Sorrell SNS-7 Hiperbipe - RC Groups
Thread Tools
Feb 01, 2016, 10:01 AM
Registered User
Discussion

Sorrell SNS-7 Hiperbipe


from Wikipedia:
The Sorrell SNS-7 Hiperbipe is a two-seat, negative stagger, conventional landing gear-equipped cabin biplane designed for amateur construction that was produced in kit form by Sorrell Aviation of Tenino, Washington.

The SNS-7 (Sorrell Negative Stagger, Model 7) was intended to give full unlimited aerobatic performance without sacrificing the comforts of a cabin-style aircraft.[1]

The Sorrell family originated from the state of Oregon, which was the last state to ban homebuilt aircraft. Hobie Sorrell petitioned congress for experimental aircraft regulations, and his son Tim designed the Hiperbipe in a series of family designed homebuilt aircraft. The design is of mixed construction. The fuselage, tail, engine mount, landing gear mounts, interplane struts and flight controls are all built from welded 4130 steel. The wings are made from wood, with wooden stressed skin. The landing gear is sprung steel tube. The engine cowling and wheel pants are fibreglass. The whole airframe is covered in doped aircraft fabric, including the plywood-covered wings. The airfoil is a custom symmetrical design.

The SNS-7 is capable of advanced aerobatics, including vertical eight point rolls and inside and outside vertical eights.


General characteristics

Crew: one
Capacity: one passenger
Length: 20 ft 10 in (6.35 m)
Wingspan: 22 ft 10 in (6.96 m)
Height: 5 ft 10.75 in (1.7971 m)
Wing area: 150 sq ft (14 m2)
Airfoil: Symmetrical Sorrell design
Empty weight: 1,236 lb (561 kg)
Gross weight: 1,911 lb (867 kg) utility1 category, 1690 lbs (766 kg) aerobatic
Fuel capacity: 227 lbs
Powerplant: 1 Lycoming IO-360-B1E four cylinder, four stroke, piston aircraft engine, 180 hp (130 kW)

Performance

Maximum speed: 225 mph (362 km/h; 196 kn)
Cruise speed: 160 mph (139 kn; 257 km/h)
Stall speed: 49 mph (43 kn; 79 km/h)
Range: 502 mi (436 nmi; 808 km)
Service ceiling: 20,000 ft (6,096 m)
Wing loading: 12.74 lb/sq ft (62.2 kg/m2)
Power/mass: 10.62 lb/hp








Interesting little bird. This should be an easy build using all the print on foam stuff these kids are doing today.

Is this a decendent of Burnelli's lifting body? I wonder how much the fuselage contributes to total lift.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Feb 01, 2016, 01:44 PM
Registered User
OUTSTANDING subject. Good tech data, too!
Feb 02, 2016, 10:46 AM
Registered User
Airboatflyingshp's Avatar
Ive read a bit about the burnellis at http://www.aircrash.org/burnelli/chrono1.htm and years back I proposed a large Mud duck version on their forum and here ........sadly the new owners don't seem to have done anything with the company. Ive not read of any direct relationship.
It was one of a number of scale planes suited to their med to large paper covered foam board Jedelski wing construction.
I have a small plan for a balsa one somewhere from either Traplet Rcm&e or Nexus?
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/scra...hiperbipe.html
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=821774 float conversion https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=846769
Free plan article http://www.outerzone.co.uk/plan_details.asp?ID=4081:)

The fuselage certainly has a symmetrical airfoil section and should qualify as a partial lifting body

http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/fo...-aircraft.html
http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft...00012486L.html

Bill Hempell 100cc Sorell SN-7 Hiper Bipe Maiden (4 min 51 sec)


Hiperbipe TX 2 (1 min 34 sec)
Last edited by Airboatflyingshp; Feb 02, 2016 at 12:45 PM.
Oct 24, 2017, 05:05 PM
pro vjb
the1pope's Avatar
Nice flying plane RC. I can't find any info on body lift but it has to have some. Burnelli's were pure airfoil and contributed greatly to the overall lift.

Here's some exciting news for those who believe (or don't) that Burnelli's Lifting Fuselage was, and is, superior to the tube and wing.

The first, serious study done on the Lifting Fuselage Configuration (LFC) almost 80 years was done by Reist and Zingg, University of Toronto, 2016. Their findings show the LFC has double the "fuel burn reduction" of the BWB/HWB compared to the tube and wing design. Testing to continue.

Reader's digest version... http://arrow.utias.utoronto.ca/crsa/...-2016iwacc.pdf

Full paper... http://oddjob.utias.utoronto.ca/~dwz...ggJofA2016.pdf


Thread Tools