Sod CH 5 and the "flying School" see CH4 "Scrap heap Chellenge" 22/12/02
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't there some saying the Yanks use about these countries....
...something like
The Yanks built great looking aeroplanes...
The French build aeroplanes with great flying qualities...
The English build ugly aeroplanes...
There, that ought to get a thread going....
...something like
The Yanks built great looking aeroplanes...
The French build aeroplanes with great flying qualities...
The English build ugly aeroplanes...
There, that ought to get a thread going....
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK Work: London. Home: East Anglia
Posts: 306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
National characteristics
Aeroplanes seem to have national characteristics. The ones I associate with the following nationalities (N.B. none of these stop me loving them!) are:
British
- Inadequate fin area, often later admitted by use of add-on fillets, dorsals, ventrals, anti-spin strakes etc.
- Engine goes proper way round
- Free castoring tailwheels with no lock
- Brakes applied by hand
- Cockpits full of sharp edges and awkward catches
- Need to open the cowlings as part of pre-start ritual
- Light weight, nice controls
- Slightly less power than would be comfortable
- Poor range
- Nice curves
- Fragile
- No keys required
- Stick right hand, throttle left
American
- Can't see out
- Toe brakes
- Engine goes wrong way
- Blunt noses
- Flying surfaces drawn with a ruler
- Wide cockpits
- Heavy controls
- Electrics for things that should be manual
- Hard to break
- Won't do the speed it says in the brochure
- Keys used to get in / start
- Bladder-busting endurance
- Yoke left hand, throttle right
Russian
- Same peculiar driving position as any 1960s / 70s Italian car - arms outstretched, knees up round ears
- Incomprehensible metric instruments
- Mag switches work the wrong way
- Obsession with compressed air
- Massive power, yet little speed
- Some things magnificently over-engineered and built like a lare scale Swiss watch, others apparently made out of left-over chicken-shed roof and nailed on at random.
British
- Inadequate fin area, often later admitted by use of add-on fillets, dorsals, ventrals, anti-spin strakes etc.
- Engine goes proper way round
- Free castoring tailwheels with no lock
- Brakes applied by hand
- Cockpits full of sharp edges and awkward catches
- Need to open the cowlings as part of pre-start ritual
- Light weight, nice controls
- Slightly less power than would be comfortable
- Poor range
- Nice curves
- Fragile
- No keys required
- Stick right hand, throttle left
American
- Can't see out
- Toe brakes
- Engine goes wrong way
- Blunt noses
- Flying surfaces drawn with a ruler
- Wide cockpits
- Heavy controls
- Electrics for things that should be manual
- Hard to break
- Won't do the speed it says in the brochure
- Keys used to get in / start
- Bladder-busting endurance
- Yoke left hand, throttle right
Russian
- Same peculiar driving position as any 1960s / 70s Italian car - arms outstretched, knees up round ears
- Incomprehensible metric instruments
- Mag switches work the wrong way
- Obsession with compressed air
- Massive power, yet little speed
- Some things magnificently over-engineered and built like a lare scale Swiss watch, others apparently made out of left-over chicken-shed roof and nailed on at random.
Not so N, but still FG
Join Date: May 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That all seems very correct, but you forgot to mention the national characteristics of French aircraft:
(1) ils sont merveilleux
(2) er....ca, c'est ca
not biased at all, honest
(1) ils sont merveilleux
(2) er....ca, c'est ca
not biased at all, honest
I know most of the British team in that (a few years ago I helped C4 put the UK Scrapheap glider thing together). One has told me that the British won, another has told me that they came last - I think this is all part of their disinformation plan so we watch it when it's on telly.
I have seen pictures of the British entry, a high dihedral biplane with a monowheel and roll control via the rudder. Billy does occasionally design a pretty aeroplane, but this was only really about halfway there.
I believe that all three of the entries survived and are now in the EAA's museum at Oshkosh.
G
I have seen pictures of the British entry, a high dihedral biplane with a monowheel and roll control via the rudder. Billy does occasionally design a pretty aeroplane, but this was only really about halfway there.
I believe that all three of the entries survived and are now in the EAA's museum at Oshkosh.
G
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: EGHF
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This Sunday 5:15 CH4 Scrapheap Mega Challenge: Reach for the Skies.
"A special edition to mark the 100th anniversary of the Wright brothers' first powed flight. Teams from Britain, the US and France are challenged to build an aeroplane from the 1900s and fly it for half a mile over the Mojave desert in California"- should be good!
No report of any accident so they must have made it ok!
"A special edition to mark the 100th anniversary of the Wright brothers' first powed flight. Teams from Britain, the US and France are challenged to build an aeroplane from the 1900s and fly it for half a mile over the Mojave desert in California"- should be good!
No report of any accident so they must have made it ok!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: North Weald, UK
Posts: 357
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excuse me poetpilot, but I must take exception to your statement that the english build ugly aeroplanes.
(Swallowed the bait, hook line & sinker)
The prize for uglyist must surely go to some of the 1930s french bombers. If the definition of a camel is 'a horse designed by a committee', then these aircraft must have been designed by the mother & father of all committees!!
And my own aircraft was french once.
(DH88 - most beautiful aircraft ever)
(Swallowed the bait, hook line & sinker)
The prize for uglyist must surely go to some of the 1930s french bombers. If the definition of a camel is 'a horse designed by a committee', then these aircraft must have been designed by the mother & father of all committees!!
And my own aircraft was french once.
(DH88 - most beautiful aircraft ever)
And very good it was too.
Some interesting informed comment about it on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/microlights/messages
G
Some interesting informed comment about it on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/microlights/messages
G
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And rather excellent entertainment it was too - especially when the British aeroplane soared aloft after the US and the French attempts didn't even manage to get off the ground at the first outing 
Sadly Whirlybird I didn't record it, but now I wished that I had so that I could watch it again!
Andy
Sadly Whirlybird I didn't record it, but now I wished that I had so that I could watch it again!
Andy
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just us Brits to make it harder for our selves! Building 4 wings instead of 2
But great to see them ALL flying after just 20(ish) hours, as an engineer and a pilot is was awesome!
But great to see them ALL flying after just 20(ish) hours, as an engineer and a pilot is was awesome!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It should not pass unremarked that the American and French machines would not have got into the air at all were it not for the assistance of the British team.
The British fixed the American engine and the French prop. So you see, we can be sporting, and still wipe the floor with them.
The British fixed the American engine and the French prop. So you see, we can be sporting, and still wipe the floor with them.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congrats to all the teams on a superb effort and a great show! But especially to the Brits for winning! 
I have to admit that I thought the French were the most likely to fly. Right from the start, they seemed to know what they were doing, and concentrate on building a high-quality aircraft, whereas the Brits not only made too many mistakes, but also left them uncorrected (oops, we've cut the wing spar too short - never mind, we'll shorten the wing span; or, oops, our ribs are too long - never mind, we'll lengthen the chord). The American cannard pusher 'plane seemed a little too unconventional - 100 years ago, designers spent lots of time experimenting, and there must be a reason why this type of design isn't seen very much any more. My main concern with the French design was the lack of ailerons... but they had a huge rudder, and if the aim is just to fly in a straight line from the start line to the finish line, ailerons probably aren't all that important!
Seeing the British entry soar over the dessert at 200', after the US attempt didn't get off the ground, and a very cautious "flight" by the French, was fantastic! And although it was extremely close between the British and the French, I think the right team won in the end - but then I would say that, wouldn't I!
A great day for aviation, and for British eccentricity!
FFF
--------------
But especially to the Brits for winning! I have to admit that I thought the French were the most likely to fly. Right from the start, they seemed to know what they were doing, and concentrate on building a high-quality aircraft, whereas the Brits not only made too many mistakes, but also left them uncorrected (oops, we've cut the wing spar too short - never mind, we'll shorten the wing span; or, oops, our ribs are too long - never mind, we'll lengthen the chord). The American cannard pusher 'plane seemed a little too unconventional - 100 years ago, designers spent lots of time experimenting, and there must be a reason why this type of design isn't seen very much any more. My main concern with the French design was the lack of ailerons... but they had a huge rudder, and if the aim is just to fly in a straight line from the start line to the finish line, ailerons probably aren't all that important!
Seeing the British entry soar over the dessert at 200', after the US attempt didn't get off the ground, and a very cautious "flight" by the French, was fantastic! And although it was extremely close between the British and the French, I think the right team won in the end - but then I would say that, wouldn't I!
A great day for aviation, and for British eccentricity!
FFF
--------------
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Paros, Greece
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whirly, I have it on video - email your address and I'll send it after christmas. If anyone else wants to see it I'm happy for the tape to be passed around before I get it back. The Red Baron programme is also on the tape.
Is anyone else a bit suspicious about any additional 'extra time' that must have been given? After all, last thing in the build they were fitting wings and bolting engines on, but by the next morning, fuel systems, throttles and all the other controls were in place!
All in all, very inspiring - is 50hrs total time too early to start thinking about building a kit a/c?
Is anyone else a bit suspicious about any additional 'extra time' that must have been given? After all, last thing in the build they were fitting wings and bolting engines on, but by the next morning, fuel systems, throttles and all the other controls were in place!
All in all, very inspiring - is 50hrs total time too early to start thinking about building a kit a/c?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chichester, UK
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and a very cautious "flight" by the French
Good program - only real gripe was with the presenters
and that the 'scrapheap' was a bit forced (oh look, here's a propellor!). I guess they need to follow the series theme, but building an aeroplane in 20 hours is impressive enough
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done the Brits!
I wonder if the Spitfire had a few design things like making the wings a bit shorter or wider! (very British way of designing!)
All the aircraft were pretty impresive but the British entry was superb, it seemed to handle so well I thought the pilot might have done a victory roll.
It would be nice to see more things like this on the TV.
As a footnote, the FAA managed to give the machines a certificate to fly there and then, do you think there is any chance the CAA could maybe increase the speed they could respond with a C of A, mine took 4 weeks for the paperwork to come back.
I wonder if the Spitfire had a few design things like making the wings a bit shorter or wider! (very British way of designing!)
All the aircraft were pretty impresive but the British entry was superb, it seemed to handle so well I thought the pilot might have done a victory roll.
It would be nice to see more things like this on the TV.
As a footnote, the FAA managed to give the machines a certificate to fly there and then, do you think there is any chance the CAA could maybe increase the speed they could respond with a C of A, mine took 4 weeks for the paperwork to come back.