SMALL - Telemetry SMALL - Radio
Thread Tools
Old Mar 21, 2015, 07:42 PM
CarbonVanilla is offline
Find More Posts by CarbonVanilla
aka Zeal
CarbonVanilla's Avatar
United States, PA, Philadelphia
Joined Mar 2015
23 Posts
Question
Are There Multi-Decked Flying Wings?!

As the topic says, Are there Multi-decked Flying Wings?

What do I mean? Well throughout history there have been aviators who have designed aircraft with more than one wing, for example; we've seen bi-planes and triplanes which are the more common aircraft designs but there have been other aircraft experiments with more than three wings... in one documentary I read about a plane with 10 WINGS... ten! While it looked ridiculous, it still flew. Now I did a quick search for Flying Wings with more than one wing but I didn't find any hits, none! So I'm wondering if there have been previous experiments or successful attempts with Flying Wings having more than one wing.

I'm asking this because I saw an anime called Yukikaze a few years back and while there are a few interesting fighter jets in the series, one aircraft in particular caught my eye! It was the AAC Banshee (Airborne Aircraft Carrier)! This enormous three decked flying wing was cruising through the air and is capable of carrying mid to small sized aircraft, storing and launching them from it's flight deck as well as ferrying all personal from the main base! Minus the crew and personal, I wonder if it's possible to create an airborne aircraft carrier like the Banshee for FPV aircraft to dock, recharge and re-engage in flight. Of course it'll be big, and slow but think of how awesome something like that at a flying field would be. To stay in the air for 30 minutes, an hour or MORE, who doesn't want to fly more for longer times!?!

I already have a couple idea's that could work but first, I gotta learn to fly! LOL
CarbonVanilla is offline Find More Posts by CarbonVanilla
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Mar 22, 2015, 02:56 AM
DT56 is offline
Find More Posts by DT56
Registered User
Joined Aug 2005
2,776 Posts
Welcome aboard RC Groups CarbonVanilla!

Quote:
Are there Multi-decked Flying Wings?
Yes, they're called biplanes. Here's a couple, one model and the other full scale.

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...85&postcount=9
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...1&postcount=11


http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/models/...lyingWing.html
http://flyingmachines.ru/Site2/Crafts/Craft25870.htm

Quote:
I already have a couple idea's that could work but first, I gotta learn to fly! LOL
If you're a complete novice to RC planes, I'd suggest a conventional configured model for training, as they're easier to setup and fly than a flying wing planform aircraft.

Good Luck!
DT56 is offline Find More Posts by DT56
Last edited by DT56; Mar 22, 2015 at 03:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2015, 12:50 PM
slebetman is online now
Find More Posts by slebetman
Registered User
slebetman's Avatar
Malaysia, Selangor, Kajang
Joined Jun 2009
1,534 Posts
It depends on your definition of "flying wing".

One definition, the one Wikipedia uses, is that a flying wing is an aircraft that's just a wing. More technically an aircraft where the engine, cockpit and all control mechanisms are embedded completely in the wing. Ironically, by this definition, one of the first flying wings actually had a tail with horizontal and vertical stabilizers.

The more common definition of a flying wing, one that most people who like and fly flying wings use, is an aircraft without a tail. More technically without a horizontal stabilizer. Vertical stabilizers/fins are sometimes accepted as necessary evil for stability. The first group of people above who disagree with this definition call these types of aircraft "tailless".

I'm of the view that "tailless" = "flying wing" because that's the term I grew up with reading in popular science and aviation magazines.

So if you agree with my definition. The first flying wing aircraft to fly was a biplane. The Dunne D.5: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunne_D.5



Dunne designed lots of aircraft. All of them flying wings. There were even a couple monoplanes such as the Dunne D.6



The Dunne D.5 first flew in 1910. Just 7 years after the Wright brothers first flight.
slebetman is online now Find More Posts by slebetman
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 25, 2015, 03:27 AM
CarbonVanilla is offline
Find More Posts by CarbonVanilla
aka Zeal
CarbonVanilla's Avatar
United States, PA, Philadelphia
Joined Mar 2015
23 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by slebetman View Post
one of the first flying wings actually had a tail with horizontal and vertical stabilizers.
By using Wikipedia's definition of a flying wing, I wouldn't place the aircraft you described in the same category because it does not follow the same principals defined by Wikipedia or by your understandings as a "tailless" aircraft. Also, I've been brushing up on experimental wing designs outside this forum, however, most of these aviators had built a fuselage on top of their airfoils. By using another definition from Wikipedia that defines a wing...
"A flying wing is a tailless fixed-wing aircraft that has no definite fuselage with most of the crew, payload, and equipment being housed inside the main wing structure.[1] A flying wing may have various small protuberances such as pods, nacelles, blisters, booms, vertical stabilizers (tail fins), or undercarriage. Some aircraft have no fuselage but do have a separate horizontal stabilizer surface mounted on one or more booms; these are also commonly referred to as flying wings, although this is not strictly correct. An example of such a design is the Northrop X-216H.[2]"
A good example of a concept flying wing with additional horizontal stabilizers would be Armored Core: For Answer's Cradles

The Dunne D.5, is a wonderful example but because it uses a fuselage; I'm not as interested in its design. I'm more interested in wing designs where the payload and equipment can be stored inside the main structure. Like the example I linked above of AC's Cradle System; while it is an extreme build the concept is possible and it's one of a handful of designs from other video games and movies I would like to attempt to build...
CarbonVanilla is offline Find More Posts by CarbonVanilla
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 25, 2015, 03:57 AM
CarbonVanilla is offline
Find More Posts by CarbonVanilla
aka Zeal
CarbonVanilla's Avatar
United States, PA, Philadelphia
Joined Mar 2015
23 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DT56 View Post
Welcome aboard RC Groups CarbonVanilla!
I'm sorry for the late reply but thank you for welcoming me to the website as well as the thoughtful advice! The designs you posted are interesting and I thank you for sharing your findings with me! But I'm looking for radical designs that can carry payloads and equipment inside the wing structure. I've attached a few examples from video games as well as movies below.
CarbonVanilla is offline Find More Posts by CarbonVanilla
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 25, 2015, 05:55 AM
eliworm is offline
Find More Posts by eliworm
You sabotaged my plane.
eliworm's Avatar
Arizona
Joined Jun 2002
2,917 Posts
Quadruplane Hang Glider (2 min 46 sec)
eliworm is offline Find More Posts by eliworm
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 25, 2015, 11:23 AM
Stupot46 is offline
Find More Posts by Stupot46
I don't like your altitude
Stupot46's Avatar
Joined Sep 2011
3,533 Posts
http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/n...inks_index.htm
Have a browse here.
Stupot46 is offline Find More Posts by Stupot46
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2015, 07:31 AM
Granted is online now
Find More Posts by Granted
serial scratchbuilder
Granted's Avatar
Canada, BC, Mission
Joined Sep 2012
1,626 Posts
Only one I can think of: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=559186
Granted is online now Find More Posts by Granted
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2015, 10:11 AM
Rockin Robbins is offline
Find More Posts by Rockin Robbins
buyer of the farm
United States, FL, DeLand
Joined Mar 2009
5,395 Posts
You have to realize that "planes" in video games don't have to be able to fly. In a video game a concrete block can be a radical flier without even a motor. In real life, reality constrains what is possible and concrete blocks can't fly by themselves.

It's the same with "airplanes" in video games. Translating the game design into a real plane is most often very disappointing and that's why you don't see much of it.
Rockin Robbins is offline Find More Posts by Rockin Robbins
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2015, 03:06 PM
nuteman is offline
Find More Posts by nuteman
Registered User
Joined Apr 2013
909 Posts
You could definitely get any of those shapes to fly with enough experience.
They are not, however, projects for a newbie.
There have been some pretty "far out" designs by SGTalon and others that fly OK.
Do they fly efficiently? Not very.
Also, you can get anything to fly with a quad-copter layout controlled by a "board".
nuteman is offline Find More Posts by nuteman
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2015, 07:48 PM
CarbonVanilla is offline
Find More Posts by CarbonVanilla
aka Zeal
CarbonVanilla's Avatar
United States, PA, Philadelphia
Joined Mar 2015
23 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuteman View Post
They are not, however, projects for a newbie.
You know, there have been successful people in the world who have had no prior experience or formal training in a specific field where they created something miraculous. I may be a newb at flying rc planes but that doesn't mean I'm stupid. In fact, I did two flight tests for one of my many experimental flying wings earlier today and to my surprise both trials flew modestly. The tethered free flight flew 9 times for a total of 63 minutes while I looked for instability issues and made corrections accordingly and the free flight test flew a total distance of 11 and a half feet in about 28 minutes, 34 seconds with the following weather conditions... 34 Degree's Fahrenheit with winds blowing at 12mph (about 10 kn or 19km/h) to the north-west. The wing has a small amount of yaw sway but it was barely noticeable, possibly the result of having the middle wing being swept forward.

Those are good results for someone who's a newb to rc planes and the wing had no electronics on-board to control its surfaces. Nothing but lead weights to balance the wing and thin strips of green painters tape (no wider than 3mm) to hold the angles on all four elevons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuteman View Post
Also, you can get anything to fly with a quad-copter layout controlled by a "board".
I know I can do that, however, it defeats the purpose of a flying wing and tell me... what's better, having a quad-rotor fall 100+ feet out of the sky and exploded into pieces on impact with the earth or have a wing glide back down to earth from the same height with relatively no damage. I'd rather take the latter than the former flight technique.
CarbonVanilla is offline Find More Posts by CarbonVanilla
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2015, 08:15 PM
nuteman is offline
Find More Posts by nuteman
Registered User
Joined Apr 2013
909 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarbonVanilla View Post
You know, there have been successful people in the world who have had no prior experience or formal training in a specific field where they created something miraculous. I may be a newb at flying rc planes but that doesn't mean I'm stupid.
Peace, dude...
I never said you were stupid (nothing quite like having someone put words in one's mouth) and I specifically pointed out that what you want to do CAN be done - but almost certainly with a lot more success after building something simpler first, barring some miracle.
You can end up investing tons of time/energy/money and getting discouraged (as happens all too frequently to beginners in this hobby).
By your own first post its clear you've never flown anything - let alone designed, scratch built and flown a plane. The planes you want to do are far from trivial.
Having said that, it is possible that you have the fortitude to face lots of difficulty before that first successful flight, and you'll keep at it no matter what.
The route I'm suggesting will be less frustrating and will get you to your goal a lot quicker

The comment about the quad-copter solution was made in all seriousness. It is sometimes simply the most practical way to get a very unusual shape to fly.
nuteman is offline Find More Posts by nuteman
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2015, 09:14 PM
eliworm is offline
Find More Posts by eliworm
You sabotaged my plane.
eliworm's Avatar
Arizona
Joined Jun 2002
2,917 Posts
It's not always about being practical. Sometimes it's fun just to go with trial and error, see how things work out. It's all about having fun. Being creative and trying this and that can be very satisfying even if there are some crash and burns in there somewhere. Sometimes the journey to the goal is more desirable than the reward.
eliworm is offline Find More Posts by eliworm
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2015, 10:45 PM
CarbonVanilla is offline
Find More Posts by CarbonVanilla
aka Zeal
CarbonVanilla's Avatar
United States, PA, Philadelphia
Joined Mar 2015
23 Posts
Well of course there will be crashes and burns, it comes with the territory. As you mentioned Eliworm... " It's all about having fun."

While I don't have anything against quad-rotors, why make it easy? The reason I'm trying to make this thing fly is because I love challenges and this design is a tough one... before that test I mentioned... there were... 23 failures (2 wings flew into the river and were never seen from again) but; lessons were learned and applied to later models.
CarbonVanilla is offline Find More Posts by CarbonVanilla
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 29, 2015, 05:13 AM
nuteman is offline
Find More Posts by nuteman
Registered User
Joined Apr 2013
909 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarbonVanilla View Post
While I don't have anything against quad-rotors, why make it easy? The reason I'm trying to make this thing fly is because I love challenges and this design is a tough one... before that test I mentioned... there were... 23 failures (2 wings flew into the river and were never seen from again) but; lessons were learned and applied to later models.
You are definitely made of different stuff than most
After 23 failures, most newbies would have quit.
I'm all for experimentation (if you look at some of the weird/ugly scratch built planes I've done, that will be obvious).
I'm just noting that if you start with simpler designs and gradually progress to more and more complex designs, you will get the same knowledge with a lot less frustration (and a lot less time/money expenditure). Why lose the plane in the river when you can NOT lose it and re-use its components in future planes.
I have one wing that I've used in at least 4 different airplanes (conventional, biplane, and two canard biplanes).
The quad-copter mention is just a comment about an alternative approach. I personally prefer airplanes with "traditional" control actuation.

Just to give you a sense of how weird the planes I do can get:

Canard vectored thrust takeoffs and landings - huge success (1 min 6 sec)


And that one certainly did not fly well on the first few attempts
nuteman is offline Find More Posts by nuteman
Reply With Quote


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion There are rules and laws for the special people ... then there's us ... logan5 Life, The Universe, and Politics 20 Nov 02, 2014 10:32 AM
Discussion Are there any multi compatible 2.4 rigs out there? N9NWO Xtreme Power Systems 2 Aug 11, 2008 12:11 PM
Question Are there any thermaling flying wings out there? Mchone, Jake Thermal 52 Jun 22, 2008 10:22 AM
are there any realistic flying games for the PC out there?? EABiker Simulators 6 Oct 07, 2003 05:52 PM