Warning: session_start(): open(/var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74/sess_74eafa8587def05416bf11d39f65d1f04942c5dc8f397329, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 The 109` of today - for people who cant go in the "Die Kniepe" - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums
EdelweissAntique

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 109` of today - for people who cant go in the "Die Kniepe"

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 8
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 template Next
    #106
    I have followed the progress of this build as many here have.

    My Dad was an aeronautical engineer and flight engineer in his professional life. Although I inherited his interest in all things aircraft related, I never approached the level of technical knowledge he amassed in his 50+ years in the business.

    While watching this BF 109 work, I have so many questions surrounding the airworthiness of the aircraft's structure and the power sufficiency of the intended engine.

    I was saddened to see that Apathy was expelled.

    I then Googled this build and found the following site where Apathy related to a more technically astute audience than here on WAF.

    WELL.....can you guess that the audience on this new website began to ask the tough questions and Apathy did not handle it very well.

    Judge for yourself....http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/fo...109-g-6-a.html

    I hope Apathy overcomes his defensive mode and begins to take to heart the rather serious concerns that arise in a potentially underpowered and perhaps weaker than intended structural system. I would assume that Australia has their equivalent to the US's FAA. My question becomes does this aircraft pass airworthiness qualifications? I have some doubts at this juncture.

    Ramon
    Last edited by ramon; 10-03-2010, 09:03 PM.

    Comment

      #107
      You are right Ramon.
      Flying is very serious business, and those guys there raised valid points in a mature, businesslike fashion, and those points need to be addressed instead of being apparently dismissed as unfounded criticism.

      If it was meant to be a static display that would be one thing, but its hard not to get the impression that they might be in a bit over their heads when it comes to making a scratch built high performance piston fighter.

      Comment

        #108
        It is sad that we're not going to have further updates here on WAF.
        I was curious to see the outcome of such project. Even if it is not going to fly, I bet it will display nicely!

        Comment

          #109
          I'm sure we will be able to be kept updated through their other websites. I too am following this with great intrest. I'm No building guru by no means but to me it looks like a scaled up (1:1) of a RC 1/6scale model. Never-the-less it's still an awsome build. Power wise it needs a powerful V8 or V10 engine. Hey even if it winds up to be not as robust as the original...so what? Is it going to be less desirable? So what it can't hang with a actual WW2 Spitfire or P51. It's a HOME BUILT marvel none-the-less.

          Comment

            #110
            Originally posted by PEVO View Post
            I'm sure we will be able to be kept updated through their other websites. I too am following this with great intrest. I'm No building guru by no means but to me it looks like a scaled up (1:1) of a RC 1/6scale model. Never-the-less it's still an awsome build. Power wise it needs a powerful V8 or V10 engine. Hey even if it winds up to be not as robust as the original...so what? Is it going to be less desirable? So what it can't hang with a actual WW2 Spitfire or P51. It's a HOME BUILT marvel none-the-less.

            I think we all agree that as a static display it is the cat's meow.

            The entire thrust of Apathy and his Father is that this is a FLYING home built aircraft. SO WHAT, you ask? We're talking about a man's LIFE, that's what. Let's not forget about the people on the ground in the event of a catastrophic failure of structure or underpowered engine.

            Apathy has never satisfactorily answered reasonable concerns asked of him about the technical aspects of this design. I, again, refer WAFers to the link I posted above to see the level of Apathy's understanding and handling of the tougher questions asked of him.

            Again, if this aircraft was a static display only, I have no qualms whatsoever. But this build is apparently so much more than that. With that in mind, I'll continue to constrain my OOHs and AHSSS.

            Ramon

            Comment

              #111
              see i think the he was so used to people agreeing with him that he was upset that when people who have actually done this before and know all about how to build aircraft ask tough questions he cant answer so he got upset! for me after reading that the motor being used was 300hp and that alot of the members there immediately said it was under powered for my sealed it for me!
              i fear that this project and pardon the pun probably wont get off the ground!!

              Comment

                #112
                He'd kind of shown time and again on this forum he had some anger issues towards anyone who didn't agree with him. I could see that getting in the way of this being a successful project. Hopefully he'll grow up a little, learn to listen to advice and make this project work!

                Comment

                  #113
                  Originally posted by ramon View Post
                  I think we all agree that as a static display it is the cat's meow.

                  The entire thrust of Apathy and his Father is that this is a FLYING home built aircraft. SO WHAT, you ask? We're talking about a man's LIFE, that's what. Let's not forget about the people on the ground in the event of a catastrophic failure of structure or underpowered engine.

                  Apathy has never satisfactorily answered reasonable concerns asked of him about the technical aspects of this design. I, again, refer WAFers to the link I posted above to see the level of Apathy's understanding and handling of the tougher questions asked of him.

                  Again, if this aircraft was a static display only, I have no qualms whatsoever. But this build is apparently so much more than that. With that in mind, I'll continue to constrain my OOHs and AHSSS.

                  Ramon
                  I totally agree with you on the flying aspects of this project. Surely they will do wing load stress testing etc. on a protype wing & tail section to make sure it doesn't fold up like a house of cards as soon as it leaves the ground. I was thinking ahead hopfully after it's flying...if it should be flown like a fighter or a piper cub.

                  Comment

                    #114
                    [quote=but if the authority will license it then whats the question ?.......[/quote]


                    That's the rub, isn't it?? I have no track to be off or on. Apathy's approach to tough questions concerning the aircraft's airworthiness is definitely off track.

                    I watch this build from afar with great interest. I want to see its success as I think we all do. BUT these questions continue to linger in my mind as I see this project beyond "it's neat, cool, awesome" aspects.

                    Apathy appears to be ill advised to get pissy over a more critical analysis of this aircraft's attributes.


                    Ramon

                    Comment

                      #115
                      Welcome back Apathy!

                      Comment

                      Previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 template Next

                      Users Viewing this Thread

                      Collapse

                      There are currently 7 users online. 0 members and 7 guests.

                      Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.

                      Working...
                      X