FT Explorer biplane conversion (pictures)

Hippogriff

New member
Or: Everybody's got these cool new biplanes, and I'm just here like

IMG_1474.jpg

This all came about because the Explorer's wing is by default the exact length of my backseat, which makes transporting a little dicey with regard to closing the doors. So my dad suggested, as a joke, that I make it a biplane. Then I took him seriously, and this happened.

Pictured at the top is actually attempt number one, which was ruined by adhesion promoter when I tried to paint it. Attempt two suffered a catastrophic crash in high wind, and I didn't get a picture of it before crashing. So I'll take a picture of that once I put it back together.

Attempt number one is made with the spare trainer wings from two kits. The upper wings are cut down nine inches on each side, and the lower are cut down ten. The tape on the wings covers the polyhedral allowances.

IMG_1455.jpg

This is the inside of the upper wing, showing modifications for servo allowances; measurements are from center line.

IMG_1461.jpg

This is the inside of the lower wing; the two holes in the bottom surface are where the ski hardpoints tab into. The hardpoints are made of 4" sections of leftover strut, with an inch and a quarter between the tabs, so it sits on either side of the spar. This then gets a hole about 3/4" from the front and about in the middle vertically, where it pins into the ski itself.

IMG_1464.jpg

Here's the design for the first edition of the skis. The original location of the mounting hole is marked there; after taxi tests where the Explorer's thrust angle proved tricky, the proper hole should be 3" from the rear, instead of 3" from the front.

IMG_1467.jpg

This is what it looks like folded and glued - again, with the hole too far forwards. With a bit of tape on the bottom, these will work just fine on solid surfaces. However, they'll bog down hard in snow.

On this version, I maintained removability with some plastic tubing and a dowel. There's an extra control horn on the top wing, and then one on the bottom, where the top wing servo controls both ailerons. This saves me some wiring holes in the bottom of the plane. The bottom wing also had a platform on the top, built from some assorted small scraps, which keeps the bottom wing from rotating.

I have a video of the first version in the air; it wasn't my best flying, considering I accidentally trimmed the darn thing for additional up instead of down. Given that, it actually handled okay. It was just a little weird, considering it's very long for a biplane. Much as I'd have liked to make a new tail with a bigger surface, I didn't have the surplus waterproof foam.

The plane is a wee bit less stable and it seems to have a higher stall speed. I'm presently running a C-pack, 4s battery, and an 8*4.5 prop, temporarily absent a reverse 9*6.




That would have been about it, and I'd be posting a picture of everything painted. But, after hearing from plastic modelers about how adhesion promoter really helps, I tried some. Don't know if it was the temperature from my paints having gotten cold, or whether it was the stuff itself, but the promoter soaked straight through the waterproof paper and bubbled it right off, such that I no longer trusted the wings structurally. Fortunately, when I ordered my C-pack, I also got an extra Explorer kit while it was on sale. So, time to go at it again, but with a slightly different design goal: get the entire biplane conversion out of parts that were in the kit. The only things you need extra are a couple of mini control horns and linkage stoppers, plus some extra BBQ skewer. I also noticed that on rough landings, the bottom wing would go askew, so that had to be fixed, the tubing in the cabane struts was already pulling out of the foam, and the skis that bogged down in snow needed to be fixed. No all-together pic yet, gotta fix it up for that first.

After I get repairs done in the next couple days, I'll take a proper picture, and post a bit more on processes.
 
Last edited:

fliteadmin

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
HEY HIPPOGRIFF!!

Just showed Josh Bixler your explorer BI-plane! We loved it! HE DID mention that if you were to scale the bottom wing down to about 2/3rds the size of the top wing and move it back about 2 inches you will make it have even more stable flight characteristics. He was super impressed and thought it was a great modification of the original Explorer! GREAT WORK!!
LOVE seeing what the community comes up with on a regular basis...it makes my job awesome, so THANK YOU!

Keep up the good work and looking forward to seeing more of your stuff in the future!

Blessings my friend!
Stefan
 

Hippogriff

New member
HEY HIPPOGRIFF!!

Just showed Josh Bixler your explorer BI-plane! We loved it! HE DID mention that if you were to scale the bottom wing down to about 2/3rds the size of the top wing and move it back about 2 inches you will make it have even more stable flight characteristics. He was super impressed and thought it was a great modification of the original Explorer! GREAT WORK!!
LOVE seeing what the community comes up with on a regular basis...it makes my job awesome, so THANK YOU!

Keep up the good work and looking forward to seeing more of your stuff in the future!

Blessings my friend!
Stefan

Hmmm, moving the bottom wing back would be tricky. That'd be moving into putting pegs on the tail boom; the Explorer doesn't actually have nearly as much room on the bottom as one would expect. I could manage an inch forwards on the top, perhaps if I stuck the tail boom in a bit more than I already have to compensate for altered CG. My bottom wingtips were dinged up in the crash, so I could shave an inch off just the cambered tip portions without losing anything as well. I'm making repairs at the moment, so I'll see what I can do as far as those mods go.

Mike: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/0dtv3q31tmt7r4u/AACfg79L-3VuynOGfvyBLvHSa?dl=0 This is the folder with the biplane pics in it. Should be able to see everything in here okay.

Akimbo: Thanks! Hopefully I'll be able to get some proper paint on it soon, and I'll show it when it's done and everything matches. Pics and writeup on the new version will be coming later today, hopefully.
 

Frankschtaldt

New member
Hi Hippogriff, that looks pretty cool.

Regarding the stability issues you're having, even sized wings stacked evenly like that are known to interfere with each other.
That's why most real world biplanes have the bottom wing a little smaller and mounted behind the top wing.
You could try that though it looks like there's not a lot of room on the fuse to do that.
Just a narrower chord with mounted as far back as you can might be enough though.

There are a couple of examples of biplanes with the bottom wing mounted forward of the top wing which have also worked so you could try that instead. It should still improve your stability issues but as far as I know the reason this isn't as popular is that when pulling up hard the bottom wing can block airflow to the top wing effectively reducing your usable wing area and making it harder to pull up.

Looks like an excuse to play around with lots of different layouts to me :)
 

Hippogriff

New member
The way my new cabane struts are set up, I can only cut my wings down so much; I'm pretty much down to taking bits off the wingtips. I'm about to take off an inch and a half more on each side. My top wing this time around is slightly larger, but not by much; we'll see how she looks with a somewhat reduced bottom wing. Also, the sport wing has a narrower chord than the trainer wing, and that's currently making up my bottom wing, so I have a little of that going for me.

As far as stagger goes, the existing not-quite-an-inch is probably all I can do; the explorer core is deceptively small. But, this version does have a bit extra inter-wing distance built in. Near as I could tell from my research, the general minimum inter-wing distance to avoid interference is roughly equal to the wing chord. That's a tough deal on the Explorer, which is built like a tank, so I'd be hesitant to suspend it from the top wing with a parasol arrangement. A bit of spacers were about what I could do. If anything though, it seems like it goes up a little too readily :p

I could bring the top wing forwards more, but I'd be worried about having to add a bunch of extra nose weight.

hrkb14mT9Jeo6cuIA2ML-G3BOuUvvFI1c7n9OY8-R68
 
it seems to porpoise. you could shim the TE of the top wing a bit to give it some negative incidence which may help.
it's a brilliant direction for the design.
I scratch built mine, and find it to be a good plane that would rather be two different planes.
It cant decide if it wants to be a sail plane or a mild mannered sport plane.
The bipe route looks like the meds it needs to treat its bi polar disorder

do share how you went about mounting the second wing
 

fliteadmin

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Any news on if it is any more stable? ;)

Just checkin in!

STEFAN
 
Last edited:

Hippogriff

New member
I won't get the chance to fly again until tomorrow, perhaps Sunday - we're mid-snowstorm, so wind conditions aren't terribly conducive. I'll be sure to post once I get it in the air.

For now, though, repairs are finished, and I have pictures of attempt number two.
IMG_1513 copy.jpg

IMG_1515 copy.jpg

Starting from a whole kit, I was expecting to use the 4ch wing on top, given that it already had servo mounts, but the 3ch wing was sufficiently broader that I still had to carve servo mounts in it and use it as the top anyway. I also came up with a different solution for the cabane struts, which involved a C-folded tab, covered with strapping tape, on each corner of the wings, flush with the ends of the flat bottom on the lower ones. This has a hole in it, which allows a foam strut to peg in. Here's how the internals were laid out. Also noting the stall speed of the biplane version seemed a little higher, I gave the upper wing another inch back from the previous version. It still fits neatly in my trunk without disassembly.

IMG_1476.jpg

Here's the lower wing layout; the doubler on the back edge gets taken out. Pictured at present, another inch and a half is removed from the wingtips. Probably the for the best that part is shortened, given the increased likelihood of it hitting the ground.

IMG_1478.jpg

This is the hardpoint for the skis; on the final version, the back part is trimmed for weight. In the future, I might take another part, perhaps not just a bit of extra strut, so I can make the tabs longer. This sits right underneath the spar, so that the tabs are on either side of it.

IMG_1481.jpg

I put a spacer under the main wing this time around, two layers thick.

IMG_1484.jpg

The bottom wing mount is a box mounted onto the top of the wing. It's important to note that the bottom wing still needs the cutout for the engine, at least to that first step. I didn't realize that at first in the original, and it turned out that without the cutout, there's not enough room to get the rubber bands on. In the second version, I included a pair of holes along the centerline of the fuselage, which slot in a matching pair of short pegs from the centerline of the wings. I was trying to minimize the number of holes in the fuse, but in the future, I think I would do it differently. At the very least, I would double the upper surface of the box - in the crash, the pegs ripped out.

IMG_1511.jpg

This would require rebuilding the core, but for a dedicated biplane Explorer, perhaps a set of popsicle stick tabs coming down between the battery tray/tail mount and outside of the core and through the bottom layer, one at each corner, would be a more sturdy arrangement. That way, the force of any crashes would be spread out on a larger area, and be less likely to shred out around the tabs.

The cabane struts are pretty self-explanatory - just a pair of hollow struts with a spacer at the back, sized to fit between the wings and reinforced with tape at the ends. They're sufficiently sturdy that between the pegs underneath the plane and the pins holding the wings together, you actually don't need the rubber bands at all. It makes a surprisingly secure plane sandwich, and the bands are just there for a little insurance.

IMG_1517.jpg

Last thing to mention is skis, because these required more fiddling than the actual plane thus far. It turns out getting the Explorer to taxi without the thrust angle noseplanting it isn't as simple as I had thought. I originally wanted articulated skis, hence the skewer arrangement, but that just gives the plane room to pitch forward. So I made the hole in the skis further down, limiting their motion to a few degrees - just enough to smooth out minor bumps - and that solved that. But the skis were too short, and the plane started tiptoeing and noseplanting that way. I eventually found that from where the pegs are in the picture, you need at least five and a half inches before the ski starts to curve; that seems to be the limit of the engine's leverage.

I also thought I'd need a tail ski, but since the engine picks the tail up anyway, it turned out not to be an issue.

IMG_1508.jpg

Here's the evolution of the ski design, start to finish. First round is the simple box, where you can see the holes getting moved waaaaaaaay back. It worked fine in a parking lot, but deep snow sinks it, it's overbuilt and it collects quite a lot of snow over the top.

Second is in the middle, where I tried reducing the amount of doubled-up sidewalls, and experimented with putting on a second and third piece to widen it. The bottom has the toe, which goes to about half an inch into the folded-up portion on the side, and then a heel that extends to the back The seam has a paper overlap like on the nosecone center section, for what that's worth given that it was tape-covered anyway. This version completely failed, because I'd tried to make a more gradual curve on the tips, and in doing so, reduced the effective length so far I couldn't compensate by moving the peg.

Third version is confirmed to actually work. It's built relatively minimally, with the sides doubled over only for the couple of inches or so around the peg. The bottom piece is about three inches wide and provides plenty of surface area to taxi on loose powder like it's nothing, even for a relatively heavy plane. I had to cheat a little bit sourcing my ski bottoms, so one of those came from off-kit. In my defense, I was down to scraps of scraps of scraps, so if not for the second try, I would have had no problem using only foam out of the kit. I was still able to get the main brackets out of the leftover 4ch wingtips.

Here's the piece flat; the bottom pieces are A-folded.

IMG_1505.jpg

That's about everything I have for now, I'll update after I get to fly again.
 
Last edited:
Watching this one intently as well.
As I think about it, the FT3Ds wing construction methods may also be a good step in future evolution of this bird
 

localfiend

I like 3D printers...
Mentor
Looks like you're hosting all your pictures on dropbox and they're not viewable. Can you upload them somewhere else or see if there are some privacy settings you need to adjust?
 

Hippogriff

New member
I expected a bit better out of dropbox... Everything's just attached now. Should work better.

Jamboree: Nice build; I really dig the wing profile.

Soylent: Haven't checked out the 3D yet, I'll do that when I get the chance.
 
the 3D is unique among the FT fleet in that it features a symmetrical airfoil wing.
This, applied to the explorer bipe, should eliminate all tendency to porpoise while turning it into a barnstorming sportscar of a machine.

as it works in the 3D, it really turns the design into something that is far greater than the sum of it's parts.
it just seems to smell right in your application
 

Hippogriff

New member
That may be an interesting thing to try. I just got back from flying the revision, and while it seems more or less stable, it does like to nose up a lot when it starts going slow. Maybe that would reduce that, or maybe it would raise the stall speed higher, I don't know. The porpoising in the video was due to pilot error, rather than anything the plane actually did, though.

I think I need to either tweak the CG or build a bigger empennage so it's more useful at lower speed, I'm not sure.
 
Mine, being and essentially stock 4 ch build, has similar traits.
on a hand launch, the 5 degrees of down thrust causes it to drop 3 or 4 feet before it starts to rise.
thereafter it tends to pitch nose up under thrust despite the generous use of down thrust to correct it.
it really wants to be a sailplane and acts much like a sailplane under power.
I deal with it by switching between flight modes where I transition from a launch / glide trim to a power on cruise trim
it certainly beats the good old days when we fought through all the pilot induced oscillation from over-correcting the pitch up tendency.

with the FT3D style airfoil, the thrust angle gets set to dead level zero since it is immune to pitching under thrust.
in theory, you end up with a clever aerobatic trainer.
between the airbrake fuselage block, the drag of a second wing and struts, it shouldn't get out of hand in a dive.
the high mounted pusher prop also reduces the chance of day ending damage as well.