First flight of an Aidrome Aeroplanes Sopwith PUP
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 ก.พ. 2014
- video from the very first flight of an Airdrome Aéroplanes Sopwith PUP, Vidéo du premier vol de la Réplique d'un Sopwith Pup, à partir d'un Kit d'Airdrome Aeroplanes
- วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
fantastic quality build with a beautiful looking plane at the end. Have always loved the look of the pup
Absolutely Amazing! Congratulations on building a beautiful aircraft and a successful maiden flight! Thank you for posting this video.
Both the Sopwith and the Fokker DR-1 are my absolute favorite WW1 planes.
Looks and sounds great, great work.
Wow!!! Beautiful!
Fantastic project and airplane. Ron Alexander is a good man, thanks for sharing!
Amazing building one of the rarest planes and F.1 Sopwith Congrats :-)
Thank you. Beautiful.
That was/is a piece of work!!!! WOW tremendous and fantastic the guy who built her!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Congratulations. Another fine looking bird
Dale
(N 17 under construction)
nice work , and nice plane. well done !!!
impressed the heck out of me. thank yew
This is awesome. Great job! The rudder on and vertical stabilizer on the plane look really small.
hola, soy de argentina, te felicito, muy bueno tu trabajo, buenos vuelos
Wonderful and amazing
Good job.👍
ah, found your maiden! Good job!!! Niiiiiceee... :)
Still a favorite
From what I've read about rotary engine planes, they were quite a handful to fly, especially the Sopwiths, from the pups to the camels.
Not so. The Pup had a good weight distribution and a light low powered engine. A sweet aeroplane to fly. The Camel had most of its weight on or near the c of g and had a much bigger power plant, and yes it was a bit of a handful...
The rotary was a bit peculiar to fly compared with a inline engine. The bigger rotary as was installed in camels were harder to fly but once mastered you could use it to your advantage. This plane has a radial which is quite a bit different then the rotary, much easier to fly because there is less torque effect pulling you to the right. With the rotary all the cylinders spin around. The radial the cylinders do not.
@@Triumphs1962 Yes,I was struck with the engine sound not cutting in and out,so I knew it wasn't a rotary.
When ur life on line , they fly’d real good ! SPAD xiii was the best flying weapon, guns and pilot were far more important then pos plane , in ww1 that is!
Good job. From where you take or both the plen to build this
Bravo
Congratulations! How handles the Sopwith compared to the N28?
The Pup preceded the N28. The N28 was faster and had greater firepower but was less manoeuvrable.
Thats amazing! I’m guessing that’s not a rotary though 😂
I think the most worrying part on your mind before take-off was I hope I have the CofG in the correct place as this aircraft is made of metal and not wood as in the early days, I'm interested to know what formula or maths did you used to get at the correct point. Very well done on your first flight.
PM: Every pilot learns how to perform weight and balance calculations using fractions, multiplication and division. The designer/manufacturer specifies the allowed ranges of weight and C.G. A new airplane is leveled, and weighed at each wheel and the tail. Then the calculations are made, which takes only a few minutes.
We just call that the CG.
Pilots are usually not completely stupid.
Gorgeous aircraft, fabulous engine, Pilot wasn't bad either :) Constant clicking noises I found very distracting on an otherwise flawless video. Great job.
Without the Gnome rotary it's just not the same. The blipping of the mags for throttle control and the "missing spark" exhaust tone add that "dawn of flight" charm that radials just DON'T have.
@@waynepurcell6058 And of course we now know that this engine is so unreliable that it should not be given airworthy status, the pilot is lucky to have survived 3 Rotec engine failures!
It looks very nice, but the radial engine makes completely the wrong note, I know it is probable impractical to fit a rotary, but it would sound better.
The shuttleworth will have to work hard to repair their Sopwith Triplane , rotary engines are not safe enough to fly from airshow to airshow.......
I personally think the radial sounds better than the rotary, just my opinion though.
I wonder if you have rethought your statement on the "reliable" radial engine, any thoughts on that ?
How long did it take you to build this and the Nieuport? Which one do you like more?
Does the Airdrome airplanes replicas come with brakes?, it looks like yours has them but was wondering if it came with them or you added them for safety reason?
no, I did put the brakes myself , it is not a good idea to fly this kind of plane without .....
Yeah that is what I was thinking haha, has it been fun flying your pup?
it flew only 4 hours before the Rotec R3600 failed, it wath the fourth failure for me with Rotec, the plane have been grounded , I put a Lycoming on the Nieuport 28 , and now one in the PUP as well , it will be back in the sky in 2 weeks .... waiting for the papers ....
Ohhh ouch, they don't sound very reliable, at least the Lycoming wont let ya down :),Could you possibly make a vid flying it with the Lycoming and maybe just a quick review on what you think of your Aircraft? Would love to know overall thoughts of a customer.
I will, very soon, I will also , explain the lycoming engine installation , it might be useful , for some other builder....
Could you safely do aerobatics with this aircraft?
absolutely not .....
thierryroussel1 Bummer so much for that dream. Beautiful plane you have there. Thanks for sharing with the rest of us.
+thierryroussel1:hello, loved
watching build this airplane
model of the 1st World
War, I also loved to have financial support to learn how to build old planes and
in my case I loved to build models: BREGUET XIV
and SPAD VII
C-1 and the Nieuport
10 and 0:17, planes
that flew in Portugal during and after
the 1st world war (1914-1918)
+thierryroussel1 Understood, but since the aircraft has an aluminum frame and a non rotary engine, I would have thought it was stronger and much easier to fly than the original and therefore airworthy for at least simple aerobatics.
+Adrian Larkins,
Hi, the goal for me is just to fly the plane , to allow the
public to have pictures from the plane on the ground and in the air.
Since now 4 years I am spending my free time going form an
airshow to another, there have been at least to pilots dead a year , just by
trying to show a bit more than they should have , many of them were great
pilot, but it needs just a bit of bad luck ……
Therefore it is not worthy trying, if I want to make aerobatics,
the hangar next door to mine have a nice Pitts.
Nice and easy is way safer, and still the pup had to be
totally rebuild, because the Rotec engine is not reliable, and now it is grounded
until I can find a better engine ……
Certainly not looking so nice, be way safer ….
I met a nice gentleman from Sweden flying a very very nice
Fokker 3d , I does, nice aerobatics with
his beautiful plane, but at the cost the plane is only going to airshow, disassemble
by road, and every few minutes fly requires up to 10 hours of heavy maintenance…….
Not enough free time on my side for that ……
Brakes! That’s cheating! LOL!
Sounds like the cameraman is eating coconuts
Was für eine schlechte Kameraführung. Schlimm.