Important notice
Please remember that people from all over the world read and post on this forum, and that every country has its own rules, regulations and standards. This forum is based in the USA and so much of the information posted here is for the benefit of people who operate aircraft in the experimental/exhibition or experimental/racing categories. Advice given on this forum may be region specific. A person from Europe, for example, may make suggestions perfectly appropriate for a U.S reader, although not acceptable in his home country!

Please take this into account and carefully consult the authorities, standards and approved documentation where you fly.
Fournier Forums Upload picture | User Cp  |  Register  |  Members  |  Search  |  Help
    |- Fournier Aircraft > Fourniography Post New Topic   Post A Reply
Rf3? printer friendly version
next newest post | next oldest post
Author Messages
Collin
General

Gender: Male
Location: McMinnville. Oregon
Registered: Oct 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 711

Click here to see the profile for Collin Visit http://www.cfiamerica.com Send email to Collin Send private message to Collin Find more posts by Collin Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Sunday, October 2, 2011 @ 01:47 PM  

Jorgen
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Lund, Sweden
Registered: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Posts: 833

Click here to see the profile for Jorgen Send email to Jorgen Send private message to Jorgen Find more posts by Jorgen Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Sunday, October 2, 2011 @ 03:48 PM  

Hi Collin,
it looks like a lot of RF 3 + 4 wings get smashed and are in short supply? You take what you've got and wood is good, but I can't really see any other reason to put a Jodel wing on a RF 3 or 4. Markku, maybe you should have made up a couple of new spars while you were at it, but maybe Tony can chip in with jigs and all when he get his wing project going.

That doesn't stop me from beeing curious about this hybrids handling characteristics though. I seem to remember Jodels have cable actuated ailerons as opposed to the push rods on the RF 4, correct? Any further info on that?

May the 4's be with you/ Jörgen

Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Monday, October 3, 2011 @ 06:17 AM  

Well, well, well!

Where did that picture come from Collin?

As I understand it, RF3s had cable operated plain ailerons, while RF4s had rod-operated Frise ailerons.

Since Jodels also have cable-operated plain ailerons, it is presumably possible to connect up the controls of a hybrid like this fairly easily?

What intrigues me is its apparently tiny wing-area (and certainly lower aspect-ratio) compared with the original RF3.

A Jodel D.9 (whose wing I'm guessing this is) has a wing area of 9.0sq metres, while an RF3 has 11.2sq m. The Jodel's published empty weight is 190kg (MTOM 320kg) while an RF3's empty weight should be around 240kg (350kg MTOM) so I'm guessing this hybrid ('Fourndel D.12?') will have a rather higher stall speed (50+mph), and its wing might have limited strength margins, depending on the hybrid's actual empty weight.

Nevertheless, it should roll well, and with such a small frontal area, it should go pretty quickly too!

Yours, Bob

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Donald
Command Sergeant Major

Gender: Male
Location: Scotland
Registered: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Posts: 489

Click here to see the profile for Donald Send email to Donald Send private message to Donald Find more posts by Donald Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Monday, October 3, 2011 @ 08:02 AM  

Who'd have believed that? Wouldn't it be interesting to know the registration? I presume it's European for I'm not sure Jodels are known in America.

Bob's right about the RF3 having cable operated ailerons though they're differential through the outboard bellcranks.

Collin
General

Gender: Male
Location: McMinnville. Oregon
Registered: Oct 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 711

Click here to see the profile for Collin Visit http://www.cfiamerica.com Send email to Collin Send private message to Collin Find more posts by Collin Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Monday, October 3, 2011 @ 05:10 PM  

Hi,

I was just surfing and found it under "rectimo" search.


More info

http://www.pilotes-prives.fr/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2702&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=30

Donald
Command Sergeant Major

Gender: Male
Location: Scotland
Registered: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Posts: 489

Click here to see the profile for Donald Send email to Donald Send private message to Donald Find more posts by Donald Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Tuesday, October 4, 2011 @ 05:31 AM  

Seems to have a D18 wing. Ordinarily that would have an area of 10m2 but with the narrower RF3 fuselage I suppose it'd come out a little more. Not that I'm tempted but it would be interesting to know the performance of this hybrid for the Jodels are famous for their fine flying efficiency.
milnerd
Corporal

Gender: Male
Location: Long Valley, NJ
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 29

Click here to see the profile for milnerd Send email to milnerd Send private message to milnerd Find more posts by milnerd Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Tuesday, October 4, 2011 @ 09:16 AM  

I recall reading somewhere that the reason for a Jodel's wing efficiency comes from the fact that the outer part of the wing is set at a much lower angle of attack than the inner part. At high angles of attack the whole wing is working and aerodynamically it is very much like a high aspect ratio elliptical wing. At cruise when the angle of attack is much lower the tips are not contributing any lift and therefore no induced drag and the aerodynamically the wing looks like a low aspect ratio wing which helps the cruise speed. It seems like most of the European glder towing gets done with Robins that have the Jodel cranked wings. Despite only having 180 Hp and being burdened down with big silencers and 4 blade Hoffmann props they seem to climb as well as the noisy 235 Hp Pawnees with long two blade props that seem to be the standard towing implement over here.

Dave

Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Wednesday, October 5, 2011 @ 04:37 AM  

Hi Guys,

I concur with everything Dave says, but if it's a D.18 wing, made for a side-by-side two-place airplane, how did they tailor it to fit the slim RF3's much narrower fuselage?
That's why I assumed it was the smaller wing from the narrow little single-seat D.9.

What makes you think it's a D.18 wing Donald?

We shall have to ensure this airplane gets invited to the European Fournier get-togethers, so that we can have a good, long look at it.

Yours, Bob

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Donald
Command Sergeant Major

Gender: Male
Location: Scotland
Registered: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Posts: 489

Click here to see the profile for Donald Send email to Donald Send private message to Donald Find more posts by Donald Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Wednesday, October 5, 2011 @ 03:12 PM  

From the last post in the second of Collin's links
Quote:
"L'espèce de JOFOURNIER est constitué d'un fuselage (+empennages et train) de RF-3 et d'une aile de D-18."

As to making if fit the narrower RF3 fuselage I imagine a couple of extra spar-forward ribs and a few square feet of ply would do it.
Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Thursday, October 6, 2011 @ 05:36 AM  

Aha!

Thanks Donald. We don't have broadband in our little English village, so I didn't investigate those links. Now all is clear.
I guess the D.18's centre-section must be all solid then (rather than a box with two solid blocks for the wing attach bolt holes).

It would be fascinating to see how it flies.

Maybe this would provide an easier solution for Tony, Dave and any other Fournicators who have a fuselage but no wing.

Yours, Bob

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Donald
Command Sergeant Major

Gender: Male
Location: Scotland
Registered: Jan 2007
Status: Offline
Posts: 489

Click here to see the profile for Donald Send email to Donald Send private message to Donald Find more posts by Donald Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Thursday, October 6, 2011 @ 06:22 AM  

The same post tells that it is classed as a ULM.

Even if the centre section spar is a box it probably wouldn't be too difficult to open it up and add local solidity for bolt pass-throughs. The rear spar connections might be more of a challenge for I'm not sure the Jodel wing has a rear spar. But in the UK the real challenge would be getting the LAA to approve the mods. Not impossible, I'm sure, but almost certainly not just a nod and a wink either.

Collin
General

Gender: Male
Location: McMinnville. Oregon
Registered: Oct 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 711

Click here to see the profile for Collin Visit http://www.cfiamerica.com Send email to Collin Send private message to Collin Find more posts by Collin Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Friday, October 7, 2011 @ 12:25 PM  

Hi,

It might be worth checking on what happen to the original wing.

Collin

jb92563
Second Lieutenant

Gender: Male
Location: Lake Elsinore, CA, USA
Registered: Mar 2007
Status: Offline
Posts: 583

Click here to see the profile for jb92563 Visit http://picasaweb.google.com/jb92563 Send email to jb92563 Send private message to jb92563 Find more posts by jb92563 Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Monday, October 10, 2011 @ 04:17 PM  

There are some jodels in the US, I'm sure. I spoke to a guy who built one in southern CA.

Very interesting Fournodel RF3D12.

The extreme outboard dihedral always looked so odd to me. Is the center section flat?

Interesting note about the cruise unloading of the wingtips and reduced drag.

I noticed it has no registration markings so perhaps the design never got into the air?

Technically, doesn't that make it a UFO?

[Edit by jb92563 on Monday, October 10, 2011 @ 04:18 PM]

--------------------
Ray
RF4D #4057 N-1771 Rectimo 1400cc
http://picasaweb.google.com/jb92563/FournierRF4D
http://www.touringmotorgliders.org

Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 @ 07:38 AM  

Yes Ray, the Jodel's center-section is both flat and parallel-chord, like John Thorp's Hershey-bar T-18 or Cherokee wing, but unlike them, the Jodel/Robin family's center-section has almost no wash-out, so it's pretty efficient in the cruise.
The sophisitated bit is the tips, which are tapered to give a more nearly elliptical spanwise lift distribution (the theoretical ideal).
They also have both dihedral (for lateral stability) and wash-out (to negate tip-stalling) and yet, having virtually zero angle of attack in the cruise they contribute very little induced drag. They (the tips) are also small and very light in weight.

That's why the wooden Robin family so massively out-performed the similar-sized and weight Cherokees with identical engines, nosewheel gear etc.

The downside is of course the complexity of building such a wing and, yes the stripped Jodel wings I've seen have no rear spar, just a square, very light, hollow plywood box main spar, about six to eight inches square, depeding on the size and model of Jodel.
Indeed, with its wide rib spacing, a bare Jodel wing seems to consist of almost nothing!
Which is why it's so light of course, another reason for its efficiency.

If this RF3 is French and if it weighs less than 300kg mauw (which I suspect it does), then it presumably falls into the same new ultralight category as the RF4UL, meaning it neds no certification. That might be why it has no registration, so it may well have actually flown.
As I said earlier, I would love to see it flying, and even better, because I am a great fan and advocate of the Joly and Delemontez designs, I would love to fly it and see how it goes.

Presumably, if it has a D.18 wing (designed for a max weight of 460kg or 1,014lb) then it will be very strong, and therefore probably aerobatic at a weight of 300kg.

Yours, Bob

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 @ 08:01 AM  

see: http://www.jodel.com/index.asp?p=d9spar&construction

and there’s lots more info at: http://www.jodel.com

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 @ 08:07 AM  

I'm sorry, I know this thread is supposed to be just pictures, but to avoid a long string of questions & answers, here are my professional impressions of the earlier production two-seat Jodels. Sorry if the prose is a bit dry, it was edited to length, but with as much detail as possible for an Australian magazine.
The only real difference with the later D.18 is that the latter is slightly smaller and lighter and uses a Rotax 912 engine.
Sorry there are no photos; the pdf of this article runs to 2.45Mb, so my server (AOL) won't handle it.
As you will see, when it comes to building airplanes, the Americans know how to make money, but the French (and British and Italians) know how to make an efficient and good-handling airframe.

Two-seat Jodels (D.11, D.112, D.117, D.120) Club or Sky Princess
by Bob Grimstead

Jodels are neat, light, dainty and very efficient, French-designed, wood-and-fabric tailwheel aeroplanes, mostly using trusty four-cylinder Continental A65, A75, C-85, C-90 or O-200 engines, although some later, lighter versions have Volkswagens or Jabirus. Jodels have a comparatively high cruise speed on their low (and therefore economical) power, thanks to their light weight, low drag and that efficient, semi-tapered and noticeably cranked wing that is their trademark. All Jodels have good short-field performance, and their handling is fairly benign for tailwheelers, although the four-seaters can sometimes be amusing to fly with a rearward centre of gravity – especially on or off a hard runway.
The word Jodel came from combining the two designers’ names: CFI and aircraft maintenance engineer Edouard Joly and aeronautical engineer Jean Délémontez, both of whom were accomplished homebuilders. These men (subsequently father- and son-in-law) built their first, single-seat, open-cockpit Jodel (the D.9 Bébé) in 1946, immediately after the war, and just for fun. Having sketched its lines directly onto the structure, they were poorly placed when asked for production drawings. The Jodel family subsequently became big, spanning many models, with the wooden Robins becoming later derivatives.
All Jodels have cranked wings and predominantly wooden construction. They might be either homebuilt or factory-produced (by several firms), and it is often difficult to differentiate between the different models visually. Here I shall concentrate on two factory-built two-seaters built by SAN and Wassmer respectively, although at least half the Jodels flying around the world are actually amateur built. For specific sub-models, see the sidebar.

THE AEROPLANE
All Jodels are tailwheelers, with proper control columns, sprightly handling, great all-round visibility and excellent cruise performance, so they probably appeal to the more outgoing and adventurous among us. Most of the single- and two-seaters have no flaps, but some do have spoilers to increase their descent angle for landing. Jodels are prized by people who appreciate value for money, particularly if they enjoy rolling up their sleeves and working on their own aeroplanes – and their structures, systems and Continental engines are not complex, so this is comparaticely easy.
Lucién Quérey was an enthusiastic aeromodeller and glider pilot, a dynamic businessman, and an early Jodel convert. His SAN factory initially concentrated on equipping previously constructed Jodel D.112s with radios but, realising the type’s potential, he obtained a licence to build production models. Re-designated and improved as the D.117, the first of these was completed in 1953. Quérey later felt his Jodels didn’t have enough drag for a sensible approach angle, so he designed and fitted under-wing spoilers or airbrakes as an option. His company, SAN, eventually sold 1,098 Jodels. The red-striped example in these photos is a 1957 SAN Jodel D.117 with a 90hp Continental C-90-14F engine.
Wassmer was a woodworking concern in another part of France that started building Jodels in 1955. Altogether, they made 712 D.112s (with 65-horsepower engines) and D.120s (with 90hp engines). The blue-striped Jodel illustrated here is a 1960 Wassmer Jodel D.120A (the A is for airbrakes) with the same 90hp Continental engine as the other aeroplane.
Any little Jodel is a friendly aeroplane, with a structure that is very light for its size but remarkably strong. Hand-built from spruce, gaboon ply and Ceconite fabric, at just 350 kilogrammes, most Jodels are far lighter than a 535 kg Cessna 152 or Piper Tomahawk, and yet, with +5.6/-2.8g design load factors, much stronger than both those boring metal aeroplanes.

[Edit by Bob Grimstead on Tuesday, October 11, 2011 @ 08:23 AM]

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 @ 08:26 AM  

The classic Jodel cranked wing uses the common NACA 23012 aerofoil. Out on its upturned tips are simple, unsophisticated, constant-chord ailerons with very little differential action. The red example here has no flaps, but the otherwise similar blue one has the under-belly airbrakes that work like flaps for landing.
Despite its rounded top-decking, the Jodel fuselage is basically a slab-sided, rectangular cross-section plywood box, so it needs no fin other than the small fibreglass fillet that distinguishes a SAN D.117 from a Wassmer D.120. The all-flying rudder is generously-sized, and there is a conventional fixed tailplane, plus dual elevators with a small trim tab. As well as the standard, all-flying fin/rudder, some later Jodels also used an all-flying ‘monobloc’ tailplane or stabilator.
The fuselage sits at a low ground angle, giving good forward visibility. Fuel is contained in two tanks. The front one ahead of the cockpit holds sixty litres, and must be used for take-off and landing, while the rear tank under the baggage shelf holds an additional 55 litres. A stout transverse handle in the rear fuselage, which the D.120A lacks, aids ground handling the D.117.
With doors on both sides of the cabin, you enter by hopping up on to the low trailing-edge of either wing, moving carefully forward along the walkway to avoid puncturing the wing’s fabric covering, and lifting one half of the canopy. Both sides latch open, and although hinged along the middle, they do not touch, so it is fine to open both at once. The cockpit is 1.02 metres wide – 10 cm wider than a Cessna 152’s – but feels much roomier, thanks to its low canopy sills and extensive transparency. This, plus the slim canopy and windscreen support tubes, downward-sloping upper engine cowling, and a low instrument panel combine to give exceptionally good forward visibility for a tailwheeler. Both aeroplanes’ seats have very comfortable (and safe) conformal foam cushions, although, because the squabs are a little thicker than the originals, the never-excess headroom might suffer slightly. The red SAN D.117 has a blown ‘bubble’ windscreen, while the blue Wassmer D.120A’s screen is a simpler, single-curvature perspex or plexiglas sheet.
Most Jodels have simple but adequate instrumentation. G-BBPS’s standard panel contains six primary instruments: ASI, compass, VSI, altimeter, turn-and-slip and tachometer. To the left is a multi-function fuel gauge, indicating the selected tank’s contents, but supplementing this with warning lights for both low fuel and low oil pressure and also for some strange reason, generator amps. The magneto switch is alongside – this rotating knob is pulled out to select both mags on and then rotated left and right to switch off either in turn. The last small knob controls cabin heat, and there is no parking brake (another D.120 luxury).
Along the panel’s bottom are push-pull knobs for mixture, throttle and carburettor heat, with the yellow rotating fuel selector in the middle. The starter button and fuses are over on your right, while a neat radio is installed down on the left. Other Jodels might have more or less instrumentation, or even be completely lacking in electrics, necessitating hand-swinging the propeller. This might seem anachronistic in the 21st Century, but it does keep the airframe ultra-light, and is no chore with these easy-starting Continentals (I have two, and they both start at the first gentle swing after six priming turns).
Jodels’ dual control columns are joined at a centre-cockpit hinge, so the hand-grips move up and down through a small arc as the sticks are moved from side-to-side but, having initially noticed it, you will soon forget this eccentricity. Some Jodels have one or two throttles working up and down in vertical slots in the panel (as both these examples once did). Again, although unusual, in practice and with familiarity, this presents no problems.
As expected, with its electric starter, this little C-90 started easily after a couple of priming pumps on the throttle. The aeroplane’s simple suspension is just a stack of hollow oval rubber blocks in compression, but nevertheless comfortable, if a little stiff. The steerable tailwheel makes gentle turns easy, but only the left occupant has brake pedals and, being suspended above, inboard and separate from the rudder pedals, these are not as well positioned as they might be. Like many Jodel pilots, to turn while taxying, I found myself first applying full right rudder and then dabbing the right brake pedal with my left toes for a really tight turn. Owner Andy warned against turning too tightly when solo, or without any fuel in the rear tank – many Jodels have been tipped up and broken their propellers in this way.

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 @ 08:30 AM  

Despite only producing a mere ninety horsepower, the small Continental endows this lightweight aeroplane with a remarkably good take-off and climb, especially considering this is a full twenty per cent less power (and therefore lower fuel consumption) than in even a humble Cessna 152. You need quite a lot of right rudder deflection to keep straight, but the pedal pressure is not high, and the aeroplane is so light, it accelerates so rapidly and it lifts off at such a low speed that this does not last for long. We were airborne after a mere 150 metres in a temperature of 20°C and into a gentle ten-knot headwind. With no flaps to retract and no electric pump to turn off, there are no after take-off checks, which is always nice. The climb rate, two-up, was around 800 fpm, which is remarkably good on just 90 horsepower.
All this delightful aeroplane’s controls are light and effective. The ailerons might be a little heavier than the elevator and the rudder, but barely so. Even at a fast 125 knots they were not unduly heavy, and caused just a little adverse yaw at all speeds. Stability is good in all three axes, and despite it being a bumpy day, I could find no evidence of a mild Dutch Roll some other writers have mentioned. In fact, the aircraft is so very stable that it flies for extended periods with your hands and feet completely clear of the controls, which is quite unusual for a low-winged aeroplane. Some writers have suggested Jodels were originally approved for aerobatics. This is not true, and people have occasionally been hurt attempting to aerobat these elderly airframes in recent years, although they are significantly stronger than Cherokees or Cessnas.
To get the best from such a clean airframe, it’s important to settle it ‘on the step’ by climbing a little above your intended altitude, setting power, trimming out any slight residual elevator force, and then letting the aeroplane gently subside to the required height. For pilots used to less efficient aircraft, the nose seems very low in the cruise, giving excellent forward visibility. Even knowing about this characteristic, I still found myself climbing a couple of times before finally getting the attitude and trim precisely right. The elevator tab trimmer is a tiny lever on the left sidewall, turning through a 120-degree arc. Quite sensitive, it is also useful for getting the trim exactly correct.
Wooden airframes absorb vibration better than metal ones, so a comfortable 2,350 rpm gave us a commendably smooth 95 knots IAS at 2,500 feet, making a neat 100 knots TAS (or an impressive 115 mph). Andy’s previous Evra prop gave him five more knots, but was more expensive than this current Newton one – both are wooden. Some poorer propellers will inevitably spoil this performance a little, so it pays to shop around. With a properly leaned 18 to 20-lph consumption, full tanks allow a theoretical five hours of cruising or a 500 nm range with 45 minutes reserve. The canopy’s draught sealing looks rudimentary (and it can be difficult to source replacements) but it actually works well in flight; the airflow noise is reasonable, and we experienced none of the piercing wind blasts you get in some other types.
The Jodel’s low speed handling is every bit as good as its other traits, although everything happens at incredibly low airspeeds. Since the payload can be such a high proportion of its total mass, both cruise and stall speeds vary significantly with weight. At 558 kilos, we were at around ninety percent of the maximum allowable, and with a forward C of G. Like most aeroplanes of its generation, the Jodel has no artificial electric stall warner, although a 1959 British Airworthiness Directive required small triangular stall ‘breaker strips’ to be glued to the inboard leading-edges to provide some aerodynamic buffeting over the elevators to provide natural stall warning.
I found the handling quite normal in all axes at as low an airspeed as forty knots, but would you believe that the ASI needle had to come all the way back to an indicated 29 knots before, with a slight judder and a straightforward nose-drop, we eventually stalled. When I held the stick hard back against the rear stops, this willing little aeroplane just sank gently, nodding and wallowing a little, but still under full control. I suspect the max weight, aft C of G stall might be less benign, but I have no reason to believe it would actually be unpleasant.

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 @ 08:34 AM  

Returning to base, I found it surprisingly difficult to slow down and descend, so unexpectedly clean is this airframe. For the same reason, I found 600-foot circuits much easier than 1,000-foot ones. With such simple systems, there is little to check, except that fuel is selected from the front tank for the approach and landing. All my approaches were made with the throttle closed – the safest way – with a little sideslip to vary the descent angle. The glide angle is quite shallow, but if needed, full rudder gives a twenty degree banked sideslip, doubling the descent rate.
Andy’s recommended fifty-knot approach speed initially struck me as frighteningly slow; but a moment’s mental arithmetic confirmed that, with a 29-knot stall, 1.3 times that, or just forty knots, might be okay with some allowance for gusts. Sure enough, at my initial 55 knots we floated after the flare, thanks to the ground cushion developed under this long, low wing. Subsequently, fifty knots gave me more than adequate control, and felt much more comfortable, while Andy assured me that a 45-knot approach was no problem, and even forty knots was feasible on a calm day.
The flare and hold-off were instinctive, and it was very easy to make a succession of three-point touchdowns of gradually increasing gentleness. This is a delightful aeroplane to fly, and one of the easiest tailwheelers to land, provided, as with all taildraggers, you concentrate, and stop any directional deviation before it gets started. As I said at the beginning, it is a ‘friendly’ aeroplane, and it was a real pleasure to renew my acquaintance with the marque.
If you fancy an inexpensive, nice-flying, short-field, efficient two-seat cruiser and have reasonable foot/eye coordination, you should consider a Jodel (if you can find one).

Jodel variants

More than 4,000 Jodels have been made altogether, both production versions (by several companies) and amateur built, so this model summary is necessarily compressed.

D.9 and D.91 to D.99 The original single seaters; the second digit refers to engine type.
D.10, 100, 105 D.1050/1/2, DR.200/220/221/250/253 Three/four-seaters with various engines. These and the D.14, D.140A/B/C/E Lycoming O-360-powered four/five-seater are not relevant to this article. D.18 and D.19 are qite modern, much lighter, and mostly VW or Jabiru-powered, homebuilt, light-weight two-seaters (the D.19 has a nosewheel).

Most common, and featured here, are the D.11 two-seaters, originally designed to a French Government requirement for production, and subsequently built by several companies and many homebuilders.

Production two-seaters:

D.112 D.11 derivative with 65hp Continental A-65, built by Denize-Renard, Ginoux, Passot-Dormoy, SAN, Sauze & Wassmer.
D.112A D.112 with spoilers
D.112D D.112 built by Valladeau
D.112V D.112 built by EAC with sliding canopy
D.117 D.112 derivative built by SAN and Alpavia with larger, moulded windscreen, dorsal fillet and 90hp Continental C-90 with electrics
D.117A D.117 with airbrakes
D.119D D.112 built by Valladeau with 90hp Continental C-90
D.119DA D.119 with airbrakes
D.119V D.119 built by EAC with sliding canopy

D.120 Paris-Nice Developed D.112 built by Wassmer with 90hp Continental C-90 electrics, radio, cabin heat and hydraulic brakes
D.120A D.120 with airbrakes
D.120R D.120 glider tug
D.120AR D.120R with airbrakes
D.126 D.112 built by EAC with sliding canopy and DR100 undercarriage
D.128 D.126 with 90hp Continental C-90

D.150 Mascaret Jean Délémontez’s favourite. A roomier two-seater built only by SAN, using a cropped, flapped, D.1050 wing with fuel tanks in inboard leading-edge extensions, an all-flying tailplane, swept fin and 100hp Continental O-200.
D.150A Mascaret D.150 with 105hp Potez 4E20

Amateur built:

D.111 D.112 with 75hp Minié 4DA/C32
D.113 D.112 with 100hp Continental O-200 or 65hp Chabet
D.114 D.112 with 65/70hp Minié 4DA28
D.115 D.112 with 65/75hp Mathis 4GF60
D.116 D.112 with 60hp Salmson 9ADR60
D.118 D.112 with 60/62hp Walter Mikron
D.119 D.112 with 90hp Continental C-90
D.121 D.112 with 75hp Continental A75
D.122 D.112 with 75hp Praga
D.123 D.112 with 83hp Salmson AP01
D.124 D.112 with 80hp Salmson SAQ01
D.125 D.112 with 90hp Kaiser K90

So now you know!

Appropriate web sites:
http://www.piteraq.dk/flight/jodelring.html
http://www.airworlduk.com/jodclub.html
http://www.avionsjodel.com/

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 @ 08:39 AM  

WILL YOU BUY A JODEL?
All Jodels are wooden, and mostly amateur-constructed. Older ones were often partly or wholly assembled with water-based casein glue (although other glues have also been used, particularly in later years) so they should never be left outside. Many are fifty years old, and it only takes one wet winter in the open to cause trouble. Beware of a shiny new coat of paint, which might cover underlying problems. If you are thinking of buying one, it is well worth giving it a thorough inspection, since nowadays finding an engineer sufficiently skilled in wood and fabric construction can be difficult, and any structural repair will inevitably be time consuming and therefore expensive.
Serious structural deterioration is possible. Upon stripping the dacron from a Jodel’s control surfaces, one can discover that the structure is only held together by the fabric! Control horns occasionally come loose, so it is a good idea to grip the surfaces and waggle these horns to check.
Also check underneath the entire airframe; ensure there are plenty of drain holes, and they are not blocked. Remove all inspection panels; wing and fuselage interiors can easily be inspected through these, and have a good sniff at every hole. Any hint of the smell of mushrooms reveals rot, which must be investigated before further flight. Tap the ribs’ upper surfaces – a change in note from one to another could indicate glue failure.
Minor flying control or wing rib repairs are fairly simple (and therefore inexpensive) to fix, but spar damage can be costly. Water inevitably drains to the trailing-edges, so waggle these to reveal glue failure. Tug the ailerons to assess the integrity of their supporting false spar. Check for wing walkway sponginess; there could be rot here if the aeroplane has been outside for long.
Inspect the main undercarriage mountings. Jodel main legs break away from their attach plates if overloaded, particularly sideways, so ensure both legs are straight. Check the mainwheel tracking; they should be parallel to the aeroplane’s centreline, but are supposed to be slightly angled outwards at the top. D.120s use special brake fluid and have scissor links, which can wear. The D.117s’ unusually narrow 420 by 150 tyres are no longer available, but modern American alternatives are. Andy’s (red) Jodel has a disc brake modification, rather than its original, not very effective French drum brakes.
Significant fuselage problems can require costly re-skinning. Wing spar to fuselage, tailplane and tail spring bolts often suffer from serious corrosion because the manufacturers did not routinely use chromate anti-corrosion paste. They should be removed regularly for checking. If they are seized, do not ignore it; that could indicate advanced corrosion is going on inside.
Wooden airframes (and propellers) expand and shrink with humidity variations, so it is important to check the propeller attachment bolts and control cables every couple of months to ensure adequate tension. Waggle the controls and listen for excessive friction in the cables, which run over pulleys and through fibre friction blocks. Loose cables wear prematurely, so they should be fixed soon, and replaced if exhibiting significant wear.
All cowlings can be subject to vibration damage. Fixing this early with a small fibreglass repair is easy, but leaving it, and having a cowling depart in flight, could be catastrophic. The same is true of canopies. These small Continental engines are normally very reliable (although rather prone to carburettor icing). They do prefer to be warmed gently, and to have regular oil changes (every three months or 25 hours, whichever is sooner) so check the logbooks. Exhaust cracks are always problematic, and it may be impossible to find a crack without removal of the whole system.
Do check the empty weight, although with these small Jodels it is rarely a problem. At 348 kilos, G-BBPS (the red one) can lift full fuel (82 kg), two 82-kilo chaps and even 20 kg of baggage as well, while still being within its 617kg maximum take-off weight.
Inside the aeroplane, do check the shoulder harness attachments. Originally only a lap strap was fitted, and some shoulder straps have unsatisfactory anchorages.
My collection of post-1979 Jodel Club newsletters covers recurring maintenance topics like: brake adjustment, repair and replacement, undercarriage rubbers and servicing, fuel pump and fuel cock repair and replacement, tailwheel springs and shimmying, and sourcing parts. This has mostly been solved by British enthusiast Pete Smoothy’s Airworld (UK) Ltd, PO Box 1835, Winslow, Bucks, MK18 3ZS England. Tel: +44 1296 714900, Fax +44 1296 713303, e-mail: sales@airworlduk.com.

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Tuesday, October 11, 2011 @ 08:49 AM  

I've flown many hours in the bigger Jodels too (D.150, D.1050 and D.140) and I'm a great admirer of all of them.
I wanted to buy a D.140, but eventually got the Maule because it was easier for air-to-air photography.
But the Jodel is a far better airplane.

The wooden Robin family (DR300, DR400 ect) all followed from the Jodel line, most of the later ones having nose-wheel landing gear.
Brilliant airplanes, as Sportair's Neil Jensen understood, since he imported both Fourniers and Robins into Britain!

Yours, Bob

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Bob Grimstead
Captain

Gender: Male
Location: Perth, Western Australia or West Sussex, England
Registered: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Posts: 2027

Click here to see the profile for Bob Grimstead Visit http://www.redhawksduo.co.uk Send email to Bob Grimstead Send private message to Bob Grimstead Find more posts by Bob Grimstead Edit or delete this message Reply w/Quote
Posted Sunday, March 24, 2013 @ 01:15 AM  

OK, further research says it has flown several hours, and is based at Brive, south central Fance, inland from Toulouse & Bergerac.

Bob

--------------------
Flying and displaying Fournier RF4Ds VH-HDO and G-AWGN, building replica RF6B G-RFGB and custodian of RF6B prototype F-BPXV

Post New Topic   Post A Reply Jump to:
Contact Us | cfiamerica.com | Privacy Policy All times are GMT -4 Hours.
Welcome to The Fournier Forum, Guest!  
Login
Username :
Password :
In order to fully utilize the abilities of this board, you are required to register as a member. Registration is free, and allows you to do lots of things including turning on or off certain features of this board. Register now!
Forum Rules & Description
Who Can Read The Forum? Any registered user or guest
Who Can Post New Topics? Any registered user
Who Can Post Replies? Any registered user
Who Can Edit Posts? Any original author
Just Pictures
Currently Active Users: 87
There are currently 0 members and 87 guests on the boards. | Most users ever online was 822 on 08-01-2020 10:15 PM
Search This Forum
Search Keywords: Search From:
Powered by CuteCast v2.0 BETA 2
Copyright © 2001-2003 ArtsCore Studios