Attention AvChat! My next plane will be a...

If you were going for an L-Bird I would settle for nothing less than the L-5.
Big enough, good payload and power.
The latest development.

 

I've like to fly a Fleet. A little more rare, but they are around and prices seem affordable. For some reason these planes have always piqued my interest. I think it's the honesty/simplicity of the lines of the plane.. Kind of "Stearmanesk", but seem a little more managable as far as size goes. Probably less practical than an Aeronca though. Don't know about LSA, but these things don't look like they weigh all that much
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I've also been bitten by the plane bug lately, unfortunately, the wife is much more adamant against a plane than a fourth Ferrari...

 

After much research, and as many of you have deduced, I am electing to build a full size replica of one of the iconic dream planes of my early youth, the Sopwith 1.F.1 Camel. I have opted for a more modern engine for safety and to allow radio communication (can't use a radio with a rotary engine), but one that has the same power. So I have just purchased last week a 150 hp Rotec 9 cylinder radial that will swing a 90" propeller. I will be using the original aircrafts's rudder bar flight controls, approximate airfoil, wing areas, incidences and dihedral from the Replicraft plans of Mr. Kiger. I now also have access to Roger Freeman's local extensive references to the Camel, including factory drawings, and am locating original instruments as available. I've started a local lady replicating a wicker seat from photos and blueprints. Being a big giy, I have determined the 27"+ inter longeron width should allow a comfortable cockpit, about like a Champ. We are shooting for E-LSA eleigibility which gives a lot of advantages. There is no kit, but will be working with Robert Baslee who has built similar aircraft before. Other concessions to safety will be a welded steel tube frame to supplant the wooden airframe, and horror of horrors, brakes, so I don't run into anyone on the ramp.
While I am already buying raw materials, this will take a while to do. For me, this has always been a dream aircraft, much the same as a Corsair. And the LSA eligibility and running costs have a lot of advantages for a government pensioner. There is a former F-15 Sqn commander in Houston with a full size Nieuport 28, so we are planning some formation trips (s-l-o-w )
Here we go. All advice welcome.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

That is fantastic! I'll be the first to beg you to send snapshots/plans and document your build.

 

Russ- Sounds like great fun and the steel tube fuselage will make it much easier to build. You almost needed to be a master furniture maker to build the original fuselage. Have fun and see you in October. I will be the short, chubby bald-headed guy.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

Well, nobody can ever say you do things in a small way. This will be a fabulous airplane when you are done based on the work you've done with the Mondial and restoration of the T-28 cockpit.

 

Thanks all.
The devil is certainly in the details. The WW1 British planes were the first to use streamlined flying wires, and will be having a set of those made. Don't know how much, but am told there is a 10x difference in drag over regular wire. I'll need every knot with 231 sq feet of wing and 150 hp! Only one supplier in the states - Steen Labs - and they get them from the one manufacturer in England. Will be ordering once we verify the measurements.

And true to form, I've already sourced the two Vickers .303 ...

 

How much power did the original have?

Also, are you going to have a tailwheel, or use a skid?

 

It's not how much hp, but how much torque. The Camels had engines from 110 - 170 hp (typically a 130 hp Clerget), but it was achieved at 1300 rpm yielding massive torque and allowing the use of the large wide chord propellors.

Not sure about the skid, yet.

 

Don- Original Camels used a wide variety of engines, including the 130/140 hp Clerget, the 120 hp LeRhone 9Jb (110 hp iron pistons, 120 hp aluminum pistons), the 150 hp AR/BR-1, and the 160 hp Gnome 9N.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

The tail wheel would hurt the authenticity but I think it would be a huge plus in taxiing/ground handling.
What about brakes though?

 

Russ- There are some very clever tailskid designs that have a small wheel between two outside skid pieces/axle holders that are very difficult to see unless you are very close to them. The tailskid was the only brake for most WW-I designs, except for some German two seaters that had a pull-up-to-engage claw brake on the bottom of the axle.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

I am studying hard, and amazed constantly at the cleverness of the original designers as well as replica builders. The skid thing sounds good - any refrences? Looking fwd to seeing you at OTF; I will also be at Dayton for the September WW1 fly-in if anyone is going.

There are some intresting well documented field mods made to the Camel I've found and going to incorporate, one being the removal of the wooden front section over the guns and enlargement of the cockpit hole to allow easier gun servicing. Well, it also makes ingress/egress easier and more comfortable for this non-WW1 sized pilot. As usual, there were also differing interpretations of the general order. Here is a photo of an original specification cockpit, and two with the field modification taken from wartime photo based builds. The last replica, Peter Jackson's replica in NZ, can be identified in the cockpit shot as having the later Bentley BR-1, by the ignition variator on the right lower panel - it varies the number of cylinders firing as a way to select engine power.
I used to have an Alfa Romeo that did that on its own.

A few cockpit inches does make a huge difference.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Russ- The various schemes for lowering horsepower on the Gnome 9N and some other WW-I engines did not cut out cylinders, they varied the firing order so all cylinders were still firing, but at a much slower rate. A pretty good explanation is contained in Fred Murrin's article on the Gnome 9N for Over the Front. Fred actually won a writing award for this article. Can provide the photos later if anyone is interested.

Taz
Terry Phillips
View attachment A close look at the Gnome 9N rotary engine 2.doc

 

That is some pretty interesting stuff right there...

 

Yes - that is what I meant. All cylinders fire but it ends up being every other, every x, keeping even spacing etc, around the firing order till all have fired. That is also what my Alfa did on its own, but in a more random selection...

If you have any photos of Mr Murrin's Camel, would love to see them.

Many thanks.

 

Fuselage tacked up, will start welding tomorrow; WW1 altimeter off ebay arrived (it works), now looking for compass and airspeed indicator. Throttle quadrant in the mail; engine ordered from Australia.

I wish I could get one of the few new production Oberursels or LeRhones, but they are all spoken for, and or years away from completion.

Will be at the National WW 1 fly-in at Dayton at the USAF Museum 26 Sept if anyone going. I'll be the guy with camera, tape measure, notepad and shopping bag.

 

Hey, pilots out there!
WW1 planes used an inverted inclinometer with a bubble in the top of it.

So, stepping 'on the ball' is the same as stepping 'away from the bubble'?
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Yes, if the aircraft is rolled ccw, you apply left rudder, and the bubble would be to the right so you would be still applying left rudder and stepping away from the bubble...

Somehow that looks counter-intutitive, stepping "on the ball" seems natural, but, more likely it is going to be whatever you learned will feel natural... Maybe if you look at as pushing the airplane "under the bubble" it will feel natural...

Then again you always see videos of WW1 aircraft rocking wings and nose hunting left and right, maybe they pilots are screwing up and pushing the wrong pedal and then saying "oops!" and then getting it right...

BTW, I and a friend of mine who owns Cleveland Model and Supply were planning on going. Since we are only two hours away we were going to pick our day based on the weather, but if it holds for Saturday, we will be there at the same time, I'll pm you a cell phone number.

 

SF- Friday or Saturday is always a better deal. Gets really crowded on Sunday and many people are already shutting down for the trip home.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

Taz,

Thanks, we were figuring that might be the case, that folks would be starting to knock down by Sunday, you hate to miss anything we will try to hit Saturday if at all possible.

The last time I was there was 2003. There was a very accurate DR-1 with a LeRhone in it that we got to see fly it was very cool. There was also a wood fuselage Albatross that was being built that was on display, tremendous amount of work involved, had an original engine for it.