I have a Skywing Extra 101" coming. Should be fun.

Originally Posted by randomguy

I would!

Full-scale Pitts’ have wood wings. Last I checked, no Pitts had ever had a structural failure leading to a fatality (I’m ignoring one single example that’s not relevant here). The same was not true for any of the composites: Extra, Edge, you name it. That’s despite Pitts’ having flown many more hours.

Two reasons. One is composites are harder to work with, with less margin for error. Two is the failure modes. Wood gives you warning. Carbon is perfect til it isn’t.

Plus wood airplanes are *fun* to fly [in]. Pitts, Cubs, Champs, Stearmans. I’m starting to daydream...

No question that carbon is generally higher performance though.

Don't forget that the Lasers and the original Extra 230 had wood wings as well. ( Along with welded steel tube fuselages, another very old technology whose use goes all the way back to Anthony Fokker in 1915..) And even the Extra 300 wing is not pure CF, its a mix of CF and Wood.

Digging a bit I found this interesting read on the 230 which quotes Walter Extra himself as saying the move away from all wood construction was due to the quality of wood declining, not necessarily an absolute superiority of synthetic materials.

https://www.iac.org/files/magazines/SA-2010-05.pdf

Originally Posted by closetguy

Yeah, full scale wood planes will never hold up to that.

I know...It would be as if you built an airplane out of wood and tried to fly it over 400mph while taking machine gun fire and expect it to survive.

Obviously that could never work!

How many are flying today?

Originally Posted by ghoffman

How many are flying today?

You'll have to clarify the question - how many of what are flying? And what do we hope to prove/disprove with such a number?

I assume you mean the Mosquito - a quick search finds 4 airworthy examples are still flying.

By contrast there are zero space shuttles still flying.

Maybe a better comparison is to another vintage fighter... lets skip the P51 because its unusually popular. Take the Bf109. There are something like a dozen still flying. Ok that's a lot more than 4 Mosquitos, but then again about 5x as many 109s where manufactured as where Mosquitos so its survival % is actually slightly lower.




Does any of this information actually inform a judgement that one of these aircraft is "best" ?

OK, fair enough, but I don't fly with vacuum tubes or chrome antennas either, but some do. I wish my Pantera had a little more CF and alot less wood when it exploded in mid air after some snaps.

ANd if that is not enought for you, how about a 550mph wooden jet






Lots of intersting reading on Wood construction (vs. metal and compsite) at EAA:
https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aircraft-bui...ood-for-wings?

https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aircraft-bui...h-wood-part-1?


We all get drooling over carbon and kevlar simply because they are one of the few materials that have been developed that are acutally better in terms of strength to weight ratio than woods. Probably a lot of guys dont realize that (while you cant build an airliner out of it), Balsa wood actually rates BETTER than aluminum, Steel and even Titanium on a specific strength (tensile strength divided by density) scale.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_strength
(sort the table by column 3 specific strength)


THe rage today is to build these airframes out of crappy hard balsa and light ply (absolute garbage) that look like swiss cheese, and then add carbon until they are no longer too fragile to touch.



If instead we started from THICK pieces of high quality contest grade balsa, with some judicious use of real birch aircraft ply only in high stress areas would probably turn out an airframe just as strong and even lighter. It would just be expensive given today's wood supply and the higher labor cost for the level of craftsmanship required.

I suppose I am biased, none of the projects I ever worked on at L-M, or ULA ever had any wood on them. Nor have I personally ever flown on a wood plane. Even in the civilian market, I don't see any wood structure on any Extra, MX (all composite) Edge, Cessna 152-182, etc.

Not to change the subject but here is my question regarding EF vs SW:

So my 91 EF Yak has no coupling. My 88 EF Extra was the same way. My 3DHS 106 Edge wants to roll to up right during knife edge. It also wants to roll at the end of a pop top. Otherwise it flies great. The 106 is my only 100cc plane. So as someone mentioned, I am interested as to which brand 35% has less coupling - EF or Skywing? From what I have heard, EF puts a lot of R & D into their designs. No knowledge of SW. A plane’s appearance really matter to me, but flight characteristics will always be my priority.

Originally Posted by FX777

Not to change the subject but here is my question regarding EF vs SW:

So my 91 EF Yak has no coupling. My 88 EF Extra was the same way. My 3DHS 106 Edge wants to roll to up right during knife edge. It also wants to roll at the end of a pop top. Otherwise it flies great. The 106 is my only 100cc plane. So as someone mentioned, I am interested as to which brand 35% has less coupling - EF or Skywing? From what I have heard, EF puts a lot of R & D into their designs. No knowledge of SW. A plane’s appearance really matter to me, but flight characteristics will always be my priority.

I can only comment on my limited experience with the EF Slick and now the SW Extra 101". (my setup is neutral CG)

Both have a little coupling. The SW Extra seems to draw better lines but the EF slick is not too far behind.

I have flown the SW Edge 105" previously and I was quite impressed that it had almost no coupling.

Although it is not a 35%, the EF Turbo Raven is basically a perfect KE machine and does everything well. I hope EF makes a larger gasser version.

I own a Skywing Edge 540, it is by far the most effortless airplane I've ever owned to do Knife Edge Loops. I can throttle off to idle at the top and put in the rudder input, then gradually add more rudder as it gets vertical (pointed straight down), and it'll pull out gently with barely any noticeable coupling.

Other aircraft that I've owned would tuck in at extreme rudder, or try to roll out or both. The Skywing Edge does neither.

Anyone know who else sells Skywing planes.I waited for Northwest to get their shipment in and looks like they have sense most are back in stock.But no 91" Edges are in stock,of course that was the one I was waiting for.

Marco's Doghouse, AJ Hobbies (canada)

Thanks,email sent.

Originally Posted by closetguy

Anyone know who else sells Skywing planes.I waited for Northwest to get their shipment in and looks like they have sense most are back in stock.But no 91" Edges are in stock,of course that was the one I was waiting for.

NWRC is the place. He has another container due to hit within the next handful of days. If you want a 91" Edge, preorder through Tim, like I did before the last container. Just finished the build this past weekend and hoping to maiden my 91 Edge soon.