Horsa, Operation Coronet- Complete.

[PR19_Kit]

That looks pretty darn good already. Well done. 

[TallEng]

If two are good wouldn't 4 be better?    

Ooh I don't know 2 Gypsy 6 'R's ought to provide enough umph to get you to the LZ! 

Regards
Keith

[Gondor]

Glad to know that I have managed to get something right somewhere 

Gondor

[jcf]

Gipsy 6 'R' was 220 hp, only 10 more than the standard military version Gipsy Queen(Gipsy Six srs.II).
The Gipsy Queen 70-2 that went into production in 1946 was 380 hp.

Folding props ala the '30s style gas powered free-flight models would be cool.

[Tophe]

If two are good wouldn't 4 be better?    

Why 2? One engine is enough to get a powered glider! And this asymmetry is very crazy what-if...
All is done for the modelling part, you just need paint now.

[Geoff]

Great idea, I would go with feathered props though - not a crtisism just an idea.

[kitbasher]

If two are good wouldn't 4 be better?    

And then call it a Miles Marathon!  Ish, anyway.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handley_Page_Marathon

Actually I quite like the idea of power to help make a better landing.  Powered gliders today do that (and take off too) all of the time.

[PR19_Kit]

  Powered gliders today do that (and take off too) all of the time.

Oh dear, it'd be considered very bad form if you started the engine to eke out the descent with a motor glider at the gliding club I go to occasionally!

Not that we have many motor gliders anyway, but generally they're used for take-off and then retracted for good, unless something goes seriously wrong with the weather and the flight is likely to end up in a landing out. Then they tend to restart the engine to climb back to an altitude from which they can get home with the engine off.

I find it 'heart-in-the-mouth' time watching a motor glider take-off, they seem to take for EVER to clear the ground, and the climb-out is painfully slow............. about what it would be with a twin Gypsy powered Horsa perhaps? 

[sandiego89]

Great idea, I would go with feathered props though - not a crtisism just an idea.

Oh they will be full feathering. 

[Geoff]

Great idea, I would go with feathered props though - not a crtisism just an idea.

Oh they will be full feathering. 

[Mossie]

Like this idea.

[rickshaw]

An interesting idea.  Not one I'd be willing to try, I think.  It is seriously underpowered and I suspect it wouldn't add all that much to the Horsa's approach angle or distance.  It is a seriously heavy aircraft, which is why it had such a huge wing.  It basically put everything except the Hamilcar or the Gigant into the shade as far as military gliders went.  I'd have recommended something about 750-1000hp.  Wouldn't need to carry more than half-an-hour's fuel.  Both the Germans and the British experimented with and used "power-eggs" - self-contained engine nacelles - fuel, oil the lot, which could be flown in after the landing so that the valuable gliders that could be recovered could fly out under their own power. 

[Mossie]

Depends how you use it.  The way I read it was that it the Gypsy six's were to be used as sustainer engines, purely to maintain height an give a little bit of room for maneouver.  They'd be towed as normal.  Modern sports gliders use a small motor for this, around 20hp.  A quick guestimate suggests the Gypsy six's 400 hp total would be sufficient for this.  You could delete surplus kit like the throttle and starter.

[rickshaw]

Depends how you use it.  The way I read it was that it the Gypsy six's were to be used as sustainer engines, purely to maintain height an give a little bit of room for maneouver.  They'd be towed as normal.  Modern sports gliders use a small motor for this, around 20hp.  A quick guestimate suggests the Gypsy six's 400 hp total would be sufficient for this.  You could delete surplus kit like the throttle and starter.

I think there is a lot of difference between a flying brick like the Horsa which weighed some 15,000lbs fully loaded and a sports glider weighing a few hundred.  The sports glider is designed to be as aerodynamic as much as possible with few draggy bits.  The Horse was designed to carry a load a certain distance and is basically a flying cylinder with a bit of smoothing around the nose and tail with LOADS of draggy bits. I appreciate what is being attempted and its an interesting idea but I suspect it needs considerably more power to make any real difference.  I wouldn't expect two 750-1000hp engines to achieve much but they might have a chance over two 220hp engines.

What always surprised me about the Horsa was that it was as good a flyer as it was.   It looks big and ungainly but from the film I've seen its quite graceful, if a little lumbering.  A bit like an Elephant in a Tutu. 

The most famous WWII Glider Pilot I know of was American.  Eddie Coogan - child actor, flew Hadrians in Burma for the Chindits.  He played "Uncle Fester" in the original TV "Addams Family".

[Mossie]

I know, but stick the figures in to an online power to weight ratio calculator and the Horsa with Gypsy six's comes out well compared to a sports glider.