Looks and flies just like a jet powered barn swallow or a night hawk! Fantastic aircraft and superb flying! Thank you for the video and flight demonstration! You should be very proud of your singular achievement. This aircraft flies like it owns the sky.
Looks a lot like the skywalker falcon without the winglets, the falcon is one of my favorites I have 4 of them, but this looks a lot more involved and makes a lot more noise! nice vid thanks for sharing.
10 лет назад+2
phantastic stable and smooth flying model! Great footage-thank´s for sharing!
If ever an airplane that needed different color schemes top and bottom this is it. Congratulations to the pilot for maintaining orientation. I'm pretty sure I would have gotten it upside down and backwards some time during the flight.
Very nice indeed. Looks like just a 6 foot span, but it seemed to fly like a much larger machine. Really stable. That has to be the nicest looking hairdrier I've ever seen.
please could you explain the flight controls? it looks like it has air brakes toward the base of the wings and towards the tips it has airlerons that are also split drag rudders.
The one thing I don't like about airshows, including the "Wing For Kids" program my club puts on, is what seems to be a need to constantly talk at the crowd over loud speakers. Say what the aircraft is and some specifications and then be quiet.
Last year at our event a turbine was about to fly and the guy kept saying "it sounds like the real thing" yet we couldn't hear it very well do to his yammering.
YeOldeScience , The Horten 9 proto type flew successfully about twenty two times , until a. fatal crash due to turbine failure. The Ho 9 had the same engines as the ME 262. A simulated dog fight found that not only was the Ho 9 faster, but much more maneuverable as well. There were a few prototypes that didn't fly , only because they were uncompleted when discovered by American forces.
What a beautiful shape!! A great project especially due to the engine. Did I see split elevons and crow braking? Is there a contact for the plans? Great job...
my passion for model planes was recently reignited. any advice you can give me on the build for a delta wing? your schapel Sa882 is wonderfully stable!.
Though based on Horten-Nurflügels and on the Schapel SA882, the aerodynamic design in the video is mine. I made it around 2011 and built a model with a Kolibri microturbine. Later, John asked me for a kit, which is the one flying in this video.
@@andreschavarria1450 I worked for Schapel aircraft on this aircraft. In fact I was in charge of building all of the tooling, and making the initial composite parts for the prototype. This model has one advantage over the airplane it is based on, it actually flies.
@@andreschavarria1450 My involvement with the project ended after most of the composite parts were made prior to final assembly of the prototype. My departure from the company was not amicable. Rod Schapel, the designer, and I never spoke after I left the company. That said, I was told that their were a couple of test pilots that tried to fly it, one of which was a friend of mine. I know it was damaged on at least one flight attempt, but never new the exact extent of the damage. I think the main problem with it was that the designer failed to produce results, and the project ran out of funding. My friend indicated that he thought it would never fly without significant modifications. One of the main errors was that the engine was a Mazda style rotary engine, that was problematic from the beginning. Had they started with a proven aircraft engine, it may have eventually flown. But the details of other problems with it, I couldn't really say, as everything I know is from second or third hand sources, which I don't deem as reliable. The airplane was supposed to be a proof of concept that would later be developed as an FAA Part 103 ultralight for production. Unfortunately, the end result was that the designer over promised and under delivered. The last time I saw the airplane it was going down the highway on a flatbed truck. Recently someone told me that it was in the possession of the Planes of Fame Museum, but I haven't been able to verify that. I would love to have some pictures of it, as the only good pictures i have were of the original plug that I built to make the molds from. I don't have any photos of the finished aircraft.
You make the plane the same way you build any other radio controlled model. The engines you buy ready made just like you buy ready made piston engines.
tbobborap1 I had a hell of a time with my old instructor's cessna, white on white on white. *puf* disappeared. I covered my trainer in bright yellow and navy blue monokote. Couldn't miss it. And I still did once in a while...lol. GORGEOUS model though! Any #'s on top speed/thrust/etc?
The Horten [1] was a fighter-aircraft and DID fly - and they are not not 'hung on a wall'. The planes and parts discovered in Germany at the end of WWII were shipped to the US, [ along with the Horten brothers! ], and are still in 'classified' or 'secret' storage after extensive investigation. - 11 test flights were made in the prototype, it was faster than the ME262 with which it shared engines, but eventually it killed the test pilot after a flame out in one engine at low level. 'Flying wings' are unstable in yaw and are structurally weak with the swept-wing that was used to partly counter this defect. As usual, Hitler stuck his untrained nose in and diverted effort to a bigger, 6-engine, 600 mph suicide bomber, designed to attack US cities in about 1946 with atom bombs, which Goering hoped to have by then. None survive. The Horten [1] followed the so-called '3x1000' spec. - 1000 km/hr, 1000 kg bomb load, 1000 km range. There is speculation that the Horten was 'stealthy' - and I believe that a full-scale mock up with similar silver-loaded paint to the original did indeed have a low radar signature, except for the cockpit and engine ports. The Hortens were built of wood laminates, like the mosquito.
+belson alan from what I understand Hortens were also a bit more stable than the Northrop models that paralleled it in the U.S. Supposedly the wingtips had a slightly lower angle of attack than the rest of the wing, so the Horton pilots didn't have the nasty wing-over stall characteristic which may have lead to the cancellation of the Northrop flying wing program. That wing twist characteristic for stability is seen to a much greater extreme in modern hang-gliders.
Not reflex on the Horten wings. The Hortens used wash out. Wash out is a win - win - win on swept wings. It reduces drag by reducing the tip vortices, it increases stability and it reduces the risk of tip stalling.
You are correct about the radar signature test. It was enough that had it been fielded against the Chain Home system, it would have been far too late to scramble interceptor squadrons by the time it was detected.
We are building a microlight right now. Some videos of the progress are on my channel and we have a blog hortenmicrolight.wordpress.com By the way, the design in the video is mine. I made it around 2011 and built a model with a Kolibri microturbine. Later, John asked me for a kit, which is the one flying in this video.
Very nice model. Also I've heard this announcer is very well known and has been doing this for years, but I find him kinda annoying, arrogant, and condescending at times, haha. Just my opinion ;-)
Very impressive! I agree... It's the best flying wing I've ever seen.
Thanks a lot!
Spectacular !Congrats and cheers !
Many thanks!
Looks and flies just like a jet powered barn swallow or a night hawk! Fantastic aircraft and superb flying! Thank you for the video and flight demonstration! You should be very proud of your singular achievement. This aircraft flies like it owns the sky.
Looks a lot like the skywalker falcon without the winglets, the falcon is one of my favorites I have 4 of them, but this looks a lot more involved and makes a lot more noise! nice vid thanks for sharing.
phantastic stable and smooth flying model! Great footage-thank´s for sharing!
thanks wolfgang
If ever an airplane that needed different color schemes top and bottom this is it. Congratulations to the pilot for maintaining orientation. I'm pretty sure I would have gotten it upside down and backwards some time during the flight.
Awesome model. Flies really well and is a very unique choice to model, well cool. Thanks for posting, cheers, Dougal
thanks dougal
Flew quite nicely with the small amount of vertical stabilization (rudder). A+ on that one.
thanks
that is the most beautiful flying wing. .and a great video too. .
its the most beautiful RC plane i've ever seen
Very much designed after the German Horton. Impressive!
Very nice indeed. Looks like just a 6 foot span, but it seemed to fly like a much larger machine. Really stable. That has to be the nicest looking hairdrier I've ever seen.
thanks
That flew absolutely amazingly.
thanks paradox
Horten based? Beautiful shape. I love the bat-like trailing edge.
Elegance personified.
I am never jealous but perhaps I couldn't be trusted -:) Just Amazing!!!! Thanks for sharing!
please could you explain the flight controls? it looks like it has air brakes toward the base of the wings and towards the tips it has airlerons that are also split drag rudders.
The one thing I don't like about airshows, including the "Wing For Kids" program my club puts on, is what seems to be a need to constantly talk at the crowd over loud speakers. Say what the aircraft is and some specifications and then be quiet.
Last year at our event a turbine was about to fly and the guy kept saying "it sounds like the real thing" yet we couldn't hear it very well do to his yammering.
The horten 229 resides in the smithsonian archives.
YeOldeScience
, The Horten 9 proto type flew successfully about twenty two times , until a. fatal crash due to turbine failure. The Ho 9 had the same engines as the ME 262.
A simulated dog fight found that not only was the Ho 9 faster, but much more maneuverable as well.
There were a few prototypes that didn't fly , only because they were uncompleted when discovered by American forces.
Very stable design!
Fantástico modelo
thanks miguel
Very Cool Plane
thanks
Really nice.
What a beautiful shape!! A great project especially due to the engine. Did I see split elevons and crow braking? Is there a contact for the plans? Great job...
I like that snr,a little different.Plums up sir.
So how do you do a crosswind landing without a rudder???
COOL!
I would love to acquire plans to make this model
Too Sweet
my passion for model planes was recently reignited. any advice you can give me on the build for a delta wing? your schapel Sa882 is wonderfully stable!.
(only asking advice, not trade secrets) ^^ thx again!
likes this!!!
Toll ! Grüße aus Deutschland A. K.
How did you solve adverse Yaw? is that a prandtl wing?
excellent camera work
superb (y)
Classic Horton 229 bat wing shape
Interesting plane, can you please make a tutorial for how to make a plane like this please.
regard
Hi,
can you share design plan ?
Thanks
Cool.
Hi,
I am intrested in flying wing. Is your wing some kind of "horten" ? Regards.
Though based on Horten-Nurflügels and on the Schapel SA882, the aerodynamic design in the video is mine. I made it around 2011 and built a model with a Kolibri microturbine. Later, John asked me for a kit, which is the one flying in this video.
Now I got my own design. Btw, thank you for response :)
@@andreschavarria1450 I worked for Schapel aircraft on this aircraft. In fact I was in charge of building all of the tooling, and making the initial composite parts for the prototype. This model has one advantage over the airplane it is based on, it actually flies.
@@RandyDierks Yeah, a pitty the big one never flew. I heard that it was strongly damaged while rolling and it was never reparied. Is this true?
@@andreschavarria1450 My involvement with the project ended after most of the composite parts were made prior to final assembly of the prototype. My departure from the company was not amicable. Rod Schapel, the designer, and I never spoke after I left the company. That said, I was told that their were a couple of test pilots that tried to fly it, one of which was a friend of mine. I know it was damaged on at least one flight attempt, but never new the exact extent of the damage. I think the main problem with it was that the designer failed to produce results, and the project ran out of funding. My friend indicated that he thought it would never fly without significant modifications. One of the main errors was that the engine was a Mazda style rotary engine, that was problematic from the beginning. Had they started with a proven aircraft engine, it may have eventually flown. But the details of other problems with it, I couldn't really say, as everything I know is from second or third hand sources, which I don't deem as reliable. The airplane was supposed to be a proof of concept that would later be developed as an FAA Part 103 ultralight for production. Unfortunately, the end result was that the designer over promised and under delivered. The last time I saw the airplane it was going down the highway on a flatbed truck. Recently someone told me that it was in the possession of the Planes of Fame Museum, but I haven't been able to verify that. I would love to have some pictures of it, as the only good pictures i have were of the original plug that I built to make the molds from. I don't have any photos of the finished aircraft.
Thank you for filming this Pete.
Interesting plane .
Nara .......... (◕‿◕) ,,
many thanks nara - pete
how in gods name do you make a turbojet on your own!?!
You make the plane the same way you build any other radio controlled model. The engines you buy ready made just like you buy ready made piston engines.
Not on this one.....the engine was built by the model builder as well.....it can be done if you know what your doing
If that's true that's incredibly impressive.
Anything can be made with the proper tools and knowhow ;)
looks like horton
i like delta wings ;-))
thanks joh
my quad goes 215 km/h, can I beat that ?
Pretty cool, but I'd sure lose orientation on that baby pretty quickly!
same here alan
tbobborap1
I had a hell of a time with my old instructor's cessna, white on white on white. *puf* disappeared. I covered my trainer in bright yellow and navy blue monokote. Couldn't miss it. And I still did once in a while...lol. GORGEOUS model though! Any #'s on top speed/thrust/etc?
The Horten [1] was a fighter-aircraft and DID fly - and they are not not 'hung on a wall'. The planes and parts discovered in Germany at the end of WWII were shipped to the US, [ along with the Horten brothers! ], and are still in 'classified' or 'secret' storage after extensive investigation. - 11 test flights were made in the prototype, it was faster than the ME262 with which it shared engines, but eventually it killed the test pilot after a flame out in one engine at low level. 'Flying wings' are unstable in yaw and are structurally weak with the swept-wing that was used to partly counter this defect.
As usual, Hitler stuck his untrained nose in and diverted effort to a bigger, 6-engine, 600 mph suicide bomber, designed to attack US cities in about 1946 with atom bombs, which Goering hoped to have by then. None survive. The Horten [1] followed the so-called '3x1000' spec. - 1000 km/hr, 1000 kg bomb load, 1000 km range. There is speculation that the Horten was 'stealthy' - and I believe that a full-scale mock up with similar silver-loaded paint to the original did indeed have a low radar signature, except for the cockpit and engine ports. The Hortens were built of wood laminates, like the mosquito.
+belson alan from what I understand Hortens were also a bit more stable than the Northrop models that paralleled it in the U.S. Supposedly the wingtips had a slightly lower angle of attack than the rest of the wing, so the Horton pilots didn't have the nasty wing-over stall characteristic which may have lead to the cancellation of the Northrop flying wing program. That wing twist characteristic for stability is seen to a much greater extreme in modern hang-gliders.
+pauljs75 Reflex, it makes wings inherently stable
Not reflex on the Horten wings. The Hortens used wash out. Wash out is a win - win - win on swept wings. It reduces drag by reducing the tip vortices, it increases stability and it reduces the risk of tip stalling.
oops but they are similar, i have used both in the same context. so I consider them the same
Ross
You are correct about the radar signature test. It was enough that had it been fielded against the Chain Home system, it would have been far too late to scramble interceptor squadrons by the time it was detected.
Too bad I can't get a people-carrying version constructed. Would love a flying wing personal aircraft!
We are building a microlight right now. Some videos of the progress are on my channel and we have a blog hortenmicrolight.wordpress.com
By the way, the design in the video is mine. I made it around 2011 and built a model with a Kolibri microturbine. Later, John asked me for a kit, which is the one flying in this video.
Watched Your Video and Progress, looks amazing! Great Job! :D
Very nice model. Also I've heard this announcer is very well known and has been doing this for years, but I find him kinda annoying, arrogant, and condescending at times, haha. Just my opinion ;-)
thanks robo, yes dave bishop has been in the business for over fifty years,
take him how you like but hes probably a national treasure by now - lol,