Roland Payen projects and prototypes

I have a question about the SP.230 project. I looked at its dimensions and noticed one strange thing: the width of the fuselage in the cockpit area is 50 centimeters at its widest point. Maybe I'm wrong, but it's kind of weird. Could this project have been a scaled-down layout?
 
I do not know if this link has already been published but it allows to see what should be the Pa.100 at the beginning and what unfortunately was following the refusal of approval by A. Herbemont who prevented his participation in the "Deutsch" cup ...

http://jnpassieux.fr/www/html/Pa100.php
 
Tim52413 said:
I have a question about the SP.230 project. I looked at its dimensions and noticed one strange thing: the width of the fuselage in the cockpit area is 50 centimeters at its widest point. Maybe I'm wrong, but it's kind of weird. Could this project have been a scaled-down layout?
Click to expand...
Because of the engine which hides it, the profile drawing does not allow us to see what is the exact width of the fuselage in its highest part.
In the same way, the top photo does not allow us to know whether the width of the fuselage, hidden by the thickness of the wing, corresponds exactly to that of the cockpit. Perhaps it is more important.
In any case, it seems that the builders were instead considering a width of 80 cm (even if it is possible that, after the fact, an "8" was drawn over a "5" on the drawing).
Perhaps also, if there were errors in the known drawing, the wind tunnel model (Photo from Fast Facts issue 65, page 21, Ferdinand C W Kaesmann article) corrected them.

 

Attachments

  • Payen SP 230 cockpit.jpg
    Payen SP 230 cockpit.jpg
    137.6 KB · Views: 4
  • payen SP 230 002 - Copie.jpg
    payen SP 230 002 - Copie.jpg
    379.1 KB · Views: 5
Deltafan said:
Because of the engine which hides it, the profile drawing does not allow us to see what is the exact width of the fuselage in its highest part.
In the same way, the top photo does not allow us to know whether the width of the fuselage, hidden by the thickness of the wing, corresponds exactly to that of the cockpit. Perhaps it is more important.
In any case, it seems that the builders were instead considering a width of 80 cm (even if it is possible that, after the fact, an "8" was drawn over a "5" on the drawing).
Perhaps also, if there were errors in the known drawing, the wind tunnel model (Photo from Fast Facts issue 65, page 21, Ferdinand C W Kaesmann article) corrected them.

Click to expand...
That is, it is impossible to use these drawings and drawings from the patent without alterations. Did I understand correctly? In order for the drawing to make sense, is it necessary to expand the fuselage to an acceptable width with unchanged wings? Or the dimensions themselves in the drawings are incorrect and it is worth starting from the size of the motor (the diameter of the motor is 940 mm).
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom