GeoBat

[jpot1]

I found a thread on rcgroups with what looked like flying saucers and knew I had to build one. Very easy conversion to DTFB. Just doubled up the front and rear. Went with a 4 servo setup but probably could have skipped the rudder servo. I am using a Turnigy d2826/6 2200kv motor with a 6x4 prop and a 3s 2200 battery as the weight is needed for balance.

What a blast to fly and very easy to take off and land. Added the hatch up front like the FT spear to cover the electronics. Highly recommend for a fun relaxing flyer.

Rcgroups thread: https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?1386754-Geobat-Foamie-RC-Flying-Saucer-With-Plans

 

[kdobson83]

How does this fly? Is it anything like the FT Nutball?

 

[jpot1]

How does this fly? Is it anything like the FT Nutball?

Never built the nutball so that I can't comment. I would say it's most similar to the FT22 but less acrobatic. Due to the shape I think it handles more like an elevon plane.

 

[JimCR120]

My Snowball (Nutball conversion for the snow) pitches up a lot and rocks back and forth like a falling leaf. It takes more throttle disciple to fly it well. I think it could be balanced better but I'm not there yet.

 

[jpot1]

My Snowball (Nutball conversion for the snow) pitches up a lot and rocks back and forth like a falling leaf. It takes more throttle disciple to fly it well. I think it could be balanced better but I'm not there yet.

The GeoBat was a smooth and floaty flyer. Needed the nose weight but otherwise a very relaxing plane.

 

[JimCR120]

I like the looks of the Geobat over the Snowball, more sporty.

 

[FoamyDM]

The GeoBat was a smooth and floaty flyer. Needed the nose weight but otherwise a very relaxing plane.

Don't most planes?

Did you use the 40" Plans?

 

[Monte.C]

It looks like it would be a more reasonable flier than the Nutball.
Looks like fun!

 

[Monte.C]

But I'm having trouble with the "Geo" name. It reminds me too much of how things are getting an "Eco" name these days because "ecological" sounds friendly to people even when the product has absolutely nothing to do with the natural world.
You'll have to rename it.
How about "Non GMO Free Range Zero Carb Bat"?

 

[jpot1]

Don't most planes?

Did you use the 40" Plans?

It was a while ago but I do think it was the 40”.

 

[L Edge]

It looks like it would be a more reasonable flier than the Nutball.
Looks like fun!

You will find that the Geobat does not like wind. It can be flown if you install extra ailerons on the sides and/or add some flaps up on the top segment. The flaps can either be used as a nose up or a nose down trim that help you fly in gusty conditions. Geobat is a large flat plate and the forces generated require a lot of aileron, elevator and rudder control to fly in gusty conditions.

 

[leaded50]

"circle" planes have been made in aviation over long times. Here is a few:

 

[Monte.C]

"circle" planes have been made in aviation over long times. Here is a few:

That does it. You're the guy to ask!

 

[leaded50]

Lee-Richards plane was named "annular monoplane"... better than geobat...
Sukhanov's made in 1962 the "Diskoplan-2 glider "... perfect name, the Dicoplane !!
...just as somebody raided Area 51 and got out alive ...

 

[leaded50]

this ones looks a bit nice too... Sukhanov was the designer/builder (Russian)

 

[Monte.C]

this ones looks a bit nice too... Sukhanov was the designer/builder (Russian)

That Cosmoplan - the second pic - looks like it's from The Jetsons! But in general these sure are silly looking!! Just my personal taste.