Pretty awesome clicking on this out of the blue and seeing my airplane first thing and throughout the video. Thanks Dwayne! The G-OTWO Defiant in pics in the video is the same airplane when it was in England before my renovations. There are about 25 flying currently. You can see more videos of the Defiant and other airplanes that I have painted on my RUclips channel.
I have actually been in a defiant with an engine out. Other than my heart rate increase due to the red on the Garmin panel it was a none issue. I’ll take that experience over any traditional light twin. How many have light twins have dropped out of the sky already this year?
Learn flying gliders. I really get angry seeing all these video's on pilots who screw up, just because that stupid noisy engine stops. I'd LOVE that. Pick the best spot for landing and land your plane as you always do. Just do it right the first time. But what on earth is different? Yeah, you descend a bit faster than normal. So, flare. Duh. Most planes should be just fine, right? Why always that panick? It is not a tail dragging Spitfire, those do tip over and kill the chap, they do. But all these uliminum (no, aliminium) safety cage fuselages? Practise these power cut landings, ask an instructor along, you gotta be able to do this! Or what? You all can't? Huh? Only the pro's?! If that is true, you really are in trouble.
@@voornaam3191 not that I disagree, but I can understand the temptation that leads to a spin if an engine goes out on take off and that 50ft obstacle at the end of the runway is getting bigger…
Many thanks for your YT ! A sad story about the Cessna Skymaster: One day In St-Barth, a pilot's shoulder bag was sucked by the rear prop that was still turning. The pilot try to resist & was also sucked & killed by the rear prop blades :(
One note, the canard on the Defiant is straight rather than having any sweep. I built my canard about 3 years ago, and there is no sweep. I'm working on the wings now. A few years to go.... Also, one reason it takes so long to build is that there never was a kit. It is a plans-based scratch built plane.
Decent summary video, thanks. A bit bizarre inferring radar for a Def. True about ease of operations, and yes I did a complete rear engine only flight circa 1995. That airplane achieved 155kts on 11gph. Maxed at 200kts using almost 30. A fascinating design far ahead if its time and still rewarding to new efforts lowering weight and reducing drag.
At the time of the kit release cost was high for build, c337 were real cheep and the difference, as I remember, we’re not that great for space to carry stuff. C337 flew a lot in Alaska/ Canada ,Vietnam and Caribbean islands. Fan of Bert/designs especially liked his start as spin testing the Phantom in the rear seat. I hope I Remember that right. I am sure, in time, he will be remembered just behind the Right brothers, and along with all the other successful designers. I still think of an abbreviated Longezee with not requiring a license, just yesterday in fact. (Yes I know about that one also).
Ho, a famous British Airforce plane (Electric, or Lightning, what was it) had two huge afterburner turbofans on top of each other, in the fuselage. Centerlined twins. It is not always push pull. You could also do two engines and one prop, ever thought abought a diff in a plane? Then one engine can grind to a halt and the other engine takes over. Helicopters do that, two turboshafts and it flies home on one of them. But what do I know?
Your information is a little outdated. The Diamond has a twin engine and does not have a problem if you were to turn the engine off. Yes it goes slower, but has no problem flying on 1 engine in a twin engine aircraft
Diamond aircraft are great but both the DA-42 & 62 are not immune to Vmca issues. If you get too slow with a single engine you will lose yaw control stall & spin. Spins in a twin are "hazardous"
@@PRH123 Not quite. There are twins that do not exhibit stability and control issues flying on one engine. Look into the Rutan Boomerang. Where Burt once again solved the notoriously unsafe single engine operation issues present in twin tractor aircraft, while eliminating the noise, vibration, and thrust inefficiencies inherent to the center line thrust design of the Defiant. Don't get me wrong, Defiant is a remarkable aircraft, but Boomerang puts it to shame. If Vmca is below stall, which it is in the Boomerang, regardless of the propeller's direction of rotation, there is no critical engine, there is no single engine handling issue - at all. The airplane can be flown single engine, either engine, feet flat on the floor, stick full aft, with no tendency to depart, and with the ball at most, a half out of center. All achieved purely aerodynamically and without any sort of stability augmentation or other gadgetry.
Pretty awesome clicking on this out of the blue and seeing my airplane first thing and throughout the video. Thanks Dwayne!
The G-OTWO Defiant in pics in the video is the same airplane when it was in England before my renovations.
There are about 25 flying currently.
You can see more videos of the Defiant and other airplanes that I have painted on my RUclips channel.
Awesome 😎
Defiant was designed and built in the late 70's, not the early 90's. Nice video! A great airplane.
I have actually been in a defiant with an engine out. Other than my heart rate increase due to the red on the Garmin panel it was a none issue. I’ll take that experience over any traditional light twin. How many have light twins have dropped out of the sky already this year?
Learn flying gliders. I really get angry seeing all these video's on pilots who screw up, just because that stupid noisy engine stops. I'd LOVE that. Pick the best spot for landing and land your plane as you always do. Just do it right the first time. But what on earth is different? Yeah, you descend a bit faster than normal. So, flare. Duh. Most planes should be just fine, right? Why always that panick? It is not a tail dragging Spitfire, those do tip over and kill the chap, they do. But all these uliminum (no, aliminium) safety cage fuselages? Practise these power cut landings, ask an instructor along, you gotta be able to do this! Or what? You all can't? Huh? Only the pro's?! If that is true, you really are in trouble.
Just curious which, or who's, Defiant you were in. The Red White and Black Defiant in the videos is mine.
@@chriscalovini1258 ruclips.net/user/shortsVu8lb-JjGvg?si=hdvkfwl8-gCeRIEv
I have a couple shorts of the plane flying also. Such a unique plane
@@chriscalovini1258 aircraft was based out of Texas. If you look through some of my “shorts” I have a couple clips of the retrofit and flybys.
@@voornaam3191 not that I disagree, but I can understand the temptation that leads to a spin if an engine goes out on take off and that 50ft obstacle at the end of the runway is getting bigger…
Many thanks for your YT ! A sad story about the Cessna Skymaster: One day In St-Barth, a pilot's shoulder bag was sucked by the rear prop that was still turning. The pilot try to resist & was also sucked & killed by the rear prop blades :(
One note, the canard on the Defiant is straight rather than having any sweep. I built my canard about 3 years ago, and there is no sweep. I'm working on the wings now. A few years to go.... Also, one reason it takes so long to build is that there never was a kit. It is a plans-based scratch built plane.
Hi John!
@@chriscalovini1258Hi Chris!
John, As you get into cowls, engines and cooling, I hope you might out-do all who have gone before in the lowest weight and drag.
Decent summary video, thanks. A bit bizarre inferring radar for a Def. True about ease of operations, and yes I did a complete rear engine only flight circa 1995. That airplane achieved 155kts on 11gph. Maxed at 200kts using almost 30. A fascinating design far ahead if its time and still rewarding to new efforts lowering weight and reducing drag.
It only takes 15 years to build! Get yours today!
cool, I didn't have any plans for the next 15 years... :)
@@PRH123I'm hoping only 4(ish) years left for mine to be completed...
Rutan's designs are all interesting.
Hey, did you ever think about doing a video about flight design, especially the new F2 S-LSA and Ultralight and the F4?
great video, thanks, mate. it would be nice to have the ISU besides american measures.
Great video...👍
At the time of the kit release cost was high for build, c337 were real cheep and the difference, as I remember, we’re not that great for space to carry stuff. C337 flew a lot in Alaska/ Canada ,Vietnam and Caribbean islands. Fan of Bert/designs especially liked his start as spin testing the Phantom in the rear seat. I hope I Remember that right. I am sure, in time, he will be remembered just behind the Right brothers, and along with all the other successful designers. I still think of an abbreviated Longezee with not requiring a license, just yesterday in fact. (Yes I know about that one also).
Actually, there never was a kit that was released. Burt only ever released plans.
Please, measurements in the International System too.. We are in the XXI century...
Ho, a famous British Airforce plane (Electric, or Lightning, what was it) had two huge afterburner turbofans on top of each other, in the fuselage. Centerlined twins. It is not always push pull. You could also do two engines and one prop, ever thought abought a diff in a plane? Then one engine can grind to a halt and the other engine takes over. Helicopters do that, two turboshafts and it flies home on one of them. But what do I know?
Great info. Thank you. There is however a lot of repetitiveness in the narration, as well as a lot of fluff. Still an amazing aircraft though.
It's nothing more than a widened, lengthened Vari-EZ with one extra engine
Not exactly true. It was a tandem wing design with the canard having significant weight carrying function
Some builders are still sanding the wings. Talk about toxic dust.
Asymmetric design? What are you talking about?
Yeah...writer is no aviation person.
What about a remake but with electric motors?
I examined that, but the bats in no way supply enough energy density compared to liquid fuels.
Your information is a little outdated. The Diamond has a twin engine and does not have a problem if you were to turn the engine off. Yes it goes slower, but has no problem flying on 1 engine in a twin engine aircraft
Diamond aircraft are great but both the DA-42 & 62 are not immune to Vmca issues. If you get too slow with a single engine you will lose yaw control stall & spin. Spins in a twin are "hazardous"
Any light twin has serious issues flying on one engine, if the pilot doesn't handle the engine out situation correctly, the result is the worst...
@briankumpan9892 lol. Good luck with that ! !
@@PRH123 Not quite. There are twins that do not exhibit stability and control issues flying on one engine. Look into the Rutan Boomerang. Where Burt once again solved the notoriously unsafe single engine operation issues present in twin tractor aircraft, while eliminating the noise, vibration, and thrust inefficiencies inherent to the center line thrust design of the Defiant. Don't get me wrong, Defiant is a remarkable aircraft, but Boomerang puts it to shame.
If Vmca is below stall, which it is in the Boomerang, regardless of the propeller's direction of rotation, there is no critical engine, there is no single engine handling issue - at all. The airplane can be flown single engine, either engine, feet flat on the floor, stick full aft, with no tendency to depart, and with the ball at most, a half out of center. All achieved purely aerodynamically and without any sort of stability augmentation or other gadgetry.
@@andyamendala6611 well, the boomerang was a one off prototype, never manufactured, so it's not a plane any private pilot will even encounter
The Rutan plane has vibrations e noise too,conventional engine has those inconvenient,don't disguise the truth !