NerdyKid
New member
1) Personally, I like the semi-symmetrical airfoils like the Clark-Y because they're easier to make stiff and strong than an undercambered airfoil. Undercambered will probably need functional cross bracing between the wings to keep it strong enough.
2) I haven't seen the original specs, but I highly doubt that the CG was actually behind the NP of the wing. If you shared some of your research we might be able to help verify this and/or determine where it should be.
The wing looks pretty good to me, a good start and compromise between strength, ease of building, and scale.
I found this diagram from a post on the RCU forum and here is a quote from the guy that translated it
”Quite surely фокус (the middle point) means Neutral Point.
Since цеитр тяжести means center of gravity, the abbreviation ц.т (the right point) should indeed translate to C/G.”
![1643917642402.png 1643917642402.png](https://ftforumx2.s3.amazonaws.com/2022/02/401776_c6a040054f7720dc0d8ca6c61d4d8899_thumb.jpg)
Between the size of the tail and the length of the nose, I don't think you will be able to get a plane like this balanced using the standard 1/4 back rule. I think you will have to treat the plane like a tanden wing design (think Flying Flea) and figure the horizontal tail as a third, rear wing. Considering it like that, a CG point near the TE would then make sense.
I think you‘re right about treating this like a tandem setup, which actually a bit of a relief since I don’t know how I would’ve put nose weight in this.
Thanks all for your advice, this is the first plane I’ve designed so I don’t really know what I’m doing.