Info on Jodel

[Mi flyer]

I'm considering building a 2-place Jodel (Falconer) model 11 or 12. I
helped recover a single place Jodel and I thought it looked like a simple
to build design. Does anybody have any experience building or flying this
plane? I'm interested in the completeness of the plans, building time and
ease, flying characteristics, and real world performance (payload and
speed)

Thanks in advance.

[Peter Ashwood-Smith]

I learned to fly on a Jodel and flew both
a two place and (2 + 2 very small people) place
versions. This was about 15 years ago in France
at an air field called Til Chatel (sp) not far
from Dijon.

The model numbers (from my old log book)
show D-112 D-119 and DR-1050. I don't remember
too much about their flying characteristics
except that they were not too great to taxi
in the mud (but what tail dragger is). They also
had unusual air brakes/spoilers which were like
a gliders spoilers only they had no upper sufface
blade. I remember significant buffeting when
these things were extended.

The ones I flew were all hand started, the
fuel gauge was just a wire on a bob sticking
out of the top of the cowl. Pretty basic
stuff!

One of my fondest memories is taxing one
out for takeoff while some showoff in a Pitts
was doing low inverted down the runway, I
was so busy watching this guy I taxied the
left wheel into a shallow ditch. Took me
five minutes of playing with the throttle and
brakes to extracate myself!

Peter

[Ed Wisch]

As for building a Jodel-
1. Can you get the wood you need for it? The Jodel plans may well be
metric.
2. Can you build the box spar? (I think that's what it has) If you're
concerned about building time, and it's a wood plane...
3. Lots of European planes were, by US standards, deficient in room and
payload. Double check this.
4. A pilot report from many years ago stated that the flaps were
ineffective, but a 180 degree slipping turn to final was standard in
France, so nobody cared very much.
5. You may get to do all your own welding, too.

Good luck!
Ed Wischmeyer

[Philippe DEPONDT]

I currently fly -almost every week, Paris weather permitting :(( - a Jodel D112
which belongs to my flying club and which I am quite fond of.
It is a nice side by side two seater taildragger, with the characteristic Jodel
wing, also current on the Robin DR 200, DR 300 DR 400 series.
Cruise speed is 160km/h with 65HP and approx 3 hours' fuel. Nice cheap little
plane, but NOISY inside, and not terribly comfortable...
It is a pretty basic airplane! No flaps, which means you have to be pretty
precise in your approach. I usually begin flare at 100-110km/h and let it
slow down until I get three-point angle of incidence and then maintain until
touchdown. Easier done than said. It stops almost as soon as the wheels touch,
because it is so light. Beware of crosswind though!
Payload is essentially two people + fuel + two toothbrushes... and toothpaste
only if you are not too fat :-))
The D120 is an improved version with 80HP, glider-type airbrakes and more fuel.
Currently, those who choose to built a Jodel usually go for the D18, which is the
same thing with a better airfoil and a VW or Limbach engine. Cruise speed being
of the order of 180-190 km/h (100 kts). I remember reading about somebody flying
in one of those from Toulouse in the South of France, all the way across Spain
and Morocco and back. Quite a trip! It also means they could carry some luggage.

Now let us be frank: if I were to buy a plane, I would probably seriously
consider a D112, 120 or 18, because a lot are around, in good shape and cheap.
And they're pretty good planes, among the best in their time.
BUT, if I were to build, however, which means putting a *new* plane in the sky,
I would consider that there has been significant progress lately in design,
and that the Jodels are now rather obsolete. Think that the recent
Colomban MC-100 flies at 300km/h (160kts) top speed with a Rotax 912. It is a
simple metal low wing two seater (no canard or anything like that) with
excellent aerodynamics. Even if the cruise speed ends
up being of the order of 250-260km/h the difference is significant, to say the
least. No doubt similar designs exist in the US (Pulsar maybe?).
So why put in one or two years' work into a plane that you could buy for a price
that is probably equivalent to that of construction? If you are willing to put
that much work into an airplane, why not choose something that you cannot buy?

Hope it helps,
good luck,
Philippe Depondt