Been following this for a couple of years now. As a repeat offender plans builder, I'd be interested in building a Batray if/when parts kits would be available. Fits my mission of go up and look around the local area while generating UFO-sighting reports! If homebuilding airplanes is an unusual hobby, I'm on the unusual end of homebuilding.
The Arup planes never get enough mention. Stall proof, super-STOL, sleek and quick on available power. Video shows them to be nimble with 45 degree climb. See the "Flying Heel-Lift" video on UA-cam and others about them. As for thoroughly debunking the myth of very-low aspect-ratio planform planes being inefficient, see also the '30s Nemeth "parachute plane". Alliance Argo biplane fuselage with a 15' diameter circular wing parasol on struts. Faster than the original, similar markedly superior performance like the Arup. Also the similar Farman 1020: like the Nemeth, built on the fuselage of a known successful "normal" plane, stall-proof, faster than the original. And the '40s Eshelman. Commonly known as the "flying flounder". I bring all of these up, and never get a response when I ask what the supposed inefficiency of the very-low aspect-ratio planform is if it doesn't manifest itself in power vs speed or fuel vs range, because many examples have shown to be sleek. Then there's Milt Hatfield, in a video about the Arup & Little Bird, mentioning the recent around the world flight of the Rutan "Voyager", saying that an Arup planform would have been better in all criteria - load, range, internal volume, speed, etc.
Congratulations, Mr. Wainfan, for your genious design! I learned about your Facetmobile only a couple of years ago. I'd dare to say you are a sort of a complementary genious to the late Mr. Vincent Justus Burnelli, a pioneer of all-lift airframe concept (airfoil-shaped fuselage plus wings, whereas you've actually eliminated the wings altogether). And as for the F-117 facet-stealth design: its aerodynamic performance is considered poor - barely flyable actually - yet your Facetmobile is a marvel of benign aerodynamics and flyability. But, has anyone ever tested or at least calculated radar reflectivity of your design? Could your Facetmobile also be unintentionally inherently favorable of radar stealth? And finally, can your design be scaled-up to produce a large aeroplane, say, its linear dimensions increased ten- or twenty-fold?
I'd love to talk sometime soon. I think you've moved somewhere up north, and are missing out on all the local meth addicts here in SoCal. Your old, old ,model building friend from Tony and Addie days, in the last century.
SO GLAD this got posted!!! Thought I was going to miss out for the first time in years.
My father shared the same office building with this designer. We went to look at this aircraft I think back in 1994. Extremely interesting.
Great video, what are you expecting in range for single person? Are there coming any updates to this video?
Was recently at the Frontiers of Flight Museum in Dallas, TX and saw the Vought V-173 "Flying Pancake." Oh, what could have been!
This is what I aspire to. This is a awesome presentation data driven design innervation
Totally Fascinating ! I love the structural efficiency.
I hope the Q&A section will also be uploaded.
Been following this for a couple of years now. As a repeat offender plans builder, I'd be interested in building a Batray if/when parts kits would be available. Fits my mission of go up and look around the local area while generating UFO-sighting reports! If homebuilding airplanes is an unusual hobby, I'm on the unusual end of homebuilding.
also love the huge CG range !
The Arup planes never get enough mention.
Stall proof, super-STOL, sleek and quick on available power. Video shows them to be nimble with 45 degree climb.
See the "Flying Heel-Lift" video on UA-cam and others about them.
As for thoroughly debunking the myth of very-low aspect-ratio planform planes being inefficient, see also the '30s Nemeth "parachute plane". Alliance Argo biplane fuselage with a 15' diameter circular wing parasol on struts.
Faster than the original, similar markedly superior performance like the Arup.
Also the similar Farman 1020: like the Nemeth, built on the fuselage of a known successful "normal" plane, stall-proof, faster than the original.
And the '40s Eshelman. Commonly known as the "flying flounder".
I bring all of these up, and never get a response when I ask what the supposed inefficiency of the very-low aspect-ratio planform is if it doesn't manifest itself in power vs speed or fuel vs range, because many examples have shown to be sleek.
Then there's Milt Hatfield, in a video about the Arup & Little Bird, mentioning the recent around the world flight of the Rutan "Voyager", saying that an Arup planform would have been better in all criteria - load, range, internal volume, speed, etc.
Wow
I built a couple FMX-4
Congratulations, Mr. Wainfan, for your genious design!
I learned about your Facetmobile only a couple of years ago. I'd dare to say you are a sort of a complementary genious to the late Mr. Vincent Justus Burnelli, a pioneer of all-lift airframe concept (airfoil-shaped fuselage plus wings, whereas you've actually eliminated the wings altogether).
And as for the F-117 facet-stealth design: its aerodynamic performance is considered poor - barely flyable actually - yet your Facetmobile is a marvel of benign aerodynamics and flyability. But, has anyone ever tested or at least calculated radar reflectivity of your design? Could your Facetmobile also be unintentionally inherently favorable of radar stealth?
And finally, can your design be scaled-up to produce a large aeroplane, say, its linear dimensions increased ten- or twenty-fold?
I'd love to talk sometime soon. I think you've moved somewhere up north, and are missing out on all the local meth addicts here in SoCal. Your old, old ,model building friend from Tony and Addie days, in the last century.