Victorian Aerial Carriage: in which a decision is made and good fortune reported

[NARSES2]

Bugger!

Had vigilance not served me well in the previous incicent with this chair, in which the pillar upon which the seat rotates broke through it's upper surface, then your chosen terminology would have served as a literal descriptor and not merely as an exclamation...

All jesting aside that could have been very nasty H. Glad you survived 

[Weaver]

Well unfortunately this weekend has been lost to a variety of causes, initially the (so-far fruitless) search for a new chair or tolerable quality, and then more seriously, the hospital visiting and relative-ferrying resulting from my dear aunt being admitted to said facility as a result of her heart problems of last summer apparently re-emerging. I am however glad to report that she is now back home and apparently none the worse for wear, the problem having been diagnosed as a combination of her taking her medication incorrectly and a simultaneous viral infection.

I remain undecided on the matter of whether to build this model as an ornithopter or a helicopter, and since I have purchased, but not yet received, a pair of model kits from Ebay which are relevent to the latter scheme, I am minded to await their arrival and the opportunity to inspect the parts before reaching a decision. Rest assured that, should I opt for the former scheme, the kits will not go to waste since many other models of a similar ilk could be made from their components.

As ever though gentlemen, your opinion and advice would be much appreciated.

[Weaver]

Huzzah! One of my purchases from Ebay's splendid emporium has arrived! I am now in possession of a Sopwith Triplane, and since, as I suspected, all six of it's wings are of identical proportion, I can now build two three-bladed rotors which rotate in opposite directions. Once my second Nieuport arrives, I will have the further option of building two two-bladed rotors of opposite handedness. The Nieuport wings resemble real heliopter blades slightly more closely, being longer in span and shorter in chord than the Sopwith ones, but the difference is small. Both sets are, of course, far too small for an actual working helicopter, but that is in keeping with the Victorian fantasy nature of this build.

So I have a question to put to the assembled expertise of the good members of this board: which scheme do you prefer and why?

There are a total of SIX options:

1. Single two-bladed rotor with tail rotor.

2. Co-axial contra-rotating two-bladed rotors with a fixed tail (as per the mockup pictured elsewhere in this thread).

3. Single three-bladed rotor with tail rotor.

4. Co-axial contra-rotating three-bladed rotors with a fixed tail.

5. Tandem-wing ornithopter (as per the mockup pictured elsewhere in this thread).

6. Flaptercopter with rotating paddles providing lift in the manner of a paddle-steamer.


Your contributions would be most welcome good gentlemen!

[PR19_Kit]

Option 2 appeals to the engineer in me, if only because of its avowed complexity.

The masses will be surely amazed at the temerity of any gentleman attempting to travel aloft aboard a machine of such engineering elegance!

Such complexity could be enhanced by manufacturing the aforementioned rotors in three bladed form, and your stock of supplies would surely allow this variation.

[Weaver]

Such complexity could be enhanced by manufacturing the aforementioned rotors in three bladed form, and your stock of supplies would surely allow this variation.

Or in other words, Option 4... 

[Old Wombat]

Option 2 or Option 4 for the slightly more sane parts of my brain.

However, certain less sane parts of my brain are shouting out for a six-winged dragonfly-form ornithopter (maybe with a little fixed box-kite tail at the back).


Mind you, a couple of even less sane, quite possibly actual "insane", parts of my brain are visualising the flaptercopter of Option 6 in an almost angelic glow.

[kerick]

Sounds like option 4 appeals to me. 

[JayBee]

I say old chap, option 6 sounds much more fun, but I do suppose that if you feel you have to be sensible then one does think it will have to be option..................4.

[Rheged]

This is not an easy question to answer. Number 2 has a considerable  degree of engineering elegance but 6 sounds much more exciting.......although 4 is moderately sane.

DAMMIT!!! GO FOR 6 AND MAXIMUM IMPROBABILITY

[Tophe]

Yes, 6 seems the most crazy = most funny = best for me...

[scooter]

However, certain less sane parts of my brain are shouting out for a six-winged dragonfly-form ornithopter (maybe with a little fixed box-kite tail at the back).

That would fit the Victorian aesthetic perfectly.

[63cpe]

How about tandemrotor steampunk style (Bat like rotors) with lots of cylinders in improbable places and tubing to connect this and that...

David aka 63cpe

[Mossie]

I really like your no.5 on the last page, I  think the Triplane wings would really set it off.

[zenrat]

Option 7.  A bird form ornithopter modelled on the wandering Albatross.

[Weaver]

Well then gentlemen, it seems a decision is indicated. Thank you all for your thoughts and suggestions. Upon reading through them all however it appears that, broadly speaking, my audience is split fairly evenly in it's enthusiasms between those supporting the various helicopter schemes and those in favour of various kinds of flapping wings. It therefore falls to me to make the 'casting vote' as it were, and after much deliberation, nay procrastination, I have decided upon Option Three, namely the helicopter with co-axial three-bladed rotors.

My decision is fundamentally based upon the general principle that this option is the easiest one to pursue, and given my lamentable record in finishing projects over the last twelve months, this relative ease greatly increases the probability of this project reaching completion before the relevent deadline. Please note however, that it does not neccessarily raise that probability higher than say, fifty percent...

Two specific issues have also influenced me in this choice.

Firstly, I am able to greatly reduce the time and effort required to build the rotor mast and hubs by simply purloining said items from a model of one of Mr. Kamov's splendidly eccentric creations, namely the Airfix kit of the Ka-25, known unto NATO by the nomenclature 'Hormone'. I have two examples of this product in my kit repository, so if I am ever inclined to build one as it's designer intended, I am still able to do so. Also, the donor appears to have much potential for conversion to some other form of vertical take-off of science-fiction conveyance, and thus will also not go to waste.

Secondly, the leg shields seen in front of the seats in the mockup photographs can be assembled in one of two ways. As illustrated, they form a 'tunnel' down the centre of the craft, which I considered neccessary to accomodate a shaft taking drive to the forward flapping mechanism of an ornithopter. However, in this configuration, they also create a difficulty in that they obstruct the leg of the pilot in such a manner as to prevent him from sitting straight upon his seat, a problem to which the only apparent solution would be surgery to change his stance, of a nature to make Dr. Frankenstein shudder. The helicopter design, by contrast, does not need this shaft, and so the leg shields can be modified to form but a thin vertical wall down the centreline of the craft, thus allowing the operator to maintain his current posture without modification.

I must also relate that a most propitious example of good luck has occurred. The Nieuport model which I was initially considering as a parts donor came from a collection of childhood modelling and wargaming items most kindly donated to me by a good friend. Upon further examination of this hoarde, I discovered a Revell Sopwith Pup box, the significance of whose triply-identical wings to the helicopter option was immediately apparent. However, on opening the box, I discovered that the model had already been completed and painted to a most passable standard, and I found that I could not, in all conscience, bring myself to destroy another modeller's work, even though they had abondoned it many years before and given it to me in the explicit knowledge that that might be it's fate. Accuse me of excessive sentimentality if you wish gentlemen, however it is a failing that I will acknowledge, but am inclined neither to apologise for nor correct.

I therefore purchased another, uncompleted Sopwith Pup via the Ebay website. Upon it's arrival, I noted that the kit is provided with two forms of horizontal tailplane, representing early and late production examples of the type. I then recalled that my friend had included in his gift a bag of sundry spare parts. I examined the same, and was delighted to discover, the corresponding spare tailplane from his old build of decades before! I therefore find myself in possession of two of these items, which will enable me to construct a most appropriate tail surface for the helicopter without preventing the completion of the equivalent surface on the Pup, which will, in turn, make it possible to use the latter as the basis of an autogyro or similar creation upon some future occasion. All in all, a most gratifying outcome!