Paper Planes

Gyroscopic principles apparently that allow for a more stable flight.

Link.

How about this model aircraft

link

Ahh that brings back memories of early experiments with aeroplane designs.

I just love the link, back then women knew their place..................allowing the husband to hot dip galvanise steel in the kitchen sink and drying using their hair dryer! (page 190)

Yes, back to a time when do-it-yourselfers did their own car maintenance, and general consumer stuff repair. I missed the galvanizing article. Hardware stores that used to stock zinc ingots don't seem to exist anymore. That last good hardware store in my local town went bankrupt in the mid 80's

I found my self getting lost in time whenever I get into an old Pop. Mech. My great uncle used to subscribe to this, then gave them to me. Had a big set from the 50s. The current publication is nothing like these old ones. This is the one thing I admire google for, until the copyright police told them to stop scanning in old publications. At least that's how I thought it was left. I'm still waiting for the internet to be a big free online library.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_effect

It certainly must have something to do with the Magnus effect...a few of these turbosails were built and tested...

It would seem the spin would be very important for success, as well as a slight angle of attack on the flight path...

Thanks, folks, some great links. Bearing in mind this thing is chucked like an American football, is this the Magnus effect ? There certainly seems to be some sort of vortex going on, but the plane doesn't seem to curve in a trajectory ('bend it like Beckham') that adds up to this. The lionk I gave is a bit crap, but the plane looks to go fairly straight.

Watch carefully how the thing travels - it's not curving to one side, and it doesn't even seem to get some sort of parabolic trajectory (the norm for paper plane records). I'm probably missing some obvious point, but good as the comments are I'm still not understanding what is going on with this thing.

I fear it could be time for weekend experimenting. Some of the variations on this model that I mentioned don't seem to need the spin. They have an almost delta wing tail, and from what I could see don't need the spin.

I'm a little short on aircraft hanger space here - the nearest big hall is the local church and I'm not sure this will go down a storm with the Vicar ! Still, he's got to take a break sometime (). It would be fun to hear what results anybody else can get from trying the described model versus a more conventional style.

You don't live near one of these?

I visited the former Royal Airship Works at Cardington Bedfordshier, England in 2004...big place.

Drew K

I'll have a go, but I may be restricted to my padded cell !

Seriously, it's the daftest looking plane ever, and I still can't figure how it works so good. The weekend is going to be paper mayhem here unless I get some answers !

This is going to be a case of, 'I'll show you me mine, if you show me yours' . My favourite plane fold looks nothing of the sort. All things being well, I'll try and construct and photograph my best efforts.

I'm still waiting on a good explanation of how such a mad looking thing glides thru the air.

It flies, therefore:

Trust me, I have to go experimental It'l be bad !

Soooo, back in the late 60s early 70s Whamo Corp. made one of these in plastic, chrome plated. It was the diameter of about a hardball, and I still own one. My brother and I went through about 3 of them before we figured out how to throw it ( we are male, who needs directions!!? ). I will say once we got the hang of it we thought it was more fun to toss around the yard than a Frisbee. When you got a little bit of cross wind it would be all over the place, dipping, jigging sideways, up, down.....maybe that is the reason the design never made it to full size planes.

Cheers!!

Chrome plated is a bit 'up-market' for what I have in mind, but it has a certain panache .

I may be mistaken, but didn't the whole frizbee thing start with kids on campus in America chucking pie dishes ? Sign 'o' the times that folk now go out and pay a few quid for some plastic thing.

Back in my day we just got a stick and a hoop. I'd bait Del by suggesting that in his day he even had to make the hoop, but I'd better not because he'll see that comment and tell me it was even worse !

Sorry to all the Arospace fans if this seems a bit trivial/silly, but I'm intrigued to know how/why these ring shaped gliders seem to work so well. It looks completely 'wrong', but from the videos I've found it simply works. In my limited knowledge, I still can't figure out why.

This , to me , is a MOST "re-eye-opening" thread.....

Somewhere between 8-and-10 years ago, I began a search online for a "Nerf-sort" of toy, that shot a foam-type of "can-grenade" for a couple hundred yards.

The searching was difficult, because I had only seen the TV ad ONCE ... about a week or so before, and I couldn't remember the name to save my life.

Not only could I not find it online, but, I never saw the ad again either, which led me to believe that *somebody* pulled-the-plug on the toy IMMEDIATELY...(!)

Then it dawned on me ...

< this post has been snipped >

Hey! What happened to the rest of the post?

...!... The tv ad jumped from a "back-yard" setting (shooting across the yard at a padded {e.g. 'archery'} target , to a football field, where the 'nerf-type' (a 'tough' foam-like) ordnance was fired from one end-zone through-the-uprights at the other end of the field!

Who'd-uh pulled the plug on such a product...?!

This is how conspiracy theories start...

Quick! Gimme a can... (Before we get a desertation on how to make one with cross laminated Yew....)

Excellent ! I'm going to have a real fun time over the weekend .

Hi Kris, have a look at "Flettner's Turbine" or golf, bowling,& baseball spin theories. The flying tube thing looks as though it might have something in common with them!

Thanks, Gerry, I'll check it out .

Great post, Randall, have a well deserved GA !

I'm glad you confirmed my feeling that magnus effect was not the significant effect (direction of travel/spin). The original model does indeed mention the 'plane' being spun as it's thrown. Another very similar version has a v-shaped tailed and is more or less chucked like a cricket ball (without any spin).

Your gallant exploits are leaving me feeling a tad guilty - I got diverted over the weekend. Playing with a DIY vortex gun* is not much of an excuse, but it was the only indoor game I could get away with. I'll get some results posted as soon as I can.

*Cut the bottom off a plastic drink bottle then stretch something elastic (eg section of a party balloon) over the hole. Ping the elastic, and hey presto you can ruffle the dogs hair at 10 feet distance.

I think the spin has more of a stabalizing effect than providing any lift.

Drew K

Could be, though would it matter with something so light ? Oddly enough I'd mentioned messing about with an improvised vortex gun - perhaps the thing creates a vortex as it travels and that somehow adds to stability. I really have no idea ! The obvious answer to some of that is for me to get my act together and start chucking a few models about. Too windy outside, and my other half has sussed that I'm planning some indoor mayhem when she isn't looking !

Perhaps I could convince my local university to play with some in a wind tunnel...

_{Commence indoor mayhem!}

Drew K

Go, Drew, Go !

Haven't tried it with the gysroscopic spin yet. Thrown with the seam down, it's stable most times, seems to be randomly affected by stray air flows (indoors). A small yaw angle and low starting speed are needed for a smooth flight.

Starting with A4-sized sheets (210 x 297 mm) I tried a series of tubes with variable number of folds vs. fold width. Best results around 5 folds x 25 mm. Guess the folds should not be pressed too much, so as to keep an airfoil shape. But the airfoil gets wrinkles when you roll up.

Can a 3D printer be used with pulp??