Karoliina model 1 iteration 1

Karoliina model 1 concept iteration 1

200 kts with Rotax 914

Specs:
2 places: side by by side staggered seating (co-pilot a bit behind pilot)
Configuration: Pusher with Y-tail.
Engine: Rotax 914 115 hp (100 hp continuous), Propeller: Woodcomp SR3000
Body: 60% laminar flow body.
Body laminarity target: 100% laminar flow with suction.
Landing gear: Trigear, retractable nosegear, Steve Wright noselift. Main gear connected to wing spars at 90 degrees angle.
Wing configuration: Conventional, midwing position
Wing loading: 82 kg/m^2 (16.8 lbs/sqft)
Airfoil: NASA NLF(1)414F.
Flap config: Single slotted flaps with external hinges
AR = 10
L/Dmax = 19.8 at 115 kts
L (wing chord) = 0.8 m
wing area = 8 m^2
wing span = 8 m
Re min (stall) = 1829224
Re cruise = 4217074
Re max cruise = 5586254
empty weight = 366 kg
gross weight = 666 kg
fuel capacity = 140 liters
max cruise speed = 200 kts 370 km/h at 7000 feet
stall speed = 50 kts 92 km/h
approach speed = ~70 kts 130 km/h
drag coefficient target = < 0.016 (total drag). Lower is better. With 100% laminar flow body, a much lower drag coefficient might be possible, this figure is conservative.

Advertisements
    • mterberg
    • October 29th, 2009

    Hi Karoliina,

    You have some interesting ideas.
    I was thinking of something similar to your blended aircraft design.
    Just lengthen the nose, give more forward sweep to the main wings, and shorten the tail. The nose would be a highly swept, low renolds number section.
    This would help with pitch stability and allow for a shorter tail.
    This configuration would lend itself well to electric aircraft. The batteries could be in the nose and wings, with an electric motor on the vertical stabilizer
    (T-tail). The main wings could have some dihedral and very short landing gear (fairings integrated into the fuselage). Is there any chance of getting a CAD rendering of this? I can give details.

    – Mark TerBerg

    • karoliinasalminen
    • October 29th, 2009

    Thanks for your comment. Your suggestion sounds good. I will think about that. At the moment I have been thinking more conventional non-blended concept for a change, but the blending is one of the design alternatives. I can post the Rhino-model to our server later if you are interested or I can also send it to you via email.

    • mterberg
    • October 29th, 2009

    Please email Rhino-model. Thanks Karoliina.
    – Mark TerBerg

  1. No trackbacks yet.

You must be logged in to post a comment.
%d bloggers like this: