• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

I'm feeling Bi. Biplane, that is.

Which Biplane should I build?

  • SE5

    Votes: 3 13.0%
  • Fokker DR1

    Votes: 2 8.7%
  • Baby Blender

    Votes: 5 21.7%
  • Custom Scout Biplane

    Votes: 13 56.5%

  • Total voters
    23

Arcfyre

Well-known member
#1
Maiden flight was a resounding success! Here are some pictures of this lovely bird in the air. Flies like a dream. Very power efficient, I flew for 7 minutes on a 2200 3S and ended the trip at 11.6 volts. Can easily get 10 minutes of flight time out of this. I need to rework the landing gear, as it isn't sturdy enough to absorb less-than-perfect impacts on pavement. Videos are uploading as we speak, but here are some pictures:

IMG_9653.jpg IMG_9656.jpg IMG_9660.jpg IMG_9669.jpg IMG_9689.jpg


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Post:

Hello everyone!

I have never flown a biplane, and with the recent success of my twin versa, I am now in the mood for something slow and goofy. I've been watching the old build videos and have established that there are basically 4 choices (see the poll). I welcome some feedback from those of you with first hand experience in similar endeavors.

In general, I don't care too much for the minis. I like the larger airplanes (around 1000mm at the small end) simply because they fly better and can handle some wind. However, it doesn't seem that FT has released any "full sized" biplane plans. Of the three mini biplanes, I like the baby blender the most as it is a 4 channel stock and wouldn't need modification to fly with ailerons. I also like that the blender has an actual airfoil wing instead of just a folded piece of foam and I like the rubber banded wings and landing gear.

My other thought would be the modify a simple scout into a simple scout biplane. I know @buzzbomb did something similar, but he used a mini and as I said above, I like the slightly larger planes. I've had great success with the full sized scout, flying off land and water and I am comfortable with that airplane and its handling. My thought would be to drop the lower wing to the bottom of the fuselage, and then add an additional wing in a parasol configuration like a regular biplane. I would also stagger the upper wing forwards a bit for aerodynamic purposes. Question: How would I establish the CG on that new airplane? Base it off the upper or lower wing? Use the stock CG location?

Any feedback is welcome. I also would welcome any community designs for biplanes 1000mm or greater in wingspan. Happy building and flying and thanks for reading.
 
Last edited:

buzzbomb

I know nothing!
#3
Hey @Arcfyre, good choice! I love my biplanes. Generally speaking they're just really floaty and maneuverable and just a lot of fun to fly.

The DR1 is fun, but it is relatively small. I never liked flying the SE5 at all. It's just difficult to control and not a lot of fun to fly.

Believe it or not, you've got some other choices. @jpot1's Baby Blender Extended flies really good, and is heavy enough to handle some decent wind. He increased the fuselage and wing length, so it's not as squirly as the FT Baby Blender. https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?threads/scratching-the-baby.58721/

@sundown57 blew my Mini Scout Biplane up to 150%, and by all accounts, it flew great. That makes it pretty near the same size as the Simple Scout. That's one's high on my current build list. ;) https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?resources/mini-scout-biplane.76/ It also has the benefit of being a really fast and simple build.

@hotwax has plans up for his FB HyperBipe. https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?threads/hotwax-plan-index.18703/ He doesn't list measurements, but his designs seem to be about Simple Scout size.

@FoamyDM's Burgess-Dunne Biplane uses a C-pack. https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?resources/foamydm-burgess-dunne-flying-wing.85/ and just looks like it'd be a hoot to fly.

Alternatively, I've been toying with the idea of a Simple Scout biplane for a long time. Wing weight is what I couldn't mentally overcome. It'd be cool if you tackle that one. That's going to be my vote. Who doesn't want another new biplane to build? :)
 

buzzbomb

I know nothing!
#5
@buzzbomb that's the kind of reply I was looking for! Thank you sir! Some good info.

I'm leaning towards making my own scout bipe at the moment but I want to do as much reading and learning first to hopefully increase my chances of success
@nerdnic has an article on RC airplane design that I see referenced a lot. I googled around and found a thread on RC groups, concerning how far apart the wings should be. I guessed at the initial cg. ;) Here's the thread where I designed the MSBP. https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?threads/mini-scout-biplane.59151/ I hope you do it! Keep us posted, and I wish you all the luck! :D
 

mayan

Well-known member
#7
@Arcfyre worried your plane won't fly? You serious? You already moded a few planes and they flew great (TTT, XL Simple Soarer, Twin Versa..). I trust you'll figure it out. My tip is if you chose to take an existing airframe and change it into a Bi than go by what was stock in terms of CG and then adjust from there. On stuff I did it was about the same as in the original. Regardless a good starting point for CG is 1/3 or 25% from the wing leading edge, just what worked for me.
 

BATTLEAXE

Well-known member
#8
As most have seen I have done a lot of time with the Baby Blender and I found it to be a fun plane. It is super maneuverable and has a decent glide so slow or fast it does great. I extended the fuse by 3" between the wing and tail feathers and swept the wings back as well I had to guess at the CG because of the sweep of the wings, it did move back some. The extra tail length balanced it out nice. There is a bunch of vids on it on my YouTube channel, link in the sig.
20190815_222636.jpg

Although the Scout Bipe would also be a good one to play with. With top and bottom wings, at that wing chord, you cut the under cambered wing tips right off and it would be even more maneuverable. You would only need ailerons on the bottom wing given how big the control surfaces are. It would fly just like the baby blender, given the way the wing is folded on the Scout, it may even fly a little slower then the BB. You could almost go the 3D path with it if you planned it out right, if that's something you are into. Plus you already are familiar with the Scout so it would be a good choice as well.

I have also flown the SE5 and found it to be difficult just like buzz was saying. With some mods and scaled up to like 150% it could be a good park plane. @Tonero311 is doing that with the Peitenpol, has a thread on it. DR1 will be to many wings for a full size plane to fold and assemble.

I can't wait to see where this goes, looking forward to the build and maiden (y)
 

sundown57

Well-known member
#11
Last edited:

FoamyDM

Building Fool-Flying Noob
#12
Hey @Arcfyre, good choice! I love my biplanes. Generally speaking they're just really floaty and maneuverable and just a lot of fun to fly.

The DR1 is fun, but it is relatively small. I never liked flying the SE5 at all. It's just difficult to control and not a lot of fun to fly.

Believe it or not, you've got some other choices. @jpot1's Baby Blender Extended flies really good, and is heavy enough to handle some decent wind. He increased the fuselage and wing length, so it's not as squirly as the FT Baby Blender. https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?threads/scratching-the-baby.58721/

@sundown57 blew my Mini Scout Biplane up to 150%, and by all accounts, it flew great. That makes it pretty near the same size as the Simple Scout. That's one's high on my current build list. ;)https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?resources/mini-scout-biplane.76/ It also has the benefit of being a really fast and simple build.

@hotwax has plans up for his FB HyperBipe. https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?threads/hotwax-plan-index.18703/ He doesn't list measurements, but his designs seem to be about Simple Scout size.

@FoamyDM's Burgess-Dunne Biplane uses a C-pack. https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?resources/foamydm-burgess-dunne-flying-wing.85/ and just looks like it'd be a hoot to fly.

Alternatively, I've been toying with the idea of a Simple Scout biplane for a long time. Wing weight is what I couldn't mentally overcome. It'd be cool if you tackle that one. That's going to be my vote. Who doesn't want another new biplane to build? :)
A double scout would be fun! Also be on the lookout for my FTFC entry RD-2. Remington-Brenelli 2 I nicknamed it the flying camper.
 

TooJung2Die

Well-known member
#16
A stand-off scale SE5 is a good choice. The SE5 has a long nose and is easier to balance on the CG without extra ballast than the pug nosed Sopwith. When built to scale they are almost always great fliers. I didn't like the FT Mini SE5 at all. Very twitchy. Vincent Unrau drew some good plans for a 36" SE5. I made one from his plans and it is one of the best flying airplanes I ever made. Still flying it. Build it light and you'll have a slow floater. Vincent had a tendency to over-engineer for strength.

Royal Aircraft Factory S.E.5

IMG_2470.JPG
 
Last edited:

Arcfyre

Well-known member
#17
A stand-off scale SE5 is a good choice. The SE5 has a long nose and is easier to balance on the CG than the pug nosed Sopwith. When built to scale they are almost always great fliers. I didn't like the FT Mini SE5 at all. Very twitchy. Vincent Unrau drew some good plans for a 36" SE5. I made one from his plans and it is one of the best flying airplanes I ever made. Still flying it. Build it light and you'll have a slow floater. Vincent had a tendency to over-engineer for strength.

Royal Aircraft Factory S.E.5

View attachment 146559
That looks phenomenal.
 

BATTLEAXE

Well-known member
#18
A stand-off scale SE5 is a good choice. The SE5 has a long nose and is easier to balance on the CG than the pug nosed Sopwith. When built to scale they are almost always great fliers. I didn't like the FT Mini SE5 at all. Very twitchy. Vincent Unrau drew some good plans for a 36" SE5. I made one from his plans and it is one of the best flying airplanes I ever made. Still flying it. Build it light and you'll have a slow floater. Vincent had a tendency to over-engineer for strength.

Royal Aircraft Factory S.E.5

View attachment 146559
I wonder how sporty of a plane this SE5 could be. I like the longer fuse scale not only for looks but aerodynamically makes sense. I found the stock SE5 squirrelly as well. But say you trim off the under camber wing tips... could have potential to be super maneuverable and faster. Me likey! (y)
 

TooJung2Die

Well-known member
#19
But say you trim off the under camber wing tips... could have potential to be super maneuverable and faster.
The SE5 I made is a RET slow flier. The undercamber wings help it to fly slow. I think if I was going to build it again the full airfoil will extend to the wing tips and ailerons would be included.

Another biplane plan Vincent drew before he died is the Tiger Moth DH-82. I don't know if anyone ever built it. It has been on my must-build list for too long.

De Havilland Tiger Moth

Tiger Moth DH-82.png
 
Last edited: