pics by KeithAlanK
This is a Coupe deHiver called the Coupe deVille
Coupe deHiver is French for Winter Cup. We all know that
a Coupe deVille is, or was, a top end 2 door Cadillac.
In rubber power competition the king of competition categories is
Wakefield It's been around since the 1930's or longer, and as a
consequence, is packed with rules and dominated by guys who've
been flying them for decades, or the occasional young aerospace
engineer who still has the ability to innovate after 6-8 years of
college. Coupe deHiver has been around since the 1950's or so,
and while it has some tight rules of it's own, they still fit on one page.
After going to a few contests, I knew the event I wanted. I bought a
2nd rate kit called Slats and set it on a shelf straightaway. Not long
after, Blue Ridge Models introduced the Coupe deVille and I was
hooked. A truly great kit for it's day. All the rib sets were milled,
the propellor blades preformed, and all the wood was 1st rate and
appropriate to the task. Another nice feature is that with a couple
quick adjustments it can be loaded with as much rubberas desired
and flown in Unlimited event as well. I built it immediately during
July-August 1977. I finished the decorations the night before the first
day of my senior year. Too nervous to sleep, I stayed up finishing it
by about 3am. The name and shark mouth are all cut tissue, both
based on my own sketches. The color on the tail used to be a very
nice royal blue.
I had started collecting all the support equipment back when I bought
the Slat kit, so I was ready. I took it out a few times that fall and it
flew great. A real pleasure to watch. In October I got my own car,
and it and girls, pushed everything else out of the picture. Occasional
flying still took place now and then, but years of steady construction
projects was at an end.
When I moved back to Texas in 1981. the Coupe deVille made the
trip, but the box full of ground support equipment and supplies didn't.
By then I was a mad biker, and flying was even farther from my mind.
I thought about getting the ground suport together but it didn't happen
soon enough. By 1990 the tissue covering was already too old and
brittle. It's made 6 moves over the years, and hung from a lot of walls
and ceilings, but this is the end of the line. Now that it's finally digitized,
it's headed to a viking funeral.
Like most rockets, the build time exceeded the total airtime. This model
may have as many as 35 hours construction time, another 15 hours for
the ground support. At most, the Coupe deVille probably amassed no
more than 20 minutes in the air. 20 minutes of pure magic to watch
though.
Here's yet another gem I found at China Lake Alumni.
1970 gallery. It's called the HAP Sidewinder. HAP
stands for High Altitude Project. The limited research
I found indicates that it was created by combining a
Sparrow rocket motor with the front end of an AIM-9L.
Some test flights were performed, but the project was
soon cancelled.
I've never been a big Sidewinder fan and the
proliferation of variants has always made the study of
them a bit bewildering. Having admitted that, I must
say; I LIKE THIS!
I can look up the 2 diameters and easily scale a drawing
from there.I have an Estes Python nosecone which will
serve for the Sidewinder seeker section, or I can turn
one, as well as turning the transition section.
Sigh... just add it to an already long list of unstarted
and semi-started projects
3d by Dick Stafford
Photo KeithAlanK
Photo KeithAlanK
Photo John Lee
I can appreciate a clever euphemism.
The USAF nuclear arsenal is typically modular in nature. A sensible
approach when technology is progressing rapidly. The nuclear
explosive is a seperable unit from it's carrier body, either a
missile or a gravity bomb. In the case of a gravity bomb, the
body is referred to as a drop-shape. Cute, I like that.
This it the DS-3r; Drop Shape, 3"dia, rear ejection. This is also
the 3rd DS that I've built over the years. Won't be the last either.
I had been sketching and dreaming this particular design for a
couple years already, and when Giant Leap introduced it's 3", 5:1
plastic nosecone, I knew the time had come. I turned an upscale
Cherokee cone for a rocket buddy in trade for the Giant Leap
cone.
I always thought the slo-mo vidclips of gravity bombs with retard
packages looked cool. The small close coupled chute ejecting out
the rear to slow the bombs down. For a low altitude drop, this
gives the aircraft a lead over the slowing bombs so that they
don't explode directly under the aircraft. Nukes often are
configured the same way for the same reason, despite much
higher release altitudes. The DS-3r has the internal space to do
this well. The motor mount tube extends well into the nose. The
ejection gasses must 1st go forward, then return through the
baffled centering rings to eject the tail cap and the chute which
is packed around the motor. This utilizes the entire internal
volume of cool air to push the chute out before any hot gasses
can even reach it. Another trick I pulled is that by removing the
nose cone, the entire motor mount/baffle assembly slides right
out for servicing or for chute replacement.
When the DS-3r was nearing completion, I decided that It
needed to be run through RocSim. I've used it a time or two,
but don't have it. I still use Barrowman CP calc on paper, and
did it this time, though knowing that it has trouble with rockets
this stubby. I contacted Dick Stafford of Dick's Rocket Dungeon
fame and he helped me out. After tweaking the mass and balance
in line with the the real model, he found that only one ounce of
nose weight would be required, I added 1 1/2oz. RocSim
Barrowman CP agreed with paper Barrowman CP, and RocSim CP
was indeed a bit further back. The wedge airfoil fins [which
RocSim as yet doesn't handle] actually moves the CP still further
back a bit. The performance sim crosses Estes motors and the
24mm Blackjacks right off the list, too slow off the rail. E18W is
good for 800ft, the F39T goes to 1200ft. Just about perfect
upper range, and I may work my way down the motor list over
time. That new Aerotech E20W looks nice too.
Here's another pic I found at China Lake Alumni.
The very first pic in the 1962 gallery.
I haven't seen one of these in at least 20 years.
I do know what it is.
Do you?
Sometimes it pays to repeat a search from time to time.
Previously, when I Googled Monocopter I'd get some of the
usual scattering of model vidclips and discussion, and a whole
lot of that Euro turbofan jetpak, which may be mono, but
aint no copter. This time around the photo below popped
out at me. Quite a find.
It was at the China Lake Alumni website, in the photo gallery
page for 1963. China Lake is home to the US Navy weapons
test facilities. The site search engine, unfortunately, yielded
no other photos or info. I kept the original file name on the pic;
Monocopter perch 16AUG63 CLK SL-027985
I am able to infer a few things from the pic. Foremost is that
the protuberance on the far side of the hub is not the same as
the wing on this side, so I believe this really is a monocopter.
The wing is mounted to the hub at the center of lift, therefore
is probably capable of changing pitch in flight, likely in response
to control inputs to the elevon at the wingtip. If the hub isn't
made from actual truck hubcaps I'll be surprised as hell. If it's
heavy enough the disk hub will stabilize a rotor despite the lack
of a proper flybar. I had already designed a monocopter using
a ring shaped hub, although the ring on mine is proportionately
larger in relation to the wing since it'll have no extra internal mass.
Two things are puzzling.
Obviously; what is the powerplant?
The other is the source of the 1/2 round shadow directly below
the hub? You can see that the sun is to the left and the shadows
are stretching to the right, therefore the hub's actual shadow is
to the right as well.
If anyone knows ANYTHING further, PLEASE comment!
Today, while surfing the web for something completely different,
I ran across another version of Low Flight, this time written by
and for helicopter pilots. I previously posted the original High Flight,
and then Low Flight written for Phantom II crews earlier this year.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Low Flight
Oh, I've slipped the surly bonds of earth
And hovered out of ground effect on semi-rigid blades;
Earthward I've auto'ed and met the rising brush of non-paved terrain
And done a thousand things you would never care to
Skidded and dropped and flared
Low in the heat soaked roar.
Confined there, I've chased the earthbound traffic
And lost the race to insignificant headwinds;
Forward and up a little in ground effect
I've topped the General's hedge with drooping turns
Where never Skyhawk or even Phantom flew.
Shaking and pulling collective,
I've lumbered the low untresspassed halls of victor airways,
Put out my hand and touched a tree.
-Anonymous
On Sept 19, I went to fly with the Alamo Rocketeers over in China Grove.
Since my truck is broken, I went on my Harley Sportster with whatever I
could carry in a knapsack. It's been a long time since I did that. You're
limited to rockets that are either small enough, or that disassemble.
Sturdy is important too. The Campitch 1 is certainly small enough once
the flybar is removed. The hard part is getting by while leaving a new
25LB field box at home. It helps to have friends.
The CP1 sitting on a borrowed pad, loaded with a D12-0
After ignition it's only spun 180 degrees and the wing
is already extended for ascent at least part way. The
pads' rod angle adjuster is slipping.
That's the wing in the foreground after bouncing off the
ground, and tossing up a small cloud of orange soil.
The hub is falling after making a respectable altitude, wingless.
No major damage to speak of, but the cam follower pin was sheared
off where it came out of the reinforcement plate on top of the wing.
The pin was essentially a 2-56 steel bolt. I've already done repairs
and replaced the 2-56 with a 4-40 socket head bolt, and widened the
camtrack slot to take it.
In retrospect it's not too surprising that something happened, given the
numberof MC's that come apart under centrifigal loads. I'd've been
much less surprised if the 2-56 pin was simply bent but still there.
While I was at it, I installed the heavier return spring I had pre-selected
as a possible upgrade. I never liked the limited wing attachment method
on this model. A secondary safety attachment would be nice, but how to
do it without making the next failure worse?
This is the Campitch 1. The 1st of 2 recently finished
monocopters. Both monos employ quite different wing
control mechanisms, but I decided to build both at once
because most of the construction is routine enough to be
a bit boring and I always mix too much epoxy anyway.
The Campitch 1 uses a system similar to that of the
Rotary Space Ship that I posted about back in March of
this year. When the vehicle begins to rotate, centrifigal
force causes the wing to slide outward on its' pivot rod,
as it does so, a pin on top of the wing root follows a
cam track causing the wing to rotate from down pitch to
up so that it can ascend. Once the motor burns out, the
mono will slow it's spin until a spring can retract the
wing, returning it to down pitch so that it can autorotate
for a gentle landing. No stopping, no falling.
Now, I've done away with the burn string that the
Mousetrap requires. After I work the bugs out on D12's,
I'll be able to fly it on my own small moonburn sugar motors.
I can't remember the last time I was hot to go to a museum.
The Cosmodrome when I was in Kansas for LDRS 12?
That was a space related museum, no surprise there.
This time it was the McNay art museum here in San Antonio.
I've driven past it a 1/2 a million times without knowing it
was even there, this time we were pulling in. What snagged
me was a traveling exhibit of the art of Edward Gorey.
We aint in Kansas anymore, for sure.
We managed to get down there on the final day of the exhibit
and it was great. There were plenty of prints of course, a
mere drop in the bucket from a prolific artist, but mixed in
were occasional originals, and pencil layout sketches. One of
the prettiest displays was a cabinet with hand drawn and
watercolered envelopes that Edward sent to his mother over
the years. I'll spare you further descriptions, the book covers
above are adequate examples. The Doubtful Guest above was
my intro to Ed Gorey, it was read to me/us when quite young,
but then I grew up with hippy school teachers.
My brother and his Sylvia were the ones who went with me,
in fact drove me as I had no transportation at the time. Last
weekend was my birthday and they gave me Ed Gorey's
Amphogorey Again, a compilation. Love it.
The website below is a .net, but it's actually a .com.
http://goreydetails.net/
Other than that go to Amazon for books or simply Google,
there's plenty of E.G. out there.
I've been flying monocopters since 1988. I've also seen
other people fly them. They all shared two common
problems, the first is getting them to stay in one piece
throughout the flight despite the high rotational loads.
I've seen a few fly apart, including some of my own.
Anyone who hangs in there a while, can conquer this
sooner or later.
The second problem is the subject of this post. When
a monocopter's motor shuts off, they typically stop
spinning and fall down. Some falling monocopters will
reaquire spin, either backward or upside down, hopefully
before impact,and make a safe landing.
In short, after getting monocopters to go up reliably, the
next trick is to get them to come back back down safely.
I've seen other recovery methods tried with varied success,
but the coolest will always be autorotation, ie; true
mapleseed recovery. Spinning up, and spinning back down,
without stopping, without falling.
Last fall, I built the 1st step on this quest. I call, it the Flying
Mousetrap. It somewhat looks the part. Mousetrap has a
wing that pivots around the center of lift. There's a spring that
pulls the wing to descent angle, and a length of string to hold
the wing at ascent angle until the motor [D12-3] ejection burns
it through. This gives a timely transition after slowing to
autorotaion speed, but without falling or reversal. The string is
actually dental floss, it's easy to work with at the field, and it
comes in a neat dispenser WITH a built-in cutter.
Minty fresh too.
I don't consider this to be the best approach to the problem.
It's a simple up/down system instead of being reactive, and it
limits the choice of usable motors to ones with suitable delay
and an ejection charge. Since I make my own sugar motors,
I would prefer a system that can use them, and they're all
capped. However, I figured this would be a good first step
that others might prefer.
The 1st flight video was posted by friend John Lee at the time.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/23694991@N03/2953720670/
