Burt Rutan's Favorite Ride
The Boomerang could be the safest twin ever built.
- By Steve Schapiro
- Air & Space magazine, September 2012
Head on, the Boomerang may be hard to fathom, but it’s easy to control — even if one engine quits.
Chad Slattery
(Page 4 of 5)
Something else that was unusual: There were no rudder pedals in front of me. The only rudder pedals are on the right side.
Once I became comfortable with the controls, we did the same maneuver that Coleman and I had done in the Baron to demonstrate what makes the Boomerang unique. Clements brought the left engine to idle, and I eased the nose up to hold altitude. And that was it. Instead of pulling to the left and trying to flip over, the airplane flew straight.
To prove he wasn’t adding in any rudder, Clements stomped on the floor and said, “Look, my feet aren’t on the rudders.” In fact, with the stick all the way back, which in most airplanes would lead to a stall, I was able to roll left or right without a problem, as well as maintain heading and a safe airspeed. I had no fear that the airplane would roll inverted, or lose altitude. Flying with either engine idled made no discernible difference in performance: The Boomerang just keeps flying.
As we neared Scappoose, Clements took the controls. When we touched down and taxied in, a crowd led by Oregon Aero President Mike Dennis met us. Clements is used to that kind of reception whenever he flies the Boomerang, which is about once a month. “It gets attention wherever you go,” he says. “There’s no hiding it.”
Rutan has said that this is the one general aviation aircraft he designed that he’d like to go into production. “It’s the most significant general aviation airplane I’ve ever done,” he says. “I want to keep the concept alive by keeping my own airplane flying.”
Dale Johnson, vice president of Paragon Aircraft Corporation in Salem, Oregon, is part of a group working to develop a straight-wing, turboprop version of the aircraft. Preliminary calculations show that at a cruise speed close to 370 mph, it would have a range of 2,000 to 2,300 miles. The only thing holding the group back is raising the necessary funding to get a prototype built and to undertake the costly Federal Aviation Administration certification process.
“I think it would be a very formidable aircraft in the market,” Johnson says.
One day there may be more than one Boomerang drawing crowds at airports and keeping pilots safe if an engine fails.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »





Comments (5)
Slight correction for the sixth paragraph. The author described the Vmc (minimum controllable speed) as the BLUE LINE on the airspeed indicator. The Vmc is actually indicated by a RED LINE, since going below that speed with only one engine at full power will make the plane uncontrollable, i.e. roll over.
The BLUE LINE is the Vyse or "best single engine rate of climb" which will give the greatest altitude gain (or least altitude lost) over time when only one engine is working.
Vmc
https://www.faasafety.gov/gslac/ALC/course_content.aspx?cID=30&sID=123
Vyse
https://www.faasafety.gov/gslac/ALC/course_content.aspx?cID=30&sID=124
Posted by Scott Moore on August 16,2012 | 10:14 AM
I don't know if it is appropriate to link to a video of a Vmc crash, but here are two on YouTube. What I find amazing, especially in the first video, is how fast the plane rolled over once it became uncontrollable. The Boomerang design would have prevented both of these roll-over accidents.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMpjYsCVkmM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqmomTUVsAw
Posted by Scott Moore on August 16,2012 | 11:00 AM
Not complaining, but a lot of your planes look like modified planes from WWII German drawing boards including this one. Any connection?
Posted by kirk breidenstein on August 16,2012 | 07:49 PM
fantastic exercise in engineering to reduce asymetrical thrust to a minimum.
the link of the twin boom and elevator are significant. with that in place why not simply go all the way to centerline thrust and eliminate the SE yaw? Already one engine in the fuselage. An additional engine in the tail of the fuselage ie; C-337. this would even improve CG management and %mac.
simply love the efficentcies developed/proven by all the Rutan aircraft!
colorful lines on the AS indicator. Even the expert is confused. What do u think the average GA pilots thoughts are about the rainbow? No pot of gold!
NO one heard of Vref? Obiously performance is a weak link in the cockpit. The feds think it was solved w/colorful reminders of something.
We are not idiots! Simply get with the program in performance and save your life!
cheers,
Abear
ps: fly the plane.
easy on the aileron! it just adds to the rudder requirement.
Posted by Terry Herbert on August 24,2012 | 02:16 PM
This is a common sense airplane. One, that for twins, should be thee standard.
Posted by Stan Sikorski on August 25,2012 | 09:21 PM