Bob Axsom

Well Known Member
For Short Races I developed a set of three inch wingtips and removed the stock tips and nine inch wide tip tanks. The weight reduction was ~40 lbs structure and 102 lbs fuel. The wing span was reduced by three feet. The speed increase was 3 kts at 6,000 ft density altitude, WOT, leaned for best power.

Bob Axsom
 
3 knots, congrats

Congrats Bob, 3 knots is a huge gain. Do you have any recent pics and can you tell some of us how it flew, landed, stall speed reduction if any, things like that. :cool:
 
Test notes

Below are the notes I made on Tuesday. I tried to attach photos but the image button in the tool bar doesn't work anymore - sorry.

Bob Axsom

After I got to the hangar it took two hours to complete the work to get ready to fly. All of the wires hanging out of the wing had to be terminated, insulated and secured until the fuel tank and stock wingtip are reinstalled. The fuel line which I had capped earlier had to be secured. Then I put the new short race tip on the left wing and installed the 47 screws. The approach used to place the mounting holes in this wingtip was better than that used on the right wingtip. Drilling through the dimpled holes in the wing skin was more accurate than marking the tip through the wing skin holes and drilling on the work bench separate from the wing.

I took some photographs and it was time to fly. I advised the tower that I had removed three feet from the wing and may return fairly quickly. The controller chuckled and said “Thanks for the heads up.”

The take off was not unusual and the flight progressed normally. In accordance with the U. S. Air Race Handicap Procedure (http://www.us-airrace.org), I climbed to 6,000 ft to record the temperature of 16 C. Then subtracted 3C to determine that the speed run would be flown at 4,700 ft for a 6,000 ft density altitude.

I contacted Razorback Approach and told them my intentions to fly a triangular speed run at 4,700 ft.MSL. They assigned squawk code 0440 and told me to advise them when I was ready to return to Drake field.

I dropped down to 4,700 ft, turned north, closed the vents, went to wide open throttle, maximum rpm (which turned out to be 2730) trimmed for straight and level flight, activated the autopilot (Pictorial Pilot) on a track of 000 degrees (magnetic), pressed the Altrak “ALT” button to hold 4,700 ft and monitored the GPS ground speed. When the speed stabilized I recorded five consecutive readings at twenty-second intervals. The speeds were 182, 182, 182, 182 and 183 kts.

I disengaged the autopilot and turned southeast to 120 degrees and repeated the process on the new track. The speeds were 170, 169, 168, 169 and 168 kts.

For the final leg I turned southwest to 240 degrees and repeated the process for the last time. The speeds were 183, 182, 181, 181 and 180 kts.

The handicap procedure requires deviations of no more than 1 kt but time was short and experience has shown that this is good enough.

On the way back to Drake I pulled back the power and slowed to determine the clean stall speed. It is 59 kts. The landing was fairly normal but the sink rate seemed higher than the configuration with three feet longer wingspan even with the reduction in weight of 100 pounds of fuel and 40 pounds of structure.

When I got back home I brought up the National Test Pilot School spreadsheet for three leg speed runs and determined that the speed for this test run was 177.8 kts or 204.6 mph and the wind was 9kts from 125 degrees. This is an increase of 3 kts over the previous best configuration.

I want to do some fiberglass work for a better fit at the leading edge and perhaps install a few floating platenuts (only one or two are bothersome) but it is ready to race right now if necessary. I will certainly use the short race wingtips in the Memphis 100 cross country air race.

dvc00007bo2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Congrats on a cool program Bob! I really enjoy reading your quest for speed - mainly because you approach it in a very calibrated, engineering fashion which appeals to me. How does that saying go? "A knot here, a knot there...pretty soon you're supersonic!"

Paul
 
Square tips Versus the sexy ones............

Hey Bob, have you thought of taking the wingtip completely off and making it square. I learned this from an F-1 Rocket pilot and he claims it worked. It would be easy to test and try. For testing I've thought of just taking a piece of plywood and cutting it to the shape of the airfoil, then attach a few screws/duct tape/redneck style and see what it does. I'd be curious to see if there is any difference. Something else I was told, make one wing tip squared off and leave the other side alone and see which wing leads or trails with the greatest or least drag. I've been wanting to try some things like your doing, but no time to play around with things like that. My work schedule building race car engines has got me snowed under. Again, congrats on your gains and progress. Keep us posted!!!!!!
 
Last edited:
Bob, that is good but I have a better suggestion

Alan was right on. Just remove the wingtip...cram in some urethane foam, sorta sand it to semi-curved and attach with duct tape on the outside.
 
Bob, looking at the photo you posted, something stuck right out at me. Your VOR "whiskers" antenna. I'm not gonna try to sell you on a wing tip nav antenna, because you've undoubtedly considered that before. But what really stuck out at me was that the antenna is not aligned with the longitudinal axis of the airplane.

Now maybe it's just the perspective in the photo, but it looks like the whiskers droop down a bit...I'm using the longerons as a reference. Is it just me?

Seems like you could reduce a smidgen of drag there...
 
I Know What You Mean Dan

The Nav Antenna does look like a drag item but I did remove the elements and flew a test to check the difference. I could not measure any - I know there is some drag there but I could find no objective evidence of it. One thing about the angle of the antenna plane with respect to the centerline of the fuselage (or any fixed waterline reference) it would be very tedious to determine the maximum speed angle of attack of the airplane and the perfectly intrail angle for the antenna. I may just loosen the set screws and unscrew the receive elements of the antenna assembly for the Memphis 100 race to attempt to be competitive with Ron Lee and the other racers in the RV Blue class. The last time I did that my nav radio was a little quirkey until I removed and reseated the elements again - I don't like that much. It is a good observation and it naggs at me too.

Bob Axsom
 
Ah, nevermind...if you've tested it without the antenna and can't notice any difference in speed, then I definitely wouldn't let it bug ya!
 
I am slow

My fastest TAS at 8000' density altitude before the engine rebuild and gear leg fairing/wheel pant change was about 197 mph. I will be in the back of the pack just looking at the country side. Maybe we can convince John Huft to enter another class.
 
I have the evo wing and when it came with a flat tip I thought I could make something more attractive. I spent a lot of time and came up with a very nice looking tip that complemented the tapered wing. After a couple of months I took one tip off and replaced it with the stock flap tip. There was no doubt which wing was fastest as my nice rounded tip was dragging the aircraft noticeably on that side.
This year I thought, if it worked for the wing, it should work for the tail. So I cut off those nice rounded tips on the tail and made some flat tips by filling the end with foam and glass. I could not measure any speed advantage. However the tail now matches the wings and it has given the plane a whole new beasty look.
Keep in mind that my flat wing tips were done on the EVO wing. Tony Blair, a rocket owner in Austrailia, flew with flat tips on a standard wing. He reported a faster roll rate, reduced weight, a 5 knot increase in stall speed an NO improvement in cruise speed. From this limited comparison you could speculate that the standard wing has a higher induced drag at the tip than does the samller EVO tip. There is a relationship between the removal of the parasitic drag of the tip that is balanced with any benefits that the tip plays in reducing induced drag. Older Mooney aircraft had flat tips which have been replaced on newer offerings, I wonder what testing they did and which tips worked better with their tapered wing?
 
Last edited:
Older Mooney aircraft had flat tips which have been replaced on newer offerings, I wonder what testing they did and which tips worked better with their tapered wing?

Last summer we toured the Mooney factory and I asked the guide about the new wingtips...he said they were pure marketing/cosmetics and did nothing for speed.

The hershey bar wings may have a bigger wingtip vortex than the tapered wings, and so respond differently. The aero case for tapered wings (and props) involves reducing the tip vortex.

John
 
Bob - Congrats on the nice speed increase. If you can stop tinkering with the aircraft for more than a few days, it would be interesting to see the results from some speed runs on additional flights. How consistent are the results from flight to flight?
 
The runs seem coherent

The wind seemed fairly light and steady even though I did not maintain the 1 kt margin over the five 20 sec. interval recordings on each leg. it was close. This test seems to fall in place with the other tests that I have run and I believe additional tests would confirm that. Sometimes I have an uneasy feeling about the validity of test results but I believe these results are accurate and the plane is actually faster.

I have pulled the tips and laid on 8 strips of cross stacked fiberglass at the nose already to get a better fit between the mounting surface of the tip and the inside of the wing skin at the front end. The stacks have cured and I started sanding the right tip. The shape is pretty good now but I need to remove some material to allow the whole tip to move forward slightly and center, as much as possible, the platenuts under the wing skin dimpled holes - I can shove it there but it's not quite right. I have to do the whole front end fit thing with the left tip yet. Then I have to smooth the exposed surface of the the stacked fiberglass and bend it into the basic tip fiberglass so there are no iregularities. After that I want to sand and fill and sand the tips until thy are free of visible fiberglass weave pattern and resin excesses and try to paint them before next Saturday's (10-27) race at Memphis. I do not believe any of this work will have any effect on speed but it will probably a couple of weeks before I can do it. Something could happen to invalidate the comparative test but I don't really think so. I will try to do that and report the results.

Bob Axsom
 
What about NO wing tip

Tony Blair, a rocket owner in Australia (I thought he was British :rolleyes: ) , flew with flat tips on a standard wing. He reported a faster roll rate, reduced weight, a 5 knot increase in stall speed an NO improvement in cruise speed. Older Mooney aircraft had flat tips which have been replaced on newer offerings, I wonder what testing they did and which tips worked better with their tapered wing?

Yea my thought exactly. How a bout a flat "end plate", with or with out some flange extending like a winglet? Hummmm further reducing wing span, frontal area, wetted area.

If designed properly might be cool.

Bob, did I miss if you checked stall speed? Rate of Climb? Roll Rate? The no free lunch rule may be. However 3 ka-not's ain't bad.

Any way nice experiment Bob.
 
Last edited:
Memphis Check

Flew to Memphis, participated in the Memphis 100 and returned. No formal speed check was made but the plane is faster than it has ever been with the change to this configuration. It is slightly more demanding to fly with a higher sink rate and roll rate but it seems more "solid" in turbulance. We won the RV Blue Class in the Memphis 100 Air Race beating Mike Thompson in his fast RV-6 for the first time ever. We averaged 203.52 mph which was run at 1,000 MSL except for the finish which was at 1,200 MSL.

Bob Axsom
 
Last edited:
Way to Go Bob!

I follow your experiments here on the forums and am happy to see your work paid off! Good show!
 
Flew to Memphis, participated in the Memphis 100 and returned. No formal speed check was made but the plane is faster than it has ever been with the change to this configuration. It is slightly more demanding to fly with a higher sink rate and roll rate but it seems more "solid" in turbulance. We won the RV Blue Class in the Memphis 100 Air Race beating Mike Thompson in his fast RV-6 for the first time ever.
Congrats Bob. It is good to learn that all your hard work has paid off. Of course the other guys will be working hard to catch up, so you need to keep improving too.
 
New Wingtips

Congrats Bob. It is good to learn that all your hard work has paid off. Of course the other guys will be working hard to catch up, so you need to keep improving too.

Boy, you got that right.
As the beatee, I have some ideas for a Winter project and race season 2008!

Your next project should be rear-view mirrors, Bob, cause here I come!

- Mike
 
Hi Bob,

You've been so good to let all of us see your testing over time...so thanks!

But, since Dan had to point out your draggy antenna - I felt it my duty to aky why you haven't thought of removing that large carbunkle hanging off the front of your plane...you know...that "land-o-matic" thingy under the front cowl! I don't see one of those on Huft's or Martin's plane?!?!?! :)

You realize Van's does make a "low drag" version, and even a fairing to match!

All in fun I promise! :p

Cheers,
Stein

PS, I am serious about thanking you for posting your trials. I truly like to see real world testing and since I'm too lazy and stupid to do it myself, I appreciate you putting up with ribbing from people like me!
 
My pleasure

I enjoy the process of striving for "better" while being loyal to our bird. All my reasonably long life I had a feeling approaching love for airplanes as a spectator. That was a common perspective for my generation and I think it is still true today - there are a lot more poor kids with no visible opportunities the otherwise. We probably do not fully understand how significant the EAA Young Eagles program is to the future of aviation. It is giving the experience of personal flying to a much broader crossection of society that anything has ever done before. I paid my dues and worked for 50 years in aerospace but never in anyway directly involved in aircraft flight operations. Now it is my turn and I am lovin' it! It keeps the mind active with real life opportunities and risks, successes and failures. I'm glad you are interested.

Bob Axsom