Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
August 20, 2017, 03:18:23 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with email, password and session length
 
Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: 60% Reduction in Size  (Read 798 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
USch
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 14
Offline Offline

Italy Italy

Posts: 841




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: July 26, 2017, 03:13:40 PM »

I would define it a bit different. Look at the second pic, which seems similar to a Bubble Dancer, it is not the tailplane moving forward, it's the fin which moved behind the fuselage. Look at the boom length....

Urs
Logged

Fast up-Slow down
kukailimoku
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 107


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #26 on: July 26, 2017, 03:22:11 PM »

I agree but my hope is to not extend anything further back than it already is to avoid having to add extra weight in the nose to pull the CG back into place. Moving something forward would make it better than it currently is.
Logged
USch
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 14
Offline Offline

Italy Italy

Posts: 841




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: July 26, 2017, 04:34:43 PM »

That's ok for the mass balance but less for the aerodynamic behaving. You are already short on tail-boom length, so further reducing means even less controlling power. Your model is very short coupled, maybe you have to heavy a tailplane or fin or both, because to get the CG right the nose length seems more than adequate looking at the photo's.

Urs
Logged

Fast up-Slow down
kukailimoku
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 107


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #28 on: July 26, 2017, 05:20:45 PM »

The overall length is a stock Oly 650 so I'm thinking I've got some wiggle room, we'll see.
Logged
OZPAF
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 38
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 3,505



Ignore
« Reply #29 on: July 27, 2017, 07:55:26 PM »

My preference would be to leave the stab where it is and move the fin if you need to. This would maintain your pitch stability which I think is more important than losing a small amount of rudder authority. Rudder power should be ample in any case with the small size and inertia of this model.

John
Logged
kukailimoku
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 107


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #30 on: July 27, 2017, 09:11:31 PM »

That's what I settled on as well. The change in nose weight for getting the CG right would be minimal but the whole setup would be easier to build and a lot more durable. Thanks for the input!
Logged
kukailimoku
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 107


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #31 on: July 31, 2017, 02:17:40 PM »

Nearly done, just waiting for the hinges to arrive. This is what the final configuration should look like (the rudder isn't attached yet, but that's my planned location). Clothespin included to give a bit of scale.

I found an old spare soft diving weight back in a corner with all the SCUBA and snorkel stuff and had an epiphany. Not needing it, I sliced it open and now have about a zillion 1/16" lead balls to use to make CG locations as perfect as possible. Yay me. You can get such a thing on Amazon for under $10 and pretty much be set for lead forever.

Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: 60% Reduction in Size
Logged
OZPAF
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 38
Offline Offline

Australia Australia

Posts: 3,505



Ignore
« Reply #32 on: July 31, 2017, 07:47:51 PM »

That's a large peg Smiley

John
Logged
kukailimoku
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 107


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #33 on: July 31, 2017, 07:50:04 PM »

Resist.

Bad.

Genital.

Joke.

 Lips sealed
Logged
kukailimoku
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 107


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #34 on: August 07, 2017, 01:57:55 PM »

Final configuration with the new positioning of the vertical stab. Dang near ready to fly (having a job gets in the way).

I want to thank my sponsors, Pacifico beer Herradura Anejo tequila. Without their inspiration sailplanes remain grounded.

 Grin

(And that's not a peg. It's the back screw for a wooden clamp I got from my grandfather that's got to be somewhere around 100 years old by now. It still gets a lot of use.)
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: 60% Reduction in Size
Re: 60% Reduction in Size
Re: 60% Reduction in Size
Logged
kukailimoku
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 107


Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #35 on: August 14, 2017, 01:40:32 PM »

It lives (sorta). With all the tinkering and re-tinkering (I think this is tail section #5) I went ahead and re-covered it. I'm ready to get it airborne to see if it flies at all but the CG is a challenge and I'm taping lead solder to the nose for the test flying. If it works I'll extend the beak to get the leverage necessary to do it less Flintstone-like.

Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Re: 60% Reduction in Size
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!