Why the VK-30 idea didn't explode in popularity I have no idea. What an amazing plane idea it was. It should not have been a homebuilt though. If it were built as a ready to fly plane I'm sure it would have "taken off". lol, pun intended. Not to mention it's WICKED beautiful.
@aircraftadventures-vids
10 ай бұрын
In a way, it sort of did explode in popularity, with the Cirrus SR series. Much simpler to produce, much simpler to operate, and nearly same performance.
@tikitime
6 ай бұрын
Many crashes in the first kits that were completed.
@andymunnings9109
9 ай бұрын
"I like the history lecture on each item presented. You do very good research work." 👍
@mikepowell3335
11 ай бұрын
I LUSTED after a VK-30 in the mid-late 1980's, when I started my aviation endeavors. Sadly, life got in the way and I didn't continue them at that time-- but still lusted after a VK-30. I understand their problems centered around the complex and trouble-prone driveshaft-- but wonder if more modern manufacturing processes could address and mitigate those issues. I'm building a Glasair now, but would still love to own a VK-30.
@maxgood42
11 ай бұрын
Yes I see this a lot in previous design ideas that have a bad rep , we have have more technology now , and or "OK so that bit is a problem ? then fix it or upgrade it" It's like John Denver all over again , that plane got a bad rep for stupid things that could be easily fixed.
@aircraftadventures-vids
11 ай бұрын
Glasairs are sweet! Which model? As to the Cirrus saga...I have a hard time imagining what modern process would circumvent the issue of connecting the distance between the prop and engine. The physics issues don't go away.
@aircraftadventures-vids
11 ай бұрын
They got it "fixed" when they put the engine up front and made it fixed landing gear. 👍
@maxgood42
11 ай бұрын
@@aircraftadventures-vids Not every idea turns out to be a good one 🤣
@mikepowell3335
11 ай бұрын
@@aircraftadventures-vids - I'm building a Glasair II FT. Structurally about 80% done now. In the VK-30, I don't think the DISTANCE between the engine and prop were the problem-- seems like adequate supporting structures for bearings (at both ends) and balancing the shaft were the problems. I think Klapmeiers' engineering was good and I never read about any problems with the physics-- the flight characteristics were fantastic. If I were building one today, I'd take a bunch of lessons from the Porsche 928-- They have a long driveshaft from the engine to the rear diff. They seemed to work OK...
@afterburner2869
9 ай бұрын
Every one of those planes are gorgeous!
@aircraftadventures-vids
9 ай бұрын
Agreed!
@robjohnson8522
11 ай бұрын
I had heard of all of these but I still enjoyed the video!
@cargopilot747
7 ай бұрын
At 3:26 - so true. And reportedly it had better flight characteristics, too. So unfortunate that it wasn't widely available in kit form. Way ahead of its time.
@bravocharlie639
Жыл бұрын
Excellent video, Thank you.
@mariehart4294
9 ай бұрын
I got to see the original VK30 at the Wisconsin Dells airport. It was a beautiful plane.
@kstwind
9 ай бұрын
I got to fly right seat in the Angel. Was given controls after lift-off and I flew the pattern, approach and landing. It handled nicely although quite loud.
@tobberfutooagain2628
9 ай бұрын
Prescott Pusher! I remember that one! Guy on our airport built a VK-30. Never flew. Always had cooling problems….
@thekehoeshow..
11 ай бұрын
Great video. Thanks
@aircraftadventures-vids
10 ай бұрын
Glad you liked it!
@crabby7668
11 ай бұрын
The trouble with single engine pushers is a lot of the weight is at the back and affects the centre of gravity, stall speeds etc. So you have to take more care with your calculations. The edgely optica was supposed to be slow. It was designed for ground inspection roles such as pipeline inspection, where it could take over from helicopters which had much higher maintenance costs. It was also supposed to have longer loiter time than your average helicopter. Really a different use case to your average get A to B type of plane.
@aircraftadventures-vids
10 ай бұрын
Agree fully, not the same plane, but was just making a general statement about visibility on high performance planes.
@maxsmodels
Жыл бұрын
A plane like the Orion and VK30 could do well with a hybrid power system. An electric motor in the tail and the piston engine in the mid-section. This would eliminate the need for a prop shart. The prescott need a small jet engine.
@robjohnson8522
11 ай бұрын
That is a great idea but a 200 hp electric motor is very heavy. Now you have the weight of almost two engines but the power of only one.
@cargopilot747
7 ай бұрын
@@robjohnson8522 Motors produce far more hp per pound than engines do. Siemens, for example, manufacturers a 260 kW (348 hp) aircraft motor that weighs only 110 lbs - about 5 times the power-to-weight ratio of an aircraft piston engine. The challenge is the battery pack, or hybrid drive system. But @maxmodels is correct -- mounting a motor in an ideal location is easier and doesn't require a prop shaft. The tradeoff is the energy source for the motor weighs much, except for short flights.
@blackbelt2000
8 ай бұрын
I was hoping you would have included the cobalt valkyrie pusher aircraft. That plane was something special.
@blueskyresearch6701
10 ай бұрын
I think these pusher designs will become popular with electric propulsion you can center the batteries and stick the motor and prop far aft without a propshaft.
@aircraftadventures-vids
10 ай бұрын
Too heavy to work for these type of homebuilts. At present time they work for small trainers that can barely manage a few hops around the pattern.
@curbowman
10 ай бұрын
I remember a Learjet project that had straight wings and a pusher propeller (or two contrarrotating ones?), powered by a PT6.
@aircraftadventures-vids
10 ай бұрын
Yes, the Learfan I think
@scottrichmond3400
Жыл бұрын
AWESOME VIDEO BROTHER! well done 👍 new sub
@aircraftadventures-vids
Жыл бұрын
Thank you!
@maxsmodels
Жыл бұрын
I rode in the Angel 44. It actually has potential.
@PRH123
9 ай бұрын
It looks tough. In its case, the pusher props make sense to protect them from damage in the bush. But I suppose in the end operators compared the cost of a twin to singles like the Cherokee six, with a similar useful load, and chose the less expensive route.
@BennysThoughts
Жыл бұрын
Wow. You made this ine pretty quick! Thanks for the great list. If you'd like another suggestion, I'd love to see one on ultralight gliders. I have selfish reasons for this. 😂
@DanFrederiksen
10 ай бұрын
The Cirrus looked good and I like the rear propulsion for noise and looks. But out of 13 planes there were 11 fatalities, that's one hell of a record. I wonder what happened. Maybe that's why they have such belief in parachutes.
@DanFrederiksen
10 ай бұрын
PS. small turbofan is the holy grail answer. Or was. We are about to have UFO disclosure which might change aviation just a tiny bit.
@bernieschiff5919
9 ай бұрын
In the last crash that I recall a prop shaft failure resulted in an off-airport landing. The aircraft either hit rocks or uneven terrain in the desert on landing resulting in I believe 2 fatalities. Might have been a combination of the glass fuselage composite construction and high approach or impact speed that caused the breakup. I think torsional vibration caused the shaft failure.
@danfrederiksen1607
9 ай бұрын
@@bernieschiff5919 yeah if it has a long drive shaft that could perhaps create some snapping forces if it isn't rigid or balanced. Maybe the uneven torque of a piston engine. I can't find the stall speed for it but it's built like a fast bird which makes ditching more dangerous. Fiberglass is a pretty tough material so I wouldn't suspect that first as a cause of injury, quite the opposite. But it could have been unforgiving terrain or a stall crash. If you land on semi flat terrain you probably have to be unlucky to die.
@bernieschiff5919
9 ай бұрын
Torsional vibration is a serious deal. Ridgid and flexible systems can work but analysis needs to be done. Metal fatigue plays a part here as well. This was similar to the Veri-easy canard in approach speeds and also has had a poor record in crashes, thin fiberglass as used in homebuilt aircraft tends to shatter and not deform like aluminum so perhaps not as good with impact absorption.@@danfrederiksen1607
@b43xoit
Жыл бұрын
You would think that after a propshaft breaks, owners would be interested in some kind of analysis as to why and some engineering work toward a way to keep it from happening again.
@maxgood42
11 ай бұрын
I could see as soon I saw it that there are no rubbers in the connections , ( It's like a rubber disk with 6 holes in it ) So Fatigue Cracks here we come...
@chippyjohn1
11 ай бұрын
@@maxgood42 Spring steel couplings are quite common in aviation, especially in helicopters. The difference being the powerplant usually being a turbine which has smooth torque output. A damper needs to be used preferably before the transmission for a piston engine.
@maxgood42
11 ай бұрын
@@chippyjohn1 And as a pusher even with a turbine there is turbulent air coming of the body hitting the blades so that will also make it ruff .
@chippyjohn1
11 ай бұрын
@@maxgood42 True, but not as much as the torque pulses from a piston engine.
@ivannightly1919
9 ай бұрын
hard of all of them and seen 3 of them Cirrus (used to be on display at Oshkosh), Prescott (Oshkosh, had over 36 mods by the pilot to cover its issues) and the Orion (say that in Scotland, really nice polish pilot it had a carbon fiber shaft, he cl;aimed fixed its issue), The Orion was a major development in kit plane design its building methods are still used to day Id love to build one or a Vampire a cool auzi pusher
@genxpilot69
2 ай бұрын
If Cirrus ever introduced a twin, they should use that first Cirrus as a platform
@ЮрийСалтыкарло
9 ай бұрын
Выглядят самолёты очень гармонично . Только один вопрос - сохраняется ли КПД винта при таком его размещении в полном объёме ? Ведь фюзеляж сильно его затеняет несмотря на прекрасную аэродинамику ? The planes look very harmonious. There is only one question - is the efficiency of the propeller maintained with such a full placement? After all, the fuselage greatly obscures it despite its excellent aerodynamics?
@artrozenbaum2367
8 ай бұрын
Is it possible to turn off the subtitles please? It's a bit distracting.
@aircraftadventures-vids
8 ай бұрын
yeah sorry, I no longer use the permanent titles, you can turn on and off on the newer videos
@marckerger
Жыл бұрын
not unknown but nice anyway: many Rutan planes and piaggio Avanti:fastest Prop plane today
@TheJustinJ
Жыл бұрын
Those are the opposite of unknown, they are the definitive object when mentioning pushers.
@killerflamingo9566
11 ай бұрын
aspiring home builder here is it better to just avoid pusher planes?
@vick.1349
Жыл бұрын
The Custer Channel Wing was a strange pusher.
@aircraftadventures-vids
Жыл бұрын
Agreed 100%. There's so many more to cover, I can add it for a pt II next time.
@rapidthrash1964
7 ай бұрын
I would love to have my own Angel (with upgrades)
@joanbarreiro3841
Жыл бұрын
true quality concent.
@aircraftadventures-vids
Жыл бұрын
Thank you! And this time I'm using my voice, lol
@mevalemadre6223
Жыл бұрын
You forgot the Lear Fan!!
@clivestainlesssteelwomble7665
Жыл бұрын
Before the Piaggio avantie there was the gull amphibian and then the later conventional high wing land plane.. The Poles also designed an air ambulance pusher . The russians also built a twin pusher light twin Amphibian for backcountry fishing and exploration.
@aircraftadventures-vids
Жыл бұрын
Yes, the Royal Gull! One of my favorite planes. I have a video on it, check it out.
@clivestainlesssteelwomble7665
Жыл бұрын
@@aircraftadventures-vids I did but theres a later land plane with gull wings and pushers that was used as a transport air ambulance and observation/coast guard patrol aircraft .. P166 Albatross. kzitem.info/news/bejne/s6mkyoWIanp0lWUsi=KNBpZRgL4Dv_aSUZ Civilian version but Italian and South African AF / military and coast guard versisions.
@matthewwilson5019
Жыл бұрын
@@aircraftadventures-vids have you heard about the B-36 plane?? its a pusher plane as well
@clivestainlesssteelwomble7665
Жыл бұрын
@@matthewwilson5019 6 turning 4 burning ... featured in the James Stuart's film about SAC ... unlike most actors he actually flew them and others begining his career as a WW2 bomber pilot 😎 respect🇬🇧🧙♂️
@paperfly100
Жыл бұрын
In my opinion, pusher engine aircraft would be much more better as all thrust will not blocked by the engine fairing and the fuselagem and any other fuselagem interference. That's why the Beechcraft Starship was very fast aircraft.
@tinolino58
Жыл бұрын
Get update regarding impulse value of the disturbed air going over fuselage, wings, stabilizer, ruder and landing gear. The speed of the starship is not extraordinary considering the small fuselage and the high power of two turboprops .
@shauny2285
Жыл бұрын
Don't forget that the Starship airframe used composites. As I recall, the FAA certification was time consuming.
@Hawka-Loogy
Жыл бұрын
I believe the Angel derived from Bob Mael’s “Mael Twin.”
@klrmoto
Жыл бұрын
Rohr 2-175 Fan Jet?
@tikitime
6 ай бұрын
Fire the closed caption ‘bot. It doesn’t know what a kit plane is. Miscaptioned as a “kid” plane.
@aircraftadventures-vids
6 ай бұрын
No worries, it’s been laid off 👍
@bitc0inlightningrules423
7 ай бұрын
If batteries get lighter and we're able to use lightweight electric engines wouldn't the pusher configuration get a comeback?
@ethanheath5599
Жыл бұрын
Molt Taylor Mini-IMP and Micro-IMP
@ziggy20072008
Жыл бұрын
Lockspeiser LDA-1
@aircraftadventures-vids
Жыл бұрын
Good pick! That's actually in one of my recent videos about cargo planes, check it out.
@ziggy20072008
Жыл бұрын
Will do, thanks!!
@freddiecunningham2860
Жыл бұрын
The first plane had crashes?
@aircraftadventures-vids
Жыл бұрын
Yes, several
@cartmanrlsusall
Жыл бұрын
Ev conversion would make several of these aircraft viable just eliminating the long driveshafts would be worth it
@ianbell8701
Жыл бұрын
You left out one of the ugliest airplanes ever to, regrettably, take to the sky…the OMAC Laser 300. I actually worked on this project in Albany, Georgia. I first saw the TPE331 powered version in Reno, Nevada. The final version was PT-6 powered…both wonderful powerplants.
@aircraftadventures-vids
Жыл бұрын
I missed a bunch I'm sure! I'll be doing another "Pt II" pushers and make to add the OMAC. OMAC = "Old Man's Aircraft Company"
@bruceferrero8178
Жыл бұрын
FBO I worked for at the time was to be a sales and service center for OMAC. Several of us were at the press day in Albany.
@ianbell8701
Жыл бұрын
@@bruceferrero8178 Cool. I was a Pratt & Whitney Canada installation design engineer.
@BlueAirways
Жыл бұрын
Could We Make A Colab?
@golfkid333
Жыл бұрын
Did we miss any? Comment below about your favorite lesser known pusher aircraft
@FlareAt30Feet
10 ай бұрын
NAL Saras!
@CoolioDaMan
9 ай бұрын
Horrible computer voice…zero credibility
@TheJustinJ
Жыл бұрын
Most pushers are total turds. Not because its inherently inferior. But because those proponents of different designs are generally not great designers. I have yet to see a pusher with proper cooling inlets, ram air intakes, Meredith effect, and laminar flow fuselage, etc. they go to all the effort and screw up the areas that are known to be the areas that need work and will produce benefits.
@daveinstlouis
Жыл бұрын
Beechcraft Starship
@francisvantuyle
Жыл бұрын
The Starship remains the most beautiful private aircraft ever produced. There are only two left flying today.
@bravocharlie639
Жыл бұрын
"only two left flying today". Wow, must have nothing to do with being a turd on a stick and everything to do with poor "genius" Rutan being mistreated.
@francisvantuyle
Жыл бұрын
@bravocharlie639 the wings on the Starship started delaminating. Other than that. It cost twice as much as King-Air C90. Had the same passenger capacity. So it had its fair share of reasons not to ownn one. Beechcraft bought all but two back from the owners. Then scrapped them.
@TheJustinJ
Жыл бұрын
@@bravocharlie639 I don't know, the owners love them and keep them flying on their own dime. So what's the problem?
@ОлегКо-э9к
Жыл бұрын
абсолютно провальные проекты в плане компоновки . Неопытные инженеры поиздевались над технологами . В классической компоновке вставить винт в хвост ? Разнести массу по оси Х или длинный вал ? Чем вы будете инерционные колебания демфировать ? Своими мнимыми желаниями ?
@aivarassaulys5039
9 ай бұрын
Корабэлы как-то умудрялись гасить колебания валов длиной под 40 метров, масса которых на порядки больше авиационных, и не ставили гребные винты спереди парохода (а почему, не догадываетесь?) - схожим способом не разучились гасить колебания и тута. Ваши "классики" установили винт перед фюзеляжем, воздушный поток от которого активно тормозится всей площадью и длиной этого самого (не самого аэродинамичного по сравнению с крылом или оперением) фюзеляжа. Опытный ты наш, так в каком случае КПД винта будет выше?
@ОлегКо-э9к
9 ай бұрын
@@aivarassaulys5039 ваша компетенция оставляет желать лучшего. Остойчивость корабля и центровки самолёта посмотри внимательно. Новатор мамкин. И обороты сравни . А теперь вихревая аэродинамика , которая при корневом наплыве и турбулизаторе на фюзеляже даёт прирост подъемной силы на 20 процентов без увеличения размаха. Посмотри проекты Рутана и последний Сириус 22. Но вам дебилам ансис в компьютере, что палка макаке.
@MENSA.lady2
11 ай бұрын
Usual AI Rubbish, Climb at becomes climate. Get real.
@gavinclaassen6440
Жыл бұрын
Any aft mounted engine design has problems, unless it's a jet . Rotate on take off and your propeller strikes the ground Duh !!?? In the Cessna 337 , the aft engines overheated , not enough cooling back there. In cars , it's an abortion idea, VW air-cooled engines all suffered over heating and lacked power . Then they build a stupid car called Porsche which had an even bigger air-cooled engine stuck in the back where it lacked cooling, same as the Cessna 337 . It's stupid !!! Now days Porsche 911 concept designs come liquid cooled and have radiators in the front to handle the heat generated by those thirsty flat 6's in the back. Look at the plumbing required and the length of it and potential failure points . Well it's similar for airplanes with one extra potential disaster, PROPSTRIKE !!!!
@Pleksilasi
10 ай бұрын
Teach me senpai.
@pablosuarez4592
10 ай бұрын
Anyone remember the "Prescott Pusher"??? I have one😊
@arcanondrum6543
9 ай бұрын
I was hoping to find a detailed walkaround video with a review on your Channel but I'd love to at least read your comments about the Prescott Pusher.
@wokekkk
Жыл бұрын
No piaggio menyioned, day ruined
@aircraftadventures-vids
Жыл бұрын
Got great news, i got a PIAGGIO-ONLY video on my channel, check it out! 👍
@rnordquest
11 ай бұрын
You’re kidding right? These are ones you’ve never heard of. This list couldn’t include it.
Пікірлер