Probably easier than building by the instructions.
Best advice I can give anybody building this kit is to throw the instructions away and never look back. My build threads hopefully could replace the crap they include.
Hobby King Red Swan Balsa Glider Build Thread
- Thread starter Joker 53150
- Start date
Best advice I can give anybody building this kit is to throw the instructions away and never look back. My build threads hopefully could replace the crap they include.
rcspaceflight
creator of virtual planes
That's exactly what I was thinking and why I want to modify an existing kit also, instead of building from scratch.
I was thinking of building two Cloud Dancers wing tip to wing tip and hang a pulse jet from the bottom of the wing at the exact center. ... If I had the money and piloting skills. I'm not at the point where I could even attempt to fly something like that.
lonewolf7717
Senior Member
45g weight savings aint nothing to laugh at with glider, can make quite the difference at the field/slope. may not seem like much but a lot of glider guys out there tonight beating their head against a wall just to save 10g. well done.
lonewolf7717
Senior Member
actually, its that exacting attention to detail when it comes to weight coupled with strength that attracts me to gliders...powered and un-powered.
Here's hoping the weight saved along with the folding prop give me the extra performance I'm going for.
It must be a sickness, but I just ordered Red Swan #3. This one will be modified heavily to look like the German HE-162 Salamander, with an EDF mounted above the wing, landing gear, twin vertical stabilizers, complete wing re-design, and a few other changes to keep it interesting.
My thought is to make some templates from the stock pieces to then make Red Swan #4, which will be similar to a typical "hotliner" - 4S motor/battery, a major re-design to the wing, "V" tail configuration, and a bunch of other changes.
I just need to finish up on the SunBird before I get too caught up in the new Red Swans!
My thought is to make some templates from the stock pieces to then make Red Swan #4, which will be similar to a typical "hotliner" - 4S motor/battery, a major re-design to the wing, "V" tail configuration, and a bunch of other changes.
I just need to finish up on the SunBird before I get too caught up in the new Red Swans!
Are you starting your own mini air force? LOL!
You are going to be the go-to guy for Red Swan advice. How do they fly?
Almost nabbed a Navion kit the other night on ebay. Missed it by $1.
You are going to be the go-to guy for Red Swan advice. How do they fly?
Almost nabbed a Navion kit the other night on ebay. Missed it by $1.
Just doing my part to offset all the foam currently in the air!
In my opinion the Red Swan is a very good flying plane, especially for the low cost. It will never be able to compete with expensive and better designed kits, but for the cost and time to build it is hard to beat. I'm actually surprised at how well it flies. Not the best in windy conditions, but on a calm day it handles well and is relaxing to fly.
In my opinion the Red Swan is a very good flying plane, especially for the low cost. It will never be able to compete with expensive and better designed kits, but for the cost and time to build it is hard to beat. I'm actually surprised at how well it flies. Not the best in windy conditions, but on a calm day it handles well and is relaxing to fly.
The lightweight RS got a proper shakedown flight yesterday. 16 minutes in low winds and I'm very happy with it. I had problems with the ailerons again, but it was due to me having the quick links too tight so they were binding. The 2S setup doesn't climb as fast as the 3S in RS#1, but the folding prop and lighter weight makes a noticeable difference. I found I was able to glide longer without using power than on the first RS. There was no lift from thermals to help me, but I have high hopes for long flights once I catch one. Now I just need to swap in a telemetry receiver so I can monitor battery voltage in-flight - I hate landing and finding I've still got tons of battery still left!
Nice! I have to figure out some way to straighten my fuse as I managed to build in a pretty severe twist at the tail. I made the mistake of using the keys on the formers instead of using the flat building board to set up the side of the fuse and it ended up with a twist. Should be easy to fix but I need to make some time to do it. I also need to figure out what happened to all my square stock because I do not have enough to use on the inside corners of the fuse...strange.
How about soaking the area which is twisted with Windex? Let it sit a few minutes and then twist it in the correct position, clamp it securely, and let it dry overnight.
On the square stock, I don't remember if any of mine was square, I think it was all rectangular, but I'll be reminded on Wednesday when #3 arrives.
On the square stock, I don't remember if any of mine was square, I think it was all rectangular, but I'll be reminded on Wednesday when #3 arrives.
I might give that a try. Have been debating between that and cutting one side and redoing. It might be better to get it perfect by tasking it apart. Wet and twist has to be trial and error to get the twist out.
I think I have some spare stock but strange that it wasn't in the kit...
I talked the wife into joining me in the cold for a quick flight today. About 15 minutes of pure excitement condensed down to about 1-1/2.
I dropped a telemetry receiver into RS#2 today so I could monitor the battery voltage and see how long I could fly. Weather was about 36 degrees F, overcast, with winds up to 5 MPH. I started the timer and tossed the plane into the air, powered by a 1000mAh 2 cell. 36 minutes later it touched down again, with most of that time spent trying to conserve battery power.
By comparison, RS#1's best flight was 32 minutes with a few other flights in the 25-30 range - these were all in warmer conditions that were probably better for gliding. These best times were with 3 cell 850 and 1000mAh batteries.
Comparing the flight characteristics of the planes, #1 is certainly faster, but also loses altitude more quickly requiring use of the prop to gain altitude again. Other than the sink rate and speed they handle very similarly, which makes sense since they're the same basic plane. Slow roll rate, easy to fly, etc. The main differences between the planes are the overall weight and the extra drag on #1 due to the non-folding prop. #1 gains altitude much more quickly with the 3S setup, while #2 is pretty sluggish.
I think the next step will be to upgrade #1 to boost performance. The biggest changes would be moving the motor inside the fuselage and changing to a folding prop. This would increase the overall weight from where it is now, and might push the CoG far enough forward to require tail weight, unless I can shift the internals around enough. I'll have to check the motor to see if it is rated to handle the larger folding prop. If so, game on!
By comparison, RS#1's best flight was 32 minutes with a few other flights in the 25-30 range - these were all in warmer conditions that were probably better for gliding. These best times were with 3 cell 850 and 1000mAh batteries.
Comparing the flight characteristics of the planes, #1 is certainly faster, but also loses altitude more quickly requiring use of the prop to gain altitude again. Other than the sink rate and speed they handle very similarly, which makes sense since they're the same basic plane. Slow roll rate, easy to fly, etc. The main differences between the planes are the overall weight and the extra drag on #1 due to the non-folding prop. #1 gains altitude much more quickly with the 3S setup, while #2 is pretty sluggish.
I think the next step will be to upgrade #1 to boost performance. The biggest changes would be moving the motor inside the fuselage and changing to a folding prop. This would increase the overall weight from where it is now, and might push the CoG far enough forward to require tail weight, unless I can shift the internals around enough. I'll have to check the motor to see if it is rated to handle the larger folding prop. If so, game on!
Great flight - congrats! Looks like it has plenty of power.
