EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

Just acquired a part built example of this early DF scale kit. Anybody have any experience with it?
It states 8-9 pounds, but just from feeling the very heavy glass fuselage, I have serious doubts about that.
I had planned to use an OS46VRDF and turbax I had lying around, but I am having second thoughts.
I think it will end up more like 10 pounds, I don't know how great that would be with a 46. The VX 46, maybe, but I don't have one.
I could do Dynamax/91, or small turbine...

NCC-1701

I small turbine is the way to go, if you have enough room inside for the fuel. Larrry Wolfe has been successful in converting his early designs to turbine. Heavy glass fuse should be abble to take the stresses from the turbbine.

Good luck with the project.


Rob

shanksow

My Feedback: (2)

Hey guys.

EASYTIGER, just sent you a PM. I'm glad it arrived all safe and sound.

Rob (NCC-1701) - Theres enough room in there for a Jetcat P80. Fuel placement (I think) would be multiple places in the fuse (i.e. no one tank). Wing spars WILL have to be beefed up for turbine operations.

DaFatha

Curtis,

The Buckeye is a good flying airplane. However, the D&B "technology" of that era was to make the fuse out of chopped glass; hence, the weight.

Several Buckeyes have flown out here on Dynamax/OS .91 power and they were not impressive. There is no inlet system and the external inlets are just too small for area rule. It would be an excellent subject, however, for a small turbine (7-8#).

We own the tooling and rights to the original D&B T-2J (single engine version). I've given some thought to pulling it out and looking at creating it for a small turbine once we see how that pans out.

Best regards,
Larry
[email protected]

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

I was just thinking about the intake problem with a 91, as I was building the wing on a 35" Berkeley Aeronca( I know YOU would appreciate that, Larry!), and keep thinking it's not going to perform on a 91 without a cheater hole. And how ugly that would be. Also without REAL ducting I would guess that performance would be sort of slack.
What do you think it would be like at 10 pounds with a 46VRDF? Not worth bothering?

If not, a 500 sized turbine will have to do. I don't know of anything smaller that is AMA certified, yet.

I did not actually weigh the fuse, but it is built like a bassboat, and heavily gelcoated, too. I can certainly sense that the advertised weight seems awfully optimistic, though...

EASYTIGER

My Feedback: (119)

PS is there a TWIN version?

elmshoot

My Feedback: (6)

I have several hundred hours in the full scale Buckeye, the t-2A was the only singe engine version then the B and C models had the twin engines installed. I only flew the B or c version they were very nice performers. I'm told the A was quite anemic on the single motor. I have had several opportunities to buy the Buckeye kit but the fuselage is not very scale. I hope that if Larry decides to redo the Buckeye that with a turbine setup you could get away scale intakes and a bifercated twin exhaust.

The full scale was a quite forgiving plane and was used to teach spins upright and inverted as well as the coupled multi axis departure aka Lomchivok. what fun!
Sparky

S HARRIS

My Feedback: (6)

I HAD ONE FLYING WITH A 91/DYNAMAX FAN. USE A YELLOW F16 INLET MODIFIED (OF CORSE). IT DID PERFORM WELL. WEIGHT ISSUE WSN'T A PROBLEM AS FAR AS WING LOADING BUT GETTING THE CORRECT CG ADDED IT UNNECESSARYLY. IT IS ON THE SECOND " TURBINE AMERCIA" TAPE. I LOST IT TAKING OFF INTO THE SUN. THE ONE THING I CAN SAY IT WOULD SNAP IF TO MUCH ELEVATOR WAS USED. I HAVE ANOTHER ONE BUT NOT SURE WHAT TO DO WITH IT. A TURBINE ISSUE WILL BE THE REAR OF THE FUSE RIGHT BEHIND THE EHAUST OUTLET. IT A BIT CLOSE AND WILL PROBALLY GET A BIT HOT.ANOTHER ISSUE IS THE TALL LANDING GEAR. BETTER MAKE IT RIGHT OR OUT IT WILL COME ON A BAD LANDING.WISH I HAD A PIC TO SHARE. THAT WAS THE DAYS BEFORE DIGITAL CAMERAS. I STILL WONDER HOW OLD THESE KITS ARE? SCOTT

rednmc165

My Feedback: (7)

I did assemble and fly one of these beasts several years ago. You can see the aircraft on the Florida Jets 2000 tape or Joe Lupton's on the Mid Atlantic Jet pictures. I too thought it would be a good flyer since it was the Navy Trainer. I made inlet ducting, exhaust ducting, created a cheater hole and dropped a Dynamax and O.S .91 in for power. The beast was heavy and exceeded the 7-9 pound target. The C.G and unsettling flying charactoristics were exciting to say the least. With redesign for a turbine toy with todays building tecniques, this could be a great subject even as a single T-2J. I am still undecided about the underslung engine configuration. This engine location and thrust line does present some problems as defined in the basic Navy fighter aircraft publication.

wooden shoes

My Feedback: (10)

Curtiss,
Looking for something else I came across this thread.
If you still have this D & B Buckeye, I have a completely built wing for this. Yes it would require a small 12 lb turbine. Let me know
Ed Reints (F troop)

drr9703

My Feedback: (7)

Hello, I have a model of the same jet. It's been in a box for years and was aquired recently at an auction. I am going to make it an electric model using a Lehner motor and probably a Schuebler fan. It looks like a very complete kit with the cockpit and pilot. Should be fun to build. Any comments etc. would be appreciated.

Dave

KP.

My Feedback: (77)

I have 90% of the parts for the Buckeye single engine kit. I am missing (1) tip tank and plan sheets 2-4. Does anyone have the plan sets that I can get a copy of.. Thanks....Ken

L Turner

My Feedback: (3)

KP.

Still flying my T-2 Buckeye MW54. (Search for the thread). Your best bet for a second tip tank would probably be to call Aeroloft in Mesa AZ. They recently supplied me with a spare canopy. Otherwise, could make a mold or even a styrofoam copy of the one tank you have and glass it. I have the plan sheets & could help that way, as well as details on a strong wing build and the Fuse ducting/ turbine mounting I used.

Email me. It's a great flying bird.


Cheers,

Larry Turner