G.1vw Fokker

Tophe · February 27, 2011, 05:02:16 AM

The next kit I am going to build is the Fokker G.1 that I want to make (very short span and) asymmetric, no matter how poor are my skills.
I am not good enough to move the central pod inside the boom for a single-engine single-fuselage-single-boom layout... Too bad.
My project was to install a double-engine on the port boom and no engine on the starboard one: either nothing or a radar. I wondered: how do we say double-Twin-Wasp in Dutch? That makes translating "Quadruple-Wasp", and Google Translate told me this is "viervoudige wesp", so a "G.1vw" code with no relation to a German licence VolksWagen...
(Checking if the normal G.1 was using Twin-Wasp, Wikipedia told me No, but Mercury. Anyway, this will be a Quadruple-Wasp prototype).

Tophe · February 27, 2011, 05:52:54 AM

This is the principle of my project G.1a --> G.1vw:

saintkatanalegacy · February 27, 2011, 07:33:52 AM

looks tamed compared to your other creations

Taiidantomcat · February 27, 2011, 09:31:36 AM

Quote from: saintkatanalegacy on February 27, 2011, 07:33:52 AM
looks tamed compared to your other creations

Give it time

Tophe · February 27, 2011, 09:54:03 AM

You are right, ahem... $:-\$
A quadruple Wasp radial is too much power for a single 3-bladed propeller, and contraprop are not funny enough. Well... with shafts and gears, that could drive also a pusher propeller (which would justify fully the twin-boom layout! yes, this must be the truth about the G.1...

)
[And I said I must reduce span drastically]:

Weaver · February 27, 2011, 07:40:25 PM

How about a push-pull engine pair on one side and a single boom on the other?

Tophe · February 27, 2011, 08:09:19 PM

Yes (or like this below?

), it is funny

. But I am not skillful enough to make it plastic $:-\$ . And destroying a twin-boom layout is pain for me

EDIT: Dear Weaver, I have made your designer name: part of Aviation History on my asymmetric aircraft site http://cmeunier.chez-alice.fr/Asymm_addition.htm Thanks!

philp · February 27, 2011, 10:24:02 PM

Different ideas as usual.

Been trying to find one of these kits for a RW build.

Weaver · February 28, 2011, 08:52:46 AM

Cheers Tophe!

How about a three-surface layout?

Tophe · February 28, 2011, 09:34:58 AM

Funny!

Or 4-engined G.1, rather easy as drawings, while I am unable to build them, sorry $:-\$

Tophe · February 28, 2011, 10:17:24 AM

Building has started: gluing, putty...
I consider using a 3rd propeller, as antitorque rotor (horizontal, from a P-47 kit). I know the push-pull layout may be balanced enough contrarotating, but the main propeller (tractive) is supersonic (noisy) and the extra pusher propeller is not counter-balancing enough...

Tophe · February 28, 2011, 10:46:23 AM

from my twin-boom topic http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,20326.675.html

Quote from: Tophe on February 28, 2011, 10:43:45 AM
At http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,31754.0.html dear Weaver invented a wonderful 3-surface Fokker G.1 with 2 booms, and in French, we would say "bipoutre" meaning twin-boomer, but in English, I don't know if the word "twin" is appropriate, so I have made 2 derivatives (twin-tractor, or else twin-pusher) that may be better in this English collection.

Weaver · February 28, 2011, 12:23:36 PM

And here is a logical one which I quite fancy forsome heavy bomber projects (not based on the G.1 per se):

Tophe · February 28, 2011, 08:09:40 PM

Thanks Weaver for your great enrichment (so funny) to this (quite boring) topic!

Tophe · March 06, 2011, 12:16:19 AM

Back to plastic... the model is taking shape:
(at last the starboard anti-torque rotor will not be 4-blade propeller from P-47 but 3-blade from Mc-202)