company where the owner had a plane we used to get
around parts of the country in. He told me one time of an ultralight owner who bragged about
getting up over 20,000 ft. He says "What happens if that guy gets up there and clouds move
in below before he can get back down?". It takes a long time to fly an UL down half that far.
We could be flying through a cloud and hit one of those, it's bad enough with the birds like
geese.

When there's no license there is nothing requiring these people to know things like that.

I've seen nice vids on UL rotorcraft. They are not nearly as subject to winds as fixed wing.
At times I've been almost tempted.

STENKA_69.GIAP
09-23-2008, 05:32 AM
US Ultralight legislation is not typical.

In Europe there is compulsory Pilot training, CAA written exams, a licence that can be withdrawn and you have to follow the same VFR regulations as private aircraft.

In return for that we are allowed relatively high performance two seat aircraft, fully equipped with radio, transponder and parachute.

For example more than 50% of light aircraft sales in France are now Ultralight class. The basic advantages are that the cost of ownership/rental rates are significantly lower, there is significantly less burocracy and you can maintain your own aircraft.

Strangely enough the class has a better safety record than "professional" aviation. Ultralights can be put down in most small fields and in the case of a big problem the parachute will take down the whole plane and two occupants.

M_Gunz
09-23-2008, 06:11 AM
Here I think that is the experimental class.

buzzsaw1939
09-23-2008, 11:53 AM
STENKA,... what your describing would fall into a new class here in the states called LSA (light sport aircraft), ultralight has become a broad term anymore, to fly with out training or certificate, you have to adhere to part 103 in the FAR's, very restrictive!

Buzzsaw-
09-23-2008, 12:42 PM
Salute

AFAIK, in Canada the Spitfire Mk26 and the Titan would be classed as 'Experimental', same as in the States. This class can have retractable undercarriage and higher horsepower.

The 'Ultralight' class is typically powered by low hp engines and has non retractable undercarriages.

The building of WWI replicas such as this Nieuport 11 is fairly common in the Ultralight class. Below is a Graham Lee design, powered by a 41 hp Rotax engine:

http://www.foxflier.com/nieuport/P9130034.jpg

http://www.foxflier.com/nieuport/N11gs.wmv

buzzsaw1939
09-23-2008, 01:43 PM
Right on Buzzsaw!.. Unfortunately I think this beauty had to be reclassified to the LSA catagory, do to it's wieght, 103 requires max empty wieght of 254 lbs.