Hello all,
I’m a German and my hobby is flying radio controlled gliders. I want to start building my first scale glider. Actually, I’m thinking about building a Twin Hotspur in 1:4 scale since this very interesting and unusual plane and nearly unknown in Germany.
Now I’m looking for pictures of a Twin Hotspur. I just found 2 pictures in the Internet. Does someone know where I can get more pictures of a Twin Hotspur?
BTW I have some questions. Hopefully, someone can answer these:
– Does the Twin Hotspur base on the Hotspur MKI or on Hotspur MK II?
– I read somewhere that the fuselage could be open up for a faster leaving. Is this the case for the Twin Hotspur, too? If yes, are pictures available about this?
– Was the Twin Hotspur gear fix or was it retractable? I just read that the “normal” Hotspur can drop it after start.
– Is somewhere a blueprint available from Twin Hotspur or a standard Hoptspur?
– Does someone know which profile was used for the Twin Hotspur wing? I don’t think that they used a German GoeXXX profile. 😀
To avoid misunderstandings: I think building this plane in 1:4 will take a few (3?) years, because I have to engineer a lot, starting with calculating the profile of the wings, etc. Beside this I have to do my time consuming job. So please dont ask after a month for pictures from the maiden flight. 😮
At the end: Please forgive me for my bad English!
1000 Thanks in advance and kind regards,
Juergen Moors
By: Arabella-Cox - 9th September 2010 at 16:42
Juergen,
I’ve got that fuselage diagram and bunch more printed out for you now. I just need to put them in the post. 🙂
By: jmoors - 9th September 2010 at 16:19
@aeronut 2008: Great! Thank You!! Do you have more technical drawings from the Hotspur? Maybe a view from above? Or from the wings?
@OneEightBit: If I use rib 33 for splitting the fuselage the front section will be too long. Then I just can build the plane in scale 1:5.2 I have a limit for 1.5m for the fuselage parts so splitting the fuselage in the middle (rib 26) will not be scale, but the best solution.
Kind regards,
Juergen
By: Arabella-Cox - 8th September 2010 at 19:44
RAF Bruggen is one of only two RAF stations where I’ve had accomodation in all three messes.
Anyway to save OneEigthBit the trouble of finding his manuals here’s the Hotspur’s fuselage structure.
[ATTACH]188353[/ATTACH]
By: jmoors - 8th September 2010 at 17:33
@TonyT: Must be a while ago. So I know the Air Force left Elmpt 2002. Actually, there are just a few civilian gliders.
I moved from Duesseldorf to Brueggen in 2000 and quite happy about this. It is a beautyful area.
Kind regards,
Juergen
By: TonyT - 7th September 2010 at 19:46
Brueggen
As in Bruggen near Elmpt on the Dutch border near Roermond…………
Well small world, I was at RAF Bruggen on Jaguars for 3 years……… Loved your town.
By: Arabella-Cox - 7th September 2010 at 18:59
Jurgen,
I’ll send you and email soon. I need to go through all my files and pull out the drawings. I’ve got construction drawings for most of the major assemblies so you’ll be able to figure out how it was put together – and yes, where the transport joints are. 🙂
By: jmoors - 7th September 2010 at 18:02
:):) Looks like this thread will not sleep. :):)
OneEightBit: Of course I would like to get your technical drawings. Please sent a PM or a mail to [email]jmoors@gmx.de[/email] regarding the costs.
I built a couple of “normal” model planes. So I jump directly into the cold water and built a large scale plane. If it doesn’t work I will go on trying until it works.:D
Secondly, why not use the same transport joints as the original aircraft? I would imagine emulating the stub-wing into the monocoque would give good strength and the transport joint at frame 33 should make it small enough to get into your car.
I have neither anyclues regaring any transport joints nor do I know where frame 33 is. Is there a plan available where I can see this? I’m still searching for a technical drawing from a Hotspur MKII.
Guys, I love you and I really appreciate your help and your comments!!!
Kind regards from rainy Brueggen,
Juergen
By: Arabella-Cox - 6th September 2010 at 21:04
Odd. I posted early but my post has vanished. :confused:
Aeronut, thanks for clearing up the papier-mâché question. It makes sense as it would of been cheap, light and readily available and and easy to mould into complex shapes. Having taking a look through the riggers notes for the tail I can see on the diagrams now it is indeed a single moulded piece.
Juergen, as G-ASEA pointed out, the wooden framework had plywood sheet glued to it and those were covered with cloth and painted.
Couple of suggestions – why not start with a normal MkII/III to begin with? Surely getting one of those flying would be a better basis for a twin later on?
Secondly, why not use the same transport joints as the original aircraft? I would imagine emulating the stub-wing into the monocoque would give good strength and the transport joint at frame 33 should make it small enough to get into your car.
By: jmoors - 6th September 2010 at 17:49
Thank You.
By: G-ASEA - 6th September 2010 at 17:06
Covered with sheets of plywood.
Dave
Sign In
September 1, 2010 at 7:40 pm