Baby Ace

Yeah the one strap for the wing join just "needs" something doesn't it!
As for the main struts,..if you use the design diameters it should be ok
wouldn't you think. They did build these as a kit and of course I am just
guessing here (since I wasn't alive wayyy back then! ) but if there had
been a warping problem as "built as designed" wouldn't we have heard about
it? Not arguing with you mind you, it is a distinct possibility with "not
the right stuff" for the job. I may have to just get an old mechanix
Illustrated copy and see the changes Paul made,...heck I may like his design
as well.

Patrick

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
"W P Dixon"
:

Yep,
I am thinking on the lines of the cabin ace myself and I have
noticed the
wing attach. If anyone knows of a reported failure I'd sure like to
know about it. May have to see if I can get ahold of the old Mechanix
Illustrated article of Paul's as well. I think I'd be an idiot to pay
for plans from a place in Georgia or whomever, when they are public
record in any library since being published.
I imagine they have made improvements, but it comes to a point
when you
are overkilling something and just adding weight..so I am trying to
see where that fine line ends and starts I guess you could say.

Just had a look at the old magazine article. Teh strut attach points
aren't
the best design either, but they're not the worst form that period. The
wing attach points would definitely have to be redone, though. The straps
simply aren't a good idea. The 30s version also has no jury struts. If you
omit them and the main struts are of insufficient dia and thickness to
resist flexing under compression, you'll get control reversal when your
wings warp as you aply aileron! (I know someone who rebuilt a T-craft and
did exactly this). The strut attachments to the lower fuselage are OK,
though I'd alter the rear one and subsitute something closer to the front,
but the rear strap arrangement would be OK. The top fuse to wing weldments
really have to be changed, though. There wouldn't be a lot of extra
weight.
Couple of pounds, tops. Just looking at them now, though, It's hard to see
how it would be done with the cross members buched up around the wing
area.
Someone has built a replica of that airplane form original plans, though,
and you could always ask him!
Just found him, in fact...

http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/NNum...Numbertxt=386m

Good luck!

"W P Dixon"
:

Yeah the one strap for the wing join just "needs" something doesn't
it! As for the main struts,..if you use the design diameters it
should be ok wouldn't you think. They did build these as a kit and of
course I am just guessing here (since I wasn't alive wayyy back then!
) but if there had been a warping problem as "built as designed"
wouldn't we have heard about it? Not arguing with you mind you, it is
a distinct possibility with "not the right stuff" for the job. I may
have to just get an old mechanix Illustrated copy and see the changes
Paul made,...heck I may like his design as well.


I prefer the look of the thirties, one, of course. The outrigger gear just
looks right for it. It'd be nearly as tough as cub gear and I'd say Paul
only changed it for reasons of fashion. The other changes he's made are
much more significant though and looking at both side by side, they make a
lot of sense.
He changed very little aside from the wing attachments, though. Tail
fittings all look pretty similar, tubing sizes are all OK and since they
only used mild steel on the 30's version IIRC, it'd all be a lot stronger
anyway.
I've been through a lot of plans of similar airplanes, and they all have
wing fittings similar to the 50's and later Aces. The strut to spar
fittings look to me to be a bit weak as well. That wraparound thing they
did is much more easily and efficiently dealt with by simply using a
slightly more robust and smaller fiting along with a couple of 1/8th
doublers, as is modern practice. Probably be lighter as well as stronger
too!

"W P Dixon"
:

Yeah the one strap for the wing join just "needs" something doesn't
it! As for the main struts,..if you use the design diameters it
should be ok wouldn't you think. They did build these as a kit and of
course I am just guessing here (since I wasn't alive wayyy back then!
) but if there had been a warping problem as "built as designed"
wouldn't we have heard about it? Not arguing with you mind you, it is
a distinct possibility with "not the right stuff" for the job. I may
have to just get an old mechanix Illustrated copy and see the changes
Paul made,...heck I may like his design as well.


Oh yes, the struts. on the relatively short wing, they're probably OK the
way they are. Pope Paul added jury struts to his, but he also used
streamlined tubing which is narower along the short axis and so might have
been more flexible (though I doubt it)
Lots of similar airplanes ofthe period had no jury struts (monocoupe 113
and 70, ST. Louis Cardinal, Inland Sport, etc) so it may be that round,
faired struts are less flexible in compression.
The other major change i can see is that Paul deleted the "N" strut on the
open model and subsituted a drag wire in it's place. The cabin model
doesn't use one, of course.
People have built cabin models of the modern designs as well. Most of these
are "convertible" i.e., they are plexiglass enclosures that can be taken
off in summer, but a few have built them permanently enclosed by adding a
fairing from the trailing edge straight back to the stab.
There's also at least one undr construction using the rotec radial engine,
which should really look the business when it flies!

Well, if you want a "real" Baby Ace, you won't be able to use modern
wheels and brakes or a 65 HP Continental. If you make those
concessions, you may as well go for the Cub type gear as well. Probably
less drag as well.

If you are interested in the "real" Corbens, you can check out a copy of
the original Corben Literature at my website
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/ as it shows what the originals looked
like. It even shows the cabin version. If you are truely interested in
the Ace series, you can also sign up for the CorbenAces email list from
the site.

Scott
Corben Junior Ace

W P Dixon wrote:
Thanks Doc,
I had seen the site, it really is a nice looking little plane. They do
not seem to be using the gear setup the original used, and I really do
like the original setup. Sure there are better ways to do it, but I just
like the simplicity that Corbin used in the design. I would imagine I
would go with a more modern wheel and brake system but I would like the
use the original gear set up and not have to go with a Cub type gear.
Maybe my train of thought is I want a real Baby Ace and not a clone of
Piper gear etc., hoping to get some input here to see if "I" am the only
one who thinks it is feasible to do and do right. I will go with a
Continental 65, just because they are easier to get ahold of than the
original powerplants.

Patrick

"Doc Font" wrote in message
...

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
"W P Dixon"
:

Anyone ever had anything to do with this plane, I really like it.
Just
wonder about the gear used on modern versions.


You can check out the Baby Ace webpage;
http://exp-aircraft.com/aircraft/ace/ace.html