Airdrome Nieuport 11 - Alabama Version

[Dart]

7/8ths scale Nieuport 11 kit ordered from Robert (finally), with a trip to the HOP the first week in August (still hammering out the exact dates).

I'm so excited about the build I can barely contain my enthusiasm. I know it'll be a lot of work and time, but I'm looking forward to learning a bunch and having a plane to fly at the end of it.

If y'all recall, I made a butchery of the rudder kit last fall:



However, it was judged "gooder enough" by our local DAR, which was encouraging. Actually, he said "well, I've seen worse on airplanes," but I'll take that as an endorsement!

I'll be using that rudder to learn covering and painting, so it's the learning tool that keeps on giving. Plus it'll be a nice thing to hang on a wall when it's done.

My action plan is to build the plane as designed, with little or no modification for a couple reasons:

1) I know jack all about engineering and aeronautics - or at least enough to know that I shouldn't risk my life on what I don't know.

2) This will be my one and only airplane, and I want to get it done. Renting a plane is just too harmful to my mental balance. While one can convincingly argue that few other things in life are worth a hundred bucks an hour, ouch. Redesign and testing of that design takes time....the wheel is not only invented, there are plans and all the materials to make it included in the kit.

3) Once the rubicon of 7/8th scale is crossed, 1:1 authenticity is off the menu IMHO. I look at it as a representation of a WWI aircraft, not a replica. Standard panel with modern instruments, steerable tailwheel just sticking on out there (like the KC Dawn Patrol ones), and brakes. From 1,500 feet AGL I think it'll still look pretty cool.

My work space is not the pristine hangars and garages of some of y'all. I'll be using a largish shed and the back yard for most of the work. I tend to buy two of every hand tool and three of any socket so that I might be able to find one of them at any given time. We'll definately be testing the "basic hand tools" blurb in building. So don't be suprised if things look a bit disorganized....I just believe in being as exacting as the situation dicates, and not much more.

I'll be asking a LOT of dumb questions! All help appreciated! The user groups are a bit unweildy to me; I never got the hang of Yahoo groups, having jumped from USENET to UBB, skipping right over them.

I also plan on asking one really stupid question in every post of this thread.

The first stupid question of the day (SQOD): How are props measured? When I read 70x24 or whatever is that total tip to tip length and then with? I've dug all around and haven't found the answer!

[womenfly2]

The first stupid question of the day (SQOD): How are props measured? When I read 70x24 or whatever is that total tip to tip length and then with? I've dug all around and haven't found the answer!

Simply, 70" = diameter tip to tip, 42" = helix rotation distance in inches per one revolution of prop, geometrical pitch.

http://www.sensenich.com/files/docum...1297966148.pdf

[Bookmaker]

Dart, you may have mentioned in your other thread, but what engine are you planning to use?

I an pretty sure the KC guys are flying VW's. Direct drve, I think. They are Graham Lee plan planes, but basically the same as AA planes.

My dad and I are going to Gardner for the fly in. Do you want some photos of their N 11's? Specific areas?

Dale

[Dart]

Oh, heck yeah, I need photos - especially brakes, tailwheel, cockpit/control setups! Oh, and rudders, specifically if they rib stitched/riveted the cross beams.

There really are two thoughts about engines:

1) VW with either direct drive or PSRU. I like the idea of the PSRU simply because I can take the strain of the prop off of the engine and it's much simpler to put together. Heat shrinking a prop hub onto a crank shaft scares the hell out of me for some reason!

I really don't mind spending money when it's required - one can't complain about the price of a Diehl kit for the back of the engine, for example, since it is what it is and is really needed if one wants an electrical system. But I hate spending money just to spend money.

What is irritating me is that stock VW engines are getting almost impossible to find. Everything is bored out and tricked out, with a price to match. Since I really don't need it that way and and concerned about keeping the TBO as long as I can, stock is a better option IMHO owing to keeping the block as nice and thick as I can.

It's literally been thirty years since I rebuilt a carb or pulled so much as a valve cover gasket I'm chagrined at the prospect of relearning it. If only I knew as much as I did when I was fifteen years old. Sigh. One is tempted to pull one that runs off of a Bug at the Pull-A-Part and just stick it on there. If there are any more bugs in junk yards like that.

2) Yamaha V Twin, ala Rick Bennett's N12. I've got a line on a near zero-hour 1858 80HP engine and transmission for dirt cheap. One of the guys I work with pulled it off of his motorcycle and replaced it with a bigger one. Lots of upsides, including fuel injection, which eliminates the carb heat problem.

Some of the issues are minor, like engine mounts (the Valley Engineering guys and Mr. Bennett both have solved that); some require a lot more thought, like how to mount a PSRU, working out the clutch cable linkage in the cockpit, and ensuring the throttle cable only throws so far to avoid hitting the RPM limiter (and that it doesn't go too high), and of course ensuring the PSRU pulley fits onto the final drive of the transmission.

Plus finding out how much the darned thing weighs with oil in the transmission and engine! It might be a non-starter if to get the CG right I've have to line the tail section with bricks.

That's where the SQOD about prop lengths came from. I obviously can't swing too big a prop, as it's not that tall an aircraft. I suppose I could do a lot of research on how far the center of the cowling to the ground is when in a wheel landing configuration, but I'm leaning more in the direction of just waiting until I have my plane on gear and measure it directly.

Fortunately there is quite some time until I get to the engine crossroads and have to commit.

I'm shooting for four days in Holden, with the goal of having fuselage on gear and controls in. It's more safety than impatience (okay, it's that, too), as I've got to have a solid frame, gear, and controls correctly installed, and the wife wants me to have adult supervision for them. Yes, it's the wings that fall off, I know, but one cannot argue with irrational fears.



I may re-look the rudder pedals in favor of a modified bar setup. I like the foot rest plate versus just a bar (though the plane I fly now has two bars to push with one's feet), but I also like the notion of both the bungee rudder trim solution and the inability to put pull on both sides of the rudder at one time. I heard a story of a guy that actually bent a plane by holding one pedal steady and stomping on the other when he was a bit stressed on his flight condition. And with a little loop of leather, if one leg gets tired of pushing, the other can pull on long flights.

Stupid Question of the Day: Do open cockpit aircraft require a static port for the instruments?

[RobW]

Originally Posted by Dart

2) Yamaha V Twin, ala Rick Bennett's N12. I've got a line on a near zero-hour 1858 80HP engine and transmission for dirt cheap. One of the guys I work with pulled it off of his motorcycle and replaced it with a bigger one. Lots of upsides, including fuel injection, which eliminates the carb heat problem.

Ummm... Rick Bennett has a N-23 with a VW... I think you mean Rick Giles' N-12... which now has a Rotec radial.

[Dart]

You, sir, are correct! That's what I get for relying on memory.

[Bookmaker]

Wow 4 days. You're gonna be pooped Make as many decisions as you can before you get there. They don't like to stand around while you're trying to figure wich way is up

I'll take plenty of photos, over, under, around and through. I'll put them on a CD and send it to you.

Dale

[Dart]

That's one of the reasons I'm not changing hardly anything!



Thanks, Dale, you're the man!

- Frank

[hank jarrett]

I have two Taylorcrafts (they aren't open cockpit unless you take the doors off) and both have static ports. It is the open hole in the back of the instrument. You don't really have to have a static line unless the cockpit has a much different static pressure than the surrounding air in flight. On my plane the ASI will move slightly when the window is opened or closed, but it is an insignificant difference.
I would be really interesting to find out how much the pressure behind the panel changes in different flight attitudes.
Hank

OH BOY! An excuse to do some real flight tests!

[Dart]

You're correct in guessing that I meant a central port like in closed cockpit aircraft! I wonder if putting a short line on the backs of the instruments to keep dust and crap out of them would be a fix for something that doesn't need repairing.

I'm not too concerned if things are a little off of true in the altimeter, since I'm a daytime VFR must-see-the-ground-at-all-times Sport Pilot. It's not like I look at the dash very much when flying to begin with, and when I do it's the ball and the oil and temp gauges that I have a real interest in. In the pattern it's the tach and the ball, as the CTLS' rotax sounds pretty much the same to me through the mid band, and the throttle lever has a weird throw that isn't intuitive. Maybe I'm not doing things right, but airspeed is mostly by feel of handling and sight, as well as altitude.

The CTLS doesn't really give a lot of slip feedback, though it's got a big rudder and one would think it would. Maybe it's because one is right under the wing and on top of the CG.

I sure did like my time in that Champ, as it really speaks to a pilot.

Speaking of which, my instructor bought a Champ to do tailwheel endorsements in, and asked me to be his first student for it in that plane. I was his first Sport Pilot that went to license, and he modified his syllabus based on my unique and unexpected ways of screwing up.

For example, he now starts everyone off using flaps on landings. I went no flaps, and didn't much take to them when we started lowering them. On the CTLS the sight lines really change a lot (on full flaps it looks like one is pitched straight down for level flight!), and the ailerons have a mild flaperon adjustment that kicks in with the flaps that changes the handling. I'd rather just do a big slip if I have to dump altitude.

That and I knew going in that my plane wouldn't have flaps, so why get to where I lean on them?

Also I spoke to Mr. Baslee today and he said that if one can competently pilot a Champ from the back seat the Nieuport won't be a shocker to fly. Gosh I hope so, as I was grinning for an hour after getting a chance at Champ a few months ago.

He's sending me the plans once the kit is completed. Last week he was cagey about the HOP dates as he hadn't even started putting the kit together. Today he said "Hmmmm, rudder, elevator, stab, fuselage and gear in the box - a lot more to do - and plans are down the checklist; I'll send you them when I get to that step."

I find his methodical approach very reassuring.

I also love his candid nature when we talked about what can get done in four days at the HOP:

"It depends on you; how much you want to do and how well you work with us," which I took to mean "We work as hard as you do; if you want to stand around and not do much or argue and question rather than build the airplane we'll be happy to ablige."



Anyhow, looks like the week after Oshkosh is going to be okay for him.

Dumb question of the day:

Does the wind of an open cockpit come across the microphone of a headset, requiring an extra wind muff of some sort?