Anyone know what this plane is?

Bob Smith · April 10, 2015, 08:33:39 AM

Fred Weick's W-1??

JNev · April 10, 2015, 10:23:46 AM

Quote from: Bob Smith on April 10, 2015, 08:33:39 AM
Fred Weick's W-1??

...if not a W1A...

Weick was a genius for all kinds of practical innovation from Ag plane concept to safety / ease of handling in light airplanes for the average pilot, etc.

I wouldn't have known of this Weick design or "W1" without the lead, Bob - good find. And good challenge, Friend!

Martin X. Moleski, SJ · April 10, 2015, 10:25:49 AM

Quote from: Bob Smith on April 10, 2015, 08:33:39 AM
Fred Weick ...

Wow! What an interesting character!

I didn't recognize his name or the aircraft, but I've heard a lot about Ercoupes from a former restorer/owner/pilot.

Bob Smith · April 10, 2015, 12:08:22 PM

Sounds like he knew all the the right people!! Sounds like something even I could learn to pilot== if younger..

Friend Weller · April 10, 2015, 02:00:44 PM

I'm a sucker for interesting aircraft......and Ercoupes!

Bob Smith · April 10, 2015, 03:17:51 PM

This guy just liked wings, I guess!

Martin X. Moleski, SJ · April 10, 2015, 03:40:47 PM

Quote from: Bob Smith on April 10, 2015, 03:17:51 PM
This guy just liked wings, I guess!

Lots and lots and LOTS of wings!

Neff Jacobs · April 10, 2015, 08:09:23 PM

I've often thought the multi-plane would work. This one seems to be missing a rudder, elevator, ailerons and enough engine to get it to flying speed. But, I see nothing inherently wrong with a series of Venetian blinds for wings. That was near the Wright Brothers profile. It would have been slow, weird and high drag but for some reason it has a certain amount of appeal at lest to me.
Neff

Bob Smith · April 10, 2015, 08:39:26 PM

Agreed, Neff. Very original at least. I don't think it worked very well, though. Like the article said: the guys designing them didn't aways know what they were doing, but thought if 2 wings worked, many would work better!

Bob Smith · April 10, 2015, 09:11:05 PM

This time I went straight to the source, or as close as I could get! Look at these beauties. What type of flight would they be best suited for?

Jeff Lange · April 10, 2015, 10:49:49 PM

Feathered flight! ;D

(I'm sorry- I couldn't resist it! I will now go sit in the corner until dinner time.)

Bob Smith · April 11, 2015, 07:52:49 AM

Wrong answer, Jeff. A little more thought and respect would be good! Without birds we wouldn't be on this forum, do you think??

James Champion · April 11, 2015, 08:31:50 AM

Looks like for birds, nature eventually selected the monoplane approach where one set of wings provide the lift.

Nature did try more of a biplane arrangement for proto-birds with two sets of wings, but it went obsolete:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microraptor

For insects, nature did eventually settle on both a single (butterflies) and dual (dragonflies) set of wings as working solutions.

Bob Smith · April 22, 2015, 05:46:53 PM

Back to the DC-3-- I rode in what I think was one and I remember it was verrrrrry noisy. If Amelia and Fred had to put up with something like that in their Lockheed I can understand if they wanted to get out. They must have been deaf hot, and hungry!

Martin X. Moleski, SJ · April 22, 2015, 06:49:36 PM

Quote from: Bob Smith on April 22, 2015, 05:46:53 PM
Back to the DC-3-- I rode in what I think was one and I remember it was verrrrrry noisy. If Amelia and Fred had to put up with something like that in their Lockheed I can understand if they wanted to get out. They must have been deaf hot, and hungry!

Absolutely.

That was one of the problems with using the headset to "find a null." Their hearing could not have been all that sensitive after 22 hours sitting just a foot or so away from the prop tips.

So sad ...