It's not the placement of the engine closer to the center of gravity that made it handle more like a jet, it's is the reduction in propeller induced yaw due to the ducted fan. That and the fuselage as a flow splitter must have all but eliminated the spiral slipstream effect on the vertical stabilizer.
@@thekraken1173 I don't know that any airplane actually "needs" an "angled engine", but I would say the fact that this airplane didn't have one answers your question.
@@Galil-aces No, it clearly is not. Your emoticon indicates lack of maturity, so I'm not surprised you are unable to process new information. The relationship between the engine location and the center of gravity has little to do with making an airplane handle like a jet. The placement of the propeller has much more to do with it. For example, the P-39 had its engine near the center of gravity, but nobody thought of using it as a substitute for jet-like handling. Jet fighters have their engines well aft of the CG. The CG of any stable airplane will be in the neighborhood of 23% of wing Mean Aerodynamic Chord, regardless of where the propeller or engine are placed.
I'm a German living in Germany and aviation enthusiast but I've never heard about this trainer until just now! Thanks for the interesting video about a great concept. Happy to hear it gets a 2nd chance.
Einen Fan Trainer gibt es noch am Flugplatz Mönchengladbach - soviel ich weiss ist er auch noch flugfähig! Es gibt seit einigen Jahren "Oldtimer-Tage" an den letzten Sonntagen im Mai bis September, da war er regelmässig zu sehen! Wue es dieses Jahr wird; weiß ich noch nicht!
I wonder if they'd be cheap enough for General Aviation. Something more interesting than a Cessna and the like. Thanks for making this video - I've walked past the Fantrainers at the Museum numerous times on the way to more interesting stuff like their Spitfire and Mig 21, and always wondered what the story was behind them.
The photo at :46 looked like an attempt to give a sailplane an auxiliary power plant, and that sleek little Fanliner...stimulated...the pilot in me. That RFB/Rockwell 'Fanranger' looks like an attempt to shrink the T-2 Buckeye down a bit.
Speaking of obscure Trainer Aircraft, have you heared about the HFB 320 Hansajet? Germanys first jet-powered Passenger plane which, of course, had forward-swept wings. The Bundeswehr used the HFB 320 ECM variant as trainer for electronic warfare.
One of those "three still flying" is stationed at my local airport I fly out from. It is currently under maintance. It really does have a unique sound, very high pitch.
I noticed the wing was mid wing configuration., good for having less aerodynamic drag but problematic in small aircraft because the wing structure goes through the middle of the fuselage limiting space and seating to front of the wing. Interestingly also having a mid mounted engine allows for a larger fuselage forward of the wing, so that addresses that problem.
I also remember seeing the Fantrainer at the Farnborough Air Show, in 1988. It was in competition with the Pilatus PC9, the Valmet Redigo and the Embraer Tucano in both its Brazilian and Northern Irish versions, all of which far outperformed it. I felt quite sorry for the pilot. All four of the rival aircraft took off directly in front of the spectators and climbed away vertically to a considerable height; the Fantrainer took off unannounced from the other side of the airfield and slunk off into the distance, reappearing about 20 minutes later at a great height and starting its display by diving thousands of feet followed by a zoom climb from which it levelled out just before its speed would have dropped to the point where it would have stalled.
Ooh! Ahora veo la base de diseño del entrenador jet argentino IA63 "PAMPA", tiene su mismo perfil de fuselaje y planta alar, incluso el tren de aterrizaje!.
The concept is a good one, in many respects. Especially the modular construction and commonality of parts with high performance variants. See, The Aerialis Project currently underway.
Commonality sounds great, but when parts like body panels need replacing, they generally need to be custom fitted by the airframe mechanic as the parts are never actually identical coming off the assembly line, and especially after seeing maintenance in the field.
I really like how you are covering lesser known aircraft from lesser known manufacturers used by countries outside of Europe and North America. Any chance of covering the CT4 family of trainers?
@@priceyA320 I have a fair number of CT4B photgraphs from the former BAE Systems Flight Training Tamworth but I would like to know a bit more about the CT4A and the proposals that got talked about but never made it to the drawing board. I am hoping someone could send Ed one of the Angry Parrot cartoons. I recall one from the time when the RNZAF dropped its fighters that had a CT4 with Sidewinders on the wingtips and M60s on each wing with the caption "CT4 our last line of defence."
@@grahambaker6664 That'd be a static forward OP then! Although, I once took off 2up with the "baggage" area filled with leaky sack with 90kg of Bass Strait crayfish. The little plane that could! So, @priceyA320 , hoping it isn't yours now...
That would be an interesting aircraft to cover. From what I know it seemed the CT4 is an excellent aircraft and probably should have sold better. Its hard for small companies, just like RFB to compete with bigger aircraft manufactures.
Okay so its not a military aircraft but have you ever considered doing a video on the Jim Bede BD-5J......you know,the little jet hidden in the fake horse box and used by James Bond in the movie "octopussy"
One question I have to ask, did it have the torque issues with single prop propeller driven planes , as one would the plane have the tendency to roll to one side due to the rotation of the prop?
@@DavidOfWhitehills I am aware that all single engined prop planes have this issue, unless it has a certain design feature such as counter rotating propellers (such as the later Seafires for example), or have a wing slightly longer than the other (such as the mc202), with the propeller in a duct behind the pilot ,does it behave more like a jet engine or does it still have the same issue.
Torque would probably be an issue, since it's it's not a contra-rotating prop. Given RFB's focus on "handles like a jet, except slow and simple enough for basic training" it's a bit surprising that they didn't go with contra-rotating so that there'd be zero torque. But maybe they deemed the torque to be minor enough to be not worth worry about.
Just assuming from what i know, since the props are encased by the duct, and that the exhaust are split between the aft section leading to the tail, it would have little rotational forces acting upon the tail that would be caused by propeller tip vortices Now in the case of the drivetrain, it's quite tricky, for what i heard from friends long ago, that turboshaft engined aircrafts have less tendency to roll since the power delivery is smoother than what the IC engined aircrafts they had flown. Although im interested in being corrected on what i have posted, hope ya'll have a nice day.
I can feel the engine torque twisting the cab on my W900 Kenworth, I can only imagine that this would be much worse on an aircraft with a single prop. I think contra-rotating prop would be too complex and heavy for a light machine like this?
Always loved the shape and conceppt of this aircraft. It was a great video to watch and learn some very enterrtaining and cool stuff. Indeed the fan trainer using modern technology could sell a few 100 to some smaller countries.
There was another model: the Fankiller. It was a variant with a 21 foot, foldable prop/fan that had the fan shaft of the engine continue to the back of the aircraft. When the pilot wanted to use the aircraft for ground attack? He/she would fold out the 21 foot rear props (made of kevlar-tipped carbon fiber), activate the fan and proceed to mow down any troops that were unlucky enough to be in the way. A prototype was modified and a demonstration commenced. Unfortunately, the pilot mistook the military brass for the 'dummies' that were to be 'killed' by the Fankiller. And ended up beheading several onlookers. Needless to say - this ended the program. Just kidding. I couldn't resist. Seriously, I knew nothing of this Ed. Thank you. ☮
Great video! BTW you have to see UL-39 Albi created by Faculty of Aviation Prague in cooperation with "LA composite" and "JIHLAVAN airplanes" inspired by L-39 Albatros.
I was really hoping for this. That last video of yours was the first I had heard of the Fantrainer and it looked cool! Edit: I've never heard of a rotary engine in an aircraft. Thank you for looking deeper into this! That Swiss PC7 @ 5:05 is just drop dead gorgeous.
Interesting that they're trying to revive the design. It might have a shot at filling its original niche, but I see a whole different market for a slightly modified design. These could have potential in the "counter-insurgency ground-strike close air support" role that's developed in asymmetrical conflicts. Something like a Super Tucano, basically a slower/lighter/cheaper option for times when an A-10 would be ludicrously expensive overkill.
It would need to be quiet if not outright stealthy It would need the ability to shoulder a much heavier payload than yet stated You could get all you want and more form a revised, updated Pucara BUT they shut down production because of lack of demand
Remember reading about these in the 80s, together with the "PropFan" experiments. Highly interesting concept, pity it wasn't developed further into the civilian market. Instead - however likeable - we still use high drag Cessna and Piper designs, dating back to the late 50s.
If they solved the noise issue these probably would have been great aircraft for light observation and attack as well as trainers. The pilot’s visibility looks incredible. I wonder if a STOL version would be possible? It has a high power engine and most of the weight located well behind the cockpit. Imagine a spoiler fin just aft of the duct that allowed the pilot to redirect some of the power vertically. That could substantially lower the runway necessary.
So had the Fan Trainer a peaky power available curve or a flat rising thrust available curve almost paralleling the thrust required curve over quite a wide speed range? A narrow best climb speed band makes it a gimmicky piston trainer.
Thanks for covering this Ed, always had such a softspot for these weird little things but wasn’t aware of their full service history. ( Didn’t know there was a later company- as it happens only recently did it cross my mind the rise of lighter weight more efficient electric motor maybe a similar design with electric power plant might make a comeback sometime soon...🤔)
To be competetive today, they will have to invest into a new fan. The performance data doesn't look like the old one was very efficient. Being very loud also isn't good. Maybe they can team up with a company that has experience with high bypass turbofans.
Modern composites, 3D CAD design with fluid modelling improvements, along with advanced aerodynamics from helicopter rotor tips, ...all together could solve alot of the sound issues, that and a slightly longer rearsection to the duct to shield the noise from the fan tips more. Effectively the Fantrainers and Fanliners were all design wise were barely prototypes, it's amazing the company got as far as it did ! But the design concepts can go so much further with some.. work, time, improved materials & design etc, and money within it ! BEST OF LUCK !
The basic ideas of the fan trainer concept are still valid today. If you think about the concept further with today's technological means, there is a much more far-reaching potential than was possible at the time. The use of a Wankel engine (rotary piston engine) would now make much more sense than it did with the prototype, since the Wankel engine has also developed further over the last 50 years and has proven its efficiency. A good example is the success of the Mazda 787B in the 24 Hours of LeMans in 1991. The engine performed so well and reliably that the regulations were changed shortly thereafter, so that Mazda could no longer participate with its Wankel engines. Shortly thereafter, Mazda left motorsport and of course also ended the further development of high-performance Wankel engines. The "26 B" engine had an output of almost 700 hp with a chamber volume of just 2.6 l! The Wankel engines of the Fantrainer / Fanliner prototypes were test engines from Audi-NSU. They were further developments of the series-built NSU Ro 80 engine with 115 hp. The test engines were available with 150/170 hp and were even installed in some test vehicles. An acquaintance of my father was a test engineer at Audi-NSU and drove an Audi 200 with a 170 hp Wankel engine for a number of years for a long-term test. No problems at all over a period of 5 years and 200,000 km mileage. I myself have driven 2 NSU Ro80. A major advantage of the engine is, among other things, the significantly lower noise level compared to a reciprocating engine. The faster the Wankel spins, the quieter it gets! The high level of noise generated by the Fantrainer / Fanliner comes from the ducted propeller concept. But here, too, the problem could probably be eliminated with adjustable propellers. The company Wankel SuperTec from Cottbus, Germany has developed a Wankel engine (approx. 122 hp) which is designed as a multi-fuel engine. This runs on diesel or kerosene. A variant that runs on hydrogen is now also available. A multi-fuel engine is even offered at wankelaviation.com, which runs on almost all fuels. Wankel engines are now being used more and more, especially in military drones. The motor is particularly suitable for this application (or light aircraft of all kinds). A modernized fan trainer with 2 coupled Wankel SuperTec engines or a high-performance electric motor, for example from the sports car sector, combined with a Wankel engine as a range extender, could be an interesting possibility to further develop the concept. (Especially with a trainer, 2 motors are always better than one...) Use as a trainer for beginners and advanced training, a "flying simulator" for types like the F-16 or JAS-39 Gripen or possibly even as an armed drone are just a few of the options that come to mind spontaneously. By the way, the current "Fanjet" achieves significantly higher speeds and climb rates than its RFB predecessors from the 70's.
The Fantrainer seems less successful than it ought to be. It might be worth doing a video on the Jet Provost (and relatives of that era) which was one of the first jet trainers.
a idea that works 3vtols fan attach on Y holder is like whistler sound actualy two more engine added on a double hold on a servo not much heavier but slight biger tank and wings can slight longer for easier glide now thats scfi made on already made design
I remember these from back then and was surprised they didn't become successful. The Luftwaffe not continuing with the order probably didn't help - it could have slotted in under the Alpha Jet and been sold to countries that already operated that type.
Good concept, needs a bit of refining and might be easier/cheaper to build with modern production methods regarding carbon fiber / fiber reinforced plastics....
It wouldn't have great endurance - but - there's a growing market for electric aeroplanes. A battery powered version would certainly appease the green lobbies so could give the revitalised company a springboard.
I often thought it'd be beneficial if RFB teamed up with Brittan-Norman and produced this for the RAF instead of the Tucano. A Hawk type cockpit instead of Alpha Jet.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
I remember these from an ancient Observers Book Of Aircraft, published some time in the '70's. They looked so futuristic nearly 50 years ago.
Thank you for have reminded me that majestic small white books
I had a book like that too, immediately recognized that airframe.
Yes, completely with you on that.
The RFB fan trainer was a great concept. Cheap to operate and build and maintain. Ed, thanks for the upload.
Totally agree. Looks like the only box it couldn't tick was the one marked 'overcome short-sighted procurement decisions.'
It's not the placement of the engine closer to the center of gravity that made it handle more like a jet, it's is the reduction in propeller induced yaw due to the ducted fan. That and the fuselage as a flow splitter must have all but eliminated the spiral slipstream effect on the vertical stabilizer.
So ducted fan aircraft don’t need angled engines for pi factor and yaw?
@@thekraken1173 I don't know that any airplane actually "needs" an "angled engine", but I would say the fact that this airplane didn't have one answers your question.
So you’re saying that it’s not one of the reasons although it clearly is???😂
@@Galil-aces No, it clearly is not. Your emoticon indicates lack of maturity, so I'm not surprised you are unable to process new information.
The relationship between the engine location and the center of gravity has little to do with making an airplane handle like a jet. The placement of the propeller has much more to do with it. For example, the P-39 had its engine near the center of gravity, but nobody thought of using it as a substitute for jet-like handling. Jet fighters have their engines well aft of the CG. The CG of any stable airplane will be in the neighborhood of 23% of wing Mean Aerodynamic Chord, regardless of where the propeller or engine are placed.
@@gort8203 an emoji indicates my maturity take your meds old man😂
you answered a question i didnt even know i wanted the answer to.... thanks as always👌👌👌👌
That fan trainer is such a cool idea
I'm a German living in Germany and aviation enthusiast but I've never heard about this trainer until just now! Thanks for the interesting video about a great concept. Happy to hear it gets a 2nd chance.
Einen Fan Trainer gibt es noch am Flugplatz Mönchengladbach - soviel ich weiss ist er auch noch flugfähig! Es gibt seit einigen Jahren "Oldtimer-Tage" an den letzten Sonntagen im Mai bis September, da war er regelmässig zu sehen! Wue es dieses Jahr wird; weiß ich noch nicht!
Aw yeah, more Ed Nash. The best.
Great idea for modern electric motors
Remember seeing this in an Observer's book in the mid-70s. Thought it looked really cool
I wonder if they'd be cheap enough for General Aviation. Something more interesting than a Cessna and the like. Thanks for making this video - I've walked past the Fantrainers at the Museum numerous times on the way to more interesting stuff like their Spitfire and Mig 21, and always wondered what the story was behind them.
The photo at :46 looked like an attempt to give a sailplane an auxiliary power plant, and that sleek little Fanliner...stimulated...the pilot in me.
That RFB/Rockwell 'Fanranger' looks like an attempt to shrink the T-2 Buckeye down a bit.
My personal favorite trainer is the SAAB SK60
Speaking of obscure Trainer Aircraft, have you heared about the HFB 320 Hansajet?
Germanys first jet-powered Passenger plane which, of course, had forward-swept wings.
The Bundeswehr used the HFB 320 ECM variant as trainer for electronic warfare.
One of those "three still flying" is stationed at my local airport I fly out from. It is currently under maintance. It really does have a unique sound, very high pitch.
I noticed the wing was mid wing configuration., good for having less aerodynamic drag but problematic in small aircraft because the wing structure goes through the middle of the fuselage limiting space and seating to front of the wing.
Interestingly also having a mid mounted engine allows for a larger fuselage forward of the wing, so that addresses that problem.
I fondly remember that one growing up just a stone throw away from the airport in Mönchengladbach. Good memories!
Who doesn't see this as an ideal drone platform? This is a plane I'd love to see re-examined.
While it might not be a hot rod, something tells me this would be a really fun plane to fly.
Full points for intro joke. Well done.
Remember seeing this at Farnborough. Great concept.
I also remember seeing the Fantrainer at the Farnborough Air Show, in 1988. It was in competition with the Pilatus PC9, the Valmet Redigo and the Embraer Tucano in both its Brazilian and Northern Irish versions, all of which far outperformed it. I felt quite sorry for the pilot. All four of the rival aircraft took off directly in front of the spectators and climbed away vertically to a considerable height; the Fantrainer took off unannounced from the other side of the airfield and slunk off into the distance, reappearing about 20 minutes later at a great height and starting its display by diving thousands of feet followed by a zoom climb from which it levelled out just before its speed would have dropped to the point where it would have stalled.
First time I saw an image of this plane, I thought it was a science fiction concept!
Ooh! Ahora veo la base de diseño del entrenador jet argentino IA63 "PAMPA", tiene su mismo perfil de fuselaje y planta alar, incluso el tren de aterrizaje!.
Only learned of this plane a year ago. I absolutely love the design and would love the fly one. I could only imagine how fun it would be
This is probably the most economical plane design I've ever seen.
The concept is a good one, in many respects. Especially the modular construction and commonality of parts with high performance variants. See, The Aerialis Project currently underway.
Commonality sounds great, but when parts like body panels need replacing, they generally need to be custom fitted by the airframe mechanic as the parts are never actually identical coming off the assembly line, and especially after seeing maintenance in the field.
ruclips.net/video/K1_fXe_CdVs/видео.html
I really like how you are covering lesser known aircraft from lesser known manufacturers used by countries outside of Europe and North America. Any chance of covering the CT4 family of trainers?
Entirely possible one day :D
I have a share in one if you need some photos..
@@priceyA320 I have a fair number of CT4B photgraphs from the former BAE Systems Flight Training Tamworth but I would like to know a bit more about the CT4A and the proposals that got talked about but never made it to the drawing board. I am hoping someone could send Ed one of the Angry Parrot cartoons. I recall one from the time when the RNZAF dropped its fighters that had a CT4 with Sidewinders on the wingtips and M60s on each wing with the caption "CT4 our last line of defence."
@@grahambaker6664 That'd be a static forward OP then! Although, I once took off 2up with the "baggage" area filled with leaky sack with 90kg of Bass Strait crayfish. The little plane that could! So, @priceyA320 , hoping it isn't yours now...
That would be an interesting aircraft to cover. From what I know it seemed the CT4 is an excellent aircraft and probably should have sold better. Its hard for small companies, just like RFB to compete with bigger aircraft manufactures.
Lol I always wonder what this weird little aircraft was doing in the rtaf museum. Thanks for the story!
Quite surprised such aircraft once had a Rotary Wankel for an engine, imagine the noise it must've made in the sky.
The Norton rotary engine you may have heard of in motorcycle form was for years the powerplant in many a drone.
Likely the Fantrainer used two DKW rotors, coupled, if not motors from the Wankel company themselves..
@@razor1uk610 Not DKW, these engines were made by Sachs...
With a large turbo 13b it could have run in Reno Bronze class!
This is still a valid concept, would make sense for a lot of air forces even today
Hard to believe that aircraft is nearly 50 years old!
great series of Fans ! always looks as if you could vector / swivel rear fuselage to steer .
Thanks Ed. Gone but not quite forgotten . I would really like it to succeed !
@EdNashsMilitaryMatters >>> 👍👍
Interesting video the only other ducted plane I remember was the edgley ea 7 I think that had a helicopter cabin they used for survey work
Okay so its not a military aircraft but have you ever considered doing a video on the Jim Bede BD-5J......you know,the little jet hidden in the fake horse box and used by James Bond in the movie "octopussy"
The Bd-5 and its propeller variants are not for novices or beginners
@@PhilipStewart-c6t i didnt say they are
I like the idea of not having the prop spinning in front and the exhaust located at the rear to.
Have any of the kit companies ever made a model of this,paricularly in 1/72 scale?
In my fifty-plus years of model building I've never seen one. I'd be interested.
@@lancerevell5979 yep...its definitly different
Someone was selling a cheap electric RC version made out of flat styrofoam some years back... 😁
@@iskandartaib intresting.
the factory building of Rhein Flugzeugbau (RFB) is still there, you can see it in Mönchengladbach.
Good video on a unique design, on a side note have you seen the Aeralis modular design that is being proposed in the Uk?
Most interesting. Thanx a thousand!
One question I have to ask, did it have the torque issues with single prop propeller driven planes , as one would the plane have the tendency to roll to one side due to the rotation of the prop?
Good question.
@@DavidOfWhitehills I am aware that all single engined prop planes have this issue, unless it has a certain design feature such as counter rotating propellers (such as the later Seafires for example), or have a wing slightly longer than the other (such as the mc202), with the propeller in a duct behind the pilot ,does it behave more like a jet engine or does it still have the same issue.
Torque would probably be an issue, since it's it's not a contra-rotating prop.
Given RFB's focus on "handles like a jet, except slow and simple enough for basic training" it's a bit surprising that they didn't go with contra-rotating so that there'd be zero torque. But maybe they deemed the torque to be minor enough to be not worth worry about.
Just assuming from what i know,
since the props are encased by the duct, and that the exhaust are split between the aft section leading to the tail, it would have little rotational forces acting upon the tail that would be caused by propeller tip vortices
Now in the case of the drivetrain, it's quite tricky, for what i heard from friends long ago, that turboshaft engined aircrafts have less tendency to roll since the power delivery is smoother than what the IC engined aircrafts they had flown.
Although im interested in being corrected on what i have posted, hope ya'll have a nice day.
I can feel the engine torque twisting the cab on my W900 Kenworth, I can only imagine that this would be much worse on an aircraft with a single prop.
I think contra-rotating prop would be too complex and heavy for a light machine like this?
Always loved the shape and conceppt of this aircraft. It was a great video to watch and learn some very enterrtaining and cool stuff.
Indeed the fan trainer using modern technology could sell a few 100 to some smaller countries.
There was another model: the Fankiller.
It was a variant with a 21 foot, foldable prop/fan that had the fan shaft of the engine continue to the back of the aircraft.
When the pilot wanted to use the aircraft for ground attack?
He/she would fold out the 21 foot rear props (made of kevlar-tipped carbon fiber), activate the fan and proceed to mow down any troops that were unlucky enough to be in the way.
A prototype was modified and a demonstration commenced.
Unfortunately, the pilot mistook the military brass for the 'dummies' that were to be 'killed' by the Fankiller. And ended up beheading several onlookers.
Needless to say - this ended the program.
Just kidding.
I couldn't resist.
Seriously, I knew nothing of this Ed.
Thank you.
☮
Loving this, thanks Ed!
Great video! BTW you have to see UL-39 Albi created by Faculty of Aviation Prague in cooperation with "LA composite" and "JIHLAVAN airplanes" inspired by L-39 Albatros.
Great video as always. Perhaps the Edgly Optica would make a good companion video with it having a similar general layout.
Wow what a cool plane
Have you ( or are you aware) of any history of the bubble canopy?
really pretty aircraft
With the military's love for modularity - its only a matter of time when something like this becomes adpoted.
I was really hoping for this. That last video of yours was the first I had heard of the Fantrainer and it looked cool!
Edit: I've never heard of a rotary engine in an aircraft. Thank you for looking deeper into this!
That Swiss PC7 @ 5:05 is just drop dead gorgeous.
Interesting that they're trying to revive the design. It might have a shot at filling its original niche, but I see a whole different market for a slightly modified design. These could have potential in the "counter-insurgency ground-strike close air support" role that's developed in asymmetrical conflicts. Something like a Super Tucano, basically a slower/lighter/cheaper option for times when an A-10 would be ludicrously expensive overkill.
It would need to be quiet if not outright stealthy
It would need the ability to shoulder a much heavier payload than yet stated
You could get all you want and more form a revised, updated Pucara
BUT they shut down production because of lack of demand
something like this en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AHRLAC_Holdings_Ahrlac
What a deal.....Thanks Mr. Ed Nash......
Shoe🇺🇸
I'm a fan , excellent stuff. Ed 👌
I would love 10 hours of lessons in one.
i like this version the most 2:22 but what is it called??? i couldnt find anything...
Check out the Arcon homebuilt aircraft. Looks like a miniature F-22.
Remember reading about these in the 80s, together with the "PropFan" experiments. Highly interesting concept, pity it wasn't developed further into the civilian market. Instead - however likeable - we still use high drag Cessna and Piper designs, dating back to the late 50s.
If they solved the noise issue these probably would have been great aircraft for light observation and attack as well as trainers. The pilot’s visibility looks incredible.
I wonder if a STOL version would be possible? It has a high power engine and most of the weight located well behind the cockpit. Imagine a spoiler fin just aft of the duct that allowed the pilot to redirect some of the power vertically. That could substantially lower the runway necessary.
I've never seen this cutie before. Thanks for sharing !
So had the Fan Trainer a peaky power available curve or a flat rising thrust available curve almost paralleling the thrust required curve over quite a wide speed range? A narrow best climb speed band makes it a gimmicky piston trainer.
Sweet design but wait, what about the "other pusher designs" that preceded this project?
It looks like it has great potential. Maybe it was just a bit before its time. Maybe the second time is the charm.
Thanks for covering this Ed, always had such a softspot for these weird little things but wasn’t aware of their full service history. ( Didn’t know there was a later company- as it happens only recently did it cross my mind the rise of lighter weight more efficient electric motor maybe a similar design with electric power plant might make a comeback sometime soon...🤔)
0:19 Not Ed btw lol, took me a few to realise that
Muito interessante! Gratidão pelo vídeo e pelas informações!🌟
WOW! That's a fantastic looking concept. I am so surprised because l have designed an aircraft using this Fantrainer propulsion principle before.
That trainers call number is literally "D-EATR" 😆
I was looking for this comment!
Hey, look at my awesome new machine, the D-EATR!
@@suzi_mai the fastest D-EAT unit ever made.the D-EATR
To be competetive today, they will have to invest into a new fan. The performance data doesn't look like the old one was very efficient. Being very loud also isn't good. Maybe they can team up with a company that has experience with high bypass turbofans.
Modern composites, 3D CAD design with fluid modelling improvements, along with advanced aerodynamics from helicopter rotor tips,
...all together could solve alot of the sound issues, that and a slightly longer rearsection to the duct to shield the noise from the fan tips more.
Effectively the Fantrainers and Fanliners were all design wise were barely prototypes, it's amazing the company got as far as it did !
But the design concepts can go so much further with some.. work, time, improved materials & design etc, and money within it !
BEST OF LUCK !
Seen so many around here in Thailand. (also the ones in this vid at DMK museum). Odd machine for sure.
The basic ideas of the fan trainer concept are still valid today.
If you think about the concept further with today's technological means, there is a much more far-reaching potential than was possible at the time.
The use of a Wankel engine (rotary piston engine) would now make much more sense than it did with the prototype, since the Wankel engine has also developed further over the last 50 years and has proven its efficiency.
A good example is the success of the Mazda 787B in the 24 Hours of LeMans in 1991. The engine performed so well and reliably that the regulations were changed shortly thereafter, so that Mazda could no longer participate with its Wankel engines. Shortly thereafter, Mazda left motorsport and of course also ended the further development of high-performance Wankel engines. The "26 B" engine had an output of almost 700 hp with a chamber volume of just 2.6 l!
The Wankel engines of the Fantrainer / Fanliner prototypes were test engines from Audi-NSU. They were further developments of the series-built NSU Ro 80 engine with 115 hp. The test engines were available with 150/170 hp and were even installed in some test vehicles. An acquaintance of my father was a test engineer at Audi-NSU and drove an Audi 200 with a 170 hp Wankel engine for a number of years for a long-term test. No problems at all over a period of 5 years and 200,000 km mileage.
I myself have driven 2 NSU Ro80. A major advantage of the engine is, among other things, the significantly lower noise level compared to a reciprocating engine. The faster the Wankel spins, the quieter it gets! The high level of noise generated by the Fantrainer / Fanliner comes from the ducted propeller concept. But here, too, the problem could probably be eliminated with adjustable propellers.
The company Wankel SuperTec from Cottbus, Germany has developed a Wankel engine (approx. 122 hp) which is designed as a multi-fuel engine. This runs on diesel or kerosene. A variant that runs on hydrogen is now also available.
A multi-fuel engine is even offered at wankelaviation.com, which runs on almost all fuels.
Wankel engines are now being used more and more, especially in military drones. The motor is particularly suitable for this application (or light aircraft of all kinds).
A modernized fan trainer with 2 coupled Wankel SuperTec engines or a high-performance electric motor, for example from the sports car sector, combined with a Wankel engine as a range extender, could be an interesting possibility to further develop the concept. (Especially with a trainer, 2 motors are always better than one...)
Use as a trainer for beginners and advanced training, a "flying simulator" for types like the F-16 or JAS-39 Gripen or possibly even as an armed drone are just a few of the options that come to mind spontaneously. By the way, the current "Fanjet" achieves significantly higher speeds and climb rates than its RFB predecessors from the 70's.
The US had an operational model of this type of aircraft, seen one on display outside a Thai military base in Buriram.
A long time favourite design for me, more in respect of the shrouded fan concept than the ab inito to advanced training platform.
I actually still have part of the original fantrainer plans as my grandfather built them.
I thought ducted fans were supposed to be quieter.
Unreal. I said to myself the only way the Fantrainer could possibly be cooler would be for it to use Wankel rotaries.
And there it is.
Astounding.
I really like these planes. I imagined they were quiet but that was probably wrong. Been wondering if I wshould make an big RC model of it for years.
The Fantrainer seems less successful than it ought to be. It might be worth doing a video on the Jet Provost (and relatives of that era) which was one of the first jet trainers.
a idea that works 3vtols fan attach on Y holder is like whistler sound actualy two more engine added on a double hold on a servo not much heavier but slight biger tank and wings can slight longer for easier glide now thats scfi made on already made design
I remember these from back then and was surprised they didn't become successful. The Luftwaffe not continuing with the order probably didn't help - it could have slotted in under the Alpha Jet and been sold to countries that already operated that type.
I love it, looks super cool and weird.
Rick Hunter's heartbeat intensifies.
I believe the RFB Fanliner used the metal wings from the Grumman American Tiger.
Thanks 🙂
great looking plane
Love that intro.
I like it. A little odd-looking, but very much all in proportion.
what is the plane at the beginning of the video?
RTAF-5, there is a link to the video on that at the end.
Good concept, needs a bit of refining and might be easier/cheaper to build with modern production methods regarding carbon fiber / fiber reinforced plastics....
This would be a great homebuilt airplane...
Well, I'm a Fan of this!
It wouldn't have great endurance - but - there's a growing market for electric aeroplanes.
A battery powered version would certainly appease the green lobbies
so could give the revitalised company a springboard.
Genius I love it.
I often thought it'd be beneficial if RFB teamed up with Brittan-Norman and produced this for the RAF instead of the Tucano. A Hawk type cockpit instead of Alpha Jet.
Rotory powered Fan plane. I see that this was the airplane Shōji Kawamori copied for Macross.
definitely seems to be an inspiration for Hikaru's racing plane. and the smaller sleeker thing that Minmei won in that idol contest.
This seems like it could be a great light attack aircraft that could fill the gap between helicopters and multi role fighters
and we thought, only weird & wacky designs came from the inter-wars period .. :D
All periods between major wars are inter-war, unfortunately.
I wonder what the ducted fan might have sounded like? Closer to a turbine or still prop wash.
Belay that I just watched a different upload…it’s both.
What a beautiful little bird…
Maybe because I've been bingeing Captain Scarlet all week but it looks very Gerry Anderson to me.