BD-10 and other homebuilt mach 1 contenders !

Profile picture for user topspeed

Member for

10 years 8 months

Posts: 2,595

Hi ! I wondered since this was not a success; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bede_BD-10 Could there still be a customer for homebuilt supersonic jet ? With e-seat and min 340 liters / hr consumtion ( subsonic ). This could go sonic with 2 x 8 kN rockets. Cruise engine is PW617F-E of 8 kN.
Original post
Profile picture for user J Boyle

Member for

14 years 11 months

Posts: 9,617

I think its main attraction was as a "personal fighter-type" aircraft as opposed to its hypothetical supersonic speed. It was seen as a sport aircraft or perhaps as a two seat business jet for an owner-pilot. Still, the maket might be limited, I'm not sure I'd fly it without military fast-jet training.
Profile picture for user topspeed

Member for

10 years 8 months

Posts: 2,595

I think its main attraction was as a "personal fighter-type" aircraft as opposed to its hypothetical supersonic speed. It was seen as a sport aircraft or perhaps as a two seat business jet for an owner-pilot. Still, the maket might be limited, I'm not sure I'd fly it without military fast-jet training.
Thanks Boyle for your input ! Do you think this cruise engine + 2 rockets is a viable idea to go supersonic pretty cheaply ? Here is another contender...David Rose's MACH BUSTER. http://i642.photobucket.com/albums/uu145/p_odea/MachBuster.jpg
Profile picture for user topspeed

Member for

10 years 8 months

Posts: 2,595

RCS This could also be made into a sales article while it carries an AESA radar and a cannon + 4 concealed AAMs. Anyone interested ? 5.2 x smaller than a J.20 it has 1/5.2^2=1/27 just one twenty seventh RCS...am I right..if othervise stealth design done correctly..or more if even better made.
Profile picture for user J Boyle

Member for

14 years 11 months

Posts: 9,617

There are also regulatory issues (at least in the US): Sec. 91.817 — Civil aircraft sonic boom. (a) No person may operate a civil aircraft in the United States at a true flight Mach number greater than 1 except in compliance with conditions and limitations in an authorization to exceed Mach 1 issued to the operator under appendix B of this part. (b) In addition, no person may operate a civil aircraft for which the maximum operating limit speed MM0exceeds a Mach number of 1, to or from an airport in the United States, unless— (1) Information available to the flight crew includes flight limitations that ensure that flights entering or leaving the United States will not cause a sonic boom to reach the surface within the United States; and (2) The operator complies with the flight limitations prescribed in paragraph (b)(1) of this section or complies with conditions and limitations in an authorization to exceed Mach 1 issued under appendix B of this part.
Profile picture for user Moggy C

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 16,831

Also regulatory issues in the UK for anything faster than 250 knots Mogy
Profile picture for user topspeed

Member for

10 years 8 months

Posts: 2,595

Also regulatory issues in the UK for anything faster than 250 knots Mogy
Ok I see...so what this could become is like in Switzerland they can bring arms home for reservists right ? So a group of reservists like lets say 10 all pay 100 000 £/$/€ ( or larger community like 1000 people all pay 1000 ) and these 10 reservist ( per plane ) then maintain this ac and fly it no faster than 250 kts on weekends to keep up their skills. On army rehersals they can fit the craft with 2 rockets ( 130 kg each cost lets say 800 €/$/£ ) they can experience the mach 1 macig all when no restrictions apply. Community of 1000 could pay for these 10 people then the needed flying time. I bet the PW617F-E won't burn much more than 300 liters / hr. This sized 1800 kg jet cannot cost more than a 10 000 000 usd a piece.
Profile picture for user topspeed

Member for

10 years 8 months

Posts: 2,595

I think its main attraction was as a "personal fighter-type" aircraft as opposed to its hypothetical supersonic speed.
It was strongly marketed and widely made publicly known as a super sonic homebuilt.
Profile picture for user Newforest

Member for

14 years 6 months

Posts: 8,807

Community of 1000 could pay for these 10 people then the needed flying time. I bet the PW617F-E won't burn much more than 300 liters / hr. This sized 1800 kg jet cannot cost more than a 10 000 000 usd a piece.
Looks as though you have done a lot of planning and maybe have a secret agenda on this subject? :D
Profile picture for user topspeed

Member for

10 years 8 months

Posts: 2,595

Secret Agenda ? No secret agenda...( if not downsizing is a secret ) ! This is a 7th generation jet interceptor. I figure by 2040 there is paractically no oil left. At present a J-20 burns 90 000 liter / hr at full AB ( SFC 2.0 ). A regular bio fuel plant produces around 10 000 000 liters a year. This is comsumed by a J-20 and alike in 100-150 AB hours. For Finland sized country this V-raptor could still be used in 65 copies and yet be flown at 500 hrs annually each with one biofuel factorys annual capacity. I am thinking into the future. Thanks for asking. rgds, Juke :rolleyes: PS: ...and yes done a lot of planning since I will make flying R/C copy soon...I wanna be sure it is right at the first try. Furthermore I don't want anyone to call MAYDAY; " Disintegrating....", like someone called on BD-10. Mach 1 is a brickwall.
Profile picture for user J Boyle

Member for

14 years 11 months

Posts: 9,617

It was strongly marketed and widely made publicly known as a super sonic homebuilt.
I recall reading the report on it in Aviation Week, and at that time the designers were not stressing that...probably in light of the FAA restrictions as pointed out above. After the BD-5 program, most people were a bit wary of Jim Bede's promises...the supersonic fighter at the weight of a Cessna seemed a impractical. Still, it would have been fun as a cheap fighter trainier or as a "time builder" for military pilots, or as a race plane for Reno.
Profile picture for user Newforest

Member for

14 years 6 months

Posts: 8,807

No secret agenda I am thinking into the future. Thanks for asking. rgds, Juke :rolleyes: PS: ...and yes done a lot of planning since I will make flying R/C copy soon...I wanna be sure it is right at the first try. Furthermore I don't want anyone to call MAYDAY; " Disintegrating....", like someone called on BD-10. Mach 1 is a brickwall.
No criticism intended! ;) Good luck with the model. :) Nice photo of the BD-10 here. Note the Titantic behind, coincidence? Five aircraft were built, three crashed. None are flying now. http://www.airliners.net/photo/0118958/L/ That RP4 racer looks 'interesting'! :D