One Wing is Never Enough

How about a canard biplane! Yeah, that's the ticket! New meets old. What a great idea! Oh, it's been done already? Oh, yeah, Orville and Wilbur. I forgot about them.

Biplanes have been with us since day one and, in fact, were the first, and favored type of homebuilt even before the Wright boys wandered on the scene. It was shortly after graduating out of box kites that guys like Lillenthal and Chanute began building biplanes and gliding down every piece of sloping topography they could find. In fact, it may have been the light, but rigid box-kite that gave them their inspiration in the first place.

They needed light, extremely strong and easy-to-build structures. The biplane was it. A century later, the biplane is STILL it. The stick and wire structure is hard to beat when it comes to simplicity, reliability and ease of construction.

At the beginning, there was no romance attached to a biplane. After all, that's what all airplane's were. It was the up-start monoplanes that were in the minority. Today, however, looking back on a century of biplanes, it's impossible to miss the romance and satisfaction that's attached to a wind-in-the-wires biplane.

Many don't realize that the homebuilt aircraft industry was alive and thriving before WWI and a lot of the designs were biplanes. Then, in the '20's, magazines loved to fill their pages with tempting plans and pictures of baby bipes like the Lincoln Sport.

Leap over the war and homebuilding is reborn yet again, this time under the marquee of the EAA. And the biplane is still there. This year, the EAA will celebrate 45 years as an organization and the biplane, which looked like it might be sliding off to the edges of 1990's sport aviation, is coming on stronger than ever. Now we're seeing things like composite sorta-Staggerwings and Curtis's latest, the Macho Stinker.

The biplane soldiers on.

In celebration of a century of bipes, we thought we'd do a round-up of the more popular types as well as those golden oldies which are as good now as they were then.

Golden Oldies

During the 1950's and early 1960's the goal was to get in the air as economically as possible. The primary construction component was a liberal amount of builder-supplied elbow grease. Kits didn't exist and no one gave serious thought to having someone else build even a small component of their airplane for them. The biplanes which came out of that era reflected all of those concerns. They were simple, straight forward machines designed specifically to be constructed by the average handyman on a budget in his garage. And that's where the majority of them came from.

Knight Twister
Vernon Payne's inspired design actually pre-staged all other homebuilt biplanes and, when it was introduced in 1929, was radical in the extreme. It's tiny 55 sq. ft, finely tapered wing (15' span) scared a lot of pilots. Payne stayed with the design, continually updating it until his death just a few years ago. The larger wing airplanes (75 sq. ft.) known as the Imperials are one of the sexiest airplanes ever designed. Structurally, Payne's original design is an engineering tour d' force, in its approach to lightness. The fuselage is a traditional, although light, tubing structure but the wings and tail surfaces are super lightweight, plywood covered, wood structures using balsa wood to fill in the gaps. The airplane has suffered from a lot of bad press that appears to be the result of early-day Cub pilots trying to fly what was essentially a high performance airplane without proper training. The quintessential 1950's homebuilt was Tony Sablar's KT-85. Tony put 500 hours on the airplane and had nothing but 120 and 140 time before flying it.

Mong
Ralph Mong was, and is, a compact person and his airplane shows it. With tiny wings and a narrow fuselage, it isn't made for the gravitationally challenged. It is, however, one of the least expensive biplanes that can be built, if only because it uses no flying wires. Mong chose to use a single lift strut rather than the traditional cross of wires to complete the structural truss of the wings. There is nothing in the airplane that can't be built by the average builder with a bench grinder and a welding torch. The airplane is happiest with a C-90 although some were built with 65 hp. The Mong is fairly typical of the 1950's short wing biplanes in that it assumes the general flight characteristics of a clod of dirt, when power-off, but other than that, presents no particular challenges to the modern day, well-trained tailwheel pilot.

Smith Miniplane
When Frank Smith's Miniplane, N90P, appeared on the cover of Popular Mechanics in the late 1950's, sport aviation got an incredible shot in the arm. That coverage alone may be why the Miniplane was the most popular biplane of it's day. That and the fact it is a dead-simple, easy to build and fly airplane. As originally designed, the airplane had a rigid gear which made it prone to skip and bounce on landing. A lot of builders changed that to a coil-spring gear. It's wings are among the simplest of the type to build and small enough to fit in any workshop. As with all airplanes of its type, it flies best when light, so pilots who install 150 hp engines give away some of its basic pasture goodness in search of performance. The airplane settles quickly when the power is off and is quicker than many taildraggers on the pavement. The old "...get some time in a Luscombe..." axiom applies here.

Pitts Special
Although first designed in 1945, plans for the Pitts weren't commonly available until 1960 when it was offered as the S-1C. The model designations denote different wing configurations, the C (which originally stood for Continental) had the relatively flat-bottomed M-6 airfoil with two ailerons on the bottom wing, the S-1D had the same wings with four ailerons and the S-1S, the most familiar competition model, has symmetrical wings and four ailerons. The S-1C's have had engines as small as 85 hp and as large as hopped up 200's. In any configuration, all Pitts are a delight to fly and not as demanding as their reputation would portray. They are, however, not airplanes to be flown without adequate check-out and preparation. Some dual in a two-place Pitts is worth any amount of money. The Pitts has a one-piece top wing with the swept-back spars spliced inside a plywood center section. The fuselage is trapezoidal in cross section, rather than square, so the top and bottom trusses are usually built first, rather than the sides. The cockpits get noticeably longer in the later Cs and the "D" and "S" models. The Pitts is the standard by which all other biplanes are judged, not only in aerobatic capabilities, but in overall handling and runway manners, as well. Just about all biplanes are easier on the runway, none are as capable in the air.

Starduster One
Lou Stolp's little airplane was, and is, one of the prettiest biplanes ever designed. It's elliptical trailing edges are the result of changing the airfoil at the rear, rather than having different ribs at each station, so it's not as complicated as it looks. Also, the wing uses a tubing truss for drag/anti-drag loads, rather than wires, which keeps the cost down and eases construction. The airplane is just enough larger than a Pitts that it is more sedate and possibly better suited to someone who isn't up to handling the frenetic personality of the Pitts. It might also be a better choice for those who are extremely long of leg.

The Second Biplane Generation

By the late 1960's and early '70's it was obvious that even though we were seeing lots of new, seriously fast, cross-country monoplanes entering sport aviation, the biplane still held the hearts of many. New designs came on the scene, most of which are still with us in plans-form, if not in pre-welded components.

Skyote
A light, wonderfully fragile looking little kite of an airplane, the Skyote was full of surprises. Professionally designed, its double swept-back wings used an aluminum structure while the fuselage was a fine example of finite-element analysis. Pete Bartoe purposely designed the airplane to have a period look, which it's out-rigger gear definitely gives it. It's flight characteristics are amazingly like a Buecker Jungmiester. Very well balanced and quick, the airplane does credible aerobatics on only 85-115 horsepower. It touches down at a fast walk, but it's narrow gear and high center of gravity keep the pilot's feet awake. It's not difficult but does ask that the pilot mind the store.

Acroduster
After Lou Stolp sold Starduster Corporation, they designed both a single place and two-place aircraft designed to be much more aerobatic than the Starduster One and Too. The Acroduster One has an aluminum fuselage which borrows heavily on the Midget Mustang for structure. It was designed to give the Pitts S-1S some competition and it comes close, although, with its spring steel gear, it's much easier to land. The Acroduster Two, is usually seen with much larger engines and it's a real hot rod. Once on the runway, it is well behaved, but it comes across the fence faster than some of the others.

Baby Lakes
Barney Oldfield's Baby Lakes is more "baby" than 'Lakes" and is probably the smallest biplane for which support is still readily available (although Steen AeroLab has Knight Twister drawings available). The "Baby" was designed specifically to give outstanding fun and aerobatic flight on a minimum of horsepower. It is fine with 65 hp, good with 85 hp, and out-standing with anything bigger than a C-90, which is probably the optimal engine. A tall pilot is going to stick out in the breeze, but most will find it a comfortable size. Kept light, the approach speeds are in the Aeronca Champ range although it is quicker on the runway. Construction, like the rest of the design, was aimed at economy. A two-place follow-on, the Buddy Baby, with unique, canoe-like seating is also available.

Acro-Sport I
The Acro Sport One is actually an aerobatic derivative of Paul Poberezny's EAA biplane and shares that airplane's ease of construction and handling. Larger than most single place biplanes, it is Citabria-simple on the runway and can be handled by most low-time tailwheel pilots. Although it probably flies best when kept light with an 0-200, most are seen with up to 180 hp at which point it is a real tiger, albeit, a gentle one. With its Hershey bar wings, construction is absolutely traditional and simple. The fuselage also exhibits a lot of thought given to the first time builder.

Starduster Too
Lou Stolp carried the wonderful lines of his single place airplane over to the Starduster Too. It was the first two-place biplane available to the homebuilt market and, as such, was built by the hundreds. The lowest power normally used is 150 hp which makes the airplane a gentle Sunday afternoon flyer. 260 hp Too's are quite common and they also fly on Sunday afternoon, but everything goes by much faster. Stolp never designed the airplane for serious aerobatics, although it will easily do the loop/roll/spin variety. The construction details are identical to the single place airplane. Its manners on the runway are a direct reflection of how much the airplane weighs as that changes the touchdown speed so much. Normally, it is a straight forward landing airplane with only moderate tailwheel finesse required.

Hyperbipe
The Hyperbipe holds the record as being the only negative-stagger, two-place, side-by-side, high-speed, cabin biplane available to the homebuilder. At 155-165 mph, it is a terrifically useful airplane. Normally seen using 200 hp with a constant speed prop, the airplane will also do practically any aerobatics you'd attempt in a two-place Pitts, just not quite as well. It has a few distinct characteristics, when doing aerobatics, which are probably the result of the square fuselage shape. These, however, are minor and take very little getting used to. On the ground, its tapered rod gear makes it a pussy cat that really knows how to growl on takeoff. The fuselage truss is welded square tube which are available from the factory.

Hatz
The archaic little Hatz sets aircraft design back about fifty years but moves fun-aviating ahead into the next millennium. The Hatz might be considered the Cub of the biplane clan, since it is probably the all-round easiest landing airplane with two wings as well as being one of the slowest. It was designed to be slow speed fun and it has succeeded admirably. It has also succeeded in making a modern antique available to the homebuilder. Because of its larger-than-your-average- homebuilt size, the Hatz is a very simple, but fairly large project. Nothing in the airplane is more complicated than it would have been in, say, 1928, but there's a lot of it. It'll fly with just about any engine you bolt on it, but 115 hp seems about the bottom of the practical limits.

Skybolt
It's a tribute to LaMar Steen that his early 1970's design is more popular now than ever. Larger than a two-place Pitts by nearly four feet, the airplane still gives near Pitts-like aerobatic handling (if built strictly to plans) with Citabria-like landing characteristics. It's cockpit is large enough to swallow even the long of everything and are built with every variation of canopy imaginable. Incidentally, a canopy lowers the drag on the airplane so much it flattens the approach profile. For some reason, many builders feel they need to jack the tail up on a tall tailwheel for better visibility. This only makes the airplane land faster. The top wing is one piece, ala Pitts, and construction is greatly simplified by the availability of builder-support and pre-made components.

Acro-Sport II
Paul's evolving of the Acro Sport One to a two-place airplane worked out better than most such projects do. The two-place airplane is quite light for its size (if the builder does his part) and the construction is as simple as the single-place airplane. Takeoff and landing is at least as easy as the Skybolt which means it's one of the easiest.

Eagle
The Christen/Aviat Eagle cut a huge swath through the homebuilt movement at its introduction and still continues to do so. Frank Christensen doesn't do things half way and the Eagle is testament to that. Aviat Aircraft, Inc. has continued Christensen's fetish with doing it right. If ever there was an orgy of mechanical detail work, the Eagle and everything surrounding it is it. Not available in plans form, the airplane is the ultimate model airplane with every aspect of kit assembly covered in detailed assembly books. Such a degree of development, however, doesn't come cheap and the Eagle is probably the most expensive homebuilt biplane. It is also the most comfortable, and, considering its performance, one of the easiest to land. It's spring steel gear will tolerate a surprising number of pilot mistakes. This is good, because, once wings-level over the runway, a lot of asphalt disappears. Like the Pitts, the Eagle is pretty blind. This however, is just something to be worked around.

In an age where glass bullets are capable of whisking homebuilders over far horizons at blinding speeds, there's still a place for wind-in-the-wire aviating. There is simply no substitute for curving onto final, the airplane in a slight slip, as the pilot orchestrates glide slope and centerline into the proper harmony. Then, as the ground comes up, the pilot gradually eases out of the slip. The wheels whisper through the tops of the grass and the airplane sighs onto the runway. As the airplane gently bumps through the grass, the pilot feels a part of aviation. He feels like a pilot. No place is that feeling stronger than in a biplane.