How to design a Hawker Typhoon replica?

[Downunder]

What would be required to design a flyable Hawker Typhoon replica?
I guess a scaled (say 75%) version would be more practical?
(But 100% would be obviously better!!)
Are there individuals or companies that specialise in this type of design?
The spitfire and p-51 replicas are quite popular and there's plenty of originals still flying. I'm not Knocking these birds but since there is only one complete Typhoon in existence I thought someone may have built a replica by now?
I'm not talking about an exact "reproduction" like FLUGWERK's 190 but
a "sport scale" in modellers terms.
I guess there's plenty of other aircraft in the same situation but I'm just
a Typhoon nut!!!
Regards

[bdk]

Designing your own plane is a daunting task. If you design a replica of a well known type, you might stand a chance of having a commercial success (how else would you pay the liability insurance if you sold plans?), but few people other than WIX members could tell a Tempest from a Hurricane.

There have been reduced size replicas of the FW-190, P-51, Corsair, Spitfire, Thunderbolt and others- but how many of those plans built aircraft or kits were built in large numbers? Maybe the Loehle 5151 is an exception, but it doesn't look much like a Mustang in my opinion.

I did see a photo of a 75% Tempest someone was building probably 20 years ago, but I never heard that it was completed.

Anyone with an extra Sea Fury airframe, a Griffon, and a big chin scoop want to make a Typhoon/Tempest replica? Of course then everyone will complain that it isn't exact and the proportions are off like they did about the MB-5 replica.

[Steve T]

Hi Downunder, and welcome to WIX!

An engineer I ain't...but two designs along in the Sydney Camm oeuvre from your favourite is my favourite, the Fury, so think I'll weigh in anyway...

Yeah, a scale version Tiffy would doubtless be far easier than a fullsize one; and scale Warbirds can still be quite impressive, viz. the Thunder Mustang, or the gorgeous 3/4-or-so Spitfire XIV now flying in Ontario. But if it's worth doing, it's worth doing all the way, I think.

Unfortunately there's next to no commonality between the Fury series and the Typhoon (the Tempest, in between, has more in common with the Fury but still not all that much). And all operational Tiffies were powered by the Sabre engine--which only survives in museums with none in running condition as far as I know. (There's a very impressive cutaway Sabre engine on show at CAvM in Ottawa). Sooo...you'd probably have to go the Marcel Jurca route and loft-out an "external replica"; said airframe would be powered by quite a different engine than the real Tiffy, perhaps an Allison like Bob DeFord's Jurca Spit or even a Ranger V12 like that 9/10 P-51B had way back when. Or...a turboprop! I was riding in an EMB120 Brasilia once, daydreaming a bit, and suddenly noticed that the shape of the engine cowl out on the wing (which enclosed a UACL PW120 turbine) was really quite strikingly like that of a Typhoon or Sabre-Tempest. What to do with the exhaust would be a challenge, though...! And of course she'd sound very wrong indeed. But whatever engine you hang on her, with that big fat high-lift wing I bet she'd be near-STOL and climb like crazy. (Anybody notice that about the Yagen Hurricane at Gennie last summer? Up like an elevator!)

A Tempest, on the other hand...with a little help from the Fury parts bin, and maybe an R3350 (or late-model Centaurus...or indeed one of the many ex-Fury Centauri, they've got to be somewhere)...now that ought to be doable. If John Marlin can do a homebuilt Reno racer from scratch that looks (deliberately) rather like the Martin Baker MB5--and incorporates Mustang parts--surely a "Tempury" could be conjured successfully...

Then there's the superbly mean-looking Griffon-Fury...aw, forget it...

Cheers

S. (hoping someone with some engineering knowledge also replies)

[HarvardIV]

I'd have to disagree w/ Brandon here:

Designing your own plane is a daunting task. If you design a replica of a well known type, you might stand a chance of having a commercial success (how else would you pay the liability insurance if you sold plans?),

If the plane were tested enough, and found to be of flawless design no such proof would be necessary. However if some nut built it wrong, then he'd be at fault, and would probably lose in court.

[bdk]

If the plane were tested enough, and found to be of flawless design no such proof would be necessary. However if some nut built it wrong, then he'd be at fault, and would probably lose in court.

Tell that to Burt Rutan.

[Downunder]

Hi all,
Thanks for all your replies.
I think steve is on to something with the "external replica" theme.
I was thinking along the lines of the Supermarine Spitfire built here
in Australia. http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/.or even along the lines of a home built from plans.
I see myself as a purchaser not a supplier of plans or a kit.
I have the capacity to construct but not design an aircraft of this type.
Unfortunately I do not have the finances to construct a "hybrid"
aircraft out of Fury/Tempest parts.
Perhaps if a "kit","external replica" or whatever became available and
a few were seen flying, someone may have the inspiration to construct
a proper 100% "reproduction" ala Flugwerks 190?
Anyway the fact remains, there are no flying Typhoons of any description
and anything built in flyable condition is a step in the right direction?
I hope I have not offended too many purists out there, I'm just trying to be practical.
Regards,
R.J. Mitchell

[Downunder]

Sorry this is correct http://www.supermarineaircraft.com

[chinch]

Or...a turboprop! I was riding in an EMB120 Brasilia once, daydreaming a bit, and suddenly noticed that the shape of the engine cowl out on the wing (which enclosed a UACL PW120 turbine) was really quite strikingly like that of a Typhoon or Sabre-Tempest. What to do with the exhaust would be a challenge, though...! And of course she'd sound very wrong indeed.

Maybe not so wrong as one might think

There is a WWII BBC recording of a squadron of Tempests attacking ground targets with rockets that shows the Sabre didn't sound like anything else - VERY high revving - actually, come to think of it, it sounded to my ears a lot like the Thunder Mustang with the Falconer V12 at, what, 4500 RPM? And as much as I love the Tempest, it didn't have a big, beautiful throaty roar.

But I digress - maybe *that's* the way you would do a Tempest (ie, with a Falconer V12). At 75% or 80% scale, she would still a LOT of aeroplane. Lemme see, 41' wingspan, 34' long, 16' high * 80% = 32' wingspan, 27' long, 13' high. That's not much smaller than a full size Mustang, at 37' wingspan, 32' long and 14' high. Slightly overscale the bubble canopy to offset the pilot-canopy telltale, and you could end up with a good looking aircraft.

Chris

[Downunder]

The Napier Sabre can be heard here http://user.tninet.se/~ytm843e/tempest.htm
Go to downloads then sound files

[HarvardIV]

The Napier Sabre can be heard here http://user.tninet.se/~ytm843e/tempest.htm
Go to downloads then sound files

Thanks Downunder, that's very interesting. An P-38 pilot told me about the "high pitched roar" now I've heard it too.

[Cees Broere]

Why has nobody ever attempted to convert a Mk II back to Sabre-powered status? Shouldn't be so difficult (apart from finding a Sabre).

Cheers

Cees

[Mike]

Probably because nobody has yet managed to get a Tempest II up and running, even though a number of airframes have been in circulation among collectors for well over 20 years now. I think the expression is 'don't try to run before you can walk'.

Well,

You could convert a Sea Fury, it would be similar.

Chris

[Mike]

Well,

You could convert a Sea Fury, it would be similar.

Chris

er, not really

.

Cees - A friend was going to build a Tempest II with a Griffon up front to make something similar to a Tempest V. This was a serious project. Sadly it wasn't to be.