Register | Help | Store Account | FliteTest Dashboard
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 31 to 40 of 40
  1. #31
    Skill Collector rockyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alexandria, VA USA
    Posts
    2,869
    Congrats are certainly in order! Great to hear you're getting local-in-person traction with your work!

    I will absolutely do a detailed, photographed walk through on my next build - that's becoming pretty standard for me on all my builds these days I haven't submitted for an article before, but hey - first time for everything, right? And it will absolutely be credited to you - I didn't think this up, I was inspired 'cause you showed me it could work!

    I'm also very happy to provide input on any upgrades or ideas you have cooking for this. My interest in pursuing this design (and hobby) is purely for the enjoyment of the building, flying, and community interactions. If being public with comments on prototypes would impede your retail reputation or actions in any way, just let me know and I'll be happy to keep those comments private too.

    Now if I can just remember where my buddy ordered that 2mm coroplast from....
    I want YOU to join us in the 2018 Flite Test Forum WWII Design/Build Challenge!

    My hanger listing, build threads, conversion projects, and Taranis radio mods are Over Here....

  2. #32
    Old and Bold RC PILOT
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    1,907
    As the TT was a trainer after all I looked into my own crashes and damage done when I first started to fly the TT. It dawned on me that as a trainer the nose in impact was a cause of many days of repairs rather than flying not to mention the days of waiting for fresh props to arrive.

    After doing my prototype TT based canard, (using pre-crashed electrics), I looked further into the "FAILSAFE" setup and worked out that with the dihedral and on the fixed canard a failsafe setting of cutting the motor and giving full "UP" caused the plane to settle into a slow glide descent and excluding trees and other obstacles a damage free landing EVERY TIME!

    As a trainer, with a redesign of the TT power nose, (or a fresh NEW design), to reduce weight the canard could become the closest thing to a crash proof plane that is currently possible. The long fuselage lightens the canard load but increases the overall weight and makes its pitch response a little sluggish, (Ideal as a trainer).

    When doing your combat version experiment with reducing the fuselage boom length, (down to 400 to 450mm), this will increase the canard loading a tad but allow for a great reduction in extra nose weight and even allow the nose to rise and fall at greater speed. The lower weight will help a little in roll but massively in pitch. CG will also be a little further rearward but starting with the CG at the wing LE and glide testing, will allow you to quickly establish where the CG should be, (by adding nose weights or shifting the battery as you have already done).

    I will be watching for your post, (start your own thread), and hopefully the article if FT approves it of course!

    Have fun!

  3. #33
    NEVER FLY WITHOUT IT BEEMANS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Washington, PA
    Posts
    31
    Hai-Lee

    I am looking at the pictures on the second page of the tread unfortunately all the other pictures and plan links are broken. I am currently drafting up a version of this plane and have a question. Would a flat canard with adjustable flaps work or does the canard need to be fixed with a fixed angle? I have an idea on how to make the flaps work with one servo and wanted to know what you think. I will post my plans here soon I can and would like it if you could look them over. let me know what you think

    Thanks
    Last edited by BEEMANS; 08-14-2017 at 06:57 PM.
    "How long will a plane fly on a lipo?"........ All the way to the crash site.

    Hangar:
    FF Dart, FT Bronco, FT Corsair, FT Sparrow, FT Arrow x2, FT Bloody Baron, FT Spitfire, Turnigy Bonsai & Tek Sumo, Yak 12, Bix 3, T-28 Trojan, Waco, Radian, Tundra, Bush Mule

  4. #34
    Old and Bold RC PILOT
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    1,907
    Sorry that the links are broken but they used to be pics must be something done on the server, possibly space saving?

    As for the general question about the angle of the canard foreplane, normally the canard design performs far better with some loading or load sharing with the main wing. As you decrease the loading, foreplane angle of attack, the CG point moves rearwards to maintain the balance.

    As you reduce the loading also the pitch sensitivity also increases until you get to the point where the slightest movement or even flexing of the foreplane can cause great pitch changes.

    Technically as the foreplane loading reaches zero the main wing is functioning as a flying wing with the small distance between pressure centres and so stability is reduced. I do encourage you to experiment by all means and as I type this I can see my latest canard construct awaiting my fitting of the nose wheel steering and its maiden. [Not based on the TT this time].

    There is a correlation between control stability, foreplane loading, distance between wing and foreplane, and the cord of the main wing. With the TT having such a narrow cord the foreplane was made to be loaded and at a great distance from the main wing. (I use the heavier FB and that could be part of the reason that rockboy required so much ballast to get balance)!

    The pics missing could be re-posted if required. The TT Canard was done using bits I had to hand in an attempt to make a 3 channel pusher without flex cables or complicated mechanical setups. Just 2 wing mounted servos and the usual Rx, ESC, motor, and battery.

    If you wish any more information of the pics etc just let me know!

    Have fun!
    Hopefully making a difference!

  5. #35
    Administrator flitetest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North Canton, OH United States
    Posts
    909
    Hai-Lee and Rockyboy!

    Really like what you guys have done with the TT Canard plans! I have enjoyed reading and following along with everything and seeing how you can take ONE plane(even in its damaged state).. and turn it into something completely different and make it WORK!

    Keep on doing what you are doing and keep on inspiring others!

    Blessings,
    Stefan

  6. #36
    Old and Bold RC PILOT
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    1,907
    Stefan, I am shocked and somewhat embarrassed.

    This thread and the recent similar post on http://forum.flitetest.com/showthrea...r-Plans/page12 are just my attempts to give great planes a boost especially in their overall life. Having said that my TT canards are currently flying from someone else's hangar.

    rockyboy has been invaluable in this aircrafts development and acceptance and he is effectively a co-author and test pilot.

    Perhaps, (part of my dream), is FT might evaluate some of the many different add ons for the TT and consider an "Expansion Pack" for the TT.
    Bixler nose, Lightweight fuselage, and a few of the many others, (selected for performance by the TT builders).

    FYI. I found getting real info and assistance very difficult when I started this time around and so I spend my time trying to give others that which I could not find. Additionally in a time where "Drones" are considered sinister the more users we can get the more our hobby will be secure from blanket and punitive legislation.

    Have fun!
    Hopefully making a difference!

  7. #37
    NEVER FLY WITHOUT IT BEEMANS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Washington, PA
    Posts
    31
    OK
    So it took a while to get my model in order but I have some plans worth showing. Take a look at them and let me know what you think. I like the idea of the flat variable canard in front. I figure I could after I get a basic setting for the canard and after I find that mechanically set it and then tie it into the elevator with a mix.
    TINY CANARD PG-1.pdf
    TINY CANARD ISO.pdf
    TINY CANARD PG-2.pdf




    Will be building sometime in the future I have a few project ahead of this one.
    Last edited by BEEMANS; 08-24-2017 at 06:15 PM.
    "How long will a plane fly on a lipo?"........ All the way to the crash site.

    Hangar:
    FF Dart, FT Bronco, FT Corsair, FT Sparrow, FT Arrow x2, FT Bloody Baron, FT Spitfire, Turnigy Bonsai & Tek Sumo, Yak 12, Bix 3, T-28 Trojan, Waco, Radian, Tundra, Bush Mule

  8. #38
    Skill Collector rockyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alexandria, VA USA
    Posts
    2,869
    Very nice looking plans!

    My one comment is on the front canard servo - that's pretty much how I did mine too and it was a complete pain in the rear.

    For my next one, I think it will be easier to construct using a skewer straight through the fuse as a pivot for the control surface, and attaching an arm to that skewer that the servo can control inside the fuselage. I'm probably doing a crap job explaining this, but will dig up a picture - I know I saw one on a thread for a WW2 canard design in the works somewhere...

    So it's not a proven idea yet, but hopefully it will make it easier to construct and tune I'll be building one of these in the next couple weeks and have more feedback to share then.

    Thanks!
    I want YOU to join us in the 2018 Flite Test Forum WWII Design/Build Challenge!

    My hanger listing, build threads, conversion projects, and Taranis radio mods are Over Here....

  9. #39
    Old and Bold RC PILOT
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    1,907
    You could use a pair of the 1/2A Aileron control rods. (Sorry I cannot remember the exact name). They are the torque rods used when the ailerons are to be run off of a single fuselage mounted servo where one side is pushed and the other is pulled at the same time as the servo output rotates. But in this application both are connected to the same side of the servo output disk and operate in unison rather than in opposition as an aileron installation would dictate.

    Have fun!
    Hopefully making a difference!

  10. #40
    Skill Collector rockyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alexandria, VA USA
    Posts
    2,869
    Yeah - exactly like that!

    Thanks for putting a label on it that the rest of the wold knows

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Strip-Aileron-Ball-Link-Set105613-6236.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	25.5 KB 
ID:	94611
    I want YOU to join us in the 2018 Flite Test Forum WWII Design/Build Challenge!

    My hanger listing, build threads, conversion projects, and Taranis radio mods are Over Here....

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •