I had the pleasure of working with Craig Cato in Petaluma on the Solo. American Air Technology. This was back in 1983. We built the Solo from molds and free form foam. The engine was 27 hp. The Solo looked like a Cessna 150. Craig flew this to Oshkosh, and was lined up to land in the Ultralight field. The tower radioed Craig he was at the wrong runway. He informed them he was an Ultralight. This entire plane weighed in at 300 lbs. The very first of a trend now employed by all. Thank You Craig, hope everything is well. Mike D.
I wish I could have spent an hour or two talking with this man about glass construction and getting your life's priorities in order. This is brilliant!!!!!
This technique is a master at work. Forget 3 axis milling. Demonstrated here is how craftsmen have built up the world to what it is today, Including aviation. I learned to do this with surfboards, then aircraft tooling, then 3 Americas Cup sailing campaigns, and finally, built the original SpaceShipOne for Rutan. Its also how we started ReichelPugh racing yachts back in the day. Yeah, computers shape foam nowadays, but in the beginning, craftsmen did it with hands, and an eagle eye. You still can in your garage, and that's the point of this video, to show the 'goons' how the Masters do it.
@MajorLeague cad is all very well but unless its linked to a five axis milling machine then you still have to be able to make the object by hand, was in the prototype business for twenty five years, 2D cad was no better than the guy with a drawing board apart from the saving in paper!, when 3D came along it was great, we could get sections wherever we wanted, and we knew there was room for the components within, then they went and spoiled everything by making 5 axis millers, saw one operating that could mill 6metres by 2metres by 30metres all with an accuracy of a quarter of a millimeter, awesome to see but that was the bulk of my work gone, time to do something else!, a 5 axis miller would have done everything he did and put all the steps and joggles in in one operation, all in less than a couple of weeks start to finish ready for paint and moulding, but not in his workshop and not at the cost, as he was doing most of the work himself, this shows that you can do this without the technology if you are prepared to work at it, in your own shed, more power to anyone prepared to have a go!.
Hey OH7, were you by any chance involved in the single layer diaphragm on the Saturn 2nd stage? I know they recruited surfers to do the fiber glass work, as nobody else had the skill level, or the patients to complete the work to the standards they needed.. no contractor would touch the job, so real perfectionist artists were needed, as you may already know.. All this worry of skills lost doesn't worry me anymore, there's a Renaissance of builders as the younger gen has melded old school knowledge and tech, with info flowing through the internet, ideas, projects, builds, are your oyster, you can learn almost any trick by contacting people instantly.. 3d printing helps too.. Still this guy is on another level, love how he kept it cheap and simple so the punter doesn't need to have tons of specialist equip to pull it off..
@MajorLeague the people with the skill/ talent to work by hand are unfortunately a dying breed, 3d cad linked to 5 axis millers cost me my core business, there will always be niche markets for a very few people but as those people become harder to find industry will change and even the automotive company's will give up on clay, as 3D and virtual reality becomes more powerful and more accepted prototypes will only be built for the motor shows, the
Industry is in a state of flux, but like everything it takes time to replace what was, I had the last of it, the previous generation had the best years, anyone still working how we did is on the dregs, I am not denigrating hand work it is something that still gives great pleasure, but today it tends to be just for me, designers are taught on the latest technology so they will use it, as I said before hand work will/ has become very niche and as an industrial model maker I have a very wide range of skills, skills the industry today has very little demand for, look at old drawing offices, lines of drawing boards with people everywhere, today all done with half a dozen on computers, the factories are mostly robotic, jobs change and some disappear, how many people do you know lead loads bodywork, the skill is all but extinct, roll on body filler!, that's life you can't fight it but you don't have to go quietly!!.
@MajorLeague that's kind of sad, computer designed aided by human!, its like the story of the factory of the future, staffed by a man and a dog, the dog is there to stop the man fiddling, and the mans job is to feed the dog. As for the phone numbers are you sure its the smart phone and not "just twenty years"☺, before my phone I had a little book, don't need that now, until the battery goes flat and then I am lost!!, keep the faith stay safe and don't go quietly.
We all learn from people like Mike Arnold. He's still here in everyone who is not afraid to think. Engineering/Artistry/Innovation/Creativity/Craftsmanship; It's really what changes the world along with Love of course... Thanks Mike, I do my best.
I appreciate the craftsmanship here very much also, but technology is not a cheat, it's a tool like any other. It's a definition of humans to use tools.
It's great this is shared with the world so freely! I'd love to apply this to making road vehicles. Boats would be nice too but road vehicles are more my thing right now.
Sculpted beauty and poetry in motion ! Fantastic ~ Having worked on such like projects such as the Paul Mitchel /Jonathan Tennyson solar cars in the 90's in Hawaii ... best job I ever had fiber glassing the prototypes and shaping some of the body parts ~ Aloha
Thank you for uploading this! This is great to learn from. I am building a velomobile and some of the techniques you show, I think could be applied to that. I am new to this but eager ... I too am carving foam to fit templates. I used CAD to make the drawings (only Google Sketchup mind you!) and from this I am now making templates just like yours traced out on large graph paper. I realised that I have too many templates now because of watching you work (50mm stations!). I can simplify things somewhat by using far fewer of them. I like the ideas of cutting a deep centre line and of drawing lines on the foam and sanding them off. There are so many great little nuggets of info in here and I am still only just 25 mins into it. Unfortunately I don't have a garage to do this in so it's all happeining outside under a tarp. Inspiring stuff, thanks again.
Wow!!! You really inspire me. I love to do that too. I love your patience and dedication. I love your work. Wow!!! Thousands of thumbs-up for your video.
So fascinating. This is by no means a dig, but with some modern tech, this process could be so much faster. You could take a long close up video of the engine in hood lighting while it was on a stand, and then get an accurate 3D model out of it. Put that into a CAD system, along with other things like a volume for the pilot and controls and then form a skin around the whole thing. Add structure and check for fitment and even aerodynamics. You could then either use a large CNC cutter to make the fuselage molds or even just a plotter to make templates for the sections. We really are entering a golden age of design and manufacture.
45:13 For anyone referencing this info for a future build: This spot marks a serious error, which should be corrected for future designs. The C-channel wing spar MUST have the shear-web at the leading edge, and not the aft edge of the main spar caps. There is a very serious reason for this. Ironically, that very reason is being discussed here. But stiffening up the leading edge skin of the D-box is only a partial solution. By moving the shear-center forward, especially forward of the aerodynamic center, this will have a profound affect in improving aeroelastic divergence. Anyone who is confused by this observation, get a C-channel that can be flexed, even a tri-folded 6x6" scrap of paper. Mount the top and bottom caps and shear web to the corner of a countertop. And apply upward load on the free end. Observe which way it twists and consider how that affects the wing under load. Otherwise, very impressive build. Mike Arnold was brilliant!
I sometimes wonder if people watch things all the way through before commenting. The man did a foam/glass plane and broken a record, hit over 200mph with 65hp and his hands. I'm sure he never needed any help from 3D softwares.
Unicorn Automotive#1 absolutely true,that plane looked spectacular,something Mr CAD and CAM from the eighties,will never Know,because he has no hand eye co-ordination,and probably no heart as he had to verbalise the skill he has in CAD.
Using extruded polystyrene foam as a core for sandwich composites is not something that should be promoted. Its shear strength is woefully inferior to proper core materials. The AR-5 was frighteningly experimental.
Ever heard of Burt Rutan? Lots of his planes used extruded polystyrene for the core...yup it has low shear strength but thick enough so it works in small planes
I agree with your comment, but with a minor correction. He says at 1:20 the engine is a 200CI Continental, which is an “O-200”. They typically produce at least 100HP, but are often modified to produce far more HP in these pylon racers. That said, the C-65 is an amazing engine - one of my favorites, and it is has an amazing performance record.
An excellent and valuable video on the old school way. I'm not cyborg enough at this point in my life to learn CAD. It would require about a year of my life to learn. I make sculpture and don't want my art to look like it was put together using ''nurb'' lines. I could name any make of car when I was 5 years old. As an adult car enthusiast I can't do that today. The jaguar XKE is still the most beautiful car in the world, and it was designed by human hands using clay.
Mmazing ! 🤓 You have done an incredible job. The result is staggering. BRAVO ! 👍😎 That’s what the old school means. 1) Diligence. 2) Adoption of rational ideas. 3) Iron patience. P.S.This is how I made my air model Quickie Q2 1:6
Thanks for the video! Very cool craftsmanship, and highly practical. Though today, the cost of laser and other 3-D scanners, and CNC milling of foam plugs probably makes them simpler, cheaper and faster, it's definitely good to know how to do it without those, if nothing else, for historical background. P.S. AR-6 is beautiful.
I think, making molds or any kind will continue to be an art. Computers might do 3d and calculations better than men. But man still have hands, eyes and incredible brains, that computers simplu not even close to having.
Though; high rate production moulds are made directly out of Aluminium with multiaxis milling (no need to stop at 5 axes) (The models are made with human ingenuity, even if that just means a detailed spec. and allowing machine optimisation to hit the right spot.) The human "art" comes back in when assembling the final parts to blend in all the seams and "achieve perfection" in paint.
From these informative and sincerely descriptive videos will come some prolific designers and designs, now and for many years to come - of this, I have no doubt, that is your proud legacy Mr Arnold! I myself am researching and studying for an upcoming build of an all-new design that I hope will be the first of many as the culmination of a life-long obsessive passion. As the son of a carpenter I have always appreciated the art of 'eyeing' your work and shaping by hand. I noticed some of the finer details of this AR-6 design and thought it worth bringing up for comment or response: 1.Firstly and because this is one of the fundamental points of consideration in my designs, is the airfoil. I noticed at 26:44 a very clear indication of what looks to be a fully laminar flow airfoil (at least at the root, presumably carried through the full span?) what would be the thinking behind that, would it be to maximize cruising speed, would it not sacrifice handling or performance at lower speeds, critical for a heavy wing loading? Just about every laminar wing I can think of employs a large and cumbersom flap system to improve low speed, provide necessary lift on take off and bring flight speeds down on landing, but I don't see such a system, on the AR6? 2.I notice too that in relation to the plug axis the airfoil at the root is not set at any discernable positive (or negative) angle of incidence -AoA, I know that technically this angle is measured against that of the stab but to maximize speed the closer to nuetral the stab incidence is the less drag is induced which I know is something he was obsessively concerned with to the enth degree. 3. I know he touches on this in more than one of his videos but perhaps someone can contribute as to why he chose fixed gear. For a man obsessed with reducing drag and commissioned to build a machine to go faster than any other surely the weight and complexity of a basic retractable system - even if only for the main gear with a streamlined tail wheel would be negated by the gains in speed and drag reduction? I would ask Mr Van that same thing if he were obsessed with speed but RV'S are built for rugged spritely performance not ultimate record breaking speed. I have many, many more questions that had circumstance allowed I would have mailed to Mr Arnold but in lieue of that is there perhaps someone as knowledgable or who has insight into or familiarity with his thinkling and processes who can possibly answer some questions?
Allow Me to attempt an explanation: Form follows function. The AR-5 was meant to be a sport plane with good performance having little horsepower. It went about as fast as the Vans RVs but with only 1/3rd the power.😮 Based on his article(s) Mike simply realized it had potential to break the newly established sub-300kg speed record, so he did. This video documents the AR-6 construction, which was purpose built for IF1 air racing, and flew many times at Reno Stead airport and several other venues. Race planes generally omit flaps. They add weight, and gaps create drag. There is no requirement for slow landing speed in air racing. The wing area is defined as no less than 66sqft. Minimum weight must be 500 empty, and a minimum pilot weight of 160lbs. This is a large wing for this weight, giving only 10lb/ft of wing loading. which is very light loading. So No need for flaps. And at the speed these aircraft race at (230-260mph) even at higher elevations, the large wing, lightly loaded, only needs about 1/2 a degree of incidence for level flight. And yes, that is a Laminar flow airfoil. You can see another view of leading edge at 21:22. It was described by Mike Arnold in a talk or article, as a "Harry Riblet" airfoil. But this is not true, although He apparently modified it for softer stalls. He was not capable of generating that specific shape, because Riblet had a distain for inverse design, based on a cursory read of his half baked book. The airfoil is in fact an NLF-0414F designed by a genius aerodynamicists named J.K. Viken and is an evolution of his early work and masters thesis. It was later studied and adopted by NASA. But this AR-6 airfoil has most or all of the camber removed and no flap. This Mod was actually performed by another aerodynamicist for John Sharp of Nemesis air racing for the DR-90. An article detailing this exact airfoil: Lednicer, David A. "Fluid Dynamic Analysis of Nemesis and Shadow" EAA Sport Aviation, August 1997. The basic NLF-0414F generates about as much lift as a standard NACA 4-digit airfoil dose WITH a flap deflected.😮 But removing the camber reduces max lift quite a bit. The NLF-0414 is Still a good airfoil without camber, because the leading edge shape was blunted to improve the stall. Loooong before Riblet ever got ahold of it to modify it. While this modified NLF airfoil or some near approximation of it has flown on the two fastest F1 race planes ever. It is actually not optimal for pylon racing. The original ordinates can be found in a hidden gem of a free download of the Eppler profil code which was modified by the late John Roncz, another aerodynamic genius beyond belief. That download is available from PDAS site if you go looking for the Eppler code there. Anyone that seeks a truly optimal airfoil for Reno, or wherever the next venue will be, needs a 100% inverse-designed foil that is fully optimized for the rigor of closed course pylon racing.
Un espectaculo, de hecho esto haciendo uno para Rc en base a fotografias. Es un modelo aerodinamicamente perfecto, no hay nada parecido en el mundo de la aviacion.. Felicitaciones..
One of the most fascinating videos I’ve seen in a long time. Amazing skills dedication and attention to detail and I absolutely love. I’m retired from aerospace I built many planes in my garage unfortunately the largest one was 1/3 scale. But I did fly each and everyone of them, I just wasn’t inside the aircraft but I dreamt of it. I have a pilot 172 and a piper cub. But I’ve built some amazing aircraft that I only wish I could’ve ridden in , As pilot of course!
That was amazing. I learned so much watching this video! Thank you very much for sharing it. I would like to have seen the details of how the canopy was made and attached. I would also like to have seen how the cockpit was sized. He spent so much time sizing the engine area (I understand why that is really important of course), but no time at all on sizing of the cockpit. I could not help but think of Michelangelo at work on a statue! Thanks again for sharing!
Surely the cockpit was sized to flyers or some median value (or a specific pilot or two). Canopy was probably molded from a plug. Canopies can be outsourced. Update: A description of the canopy mold is at 39:40. It's taken from the plug.
Beautiful aircraft, exquisite craftsmanship and a great example to us today of what can be done with traditional tools in the garage. A sincere question; does one think that using modern methods, CAD / CAM, CNC tooling, machining, 3D printing, laser cutting etc is LESS of an art or craft than these traditional methods. All of these modern tools require hard work to master and expertise learned over many mistakes to conquer. This is especially of interest to me as these modern tools are available to he hobbyist, even sometimes designed and constructed oneself ( like my 3D printer and CNC machine)?
Sadly, Michael Arnold's web site was removed about a year after his death in October of 2015. It was a treasure trove of information and photographs. However, these videos still remain. He used to sell them as DVD's but when he became ill, requested they be posted on You Tube. He considered them to be his legacy.
Some of the comments are funny... There is nothing wrong with doing things the old school way, and in all honesty doing it that way the first time usually discloses some things that otherwise may have been missed or not thought about as intricately, vs starting from an automated beginning,. However the "Masters" as some of you put it, AKA "hand built craftsman" that still do things that way in today's environment usually lacks the computer/CAD/CAM knowledge and diverts to what they are capable of to get by in such ways, which speaks a lot about their "just do it" mentality. I admire that in a person and have done things that way most of my life. However over the last eight years I have taught myself how to be quite efficient with CAD software and have since built a couple CNC units and laser cutters from scratch more or less. That being said, there is no turning back once you know how to utilize such tools. You just cannot do what an automated machine/system can produce, nor get the level of perfection by hand within reasonable time if it has any complexity to it. For some reason it seems like the baby boomer generation has chosen to leave themselves behind in lieu of pride, as if they cannot learn anything past what they did before PC's where a house hold item. Alternately, the millennial's may be ever worse with their crybaby attitudes that keep them scared of getting their hands dirty enough to actually learn a craftsman type of trade, thanks to being born with a smart phone in their hands. I feel very lucky to be a part of "Generation X" (1982), as this seems sadly to be only generation that had the opportunity to see things from both sides for equal utilization. I would play outside in the dirt and kick the neighborhood bully's ass with sticks, before going inside to play around with my Windows 95 PC before going to bed each night.
nice I guess for a garage project, but I would have given this to a numerical control shop with mold purposed foam or even wood to make the mold. Nothing to detract from the efforts and techniques of Mr. Arnold. But for others who may want to embark on a project like this, it doesn't cost that much and you'll have a nice symmetrical fuselage that conforms to your CFD work. Then the only questions are were your assumptions right in modeling for CFD as to being on condition with Re No., cruise condition of speed angle of attack and altitude, and did you choose the right combo of engine and prop to make that happen at those conditions.
No surprise www.AR-5.com no longer works. I guess Mike Arnold has gone out of business. Such a shame as he does amazing work. If you are out there Mike.... Thank you for video taping this process and sharing it with us.
Love it , I can do the same with the help of God ALMIGHTY. 👍 I wounder if this gentleman is still with us. Thank you men sincerely Bill Iannucci. CHEERS.
So, when you said you're leaving just enough room for the Pilot's head, what the Pilot is going to be doing, in essence, is strapping on the Plane like it's an extension of his body. I like that theory, I like the overall shape and form of the craft. This is my first time on your channel and aircraft is my favorite subject. Thank you for allowing me to observe your artwork. I've subbed and clicked on the bell and left a thumbs up.
Great video! The community is such a better place because of Mike's contributions. Rest in Peace!
These build series are awesome! Doing my first plug, mold, composite fuselage for my model planes and watching this between lay ups.
I had the pleasure of working with Craig Cato in Petaluma on the Solo. American Air Technology. This was back in 1983. We built the Solo from molds and free form foam. The engine was 27 hp. The Solo looked like a Cessna 150. Craig flew this to Oshkosh, and was lined up to land in the Ultralight field. The tower radioed Craig he was at the wrong runway. He informed them he was an Ultralight. This entire plane weighed in at 300 lbs. The very first of a trend now employed by all. Thank You Craig, hope everything is well. Mike D.
Absolutely epic, this man is a true artisan. Pure passion, love the commentary. Absolutely perfect.
Everybody say it with me.... DUCT tape.
I wish I'd watch this video 100 hours ago when I started applying Bondo to my kayak mold. Great tips.
I wish I could have spent an hour or two talking with this man about glass construction and getting your life's priorities in order. This is brilliant!!!!!
This technique is a master at work. Forget 3 axis milling. Demonstrated here is how craftsmen have built up the world to what it is today, Including aviation. I learned to do this with surfboards, then aircraft tooling, then 3 Americas Cup sailing campaigns, and finally, built the original SpaceShipOne for Rutan. Its also how we started ReichelPugh racing yachts back in the day. Yeah, computers shape foam nowadays, but in the beginning, craftsmen did it with hands, and an eagle eye. You still can in your garage, and that's the point of this video, to show the 'goons' how the Masters do it.
@MajorLeague cad is all very well but unless its linked to a five axis milling machine then you still have to be able to make the object by hand, was in the prototype business for twenty five years, 2D cad was no better than the guy with a drawing board apart from the saving in paper!, when 3D came along it was great, we could get sections wherever we wanted, and we knew there was room for the components within, then they went and spoiled everything by making 5 axis millers, saw one operating that could mill 6metres by 2metres by 30metres all with an accuracy of a quarter of a millimeter, awesome to see but that was the bulk of my work gone, time to do something else!, a 5 axis miller would have done everything he did and put all the steps and joggles in in one operation, all in less than a couple of weeks start to finish ready for paint and moulding, but not in his workshop and not at the cost, as he was doing most of the work himself, this shows that you can do this without the technology if you are prepared to work at it, in your own shed, more power to anyone prepared to have a go!.
Hey OH7, were you by any chance involved in the single layer diaphragm on the Saturn 2nd stage? I know they recruited surfers to do the fiber glass work, as nobody else had the skill level, or the patients to complete the work to the standards they needed.. no contractor would touch the job, so real perfectionist artists were needed, as you may already know..
All this worry of skills lost doesn't worry me anymore, there's a Renaissance of builders as the younger gen has melded old school knowledge and tech, with info flowing through the internet, ideas, projects, builds, are your oyster, you can learn almost any trick by contacting people instantly.. 3d printing helps too..
Still this guy is on another level, love how he kept it cheap and simple so the punter doesn't need to have tons of specialist equip to pull it off..
@MajorLeague the people with the skill/ talent to work by hand are unfortunately a dying breed, 3d cad linked to 5 axis millers cost me my core business, there will always be niche markets for a very few people but as those people become harder to find industry will change and even the automotive company's will give up on clay, as 3D and virtual reality becomes more powerful and more accepted prototypes will only be built for the motor shows, the
Industry is in a state of flux, but like everything it takes time to replace what was, I had the last of it, the previous generation had the best years, anyone still working how we did is on the dregs, I am not denigrating hand work it is something that still gives great pleasure, but today it tends to be just for me, designers are taught on the latest technology so they will use it, as I said before hand work will/ has become very niche and as an industrial model maker I have a very wide range of skills, skills the industry today has very little demand for, look at old drawing offices, lines of drawing boards with people everywhere, today all done with half a dozen on computers, the factories are mostly robotic, jobs change and some disappear, how many people do you know lead loads bodywork, the skill is all but extinct, roll on body filler!, that's life you can't fight it but you don't have to go quietly!!.
@MajorLeague that's kind of sad, computer designed aided by human!, its like the story of the factory of the future, staffed by a man and a dog, the dog is there to stop the man fiddling, and the mans job is to feed the dog. As for the phone numbers are you sure its the smart phone and not "just twenty years"☺, before my phone I had a little book, don't need that now, until the battery goes flat and then I am lost!!, keep the faith stay safe and don't go quietly.
You did an excellent on chronicling this process. Thank you for this truly invaluable contribution to the aviation community!
One of the best YT tutorials ever.
We all learn from people like Mike Arnold. He's still here in everyone who is not afraid to think. Engineering/Artistry/Innovation/Creativity/Craftsmanship; It's really what changes the world along with Love of course... Thanks Mike, I do my best.
Very sweet comment. Thank you for what you said about Mike.
Good lord, this is such a beautiful airplane! Everything about it, from the meticulous construction/sanding to the finish product. Gorgeous!
True artwork. The time and energy put into this beautiful plane. It's amazing.
I appreciate the incredible amount of craftsmanship here. It just shows that not everything needs a technology cheat. EXCELLENT VIDEO.
I appreciate the craftsmanship here very much also, but technology is not a cheat, it's a tool like any other. It's a definition of humans to use tools.
It's great this is shared with the world so freely! I'd love to apply this to making road vehicles. Boats would be nice too but road vehicles are more my thing right now.
Mike Arnolds work was amazing, a true inspiration to all.
Jeez, bless this guy and the result of his hard work! Increadible!
So talented and a beautiful plane. Mr. Arnold is truly a master of his trade.
The best video i have ever seen. This what it is truely: Hardwork and determination truely pays off one or the other day...
Sculpted beauty and poetry in motion ! Fantastic ~ Having worked on such like projects such as the Paul Mitchel /Jonathan Tennyson solar cars in the 90's in Hawaii ... best job I ever had fiber glassing the prototypes and shaping some of the body parts ~ Aloha
I cant say enough about the sheer determination to create something amazing from an idea
E wry time I watch this I find another thing that I need to remember to do. The craftsmanship involved here is amazing, I wish I were half as good.
I remember that man @ sun n fun,, rip. Use to stand a listen when he spoke. The good die young. I Started sun n fun in 92’.
Thank you for uploading this! This is great to learn from. I am building a velomobile and some of the techniques you show, I think could be applied to that. I am new to this but eager ...
I too am carving foam to fit templates. I used CAD to make the drawings (only Google Sketchup mind you!) and from this I am now making templates just like yours traced out on large graph paper. I realised that I have too many templates now because of watching you work (50mm stations!). I can simplify things somewhat by using far fewer of them. I like the ideas of cutting a deep centre line and of drawing lines on the foam and sanding them off. There are so many great little nuggets of info in here and I am still only just 25 mins into it. Unfortunately I don't have a garage to do this in so it's all happeining outside under a tarp. Inspiring stuff, thanks again.
Wonderful documentary. Beautiful design and mold fabrication Mike!
A great video showing artisans at work. Fabulous!
Wow!!! You really inspire me. I love to do that too. I love your patience and dedication. I love your work. Wow!!! Thousands of thumbs-up for your video.
Nice craftsmanship excellent video.
Thank you for sharing this video I thoroughly enjoyed it.
BEST VID ON THIS SUBJECT SUBJECT. I GOT OF ON HOW HE DEVELOPED HIS CROSS SECTIONS, FROM A VERY SMALL MODEL HE MADE OF STYRO FOAM. TOTALY AMAZING
A master craftsman,using traditional techniques,
Few people achieve and attention to detail and high standard that Mr. Arnold did with his 2 designs.
So fascinating. This is by no means a dig, but with some modern tech, this process could be so much faster. You could take a long close up video of the engine in hood lighting while it was on a stand, and then get an accurate 3D model out of it. Put that into a CAD system, along with other things like a volume for the pilot and controls and then form a skin around the whole thing. Add structure and check for fitment and even aerodynamics. You could then either use a large CNC cutter to make the fuselage molds or even just a plotter to make templates for the sections. We really are entering a golden age of design and manufacture.
This was the kind of guy I would have pay just to be in his shop while he worked.
Check out the Scrappy build by Mike Patey.
Thank god for CNC machines.
This video is a seminar on designing, molding and fiberglass in a short two hours. Mike must have been a great guy, would have liked to know him!
GENIAL FELICITACONES
Love the video! Amazing looking plane! But half way through it reminds me of a clown shoe!
Very Fascinating, thanks for posting.
One of my favorite videos
45:13 For anyone referencing this info for a future build: This spot marks a serious error, which should be corrected for future designs. The C-channel wing spar MUST have the shear-web at the leading edge, and not the aft edge of the main spar caps.
There is a very serious reason for this. Ironically, that very reason is being discussed here. But stiffening up the leading edge skin of the D-box is only a partial solution. By moving the shear-center forward, especially forward of the aerodynamic center, this will have a profound affect in improving aeroelastic divergence. Anyone who is confused by this observation, get a C-channel that can be flexed, even a tri-folded 6x6" scrap of paper. Mount the top and bottom caps and shear web to the corner of a countertop. And apply upward load on the free end. Observe which way it twists and consider how that affects the wing under load.
Otherwise, very impressive build. Mike Arnold was brilliant!
This is absolutely amazing...
Wonderful. This is pure art.
I sometimes wonder if people watch things all the way through before commenting. The man did a foam/glass plane and broken a record, hit over 200mph with 65hp and his hands. I'm sure he never needed any help from 3D softwares.
Unicorn Automotive#1 absolutely true,that plane looked spectacular,something Mr CAD and CAM from the eighties,will never Know,because he has no hand eye co-ordination,and probably no heart as he had to verbalise the skill he has in CAD.
65 hp? that's incredible. Imagine what the man would have done with a IO-550 or something.
Using extruded polystyrene foam as a core for sandwich composites is not something that should be promoted. Its shear strength is woefully inferior to proper core materials. The AR-5 was frighteningly experimental.
Ever heard of Burt Rutan? Lots of his planes used extruded polystyrene for the core...yup it has low shear strength but thick enough so it works in small planes
I agree with your comment, but with a minor correction. He says at 1:20 the engine is a 200CI Continental, which is an “O-200”. They typically produce at least 100HP, but are often modified to produce far more HP in these pylon racers. That said, the C-65 is an amazing engine - one of my favorites, and it is has an amazing performance record.
An excellent and valuable video on the old school way. I'm not cyborg enough at this point in my life to learn CAD. It would require about a year of my life to learn. I make sculpture and don't want my art to look like it was put together using ''nurb'' lines. I could name any make of car when I was 5 years old. As an adult car enthusiast I can't do that today. The jaguar XKE is still the most beautiful car in the world, and it was designed by human hands using clay.
Mmazing ! 🤓 You have done an incredible job.
The result is staggering. BRAVO ! 👍😎
That’s what the old school means.
1) Diligence.
2) Adoption of rational ideas.
3) Iron patience.
P.S.This is how I made my air model Quickie Q2 1:6
A Master Craftsman.
Thanks for the video! Very cool craftsmanship, and highly practical. Though today, the cost of laser and other 3-D scanners, and CNC milling of foam plugs probably makes them simpler, cheaper and faster, it's definitely good to know how to do it without those, if nothing else, for historical background.
P.S. AR-6 is beautiful.
Incredible amount of work done! Fantastic result!
Beautiful plane. Thanks for sharing start to finish on techniques. Awesome. Thanks for sharing.
This reminds me at all the surfboards I've shaped by hand... ;-)
Great video. Cool to see craftsmen at work.
What amazing skill and patience!
I think, making molds or any kind will continue to be an art. Computers might do 3d and calculations better than men. But man still have hands, eyes and incredible brains, that computers simplu not even close to having.
Though; high rate production moulds are made directly out of Aluminium with multiaxis milling (no need to stop at 5 axes)
(The models are made with human ingenuity, even if that just means a detailed spec. and allowing machine optimisation to hit the right spot.)
The human "art" comes back in when assembling the final parts to blend in all the seams and "achieve perfection" in paint.
From these informative and sincerely descriptive videos will come some prolific designers and designs, now and for many years to come - of this, I have no doubt, that is your proud legacy Mr Arnold!
I myself am researching and studying for an upcoming build of an all-new design that I hope will be the first of many as the culmination of a life-long obsessive passion. As the son of a carpenter I have always appreciated the art of 'eyeing' your work and shaping by hand.
I noticed some of the finer details of this AR-6 design and thought it worth bringing up for comment or response:
1.Firstly and because this is one of the fundamental points of consideration in my designs, is the airfoil. I noticed at 26:44 a very clear indication of what looks to be a fully laminar flow airfoil (at least at the root, presumably carried through the full span?) what would be the thinking behind that, would it be to maximize cruising speed, would it not sacrifice handling or performance at lower speeds, critical for a heavy wing loading? Just about every laminar wing I can think of employs a large and cumbersom flap system to improve low speed, provide necessary lift on take off and bring flight speeds down on landing, but I don't see such a system, on the AR6?
2.I notice too that in relation to the plug axis the airfoil at the root is not set at any discernable positive (or negative) angle of incidence -AoA, I know that technically this angle is measured against that of the stab but to maximize speed the closer to nuetral the stab incidence is the less drag is induced which I know is something he was obsessively concerned with to the enth degree.
3. I know he touches on this in more than one of his videos but perhaps someone can contribute as to why he chose fixed gear. For a man obsessed with reducing drag and commissioned to build a machine to go faster than any other surely the weight and complexity of a basic retractable system - even if only for the main gear with a streamlined tail wheel would be negated by the gains in speed and drag reduction? I would ask Mr Van that same thing if he were obsessed with speed but RV'S are built for rugged spritely performance not ultimate record breaking speed.
I have many, many more questions that had circumstance allowed I would have mailed to Mr Arnold but in lieue of that is there perhaps someone as knowledgable or who has insight into or familiarity with his thinkling and processes who can possibly answer some questions?
Allow Me to attempt an explanation:
Form follows function. The AR-5 was meant to be a sport plane with good performance having little horsepower. It went about as fast as the Vans RVs but with only 1/3rd the power.😮
Based on his article(s) Mike simply realized it had potential to break the newly established sub-300kg speed record, so he did.
This video documents the AR-6 construction, which was purpose built for IF1 air racing, and flew many times at Reno Stead airport and several other venues.
Race planes generally omit flaps. They add weight, and gaps create drag. There is no requirement for slow landing speed in air racing. The wing area is defined as no less than 66sqft. Minimum weight must be 500 empty, and a minimum pilot weight of 160lbs. This is a large wing for this weight, giving only 10lb/ft of wing loading. which is very light loading.
So No need for flaps. And at the speed these aircraft race at (230-260mph) even at higher elevations, the large wing, lightly loaded, only needs about 1/2 a degree of incidence for level flight.
And yes, that is a Laminar flow airfoil. You can see another view of leading edge at 21:22.
It was described by Mike Arnold in a talk or article, as a "Harry Riblet" airfoil. But this is not true, although He apparently modified it for softer stalls. He was not capable of generating that specific shape, because Riblet had a distain for inverse design, based on a cursory read of his half baked book.
The airfoil is in fact an NLF-0414F designed by a genius aerodynamicists named J.K. Viken and is an evolution of his early work and masters thesis. It was later studied and adopted by NASA. But this AR-6 airfoil has most or all of the camber removed and no flap. This Mod was actually performed by another aerodynamicist for John Sharp of Nemesis air racing for the DR-90. An article detailing this exact airfoil: Lednicer, David A. "Fluid Dynamic Analysis of Nemesis and Shadow" EAA Sport Aviation, August 1997.
The basic NLF-0414F generates about as much lift as a standard NACA 4-digit airfoil dose WITH a flap deflected.😮 But removing the camber reduces max lift quite a bit. The NLF-0414 is Still a good airfoil without camber, because the leading edge shape was blunted to improve the stall. Loooong before Riblet ever got ahold of it to modify it.
While this modified NLF airfoil or some near approximation of it has flown on the two fastest F1 race planes ever. It is actually not optimal for pylon racing. The original ordinates can be found in a hidden gem of a free download of the Eppler profil code which was modified by the late John Roncz, another aerodynamic genius beyond belief. That download is available from PDAS site if you go looking for the Eppler code there.
Anyone that seeks a truly optimal airfoil for Reno, or wherever the next venue will be, needs a 100% inverse-designed foil that is fully optimized for the rigor of closed course pylon racing.
A great video !
Thanks for sharing🙏 I’m so inspired 💯
I absolutely loved this video. Thanks so much. 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻😍👍🏻
Truly a Master at work - Very Well Done
it's absolutely amazing.....bravo for you...
Thank you for sharing, you just don't know how much appreciated you are.
Awe inspiring..
wow Awesome builders!
Art on another level, crafted by a Guinus love watching this kind of stuff. I would love to be involved in something like this as I'm a cabinetmaker.
This guy would be a good club member at our RC Airplane club. Can you imagine what he would bring to the meeting.
Old school.. I remember it well.. today we have gantry CNC foam cutters
this is rekindleing my desire to resume my stich and glue canoe, so I can get it out of the way of my wings for a motofloater
Beautiful plane !!!
Un espectaculo, de hecho esto haciendo uno para Rc en base a fotografias. Es un modelo aerodinamicamente perfecto, no hay nada parecido en el mundo de la aviacion.. Felicitaciones..
One of the most fascinating videos I’ve seen in a long time. Amazing skills dedication and attention to detail and I absolutely love. I’m retired from aerospace I built many planes in my garage unfortunately the largest one was 1/3 scale. But I did fly each and everyone of them, I just wasn’t inside the aircraft but I dreamt of it. I have a pilot 172 and a piper cub. But I’ve built some amazing aircraft that I only wish I could’ve ridden in , As pilot of course!
Nice to hear this comment from someone in the aerospace industry. Michael would have appreciated it.
Mike Arnold passed away October 6, 2015 after a brief battle with cancer at age 75.
truly saddening. A great loss. He made some beautiful airplanes and some very fine videos.
Very good that you mention...he was very kewl.. I wish i had known him
That was amazing. I learned so much watching this video! Thank you very much for sharing it.
I would like to have seen the details of how the canopy was made and attached.
I would also like to have seen how the cockpit was sized. He spent so much time sizing the engine area (I understand why that is really important of course), but no time at all on sizing of the cockpit.
I could not help but think of Michelangelo at work on a statue!
Thanks again for sharing!
Surely the cockpit was sized to flyers or some median value (or a specific pilot or two). Canopy was probably molded from a plug. Canopies can be outsourced.
Update: A description of the canopy mold is at 39:40. It's taken from the plug.
You really inspire me. I love to do that too. I love your patience and dedication
Incredible.
Beautiful aircraft, exquisite craftsmanship and a great example to us today of what can be done with traditional tools in the garage.
A sincere question; does one think that using modern methods, CAD / CAM, CNC tooling, machining, 3D printing, laser cutting etc is LESS of an art or craft than these traditional methods. All of these modern tools require hard work to master and expertise learned over many mistakes to conquer. This is especially of interest to me as these modern tools are available to he hobbyist, even sometimes designed and constructed oneself ( like my 3D printer and CNC machine)?
Love your work and video! You are the best! After I watch your work, I wanna to have my own working lab for building aircraft models
Sadly, Michael Arnold's web site was removed about a year after his death in October of 2015. It was a treasure trove of information and photographs. However, these videos still remain. He used to sell them as DVD's but when he became ill, requested they be posted on You Tube. He considered them to be his legacy.
A little bit of the p51 mustang look, nice
Great job but really hard work. You and Mike Patey should join up. Regards, Jim in NI UK
The spirit is still out there even we have 3D nowadays!
This man is a Genius.
He was a CRAFTSMAN of the first order.
He enjoyed the work. He loved talking to people at air shows, down to earth guy.
That man was soooo talented!!
Can you imagine if Howard Hughes had today’s materials, machines and computing power.
This was amazing and beautiful. Thank you
Good job
Happy landings love your work rest in peace !!!!
Some of the comments are funny... There is nothing wrong with doing things the old school way, and in all honesty doing it that way the first time usually discloses some things that otherwise may have been missed or not thought about as intricately, vs starting from an automated beginning,.
However the "Masters" as some of you put it, AKA "hand built craftsman" that still do things that way in today's environment usually lacks the computer/CAD/CAM knowledge and diverts to what they are capable of to get by in such ways, which speaks a lot about their "just do it" mentality.
I admire that in a person and have done things that way most of my life. However over the last eight years I have taught myself how to be quite efficient with CAD software and have since built a couple CNC units and laser cutters from scratch more or less. That being said, there is no turning back once you know how to utilize such tools. You just cannot do what an automated machine/system can produce, nor get the level of perfection by hand within reasonable time if it has any complexity to it. For some reason it seems like the baby boomer generation has chosen to leave themselves behind in lieu of pride, as if they cannot learn anything past what they did before PC's where a house hold item. Alternately, the millennial's may be ever worse with their crybaby attitudes that keep them scared of getting their hands dirty enough to actually learn a craftsman type of trade, thanks to being born with a smart phone in their hands.
I feel very lucky to be a part of "Generation X" (1982), as this seems sadly to be only generation that had the opportunity to see things from both sides for equal utilization. I would play outside in the dirt and kick the neighborhood bully's ass with sticks, before going inside to play around with my Windows 95 PC before going to bed each night.
I feel exactly the same way
its sad really.
A wonderful story and inspiration indeed ...
great job... one of the best and complete vídeo about planes!
nice I guess for a garage project, but I would have given this to a numerical control shop with mold purposed foam or even wood to make the mold. Nothing to detract from the efforts and techniques of Mr. Arnold. But for others who may want to embark on a project like this, it doesn't cost that much and you'll have a nice symmetrical fuselage that conforms to your CFD work. Then the only questions are were your assumptions right in modeling for CFD as to being on condition with Re No., cruise condition of speed angle of attack and altitude, and did you choose the right combo of engine and prop to make that happen at those conditions.
No surprise www.AR-5.com no longer works. I guess Mike Arnold has gone out of business. Such a shame as he does amazing work. If you are out there Mike.... Thank you for video taping this process and sharing it with us.
I can't believe this is how you can actually build an airplane.. o_O
Very nice to watch - Thanks
And here I thought that the time I got a jaguar body straighter than it came out of the factory was a Herculean chore!
Absolutely beautiful little airplane
Love it , I can do the same with the help of God ALMIGHTY. 👍 I wounder if this gentleman is still with us. Thank you men sincerely Bill Iannucci. CHEERS.
Спасибо! Отличный рассказ.
So, when you said you're leaving just enough room for the Pilot's head, what the Pilot is going to be doing, in essence, is strapping on the Plane like it's an extension of his body. I like that theory, I like the overall shape and form of the craft. This is my first time on your channel and aircraft is my favorite subject. Thank you for allowing me to observe your artwork. I've subbed and clicked on the bell and left a thumbs up.
Gran trabajo 👌👌
Amazing craftsman well done
Great education! Thanks!
This man is not a designer, he is an artist. When u look up beautiful in the dictionary, there is a picture of this plane .
This is so great! I love it.