FT Bronco Crashed and Burned
- Thread starter Jramsey1
- Start date
quorneng
Master member
The most likely cause with the limited description & assuming the controls were working in the correct sense, is down to its balance point being too far back.
Once the balance point is rearward beyond a certain point the plane will be unflyable.
The saying is "Nose heavy flies fast. Tail heavy crashes immediately!"
Was its balance point according to the instructions?
Once the balance point is rearward beyond a certain point the plane will be unflyable.
The saying is "Nose heavy flies fast. Tail heavy crashes immediately!"
Was its balance point according to the instructions?
Still a newbie. Did not check the CG before flight. My controls were as I expected. I could have done better on my part of ensuring it would fly. Does the way you put the props on matter? I could not find anything related to how they go on.
quorneng
Master member
If you look carefully at any prop blade it is shaped like a wing. The flatter side faces the rear of the plane.
Just to make it easier if there are any numbers/letters printed on the blade that side always faces the front, the direction you want it to fly.
Also be aware that the relative angle between the wing and the tail is very important. Provided you have built yours Bronco accurately to the plans it should be ok.
I do wonder if the Bronco is suitable for a newbie unless you can get an experienced flyer to atleast check it over and test fly it. Of course just because he can fly it doesn't automatically mean you can but at least if (when?) you crash it you will know it is down to you, not the plane.
Just to make it easier if there are any numbers/letters printed on the blade that side always faces the front, the direction you want it to fly.
Also be aware that the relative angle between the wing and the tail is very important. Provided you have built yours Bronco accurately to the plans it should be ok.
I do wonder if the Bronco is suitable for a newbie unless you can get an experienced flyer to atleast check it over and test fly it. Of course just because he can fly it doesn't automatically mean you can but at least if (when?) you crash it you will know it is down to you, not the plane.
The props faced the correct direction then. The only thing that comes to mind was the CG problem.
Piotrsko
Legendary member
Properly set up and trimmed, it is only slightly positive stable upright as an OV10 lookalike. Set to the appropriate throws, it is a point and goes there immediately plane, but it won't turn or climb for the fence in the way without finessed control input.(neutral stable) Responds nicely to stick slapping but dont expect it to fly inverted much, or go back to straight and level on its own. Likes to turn left with both props being the same RH rotation.
Does a really.good.ugly. when you full down and full left or right stick.
40+ years ago there were discussions about semi advanced planes used for trainers, but they all defaulted to having a very skilled friend on a buddy box system to save ones bacon or plane.
One could change it to be a stable trainer, but then it would look cartoonish ALA @Silver Surfer FPV. My opinion is it needs to double the diehederal and add a couple clicks up elevator and loose a pot load of weight, then limit throws. Your mileage may vary. A twin "C" motor pack is very much akin to model rocketry including vertical take off
NET RESULTS: lousy trainer
Does a really.good.ugly. when you full down and full left or right stick.
40+ years ago there were discussions about semi advanced planes used for trainers, but they all defaulted to having a very skilled friend on a buddy box system to save ones bacon or plane.
One could change it to be a stable trainer, but then it would look cartoonish ALA @Silver Surfer FPV. My opinion is it needs to double the diehederal and add a couple clicks up elevator and loose a pot load of weight, then limit throws. Your mileage may vary. A twin "C" motor pack is very much akin to model rocketry including vertical take off
NET RESULTS: lousy trainer
Last edited:
Bricks
Legendary member
Well that totally sucks quorneg is pretty much spot on, when building extra glue does not mean more strength weight plays a paramount effect on how a plane will fly and balance lighter fly's much better. Not only make sure the CG is correct but check lateral balance left to right.
Hope you have a much better experience on your next build we have all been there and done that so do not beat yourself up, pick an easy to fly build for your next attempt.
Hope you have a much better experience on your next build we have all been there and done that so do not beat yourself up, pick an easy to fly build for your next attempt.
Mr Man
Mr SPEED!
Agreed! And post photos so we can easily see any issues, unless there aren’t any 😉
Shurik-1960
Elite member
I suggest creating a theme.: FOR A BEGINNER. In this topic, we will tell you in detail how to assemble a typical trainer model, preflight setup, and first flight. This topic should be non-stop and complemented by the experience of other modelers.An example is a Russian website http://rc-aviation.ru/modelizm/397-aviamodelizmdljanachinajuwih .My first flight lasted 3 seconds and ended with the crash of a purchased Piper with a span of 1 meter. Now I can point out the reasons. : 1. I did not fly in the simulator and my movements with the transmitter sticks were huge 2. The model was not tested for planning. 3. Lack of quick reaction to incorrect movement of the model (it made a loop and stuck into the ice) 4. Small area of the territory (pond near the house). 5. Full throttle.
Similar threads
