BD-5 family drawings

[Weaver]

That twin-boom canard design looks like it would probably have something going for it in real life.

Re the BD-5S sailplane stability issue, one thing that occurs to me is that, since the engine isn't there, you could fit an extended boom into the tube where the prop/jet used to go, and mount the tail surfaces on it, thus putting them further back for greater leverage and also moving the C0fG back a bit to compensate for the loss of the engine. Of course, structural strength would be an issue, as would the lack of space for control linkages. Perhaps the latter issue might see them going back to a V-tail?

[Tophe]

Dear Weaver,
I thank you for this idea that I would note have thought of, great!:


And this makes me think of the opposite direction: an even smaller BD-5, like a control challenge… For the code BD-5S could have been Small but was already Sailplane, BD-5T could have been Tiny but was already Turbo, so BD-5L is Smallest…:

[Tophe]

And the BD-5L-3 was like a flying catalogue of versions, while the L-2 was a tailless fast one (even more difficult to control):

(thanks again, Weaver)

[PR19_Kit]

I can see there being a run on the LS kit of the BD5 at this rate. 

[Tophe]

Sorry this is not yet the end...

I add a simple asymmetric derivative like a Bv-141:


With a whole family of its own...:

[Flyer]

I like the BD-5B-341 and BD-5L-2, they would probably make neat R/C models... 

[Tophe]

Thanks to imagine they would actually fly!
(even if this is without pilot inside, to endanger no life…)

[Tophe]

I agree with our friend Ericr logic: each airplane (or microplane) family must have seaplane versions (flying boat or/and floatplane):

[Tophe]

I agree with our friend Ericr logic: each airplane (or microplane) family must have seaplane versions (flying boat or/and floatplane):

Not forgetting twin-hull and single-float versions, of course:

[Tophe]

And maybe this one counts both as seaplane and (vertical) twin-boom (two longitudinal bodies holding the tail):

[Tophe]

The biplane BD-5 had specific advantages: solidity, maneuverability... not speed.

[ericr]

And maybe this one counts both as seaplane and (vertical) twin-boom (two longitudinal bodies holding the tail):

these are all excellent ideas ! thanks a lot !

[Tophe]

Thanks for the approval of our "invented seaplanes" expert!
(for visitors ignoring the magic of ericr's ones, see https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=40517.0 - 57 pages only... )

[ericr]

 

[Tophe]

Thanks!

Now, more seriously, the BD-5+5 Mistel... whose layout is justified by a good technical reason: "attracting attention"...: