![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sunday, December 18, 2016 at 3:28:59 PM UTC-5, TS wrote:
On Sunday, 18 December 2016 17:46:45 UTC+1, jfitch wrote: On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 4:11:36 PM UTC-8, wrote: Thanks to J.Nieuwenhuize for posting this link Jonker's aerodynamicist Johan Bosman pictures of the JS3. http://www.imgrum.net/user/johanjbosman/697025039 As suggested, the Akaflieg München Mü31 article is also a good read. http://www.akaflieg.vo.tum.de/index.php/en/mue-31-en Go around-come around...interesting how we're back to the AS Ka-6E shoulder wing. Can't wait to inspect how they did the automatic hook-ups. Really like the retractable tail wheel too. Congratulations Johan Bosman. We'll see...pretty is as pretty does. The 26 fueselage is considerably different than a Ventus. Place the two side by side and there is no doubt. Different shape, different cockpit, different canopy. Everything different. Place a 26 fuselage next to a JS1 and you cannot tell them apart. Even many of the details inside are the same. I'm not complaining about it, I doubt the 26 fuselage is legally protectable intellectual property. But the question was posed above. The aerodynamic shape of the JS1b/c is a 100% direct copy of the ASH26. They took an existing ASH26 fuselage, and made a negative mould of it. The internals are different. also, all this business about canopy shape is irrelevant. once you have a negative mold for the 26, you can define the canopy shape however you want. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cockpit Chatter and Groundcrew Gripes | Andie Ankey-Upcuff | General Aviation | 1 | June 9th 05 02:57 AM |