> Hey Paul,
          >
          > I have seen a number of Midget Mustangs (the single seater)
         powered by
          > O-320's.  I just saw an MM powered by an O-360 with a C/S
    prop.  I'd
          > have to think it would be fairly reasonable to stuff a 13B into
         an MM.
          > Maybe even mount the radiator under/behind the pilot, just
    like the
          > P-51.  Could help the weight and balance.  I've also seen a
    couple of
          > MM's with retractable landing gear.  Such a combination should
         qualify
          > for Sport Class - enough have been built.  I'd like to have a
         structural
          > analysis for flutter.  It shouldn't be against class rules
    to put
         enough
          > more beef in the structure to make it go 400mph..  Hah.  :)  Or
         at least
          > fast enough to raise some eyebrows.
          >
          >
          > Regards
          >
          > Matt-


         If you want to run in the Sport Class with a Midget Mustang, I
    would
         use an
         aluminum 20B.  A better place for the radiators is in the inboard
         leading
         edges.  I think this is actually a lower drag installation and
    you won't
         have to sit on those coolant lines.

         Steve Brazil


    Rather than an Al 20b, I'd go with a turbocharged aluminum 13b.  It
    would fit better, and probably fly better, and be plenty of horsepower.
    I see a development path on the airframe starting with an O-200 (I have
    one), moving to an NA P-Port Iron 13b, and then to turbocharged Al (if
    I'm still having fun)..  I realize there's no replacement for
    displacement however.


    Thanks,

    Matt-

    You know Matt there are plenty of cheap Formula 1 airplanes for sale.
    Here is the slickest one I have seen so far. Not necessarily for sale.

    Paul Lamar



That's a Mike Arnold designed airplane Paul (the Endeavor - AR-6).  Mr
Arnold came to fame as a film maker turned airplane designer who built a
65hp Rotax powered airplane that ran ~215mph on a timed course - setting
a world record, and earning the claim to being the only (or one of few)
man carrying powered airplanes with a flat plate drag equivalent of less
than 1 sq ft.  Mr. Arnold studied and applied Hoerner's works
extensively in the AR-5, and then again in Dave Hoover's Endeavor.  A
talented guy.

I suspect that the AR-6 is actually a nice flying airplane, unlike most
of the F1 birds.  In a conversation I had with Gary Hubler a few years
ago, I got the impression that Mariah (a heavily modified Cassutt)
actually didn't fly particularly well - on the first flight he was doing
aerobatics - a loop required forward stick pressure all the way around.
They put lead in the prop extension/spinner to try to get the CG more
reasonable.  Most of the fast f1 airplanes have really thin airfoil
sections and tiny control surfaces.  Eeesh.

The MM's are too big to be competitive in F1 racing (IMO), but if you
put more hp on them they could be pretty fast.  They have conventional
Aluminum construction which should make structural analysis and
improvement easier.  The MM is already pretty strong - being rated at
something around 9g ultimate and having a 230mph published VNE.
Obviously a study would be required to see what the limitation on VNE is
and how to increase it.

I would prefer to keep the overall airframe weight close to the stock MM
max takeoff weight (at odds with the above goal)..  At that weight the
MM has a reasonable stall speed (~60mph).  The stall speed has the
largest effect on bad-landing (off airport) survivability.  It's _much_
easier to provide impact protection for 60mph than for 90mph.  I am not
a daredevil nor a fighter pilot, and so I would like whatever I come up
with to remain a nice sport airplane..  My goal isn't to actually win at
Reno, but to have something that I could fly to the races, raise a few
eyebrows, and have well less than $50k in (total).  It would be fun to
be able to spank a few F1 rockets and slower Lancairs too.


Regards,

Matt-

I totally agree on the stall speed. The energy in a crash is m*V^2.
Fowler flaps can triple the landing lift coefficient required so if you want
to go fast and keep 60 MPH stall speed you need just enough wing area to
have
a stall speed of 60 MPH with the flaps out. The other mandatory requirement
for
going fast at Reno is a high aspect ratio wing. AKA low span loading as you
are
in a continuous turn almost. Induced drag is Cl^2/(pi*A). 2G turn twice the
Cl.
Three G turn 3 times the Cl. Four times as much induced drag at only a 2 G
turn.
All of this assumes you keep the weight as low as possible.

I don't think a single place qualifies for Sport Aircraft at Reno.
That I think is why they put the pax sort of next to the pilot
in the Nemesis Nxt.