Help me? Chronicals of a guy who can't fly very well...
- Thread starter xunedeinx
- Start date
Hai-Lee
Old and Bold RC PILOT
Once you build and fly this one you could try a hybrid TT. Use the larger wing and tail pieces on a stretched standard width and height fuselage. This will allow the original power pod and battery mounting to be used but give you a slow and somewhat sedentary craft to linger or loiter around on the calm days!
As for your water ambitions it sounds like you might be better seeking a simpler and less expensive flying boat than some may suggest. When the time comes I have a design I am about to convert to FB so if interested you could be a co builder assuming you are flying confidently enough by then!
Have fun!
As for your water ambitions it sounds like you might be better seeking a simpler and less expensive flying boat than some may suggest. When the time comes I have a design I am about to convert to FB so if interested you could be a co builder assuming you are flying confidently enough by then!
Have fun!
I'm building the 125% to fit a standard powerpod, and the 18650 2s1p im using is slightly wider than the stock 850mah, so im actually hoping the wider fuse is a bit easier to fuss with.
I'm game to bud and test some things for you. Even if Im not that great of a pilot, Im a decent engineer and can help bug test for ya.
Well, all done. Square inches of wing area is 47"x6.75", for a wing area of 317.25sqin.
10.03 oz/sqft. Has a wing cubic loading of 6.8.
Trainers, park flyers, and 3d have a wcl of 5-7, so I'm just barely in that range. I think she will fly good!! Only worry is my power plant, but, only way to see is to do it, eh?
10.03 oz/sqft. Has a wing cubic loading of 6.8.
Trainers, park flyers, and 3d have a wcl of 5-7, so I'm just barely in that range. I think she will fly good!! Only worry is my power plant, but, only way to see is to do it, eh?
Just got a pair of these from my LHS on clearance. Any experiance sticking them on a TT? Thinking it'd be pretty cool on my 125% tt. Only worried that I'm pretty heavy as it is.
https://store.flitetest.com/dubro-3.00-micro-sport-wheels-2-dub300ms/p130274
https://store.flitetest.com/dubro-3.00-micro-sport-wheels-2-dub300ms/p130274
PlaY80
New member
Why don't u put them inline ? Maybe add 1 more 18650 and go 3s ? More power will help on 125%mod
Because the internal resistance of 18650s is pretty high. Im at 14a 100% throttle on 2s1p on 12a rated batteries. 3s1p amp draw would be more, and im all ready a tad over the rating. If I make my samsung 25r 18650s into a pack than I can though.
Well, maiden of 125% Tiny Trainer... Didn't go so well. My worries about being underpowered were for naught. Pleanty fast. Actually seemed to cruise faster than my normal sized TT with the 46'' Wing. Anywho, she passed chuck test. Passed control test. Threw her and flew her, for about a minute. Gained about 100-150ft, shes rolling pretty significantly to the right, and pitching upwards. Yaw seemed spot on. Trying to keep her in the little oval pattern so I don't lose orientation (This was at 800pm, a few minutes ago, starting to get darker. Dumb me finally saw nice calm almost complete absence of a breeze for the first time in 4 days. Days filled with storms and rain) and try trimming her. Well, I lose orientation, cut throttle, figure out what its doing, get it upright and level....
and BAM. Stalled, dropped the wing like nobodys business. was not expecting that. Unable to gain enough speed to get the nose up. I think I dug a hole about 4 feet deep. Did I mention she seems to fly a lot faster than the standard TT?
Maybe its the weight (which I thought should be fine with a wcl of 6.8), or maybe its the Armen wing with a lack of undercamber, or maybe its some unforeseen cause my inexperience is unable to explain, but she seemed to require much more speed despite the lower wing loading. And when she stalled, there was no warning, and no way my lack of experience was able to recover.
Well, wing is smushed out of shape (hit so hard, I think it tore apart the foam spar and just smuched the wing legnth wise), power pod attachment is no longer little holes for the skewers, they are nice long slashes, motor is packed full of dirt, control horn tore off an aileron, random bruises and such. Repairable, but I'm kind of iffy about this wing now.
and BAM. Stalled, dropped the wing like nobodys business. was not expecting that. Unable to gain enough speed to get the nose up. I think I dug a hole about 4 feet deep. Did I mention she seems to fly a lot faster than the standard TT?
Maybe its the weight (which I thought should be fine with a wcl of 6.8), or maybe its the Armen wing with a lack of undercamber, or maybe its some unforeseen cause my inexperience is unable to explain, but she seemed to require much more speed despite the lower wing loading. And when she stalled, there was no warning, and no way my lack of experience was able to recover.
Well, wing is smushed out of shape (hit so hard, I think it tore apart the foam spar and just smuched the wing legnth wise), power pod attachment is no longer little holes for the skewers, they are nice long slashes, motor is packed full of dirt, control horn tore off an aileron, random bruises and such. Repairable, but I'm kind of iffy about this wing now.
Namactual
Elite member
Sorry to to hear about the maiden, that sucks.
Undercamber really does make a big difference in slow speed flight performance.
The damage does not look too bad in the pics. If you wanted to try to fix what you already have, you could try to cut the bottom off of the last few inches of the wing tips. I am sure it would help.
Undercamber really does make a big difference in slow speed flight performance.
The damage does not look too bad in the pics. If you wanted to try to fix what you already have, you could try to cut the bottom off of the last few inches of the wing tips. I am sure it would help.
Sorry to to hear about the maiden, that sucks.
Undercamber really does make a big difference in slow speed flight performance.
The damage does not look too bad in the pics. If you wanted to try to fix what you already have, you could try to cut the bottom off of the last few inches of the wing tips. I am sure it would help.
Fuse is great, wing is all sorts out of wack. I have a 48'' kfm3 wing with a 5 3/4 chord I made for the AP easy and couldn't get to fly. It weighs 117g, and AUW for the entire plane is 354g vs the 600 something with the armin. Gunna give that a shot, and if it fails I'll just make a FT style wing.
It looked so good though!
Hai-Lee
Old and Bold RC PILOT
Sad result but not the end of it as a project or a flying model.
Before you get around to replacing the wing I would make a few recommendations to improve strength and its slow flying abilities.
From the pic I suspect that the ailerons fluttering or flapping would have been somewhat causal in the difficulty in the rocovery and the resultant ground impact.
If you want the suggestions then please advise and I will pass what little knowledge I have.
Have fun.
Before you get around to replacing the wing I would make a few recommendations to improve strength and its slow flying abilities.
From the pic I suspect that the ailerons fluttering or flapping would have been somewhat causal in the difficulty in the rocovery and the resultant ground impact.
If you want the suggestions then please advise and I will pass what little knowledge I have.
Have fun.
Very likely I have aileron failure. If you see in the pic the left aileron is seperated from its hinges, and the rights xontrol horn is torn off. Idk if its from the flight or the crash though. I'd like any help you can give though. I haven't chucked the red wing, just not repaired yet. Have the kfm3 wing from the ap eazy on it atm.
Im also not sure what I did to get a wing that is 300g heavier than the kfm3 wing.
Hai-Lee
Old and Bold RC PILOT
First thing I would recommend is that you consider that the wing spar is too flexible because the paper is horizontal. I number of narrower vertical paper strips glue together with Gorilla glue or similar would be many times stronger and there would be no real requirement for a CF spar tube.
The use of the hinges you fitted is not recommended as they are easily ripped from the foam and your hinge numbers are OK for a balsa wing but not for a FB wing in which the inter-hinge gaps can be too flexible if the ailerons are un-reinforced FB. It is better if you used the full support found with the original tape and paper hinge as in the standard FT design.
As mentioned elsewhere you do not need to continue the under wing portion all of the way to the wing tip.
The wing bottom panel should rest flat on the fuselage. So it might be necessary to make a cutout the wing TE where the fuselage fits to allow the wing to rest fully upon the fuselage, (this is to stop any incidence angle variations with wing loading. According to the pics supplied the wing has actually got a negative incidence angle and so cutting out the TE of the wing in the centre portion as above would actually increase the incidence angle and improve the lift at slower speeds.
Those are a few things to look at and if you require more explanation please advise.
have fun!
The use of the hinges you fitted is not recommended as they are easily ripped from the foam and your hinge numbers are OK for a balsa wing but not for a FB wing in which the inter-hinge gaps can be too flexible if the ailerons are un-reinforced FB. It is better if you used the full support found with the original tape and paper hinge as in the standard FT design.
As mentioned elsewhere you do not need to continue the under wing portion all of the way to the wing tip.
The wing bottom panel should rest flat on the fuselage. So it might be necessary to make a cutout the wing TE where the fuselage fits to allow the wing to rest fully upon the fuselage, (this is to stop any incidence angle variations with wing loading. According to the pics supplied the wing has actually got a negative incidence angle and so cutting out the TE of the wing in the centre portion as above would actually increase the incidence angle and improve the lift at slower speeds.
Those are a few things to look at and if you require more explanation please advise.
have fun!
My wing spar in the red wing was two sections of cf arrow joined together by an overlapped wooden dowel. Are the verticle spar strips a better lighter option?
Im building a new wing 100% to ft plans, so ill use the paper hinge sealed w hot glue, undercamber, the works. I didnt even notice the incidence of it. Might be why I has having a hard time trimming it out. Any way you could help is always greatly appreciated. Going to start cutting out my fb now. New wing here we come!
Hai-Lee
Old and Bold RC PILOT
The vertical strips Vs Horizontal strips for spars! Simply put, the foam is somewhat compressible whereas the paper will not compress without deformation. Now add to this the stiffening of a layer of glue holding 2 paper layers together and suddenly the vertical paper acts like a line of ultra thin Ply.
As an experiment try cutting a length of scrap FB to the width of the spar and as long as is available and holding one end try to pick up the spar with a few "Quarters on the other end. Note the Sag or bend as you do so. NOW find a similar length of scrap but cut it into 3/16 strips and glue the strips together paper to paper. The repeat the lifting experiment and you will find that there is little to zero sag.
You can also do another experiment on the crush effects of the different spar configurations. On my TTs I replaced the wide spar with 2 separated vertical spars each 3/16ths high and found that iw was slightly lighter and far stronger. In addition the vertical spars have not delaminated over time whereas my original efforts were as per the plans and had the spars continually separating or delaminating. Often the failure of the foam to paper bond would occur in hi G maneuvers and the sudden change in wing profile caused serious control issues and even a few crashes.
As stated previously even when enlarged a little there is no need for reinforcing of the spar if the spar is built with strength in mind. Some dihedral bracing is required of course. The weight saved can help it fly that little bit slower.
have fun!
As an experiment try cutting a length of scrap FB to the width of the spar and as long as is available and holding one end try to pick up the spar with a few "Quarters on the other end. Note the Sag or bend as you do so. NOW find a similar length of scrap but cut it into 3/16 strips and glue the strips together paper to paper. The repeat the lifting experiment and you will find that there is little to zero sag.
You can also do another experiment on the crush effects of the different spar configurations. On my TTs I replaced the wide spar with 2 separated vertical spars each 3/16ths high and found that iw was slightly lighter and far stronger. In addition the vertical spars have not delaminated over time whereas my original efforts were as per the plans and had the spars continually separating or delaminating. Often the failure of the foam to paper bond would occur in hi G maneuvers and the sudden change in wing profile caused serious control issues and even a few crashes.
As stated previously even when enlarged a little there is no need for reinforcing of the spar if the spar is built with strength in mind. Some dihedral bracing is required of course. The weight saved can help it fly that little bit slower.
have fun!
Similar threads
