Another Sopwith? A Nieuport? A Be2?

Along that line would be a Morane Saulnia ( Spl ) and a Phalz mono. Both good looking but like the E 111 they must have additional horizontal tail area.

 

Too late and too tard. Morane-Saulnier model L or model N or the Pfalz E-1 ( simpler landing gear than the Fokker E-1)

 

Russ, Bob- Remember, the Fokker and Pfalz Eindeckers were both wing warpers, as were the early Fokker M series biplane fighters (D.I, D.II etc). Rigging them can be bit complicated. Unless, of course, you cheat and use ailerons. Also, the full size Eindeckers were actually quite large.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

Cheating is not only allowed but recommended. No wing warping but ailerons , a stiff wing, and an enlarged horizontal tail with a fixed horizontal stabilizer.

 

That's really interesting that you like the Tabloid and futzing around. I always had a sketch pad going of how I would put an opposed engine in a Tabloid and make a nice little replica out of it. It has good and workable proportions but I see a need to enlarge the vertical fin by a bunch. The Eindecker E-111 is also a good choice if you can keep the same proportions as the original. It is a pretty airplane even in its rudimentary configuration.. Stiff wings, larger tail with a functional stabilizer, and ailerons. Fun airplane for fly in's.

 

That's the story of my life. I have always had a project on the front burner and maybe the back burner. That's what keeps one alive...always working or dreaming about a " project". And, yes, I'm a wannabe fighter pilot who never was able to realize the dream but there has always been been other avenues. I almost got a traffic ticket the other day when I was driving with my son and we started talking about dog fighting maneuvers and I got a bit " with it" and was stopped for being 10 over. I explained to the officer that we had gotten into a flying discussion and I had become a bit involved in it and probably pushed on things a bit. I got a warning. A true story because I was describing the ruse that an instructor pilot used on a student while I watched two jets over the Owens Valley, one obviously a student and one the old hand who went through a series of tight turns and then shot skyward. The student milled around trying to find the enemy who was thousands of feet above him inverted and watching, hanging there at zero speed. Then at the opportune time he pulled and pounced on the hapless student. It was great to watch. That area is a perfect theater to see our fighter pilots in training whether it is at altitude or zipping through the valley at minus sea level altitude (if you're in the right spot).

 

Russ- Then it should be the Tabloid. An Eindecker with ailerons is not a believable replica and no Eindecker looks realistic without the wing warping wires. You can make many compromises, but the basic flight control mechanisms should likely not be one of them.

A Bristol M.IC might be another good choice. If the RFC/RAF had not been so prejudiced, the M.1C could have changed the course of the air war,.

Taz
Terry Phillips

 

Terry, I'm a purist like you are but I draw the line when it comes to wing warping. Good and sensitive at speed but dangerous at or near stall. If a wing is dropped , say at landing speed , and " low wing aileron" is fed in by warping the wing , the angle of attack is increased and could cause the low wing to stall and reverse the control input. I imagine that I'm preaching to the choir but i really don't think that the addition of ailerons would ruin the replica. The Tabloid started with wing warping and they changed it to a wing with ailerons so that would be a good choice too.

 

I did some digging around to compare the Tabloid specs with those of Bower's Bi-Baby.
Tab Span both wings=25.5 ft. Bi-baby Span both wings=22.0 Ft.
Empty wt. =730 lbs. Empty wt. 672 lbs.
Gross wt.max. =1120 lbs. Gross wt. max. 970 lbs.
Wing area = 255 sq.ft. Wing area 188 sq.ft.
Wing loading = 4.4 lbs./sq.ft. Wing loading 5.15 lbs./sq.ft.

I flew Pete's little biplane and it was delightful. Quick and light on the controls, much more so than the monoplane version. If the Tabloid is anywhere near like the Bowers bi-plane , it should an enjoyable little airplane.

 

Bowers used an NACA 4412 on his Fly Baby's. The mono and bipe used a Cont.75 HP but it started out with the Cont.65HP. I think that a Cont. 85 was also used in some. I don't know how the thrust of a Cont. 85 would compare to that of the 80 HP Gnome but I would guess that the Gnome produced more. The NACA 4412 was used on the Champ and my old L-3 and you could hang the L-3 on its prop at 40 indicated and it would tolerate all kinds of abuse and try to keep flying. The Frise ailerons were still effective too.
Bob

 

Russ, I see no reason for a 16% airfoil on an airplane that is flying @ 100 MPH unless it is carrying a bunch of load. There has to be an optimum section where there is a good lift/good cruise/gentle stall in the same bundle. I personally don't like the modification where the upper surface is straight-lined back to the trailing edge and I feel that there should be a gentle upper surface curvature to get the right down-flow aft of the max thickness and to prevent separation at higher speeds. I personally think that a 12% well designed airfoil would be good for the Tabloid, maybe even a 9% with a generous leading edge radius. I'm going to talk to my gurus at work about this. Even though they are Big Tin Bird designers, they fly sailplanes and homebuilts hang glide so they know their stuff.
Bob

 

I will make some kind of reason to enter the iron palace and steal away the 60 year old secrets of the 4 digit and 5 digit airfoils...that every single power in Europe, including the Russians, used on their fighters.

 

Russ, you have a PM.
Bob

 

Shouldn't use that expression to describe mirth in the aviation community but I think we have a clown in our midst. Seriously, how do you manage this without a retractable landing gear.

 

I just spit coffee on my keyboard! Great!

 

Voisin LAS?