ETLB Squawk Forums — Archive

Next month I will plans to start building aluminum minimax R1100 fuselage and landing gear
and folding elevators/stabilizer and rudder and fin. Just pop rivet!

I don’t feel comfortable with wood airframe. Somebody arsons it or engine fires, the
Wood aircraft gets ash.

I had seen one minimax made of steel 4130 tubes. Very cool!

Richard

Then it isn't a Max. Wood is a much better material. It doesn't fatigue and it doesn't fail catastrophically as a rule
Ison had a full stress analysis done which proved the design safety. Will you be doing the same? Thought not.

Agreed it is not a MiniMax. Perhaps call it "MiniMax like" but I do look forward to your build if you post pictures here.

You could always call it Buzzard Bait!  

Just a small clarification:  TomShep said above in praise of wood that "it doesn't fatigue".  This is commonly said, however, it is more accurate to say that its fatigue characteristics are such that it can accept a higher percentage of its ultimate stress indefinitely without becoming weaker.  Another way of saying this is that it has a higher "fatigue limit".  That is it can be routinely stressed to a higher percentage of its breaking stress for an extremely large number of cycles without degradation.  However above that stress level it will definitely fatigue.  In practical terms this means that you can build an aircraft lighter in wood and epoxy than practically any other material.


Tom

  If it flies as good as the minimax and behaves similiarly then it will prove more popular .

  It also has to be less costly and easier and quicker to build!

  It also will not need any shelter or hanger which is a big plus.

  Have a look at the CA-2 utralight.You might need to move the wing a little higher though.


  KK

well sounds like a lot of discussion is about to happen

Its not a Minimax its a design based on the Minimax...as  a  starting point....only time will see if its better or worse.

However to say its going to be better is certainly a little cheeky....build it , fly it , provide evidence.....and start kitting them..and when the customers exceed the current Minimax line I will start to...acknowledge you,,,Until then your just a test pilot with a new design and an Idea...or concept...and certainly dont put shit on what is already a great aircraft....ITS Proven it self...all over the planet.

Hey Richard...aluminium burns too....quite a silly statement in your first email......no one flys an aircraft after fire damage....unless your a dick.

yes I like aircraft...in wood...and aluminium...and IVE BUILT BOTH..and flown and operated them successfully. So consider yourself TOLD...ok. Goodluck with your new aircraft...your breaking new ground, so please do your homework before making statements that can be considered disrespectful to the Minimax design and all its wonderful benefits.

You get more bees with Honey ...not Jam....or FigJAM...and yes Im a Bee keeper...

regards Arthur

Aluminum is not the easy answer to structural fabrication and operations. It requires serious attention to flawless fabrication, as even the tiniest nick can manifest very unexpectedly and rapidly into a deadly crack (and possible catastrophic failure) due to normal vibration and stress. You would end up spending many hours machining and polishing every edge of every piece of Aluminum angle to ensure elimination of every scratch and nick. The completed airframe would also require very regular and detailed inspections, and every segment that was not visible would always be in question.

Hey Arthur;
Just a note here, aluminum is used in rocket solid fuel, LOL. Also the main reason the Hindenburg went down.
All kidding aside. Do your homework on design. Ison did. Nothing wrong with what you are doing, and I for one will be interested to see the build. But it is not a Minimax.
Have fun, but be safe doing it.
Bob

YES Agree Bob...... I want to see it turn out well.........wheres the oxygen...LOL

regards Arthur

I'd like to see you use all 6063T5 as well (cue naysayers).

The authors text sounds like someone who has escaped the communist regime of China! Play nice!

Quoted from 509 The authors text sounds like someone who has escaped the communist regime of China! Play nice!

...........or someone from Drake's school.


KK

AluMax?

It could actually be a really interesting little plane. I'm eager to see how this project turns out.

At the size of the Max, I'm betting the weight won't be much different.

My 02¢... If you can buck the rivet, buck the rivet. Solid rivets are less expensive and a touch lighter than aviation pop-rivets.

As stated a New Minimax R1100 alone Saddens me to think someone would even make a post like this here. It not only insults wayne Ison and all members of this group in my opinion.
Regards,
David Cooper

At least he's not building a Composi-Max... That would be a true abomination.

I'm and A&P and Pilot, so pretty much any plane interests me. I've worked on aluminum planes my entire adult life, and I selected a wood-and-fabric plane for my project (which should be rather enlightening). Metal is cool, but it does not exactly grow on trees, and just the thought of forming all those aluminum ribs put me off metal homebuilts. I took one look at a Vans and said "no thanks" - They are just a bunch of rivets held in place by bits of sheet metal...

Also you build a metal plane several times (locate parts in position, layout holes, drill, disassemble, deburr, apply coatings to the faying surfaces, reassemble, cleco in place, install fasteners), and you'll need clocoes, twist drills, metal files, rivet guns and bucking bars (or a darn nice puller), and metal forming tools (brake, shear, fluting pliers... it can be a long list).

I'll agree that an Aluminimax is not really a "Max" (be it mini- or hi-)... he's kind of getting into slow BD-6 territory... maybe the thread should go into "Off Topic".

<addendum>
I took me a while to re-find this, but it looks like the OP is really wanting an Brutsche Freedom 40. It has some similarities to the Max-Family, but is made from tin. It's interesting that the Max family would be built in quantity, while there are no Freedom 40's in the FAA database. Both meet the same goals, both have the same mission, and had similar completions costs. Food for thought.
LINK ► http://www.ultraligero.net/aviones/modelos/freedom_40.htm
</addendum>