Paper Airplanes to RC the Challenge

[bracesport]

loved the build thread - you got this far on your own, so I am sure you will crack it!

 

[Wildthing]

I'm smellin' what your steppin' in, brother.*

This plane's cubic wing loading is a ridiculously low 2.9, which puts her in the range of indoor fliers and thermal-catching gliders, so theoretically she IS a floater. I personally can attest to her being in practice** capable of level flight at speeds so slow they approach (what comedian Ron White called) the Speed of Smell. So, we're good on weight/size. My stumbling block is controlling the available power.

The current power configuration generates about 300 g of thrust, which in this case is a (expletive deleted) lot. On the scale, ready-to-fly, she comes in at just under 200 g, so we're looking at a thrust/weight ratio of 1.5:1 (think 3-D, unlimited vertical, screaming jets, etc.) It's an odd couple -the screaming floater- but it can work. If I had a bit more finesse in my left thumb it could work quite well.

Wind gusts will always be the Achilles heel of any lightly-loaded plane, but -given enough reserve power and the skill to use it judiciously- a quick blast on the throttle can go a long way toward smoothing out almost any rough air. Reserve power I got in spades; a lock-picker's touch... not so much (not yet, anyway). Anything over half-throttle on this bird is overkill for my park-flier puttering. This cuts my safe control stick resolution in half, and leaves all kinds of head-room above that for me to wander into trouble REAL quick (as the videos above clearly show).

My near-term training plan is to either program a sensible rev-limiter into my throttle curve, or go with a lower-voltage battery. Either one would produce the same net effect: Keeping me off the highway to the danger-zone, as it were. Your proposed solution would also produce the same net-effect. Increasing the size and weight (while maintaining the lift/weight ratio) and keeping thrust/weight constant would in theory produce the same effect as decreasing the excess thrust inflicted on the current airframe. The major caveat here being that in practice bigger really does fly better (because air molecules don't scale). In that sense your solution... ummm... makes more sense, and explains why my old 4X version is just easier to fly and more forgiving than this new 3X version.

That Reynolds fella sure did know some stuff...



*I picked that phrase up from a young lady I used to run around with, when I was also a young man (which feels like a looooong time ago). I met her in a Karaoke bar, in Kentucky. These facts notwithstanding she was a nice girl. No. Really. She was.

** In Theory, theory and practice are the same. However, I have found that in Practice they are not.

I think especially for faster flying turn your throws down and maybe add a little more expo, or setup your dual rates with the low throws in it so you can just switch to it and try while flying.

 

[Michael9865]

In Theory, theory and practice are the same. However, I have found that in Practice they are not.

Very profound. I will have to use that.

 

[Screwball]

I think especially for faster flying turn your throws down and maybe add a little more expo, or setup your dual rates with the low throws in it so you can just switch to it and try while flying.

Absolutely. At full throws I'm set up for 36 deg. deflection (neutral-to-max) with a 50/50 elevon mix, so 18 deg. pitch and 18 deg. roll, and I need every bit of that during really slow flight.

I initially set dual rates at 70% throw, 40% expo. Next time out I think I'll dial down the throws even more. What I think I really need though are quicker thumbs capable of more precise corrections (translation: more stick-time). That, and a bigger flying field if I'm going to wind her up all the way. The open space in the park I go to is really small, but... it's right behind my house and there's a cool playground right next to the field, so my kids love it.

I think I've got the makings of a solid performer here, especially for its size-range. Eminently portable, durable as a cockroach, really wide flight envelope, and -if I may say so- pretty cool-looking, to my eye anyway. All I need to do now is dial in the setup and the trim (oh... That's all?)

 

[Screwball]

Very profound. I will have to use that.

Yup. It's actually a frequent source of amusement for me, to watch the succession of faces made by any number and pedigree of architects (and a few engineers, as well) when I say to them, "Yes. I understand that you can draw it like that, but -simply put- you cannot build it like that."
...and once that's had a chance to sink in, "We could build it like this... with your approval, of course."

 

[bracesport]

and the wind tunnel is where the theory gets disproven!

 

[DutchRoll]

Well, this has been a learning experience!

I wasn't willing to give up just yet on my green arrow, so I switched the power pod around to the front, and put a 5" three blade on the motor. After a month of wind and snow storms I finally got it to fly - but I forgot the expo settings, so it was VERY snappy on the rolls and I eventually sent it crashing nose first into the snowy field. After that, with all the snow packed into it the motor didn't want to spin very fast, so I hung it up to dry. I'll try it again when there is less snow to clog up the works!

 

[DutchRoll]

Dried it out, taped over the top, and took out again this evening. Managed to make a complete circuit before the 650mh battery wimped out (I hadn't charged it back up - my bad). But.. Success!

Still snappy on the roll, even with 40% expo, so I'll change the wire position on the servo control arms and try again tomorrow.

 

[The Hangar]

Dried it out, taped over the top, and took out again this evening. Managed to make a complete circuit before the 650mh battery wimped out (I hadn't charged it back up - my bad). But.. Success!

Still snappy on the roll, even with 40% expo, so I'll change the wire position on the servo control arms and try again tomorrow.

Congrats on the success! You could go into your transmitter and decrease your throws in dual rates...

 

[DutchRoll]

I switched to the closest holes on the control arms, and got it up in the air with a fresh battery. I managed about three good flights (and crashes) before I dipped to low and ran it into a water tank. The collision crushed the power pod and crumpled the first 5 inches of the nose, but didn't break the prop. The receiver went flying off the velcro strip, disconnecting from the servos.

First pic is what it looked like before I took it out this morning, and the second pic is the crumpled mess it is now! Oh well, time to start on something slower, like the tiny trainer.

 

[The Hangar]

I switched to the closest holes on the control arms, and got it up in the air with a fresh battery. I managed about three good flights (and crashes) before I dipped to low and ran it into a water tank. The collision crushed the power pod and crumpled the first 5 inches of the nose, but didn't break the prop. The receiver went flying off the velcro strip, disconnecting from the servos.

First pic is what it looked like before I took it out this morning, and the second pic is the crumpled mess it is now! Oh well, time to start on something slower, like the tiny trainer.

View attachment 162705 View attachment 162706

Too bad. At least all your gear came back in working order though! Now for some shameless self-promotion. You could try building my Simple Stick - it flies really slow and is easy to fly and would work with your power pack B! Here's the link to the thread in case you're interested:
https://forum.flitetest.com/index.php?threads/the-simple-stick-builders-thread-and-plans.62186/

 

[IdoAllMyOwnStunts]

Here’s one I made about 6 years back, flew well, thrust angle was very touchy. We added a rudder and it helped out greatly.