Whose airplane is it anyway?

http://www.eaa.org/homebuilders/list..._La%20Beau.asp

The Delta Dyke referenced above has a fuel injected Mazda engine in it.

"Richard Riley" wrote ...

Well, do check with them for your own peace of mind, but there ain't
nothin - and I do mean nothin - that he can do. It's faintly
theoretically possible that if you include his name in the registered
name type of your airplane he could have grounds to sue you, but it's
never happened and probably never will.

Just to be on the safe side, call it something else when you register
it.

Frankly, the big change that needs to be done to your airplane is it
needs fixed main gear and a lower ground attitude. One man's opinion,

Yet, as Lieutenant Edwards found out a great deal of care must be taken when
you're dealing with changes in the center of gravity of flying wings.

Rich

john smith wrote:
What are you building?

Dyke Delta.

http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org

Richard Isakson wrote:
"Richard Riley" wrote ...

Well, do check with them for your own peace of mind, but there ain't
nothin - and I do mean nothin - that he can do. It's faintly
theoretically possible that if you include his name in the registered
name type of your airplane he could have grounds to sue you, but it's
never happened and probably never will.

Just to be on the safe side, call it something else when you register
it.

Frankly, the big change that needs to be done to your airplane is it
needs fixed main gear and a lower ground attitude. One man's opinion,

Yet, as Lieutenant Edwards found out a great deal of care must be taken when
you're dealing with changes in the center of gravity of flying wings.

Rich



I've taken painstaking care not to move the CG or change the airfoil,
sweep or angles of the wings. I have made the nosegear fixed. That
saved me 10lbs, lots of complication, and several failure modes. It may
cost me a couple kts, but I consider them kts well spent. If I knew
then what I know now, the main gear would be aluminum leaf springs.
There's lots of weight in the gear retract mechanism, but its fairly
evenly spread forward and aft of the CG.

As for changing the ground attitude...you've got to get it high enough
to put a prop on there. I do have less than 9 degrees nose-up, which is
the limit. It's just under 8, if I recall correctly.

"Richard Riley" wrote

Even 8 is begging for pitch diversion on landing if anything goes
wrong. A little bounce and you're off to the races. It doesn't have
to have that high nose attitude - just a longer, fixed nose gear. A
lot of the gear design is left over from the original design goal of
making it roadable.

Are you sure about that? Are you taking the delta wing's need to come down
nose high, to slow down to reasonable speeds for landing? How about getting
the nose high enough for takeoff? If the nose were much lower, how fast
would you need to go, to get enough elevon effectiveness to lift the nose
for takeoff?

My guess, and forming an opinion from reading flight reports on the Dyke, is
that the unusual attitude is not a problem. While landing, you land nose
high, and the speed becomes whatever is necessary to get a good sink rate.
You don't come down fast, because you won't, if you are too fast. If
anything, a bounce is a non incident, because you mush right back down after
you bounce back into the air.

That is my take, anyway. I would want to fly one, before I went messing
with the landing gear geometry.

I do think fixing the gear is reasonable, though.
--
Jim in NC

"Richard Riley" wrote

Without getting into details, I have enough non-reading-flight-reports
information to be confident about it.

OK, good enough for me.
--
Jim in NC

"Ernest Christley" wrote in message
...
john smith wrote:
What are you building?

Dyke Delta.

http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org

No, you are building a Christley delta that somewhat resembles the Dyke
Delta.

Has there ever, in the history of mankind, been a "plans built" homebuilt
that exactly followed the plans?

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

Morgans wrote:
"Richard Riley" wrote
Even 8 is begging for pitch diversion on landing if anything goes
wrong. A little bounce and you're off to the races. It doesn't have
to have that high nose attitude - just a longer, fixed nose gear. A
lot of the gear design is left over from the original design goal of
making it roadable.

Are you sure about that? Are you taking the delta wing's need to come down
nose high, to slow down to reasonable speeds for landing? How about getting
the nose high enough for takeoff? If the nose were much lower, how fast
would you need to go, to get enough elevon effectiveness to lift the nose
for takeoff?

My guess, and forming an opinion from reading flight reports on the Dyke, is
that the unusual attitude is not a problem. While landing, you land nose
high, and the speed becomes whatever is necessary to get a good sink rate.
You don't come down fast, because you won't, if you are too fast. If
anything, a bounce is a non incident, because you mush right back down after
you bounce back into the air.

That is my take, anyway. I would want to fly one, before I went messing
with the landing gear geometry.


I have an Xplane model. Not the real thing, but eh...

What are you building?

Dyke Delta.


No, you are building a Christley delta that somewhat resembles the Dyke
Delta.

Has there ever, in the history of mankind, been a "plans built" homebuilt
that exactly followed the plans?

--
There must have been, somewhere. But I never saw it. :-)

Even 8 is begging for pitch diversion on landing if anything goes
wrong. A little bounce and you're off to the races. It doesn't have
to have that high nose attitude - just a longer, fixed nose gear. A
lot of the gear design is left over from the original design goal of
making it roadable.

Are you sure about that? Are you taking the delta wing's need to come
down
nose high, to slow down to reasonable speeds for landing? How about
getting
the nose high enough for takeoff? If the nose were much lower, how fast
would you need to go, to get enough elevon effectiveness to lift the
nose
for takeoff?

My guess, and forming an opinion from reading flight reports on the
Dyke, is
that the unusual attitude is not a problem. While landing, you land
nose
high, and the speed becomes whatever is necessary to get a good sink
rate.
You don't come down fast, because you won't, if you are too fast. If
anything, a bounce is a non incident, because you mush right back down
after
you bounce back into the air.

That is my take, anyway. I would want to fly one, before I went messing
with the landing gear geometry.


I have an Xplane model. Not the real thing, but eh...

I don't know the reason, but every delta winged aircraft that I can recall
ever having seen pictured has had a pronounced nose high attitude while at
rest.

From that observation, it is easy to infer reasons--and, of course, to be
wrong!

If anyone here actually knows the real reason, please post it. (Inquiring
minds want to know.)

Peter