Homebuilt Tipsy Nipper

The place to raise issues, ask questions, swap ideas and discuss anything related to aircraft engineering, maintenance and building.
NB Any opinions expressed in this forum are not necessarily those of LAA Engineering

Moderators: John Dean, Moderator

Brian Hope
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:28 pm
Location: Sheerness Kent

Post by Brian Hope » Sun Oct 26, 2008 9:00 pm

Hi Colin, not long been back from Turweston hence delay in responding. I did indeed chat with Francis on Friday and he told me there was no LAA based problem with building a Nipper. The issue is the non availability of a fuselage drawing in the plans set. If you have a fuselage, or can get one from (Raymond as John suggets) or Nipper Kits (Alan Ayles) then you can certainly build it. It might even be possible to 'copy' a fuselage but you would have to be able to show Engineering that it has the correct gauge tubing etc. So the official word is that yes you can build a Nipper.

User avatar
ColinC
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:05 pm
Location: Derbyshire

Post by ColinC » Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:08 pm

Thanks for the update Brian.
018841
Colin Cheese

User avatar
mikehallam
Posts: 576
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:12 pm
Location: West Sussex
Contact:

Post by mikehallam » Mon Oct 27, 2008 5:46 pm

Colin Cheese,

But shurely that's a bug not a mouse running around your LH text ?!?

MDF1
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 9:43 pm
Location: Hampshire

Post by MDF1 » Mon Oct 27, 2008 7:14 pm

Brian. Many thanks for taking the time to speak to FD, that is good news indeed after months of rumour about the Nipper!! Hopefully it will have a bright future and I hope I can start building in the new year!!

David Hall
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:56 pm

Post by David Hall » Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:18 am

This is good news indeed, and even though a couple of years ago I was told any new project "had to be a refurbishment/restoration job of an existing aircraft", I very much welcome it.

I was supplied with a list of available components (including new jig built fuselages) back then, so hopefully NK&C (if it's still an entity) will rise to the challenge of producing the components required.
035998

mb2
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:44 pm

Post by mb2 » Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:58 pm

I have many (30 approx) drawings of parts that are additional to the 13 part plans set people are familar with. One such drawing covers the fuselage frame in detail which could used to build from. I'm not sure how you would stand in terms of licencing as I understand Nipper Kits and Components are still in the 'frame'!.
Regards
Mark

John Austin
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 2:10 pm

Post by John Austin » Sat May 29, 2010 2:19 pm

Hello Mark

I've just bought a set of Nipper plans from NK&C and I'm planning to start building a Nipper as soon as I can sort out the fuselage situation. NK&C is in the process of being sold and I've been assured that the new owners will be able to supply fuselages (presumably built to order). Would it be possible to purchase a copy of the additional plans from yourself?

regards

John

RobW
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 8:15 pm
Location: Suffolk

Post by RobW » Mon Jun 13, 2011 2:48 pm

Just curious - but as a new owner of an old nipper, which parts wouldn't be BCAR section S compliant???

The nipper seems far stronger than my old Skyranger (which was section S compliant), with similar control forces and a similar speed range. Is it to do with stability...???

Rob
Rob Weller
:-)

Ian Melville
Posts: 1000
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:21 pm

Post by Ian Melville » Mon Jun 13, 2011 5:28 pm

May have been BCAR Section K, not Section S

Isn't the weight too high for Section S? I think stall speed is just OK

As you say stability may be an issue

RobW
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 8:15 pm
Location: Suffolk

Post by RobW » Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:57 pm

I'm not up on my BCAR sections! MTOW of Nipper is 340kg, so it's not microlight category, even if it can squeak in under the max stall speed of 35 knts....
Directional stability with the standard rudder is a bit marginal, but otherwise seems OK to me!
Rob Weller
:-)

Post Reply