I know most of you have seen the shows on cable TV about
all the Wright Flyer replica attempts to get them in the air.
The EAA project alone spent over a million dollars U.S.. I sure
and heck hope that did not come out of our dues. It unceremoniously
deposited itself in a puddle of rain water right at the end of
the take off track.

Since the thrust obviously  exceeds the drag at flying speed I don't
understand why everybody was so concerned with having a head wind.
It will eventually achieve flying speed in a calm with a long
enough track anyway.

Vance, Klause and I were standing around having a discussion about
it and Vance very brilliantly observed the Right Flyer is basically
a flying wing. The CG is way too far aft for it to load the canard
in the sense of a Rutan canard.  Vance is the first person
I have heard mention that. As such the airfoil is way wrong
for a flying wing. No wonder it is so hard to control in pitch.
A simple reflex in the trailing edge would make it far far more stable
in pitch. It might need more cord as well.

The Wright engine appears to be hard to start. My guess is you need to heat it
with a blow torch before you let the fuel drip into the evaporator
pan. (Turn the blowtorch off first :)) Be that as it may in a way it
is similar to a flooded RX8 engine:)

Paul Lamar

george wright wrote:

It was difficult to tell from the TV images, but it looks as if the take-off
"rail" was made of wood.
Seems to me that with the rain the wood would have swollen, possibly increasing
friction and slowing the
accelleration of the aircraft?

I think they had steel strap on top of the wood rail.

Paul Lamar
 
The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter.  Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            
Copyright 1998-2003 All world wide rights reserved.