Baby Ace

Anyone ever had anything to do with this plane, I really like it. Just
wonder about the gear used on modern versions. Such as what type wheels
/brakes? I actually like the original simple rubber/washer combination in
the landing gear itself. Any experiences?

--
Patrick Dixon
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

"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. Such as what type
wheels /brakes? I actually like the original simple rubber/washer
combination in the landing gear itself. Any experiences?

The original gear is OK, but if you have a set of early drawings you'r
eplanning on building from, you'd be better off leaving them in the drawer.
There are a few design deficiencies in the early thirties versions
particularly in the wing fittings. Paul Poberezny fixed all of those when
he revamped the airplanes, but I don't think there's anythng wrong with the
outrigger gear in the original.

Interesting,
I will have to get out the wing fittings, thanks!

Patrick

"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. Such as what type
wheels /brakes? I actually like the original simple rubber/washer
combination in the landing gear itself. Any experiences?

The original gear is OK, but if you have a set of early drawings you'r
eplanning on building from, you'd be better off leaving them in the
drawer.
There are a few design deficiencies in the early thirties versions
particularly in the wing fittings. Paul Poberezny fixed all of those when
he revamped the airplanes, but I don't think there's anythng wrong with
the
outrigger gear in the original.

Check them out that is, heck my mind was thinking one thing and fingers
typing another...OK finger! I use the Hunt and Peck typing system! I
would like to build it as original, any details on those problems?

Patrick
"W P Dixon" wrote in message
...
Interesting,
I will have to get out the wing fittings, thanks!

Patrick

"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. Such as what type
wheels /brakes? I actually like the original simple rubber/washer
combination in the landing gear itself. Any experiences?

The original gear is OK, but if you have a set of early drawings you'r
eplanning on building from, you'd be better off leaving them in the
drawer.
There are a few design deficiencies in the early thirties versions
particularly in the wing fittings. Paul Poberezny fixed all of those when
he revamped the airplanes, but I don't think there's anythng wrong with
the
outrigger gear in the original.

"W P Dixon"
:

Check them out that is, heck my mind was thinking one thing and
fingers typing another...OK finger! I use the Hunt and Peck typing
system! I would like to build it as original, any details on those
problems?

OK, if you're looing at original 30s drawings, the worst fault is the
actualy spar attachment point. I don't have the drawings in fromt of me,
but the fitting welded to the fuse to capture the spar is just a strap bent
around the spar and on the vertical and a single bolt drilled through that
fitting verticaly through the spar. That's the cabin model. The open
cockpit model has just a strap welded to the top of the cabane with the
same bolt inserted vertically through the spar to a strap that binds the
two spars together. Not the best setup, though they did make a lot of those
airplanes and as far as I know it never fell into disrepute.
On the Paul Poberezny revamp for the revived Mechanich Illustrated airplane
in the '50s, that was the major mod he did to the airplane. There are
substantial fittings on each spar end which transmit the load into the drag
anti drag wires and it's a hinge type mating to the cabane struts. This is
the way to go. The rest of the airplane is fairly OK and if you just build
it using standard practices it should be fine. But if you're going two
place, the junior has outrigger gear anyway!
It's a great little airplane, though. I've got a cabin ace on one of the
multitude of backbuners in my head..

Someday, maybe, if I get this one on the front burner finished before I pop
my clogs.



Bertie

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.

Patrick

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

Check them out that is, heck my mind was thinking one thing and
fingers typing another...OK finger! I use the Hunt and Peck typing
system! I would like to build it as original, any details on those
problems?

OK, if you're looing at original 30s drawings, the worst fault is the
actualy spar attachment point. I don't have the drawings in fromt of me,
but the fitting welded to the fuse to capture the spar is just a strap
bent
around the spar and on the vertical and a single bolt drilled through that
fitting verticaly through the spar. That's the cabin model. The open
cockpit model has just a strap welded to the top of the cabane with the
same bolt inserted vertically through the spar to a strap that binds the
two spars together. Not the best setup, though they did make a lot of
those
airplanes and as far as I know it never fell into disrepute.
On the Paul Poberezny revamp for the revived Mechanich Illustrated
airplane
in the '50s, that was the major mod he did to the airplane. There are
substantial fittings on each spar end which transmit the load into the
drag
anti drag wires and it's a hinge type mating to the cabane struts. This is
the way to go. The rest of the airplane is fairly OK and if you just build
it using standard practices it should be fine. But if you're going two
place, the junior has outrigger gear anyway!
It's a great little airplane, though. I've got a cabin ace on one of the
multitude of backbuners in my head..

Someday, maybe, if I get this one on the front burner finished before I
pop
my clogs.



Bertie

"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

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

"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"
:

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.

Well, you could easily powere it with anyhting that will give you 30 or
more HP and it will go like a rocket with 65! Even if you build one with
modern plans, it would be a snap to put outrigger gear on it. It's been
done to a few airplanes that never had it. There's a few Hatz bipes with
outrigger gear, for example.
As long as your struts mount to a substantial part of the fuselage, that
is, a good solid cluster, you're fine. Since it was originally designed to
do that, no problem.
If you go for the two seater Junior Ace, or the Super ace, they both still
use outrigger gear anyway. The outrigger gear, in conjunction with a nice
long travel strut (shihc were in use with airplanes of the period) would
also give you excellent rough field capability..


Bertie