Hip Pocket Builders' Forum

Outdoor Free Flight Forum => P-30 Class Sport and Competition => Topic started by: Sundance12 on August 01, 2008, 08:00:25 AM



Title: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Sundance12 on August 01, 2008, 08:00:25 AM
I have enjoyed the P-30 class airplane very much so I designed my own. It flies quite well under power but glides like a brick. It's a great training airplane to figure out trim and stability.

http://www.hippocketaeronautics.com/ff_ou_wizzywig.htm



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on August 01, 2008, 10:17:12 AM
This took me delving into the album for pics of past P30's.

First - to spur Caley in due course - a 'Potent 30'

Second - a P30 variation on my usual low-aspect ratio Mulvihill theme which has been very successful .. but this with a f/w didn't quite come up to expectations. Still did quite well and eventually was lost into a forest but didn't satisfy me.

Finally, my own old reliable 'Marcus Maximus' design - based on the '40s 'SupaDupa' ultralight design. This was the first .. have built several .. just one left now that shows its age, previous one departed at Geneseo last year. Simple, boxy .. no frills .. flys. Last pic is nearing the completion of winding for that farewell flight ..... sigh


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 01, 2008, 04:28:52 PM
I've only built two of these models. My first was the One Night 28 which was actually about the fourth model I ever built and weighed a ton at 50 some odd grams without rubber. But it did eventually fly and did quite well for being so heavy. I next built the NJAPF that was sent to me by some wonderful people in our hobby to encourage me to keep on with the hobby. I am presently still flying it and trying to get longer flights. So far I have gotten consistent flights over one minute and a flight of 90 and one of 95 seconds. I was absolutely elated at those two, which seemed to be up there forever. A couple of pics are provided. I need to rework the tail on the ON28 which is the only thing keeping it from flying again. Darn warps. :D

Caley

Sundance, Nice design.
Jim, That P-30, the middle picture with the Spirfire shaped wings is really a neat design. And I couldn't help noticing and giving a whistle or two on that pic with the legs sticking out of those cutoff jeans. ;D woo-woo!!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on August 01, 2008, 07:29:48 PM
Quote
P-30, the middle picture with the Spitfire shaped wings is really a neat design.

Well, as said ... it flew well enough but not to the standard I expected, based upon the Mulvihills which defy the pundits who say that low aspect ratios don't glide well.. and that those wings are prone to tip stall and need lots of washout. No washout, no tip stalls and good glides.. what can I say?

Maybe some day I'll try another P30 with a stretched fuselage and 4 strands.

Two very nice models, Caley, but for the photo, have you placed the wing on backwards on the ON28?

Your final comment .... hmmm :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 01, 2008, 07:51:26 PM
Yes Jim, It is on backward and I can claim that being Blonde as the problem. ;D Gee, I've put wings on backwards several times, including on glide tests. LOL!!!! We blondes are allowed great leeway at what we do. ;D ;D

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on August 01, 2008, 08:44:39 PM
Quote
We blondes are allowed great leeway at what we do.

As their partners are often pleased to allow them ..... ;D ;D ;D

Ahem ...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on August 01, 2008, 10:28:36 PM
Heres my Bob White designed "Perky 30" with all the bells and whistles including a "pop off" wing D/T.

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on August 01, 2008, 10:55:00 PM
Nice one, Bob!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on August 02, 2008, 12:56:46 AM
They are all nice. Now sometime I guess I better get one out.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on August 04, 2008, 05:44:11 PM
Here's my P30. Pic taken a couple of years ago----but it still looks the same now.
Wing based on Senator----I like the turbulator spars.
Fuselage was made over a broomstick.
Rear peg way down the back as it runs 4 strands of 1/8th---10 grams of course. Takes 2000 turns with care, and the motor run is 'forever'.
It maxed out in three local comps. to make the flyoff, but got a 2nd and 2 x 3rds.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 04, 2008, 05:51:09 PM
Gossie, Does making it over a broomstick mean it is witch brewed? ;D Do have a question on making the round fuse. If you do use a broomstick as your jig, would you wrap the broomstick with very thin plastic sheeting and then glue the balsa over that? I would think that the very thin plastic would add strength and act as a blast tube.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on August 04, 2008, 07:50:22 PM
I have to think about this------From memory I used 1/32nd straight grain medium to hard balsa, cut it to length and the diameter of the Witch's broom, doped it a couple of times on the inside only, then doped tissue onto it----can't remember if Esaki Lite or more than likely lightweight Modelspan.
I then wet the outside with water and kept it wet all day. Rolled it wet around the broom handle with no plastic or anything else and bound it up tightly with a I think it may have been a bandage-----held it all together like this on the broom handle with rubber bands until the next day when it was dry.
It of course slipped straight off, so then all I did was make sure the join was touching and run Cyano over the join very carefully to hold it together.
I then doped the outside and tissue covered it.
It's quite strong and has withstood several blowups at close to the 2000 turns. I don't use a blast tube in it.

No idea if that's the 'proper' way to do it, but it's been okay for me. Hope that helps.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: robert mathison on August 04, 2008, 07:55:07 PM
Hi all: this is photo of my P-30, named Dragonfly. This P-30 will get 90 seconds to 2 minutes dead air.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 04, 2008, 08:14:58 PM
Gossie, That sounds much like what I've heard elsewhere. I just need to know this stuff, as the next P-30 I have is a rolled tube type.

Bob, Good lookin' model and sounds like a great flyer.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: robert mathison on August 04, 2008, 08:30:23 PM
The next P30 you are working on will have a rolled fus. have you ever rolled one? it is not that bad if you get the wood good and wet. do you have a plane in mine? there are some very good ones you can get the plans for. the best one is the POLE CAT. could you keep me informed ?

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on August 04, 2008, 08:45:08 PM
Pretty airplane, Bob!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: robert mathison on August 04, 2008, 09:03:39 PM
This P30 came from a man that lives in FLA. his name is DAVE PLATT he is well known for his plane's .

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 04, 2008, 09:33:22 PM
Bob, I have the Potent 30. It is very similar to most rolled fuse P-30's I've seen. I know there are differences, but they are pretty close in appearance. The kit already has a rolled fuse, but I just don't trust wood that has been sitting for who knows how long. I will roll my own. I've done lots of balsa laminations for wingtips and stabs, so I do have some experience bending wood. I will just soak things overnight in the bathtub and have everything else ready to go when it comes out. I am thinking very seriously of using the super thin plastic on the inside instead of paper. I will experiment on how it adheres, but it should work fine. Maybe a bit heavier than tissue but much tougher. I'e heard of Dave Platt. Not sure if I have any of his plans or models.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on August 04, 2008, 09:44:22 PM
Here's my Majestyk, given some design changes. To give it that "Oldtimer Stick Model" look.

OTFlyer...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on August 04, 2008, 10:17:03 PM
Caley:

I know you do things differently and like to experiment, I would do as Gossie suggests; dope tissue to the balsa inside, soak it in water, roll it on a broom handle or piece of pvc pipe and wrap with an ACE bandage until dry. Glue the seam, cover with tissue outside and you are done.

Dave Platt is a WORLD CLASS R/C model builder/designer.If you saw the movie "The Battle of Britain" the Stuka's and other airplanes that were exploded/shot down were his..A shame to see that work destroyed.

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 04, 2008, 10:28:02 PM
Bob, OK, I just thought my idea might be stronger.Though I was trying to figure out how to glue something like plastic to the inside side of something that is soaked with water. Probably not possible.

Caley

Oh Yeah, and I will have to go out and buy an ACE bandage to put that wood in bondage. ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on August 04, 2008, 10:33:12 PM
Quote
Dave Platt is a WORLD CLASS R/C model builder/designer

An expatriate Brit, he has been just as well known in C/L circles (no pun intended) and in many areas of F/F; a very versatile craftsman and a nice guy .....

Caley, if the Potent 30 tube looks and feels sound - use it. It should be okay, anyway.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: robert mathison on August 05, 2008, 07:04:23 AM
HI Oldtime Flyer,

Yes the Majestyk is one of the best P30'S I have ever had, there is a lot of great flying P30'S out there. One of the best ones I had was a P30 was a One Knight 28.

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: robert mathison on August 06, 2008, 04:35:02 PM
This is my granddaughter holding my P30, she is starting to fly 1/2A CL.

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 06, 2008, 04:50:28 PM
Bob, Your granddaughter is a cutie. Am glad she is interested in the hobby. Wow!! C/L.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: hoogie007 on August 08, 2008, 12:08:35 AM
This is an image of my Boomer P-30 design. I market this kit through my website www.cbmodeldesigns.com

I've posted this a bit on the SFA site, so I hope it doesn't bore those of you who have already seen it there.

You can check out the details on my website. You can also view or downlaod the construction manual if you wish.

The kits will build underweight if done per plan. These models are a blast to fly and experiment with-competition or just sport flying.

Clint


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: robert mathison on October 08, 2008, 05:52:45 AM
HI All,

I was thinking [could be bad] that I will build a new P/30 ,the one I have by Dave Platt is as good they come and I know it will go OOS this gives me a reason to build a new one.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on October 08, 2008, 09:32:44 AM
Nice one, Robert. I've never seen one but they have a good reputation - look forward to performance reports. Use that d/t!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on October 08, 2008, 09:38:16 AM
Robert, Nice lookin' ship. Looks very fassssst  :)  Did you put a D/T on it?

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: robert mathison on October 08, 2008, 06:42:46 PM
I had one of these P30s DT and did not come down, it just keep going and we never got it back. I think the best way to get it down is to pop the wing.

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gkalay on October 09, 2008, 04:22:59 AM
Hi, modeller

Again NJAPF-II , total : 40 gr. wihtout rubber !
Cover easybuilt tussie
modify wing, full web


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: robert mathison on October 16, 2008, 08:11:33 PM
HI All,

I was looking though some of my P30 kits that I have,and this jumped out at me and before I do anything to it does anyone know of this P30?

I think some one gave it to me for some D T fuse at a free flight contest in VA. if anyone has info. on this model good or bad could you let me know?

The name of this P30 is Tail Firster.

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on October 17, 2008, 07:16:22 AM
Bob,

 I've heard it's a good flier. Never built one myself, though.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: faif2d on October 17, 2008, 08:17:51 PM
I think that was a full size plan in Aeromodeler years ago.. If so mine built and flew quite well. I was scared about the big rudder tip plates but I managed to get them on straight.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on October 17, 2008, 09:31:28 PM
The AEROMODELLER canard P30 was HEATHER'S BROOMSTICK from memory about 10 or 12 years ago.
Bill and Heather Thomas in the Brisbane Freeflight Society built one or two of them back then and it was accepted by AEROMODELLER to be a full size plan.
It was quite a good flier in Heather's hands with help from her husband Bill.
Unfortunately Bill passed away 6 or 8 years ago and Heather retired from flying.
Both delightful people that also had a strong interest in motor sport also.

 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: craig h on October 25, 2008, 04:19:22 PM
Hello Everyone... just a line to let you know that I am a new member to this site. I didn't know of it... and I am glad I came across it. I have belonged to NFFS and it's site for some time now. I am a big fan of P-30 and have done pretty well flying competition... although not as good as some of the well knowns. But the main thing is the enjoyment of this class.
It's good to be here!

Craig h


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Sundance12 on October 25, 2008, 09:26:01 PM
Welcome craig h, glad to have you aboard, lots of good model builders here.

Cheers

Sundance12


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on October 26, 2008, 09:01:21 PM
Hi Craig, Welcome to the group. Sorry to answer late, but for some reason, I wasn't getting notified of replies to threads I subscribe to. Just got back on the forum to look around.

My first successful flying model, thanks to many on several groups was a P-30, the "One Night 28". It would never win a contest at a whopping 50+ or so grams with no rubber in it, but it flew well, and even got up to 90 seconds. Probably a light thermal. I've never competed, but may soon try, and the P-30 class, as you said, is a good place to start. Will have to check when I get down to Eloy, if they take entries at the check in table. Might just try to fly my NJAPF which has been very consistent. Competition is ok, but just being there and meeting everyone is the best part.Have fun flyin', and let us see some of what you put together. We're all very interested.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on October 27, 2008, 07:38:37 PM
HI All,
I was looking though some of my P30 kits that I have,and this jumped out at me and before I do anything to it does anyone know of this P30?
I think some one gave it to me for some D T fuse at a free flight contest in VA. if anyone has info. on this model good or bad could you let me know?
The name of this P30 is Tail Firster.

My type of model! I have a weakness for out of the rut designs. I recall an article about this creation, i believe in FM or maybe AAM some time back.l BMJR still in business?

As I've NO competition/endurance models (yet), I'd be interested in obtaining a "Tail Firster" - I think it's neat. Wouldn't care whether it is competitive or not as I fly for fun.

Pete


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: craig h on October 27, 2008, 07:49:00 PM
Yes BMJR is still in business and still sells the Tailfirster. I know of a person that flys it in competition and does well with it but he is one of the top flyers in most AMA events.

Have fun..


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on November 07, 2008, 01:35:59 AM
Here is my Majestyk P-30 launching into a stiff wind.

Derek


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on February 25, 2009, 11:38:59 PM
Derek, Sorry for such a late reply. I must say that your model definitely stood on its tail and kept going. I guess that's the difference between a rubber motor wound properly and what mine does. Mine maybe goes up at a 45 degree angle for a few seconds, then levels out and just cruises. You're the brave sort to fly in wind. :)

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on March 02, 2009, 05:57:55 PM
Derek, Sorry for such a late reply. I must say that your model definitely stood on its tail and kept going. I guess that's the difference between a rubber motor wound properly and what mine does. Mine maybe goes up at a 45 degree angle for a few seconds, then levels out and just cruises. You're the brave sort to fly in wind. :)

Well, I don't know about being brave, I just wanted the exercise of the chase! As to winding rubber motors, I started in free flight competition with Wakefields so I learned early on to wind the snot out of them. I still wind motors pretty hard even in classes that don't need it!

Derek


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on March 02, 2009, 06:59:37 PM
I still wind motors pretty hard even in classes that don't need it!

As do I. Even a sport model has a maximum flight potential .. and I feel ANY model should be flown to its limits every time.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: craig h on March 02, 2009, 07:20:05 PM
 Yep...I fly mine with 6 strands of 1/8 rubber at 9.6 grams before lube and wind between

 1200 and 1400 turns. Of course you don't to do this without use of a blow tube!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on March 02, 2009, 07:37:47 PM
Yep...I fly mine with 6 strands of 1/8 rubber at 9.6 grams before lube and wind between

 1200 and 1400 turns. Of course you don't to do this without use of a blow tube!

Sounds about right! P-30's are tons of fun with that kind of power. It's between a 10-11 on my torque meter.

Derek


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: schnellwilli on March 02, 2009, 07:53:52 PM
When I used to fly P-30s a lot back in the 70s, I used a rubber stripper and cut .250" down to .160 (4 strands). Liked that better than using 5 strands of 1/8". Last P-30 I made was John Kamlas Marie that used 6 X3/32". Great flyer if the motor was really pushed.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on March 02, 2009, 08:05:13 PM
I've been listening to you chaps talking about how many winds you get on your motors. I must have a bad batch of rubber, as 6 strands of 1/8 rubber, well lubed, explodes at around 970 winds. Could be I'm not stretching it 100 times its length to get those massive winds. ;D I just don't have luck with putting heavy turns on my motors. They break too easily. Will have to be happy with around 900.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on March 02, 2009, 09:13:48 PM
I must have a bad batch of rubber, as 6 strands of 1/8 rubber, well lubed, explodes at around 970 winds.

I must admit I've never had 6 strand motors go as far as 1200-1400 turns - how good was the torque, Craig?

I usually get somewhere between 1000 and near 1100 dependent upon batch and courage for that 'extra couple' ; your 970 may not be out of line for your batch, Caley, and could indeed be producing more torque than a 'softer' motor carrying more turns. I think you have commented previously about having to stretch out further when winding, so there could indeed be some more turns available. 'Coming in' too fast can also reduce number of potential turns.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ram on March 02, 2009, 09:46:11 PM
I've been listening to you chaps talking about how many winds you get on your motors. I must have a bad batch of rubber, as 6 strands of 1/8 rubber, well lubed, explodes at around 970 winds. Could be I'm not stretching it 100 times its length to get those massive winds. ;D I just don't have luck with putting heavy turns on my motors. They break too easily. Will have to be happy with around 900.

Heat could be the culprit. I find that the hotter it is the fewer turns before the explosion. Under good conditions it seems that 1200 is my upper limit. Some batches of rubber are thinner than others, also. That allows relatively more turns due to the longer motor.

Rey


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on March 02, 2009, 10:17:37 PM
I checked my notes. For a 6 strand 9.6 gram March 05 plus lube motor I get between 1100-1200 turns with a torque of between 10-11 inch ounces. My torque meter is a DYO job so the exact torque is probably off. I usually get two flights out of a motor and after a good hour of rest I get 1250-1400 winds to the same torque.

As to winding I stretch the motor to 8-10x its length and hold for a couple of minutes. I then relax the motor and let it rest for a minute. Then i pull it very tight and start winding in the turns with my 10-1 winder. I start moving in at between 500-600 turns and come in slowly keeping the motor tight. It's hard to explain but as I move in if I come in to fast I can feel the torque relaxing. If it does then I stop moving in till it's tight again. I shoot to be at the hoped for torque when I get to the nose of the plane. I wind fast as well. I tend to put in 30-50 more handwinds as i wait for a thermal.

Derek


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on March 02, 2009, 10:27:04 PM
The rubber I have is called F.A.I. Rubber Tan Sport. If you're using the same, I am amased at your being able to put that many winds on it.

Tomorrow I am going to make another motor and try to stretch it out 6-8 times length, just to see if I can do it.

I'm also amazed you can use a 10:1 winder. I've tried, and mine gets cranky and wants to bind up. Maybe it is how you manipulate the rubber while winding that allows the use of this kind of winder. I will have to try mine again.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on March 02, 2009, 10:56:10 PM
The rubber I have is called F.A.I. Rubber Tan Sport. If you're using the same, I am amazed at your being able to put that many winds on it.
Tomorrow I am going to make another motor and try to stretch it out 6-8 times length, just to see if I can do it.
I'm also amazed you can use a 10:1 winder. I've tried, and mine gets cranky and wants to bind up. Maybe it is how you manipulate the rubber while winding that allows the use of this kind of winder. I will have to try mine again.

Hi Caley, the rubber I use is F.A.I Rubber Super Sport which is a better quality than the sport rubber. The same manufacturer offers them and the Super Sport is what you want for serious contest work. It is more expensive but you will be able to get more winds into it. That probably explains the difference in total number of winds. Work on getting the most out of the rubber you have.

My 10-1 winder is a nice big beefy one. Most of the smaller 10-1 winders will bog down with a 1/8" six strand motor. There are several good quality 10-1 winders available but they are more money. Mine is a 10-1/ 4-1 hybrid winder made by K &P. The other is made by a guy in Colorado and sells for $50. The K&P winder is around $125. Pretty pricey but i use it for coupe as well and it works.

Winding rubber motors is as much about feel as it is number of winds. I expect to break motors when I wind and break them i do!. In a contest i want as much as the motor can give me. Of course that means that my planes need to be trimmed so they can handle the power but that is a big part of the fun!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on March 02, 2009, 11:11:03 PM
I found a picture of my 10-1 winder on Mike Woodhouse's Free Flight Supplies web site at http://www.freeflightsupplies.co.uk/ (http://www.freeflightsupplies.co.uk/)

The winder is under rubber accessories. I attached a photo.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on March 02, 2009, 11:11:47 PM
Derek, I'm glad to know that maybe I am not as fritzy at this rubber motor winding thing, as I thought. I probably can learn to wind the motor a bit better, and maybe get another 30 or so winds. I just need to practise, and in the process, blow some motors to see just how they react with different stretches and how they react as I move in while winding. Just need more practise. Since I fly rubber powered models maybe four times a year, I don't get very much of that.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: schnellwilli on March 03, 2009, 08:50:59 AM
I don't fly P-30 anymore but find the talk about 6 strand motors very interesting. In recent years I have been building most of my models to a size that works good with 6 X1/8" X 20 gm motors. I use carved props, 10D X 11P. Generally wind to about 2100 turns in the mass launch events. No blast tube, break the motor and you are eliminated. Never broke a motor but realize that I am not winding to max.

I am curious as to how long the motor run is on P-30s with 6 strand motors and what kind of props you use, ordinary Peck, Gizmo/Peck or Czech. I don't know but would guess that a longer motor run and longer glide could be achieved with a Gizmo because of the higher pitch. Then, again, the model may not get up as higjh. I tried a 10D X 13P prop on my Chambermaid and the performance was diminished. The Czech prop has a little more pitch than the stock Peck and a better blade shape. Since the blades are narrower, perhaps the motor run would not be extended. However it should create less drag when freewheeling.

I remember reading an article by O'Dwyer, "Playing With P-30s".

I think it was in a NFFS Sympo 10 years or so ago. O'Dwyer made some glide test under controlled conditions in a gym and compared the performance of the Czech to the Peck. He wrote that the glide was longer with the Czech. Lots of other interesting stuff in the article including Gurney flaps.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on March 03, 2009, 07:26:04 PM
I am curious as to how long the motor run is on P-30s with 6 strand motors and what kind of props you use, ordinary Peck, Gizmo/Peck or Czech. I don't know but would guess that a longer motor run and longer glide could be achieved with a Gizmo because of the higher pitch. Then, again, the model may not get up as high. I tried a 10D X 13P prop on my Chambermaid and the performance was diminished. The Czech prop has a little more pitch than the stock Peck and a better blade shape. Since the blades are narrower, perhaps the motor run would not be extended. However it should creat less drag when freewheeling.

I remember reading an article by O'Dwyer, "Playing With P-30s".

I think it was in a NFFS Sympo 10 years or so ago. O'Dwyer made some glide test under controlled conditions in a gym and
compared the performance of the Czech to the Peck. He wrote that the glide was longer with the Czech. Lots of other interesting stuff in the article including Gurney flaps.

I haven't timed the motor run on one of my P-30's yet. I use the gizmo geezer front end and props. It is simple and works well. I have read O'Dwer's article. All the talk and design differences for P-30 explain why it is so popular and challenging! Easy to build and fly, not easy to win! There are at least three strategies on setting them up based on motor run. (Long motor: 4 strands of 1/8, Medium: 6 strands of 3/32, and Short: 6 strands of 1/8) The two FFQ P-30 issues show all the amazing variety. Including T. Bowls full house gadget P-30, a marvel of engineering!

It is a cool competition class. And Stan Buddenbohm's record is flat out amazing. Those San Diego boys knew what they were doing when they created it.

Derek


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on March 03, 2009, 10:54:53 PM
I've got a P-30 with Gizmo running 4 strands of 1/8. Can only make about 1600 turns, and the motor run is a bit disappointing at 90 sec average. It doesn't climb that well, but my launches ensure it gets ok altitude. One thing it is good at is finding lift. Last time I flew it, didn't get above 50' until it had been in the air for about 80 sec, then it just went up like a rocket. Fortunately the pop-off wing had it back down inside of 150 sec.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on March 04, 2009, 03:04:00 AM
As I understand it from my expert chums, the Peck prop has the lowest pitch and is best for 4 strands of 1/8" (it's also lightest. Then comes the Igra red or yellow props, and I've always used these with six strands (and an under 60 sec motor run). Finally, the Gizmo appears to be a repitched Peck, and my son's P30 with 6 strands of SS and about 1000 turns (it was only just above freezing when we flew a couple of weeks ago) gets just over a minute run.

One of the problems with the Igra & 6 strands is that when fully wound there is a good chance of either a loop, or a very flat first turn, losing much height. The latter can be cured by a Gurney flap of 1/16" on the inner right wing panel. The Gizmo with its higher pitch appears to absorb the first burst better, with greater initial height gain.

I must confess that I prefer a quick climb & height gain rather than stooging around in ground effect, hoping that what you thought was good air actually is!

PeterT's sixpennorth


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: schnellwilli on March 04, 2009, 05:53:52 AM
Thanks, gents, you answered all my questions! I read the two part article in the FFQ and agree beleive it to be the most comprehensive thing ever written on P-30s.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on March 04, 2009, 06:05:34 AM
Bill

I agree with you wholeheartedly about the FFQ P30 articles, a veritable mine of information. It would be nice if Sergio could produce Parts 3 & 4 to cover all those marvellous P30s missed before, and the new ones that have since come along (like Helmut Werfl's geared P30 with VIT). Perhaps he'll read this?!

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: schnellwilli on March 04, 2009, 09:41:15 AM
Interesting what you said about the Gizmo, PeeTee. I won several of the Gizmo front ends in contests but have never used them on any of my scale models. It is an ingenious device but I do not like the Peck blade shape and the pitch is a little too high for my liking. The Peck blades have a very wide chord towards the tip where the pitch flattens out. This must create a lot of drag when freewheeling. I read somewhere that a Larrabee blade shape has low freewheeling drag.

Makes sense because the blade is wider towards the hub where the pitch angle is greater.Obviously, Irv Olm, the designer of the Gizmo, has access to plastic moulding facilities. It is a shame that he choose to use the Peck prop for the basis of his clever device instead of designing and making a more efficient prop to go with the assembly.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on March 04, 2009, 10:19:44 AM
Obviously, Irv Olm, the designer of the Gizmo, has access to plastic moulding facilities. It is a shame that he choose to use the Peck prop for the basis of his clever device instead of designing and making a more efficient prop to go with the assembly.

Well, in fairness to Orv ... he doesn't mould props but merely repitches and matches them .. and at the time he came up with the gadget the Czech props were rarely seen and the Peck - with all their variations (taken from the mould too early?) was the one in common use. In practice, I've heard comments that there is now little to choose between his modified props and the Czech as far as performance is concerned though I tend to use the latter.

Curious that you find the standard (?) Peck pitches too high, Bill - I always considered them to be pretty low - the Czech has more pitch. At for tip area, easy enough to reshape the blade to taste - though not for P30


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: schnellwilli on March 04, 2009, 02:52:58 PM
Obviously, Irv Olm, the designer of the Gizmo, has access to plastic moulding facilities. It is a shame that he choose to use the Peck prop for the basis of his clever device instead of designing and making a more efficient prop to go with the assembly.
Well, in fairness to Orv ... he doesn't mould props but merely repitches and matches them .. and at the time he came up with the gadget the Czech props were rarely seen and the Peck - with all their variations (taken from the mould too early?) was the one in common use. In practice, I've heard comments that there is now little to choose between his modified props and the Czech as far as performance is concerned though I tend to use the latter.

Curious that you find the standard (?) Peck pitches too high, Bill - I always considered them to be pretty low - the Czech has more pitch. At for tip area, easy enough to reshape the blade to taste - though not for P30

I must have not made myself clear. As far as the stock Peck goes, the pitch is too low, the pitch from one blade to another often different and the hole that forms the bushing should be bushed with brass tubing to prevent the eventual wear that will cause wobble. The advertised pitch of the reshaped Gizmo blades is too high for my liking. The blade shape of the Peck is not the best for freewheeling as it causes to much drag as I explained earlier. Yeah, you can reshape the blade to taste on a scale model but you cannot add chord at the point where it would be more effective, towards the hub. Bottom line is that Peck blades are a lost cause, the Czech has some problems and what we really need is a new 9.5/10D plastic prop. Gizmo must have the facilities for moulding such props but choose to use the peck for their front end. I think this is because most modelers, especially the scale guys do not realize the limitations of the Peck prop.

End result is that Gizmo sells lots of his front ends with Peck props. Since it is a lucrative product as is, why go to the trouble of making it better by mouding a new prop?
Another reason why I do not use Peck/Gizmo Peck devices on my scale models is that they clash against the few aesthetics sensitivities that I have left. To install an assemblage of moulded plastic parts on the nose of one of my stick and tissue models is sacrilege. However, If Mr Olm could produce a front end using a prop other than a Peck, perhaps an original with Larrabbe outline, I would fight to be first in line to buy one.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on March 04, 2009, 04:43:22 PM
I take your point, Bill, but I do not think Orv has the ability to manufacture moulds and make a new prop from scratch - merely to warm and repitch the existing Peck items

But .. I'll ask him

Regards - Jim


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: schnellwilli on March 04, 2009, 05:12:33 PM
I take your point, Bill, but I do not think Orv has the ability to manufacture moulds and make a new prop from scratch - merely to warm and repitch the existing Peck items

But .. I'll ask him

Regards - Jim

Please ask him, Jim. If he can make all those complex moulded plastic parts for the Gizmo front end, He certainly should be able to mould a complete blade Check out his winder/ counter/torque meter. Lots of moulded parts there too, some of them metal. I really think he has the know how and facilities to come up with a real good prop for freewheeling models,
better than what is out there now. Perhaps you could get him to make a prototype and give or sell us a few to test for ourselves.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on March 04, 2009, 05:18:03 PM
I don't like getting into something I know nothing about. But, is it possible that Orv doesn't actually create all these parts, but has some outside company, possibly a Chinese one, create all these little parts? Is it also possible that the props are repitched elsewhere? Just a thought.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on March 04, 2009, 06:44:34 PM
Though this thread is starting to diverge from its titled purpose... I have copied the relevant messages to Orv together with the URL's, etc. and invited him to comment directly or indirectly to these points.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: schnellwilli on March 04, 2009, 07:17:08 PM
Though this thread is starting to diverge from its titled purpose... I have copied the relevant messages to Orv together with the URL's, etc. and invited him to comment directly or indirectly to these points.

Good for you! One of the best things IRV could do for FF would be to come up with a good 10" D X 11 or 12P prop that has a better blade shape than the Peck.\ and is lighter than the Czech. It might be too much to ask but if Irv could incorporate a double tube shaft bushing and a Garami freewheeling device, I would be overwhelmed!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on March 04, 2009, 07:30:33 PM
P30 was created as a small-field low-tech simple event. The prop limitations weren't a sad accident. The limitations that are consequential from using the available props are what makes the event so wonderful. We don't really need better props. If you want to fly terrific performance-minded planes on 10 gms rubber..... well, buy a Coupe ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on March 04, 2009, 07:53:55 PM
Dan's comments are very valid ..... if we seek the development of better commercially-available props for P30 then we are escalating performance at the possible expense of reducing participation, as some feel their levels of expertise are becoming outclassed; the event 'as is' is fine as it is. Lighter props for the class are not too significant, with a minimum airframe weight to contend with. The present Czech props are popular but Pecks still hold their own in P30 competition . .and the former are hardly a new development as they've been around for well over twenty years.

Whether improved plastic props should or could be made for other classes is a different subject altogether .. though in such instances I feel a good carved one would do as well, or better.

Maybe we should return now to the thread title ... "Show us your P-30's"

The one below was a variant on my 'Ellipsis' Mulvihills ... didn't perform to the same comparative level as those but made a couple of 'places' before it was lost into a forest.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: schnellwilli on March 04, 2009, 07:58:17 PM
P30 was created as a small-field low-tech simple event. The prop limitations weren't a sad accident. The limitations that are consequential from using the available props are what makes the event so wonderful. We don't really need better props. If you want to fly terrific performance-minded planes on 10 gms rubber..... well, buy a Coupe.

You have a GD nerve saying that to me. What are YOUR credentials? I have been active in the P-30 movement from the very beginning and know very well the intentions of those who created the event. I do fly terrific performance models on 10 grams of rubber and they are P-30s. The P-30 movement started flying with the Peck props because that was all that was available at the time. . Later the Czech props came along and then the Gizmo. They can all be purchased at reasonable prices and used by beginners. Why not something better that can be purchased at a reasonable price.

Until your very out of place comments, we were having a very enjoyable technical discussion on this tread. Read the previous posts and you may learn something about P-30 flying. I have only been a member of the Hip Pocket for a few months but this is the first time I experienced someone jumping with the intention of disrupting a very interesting thread that was progessing in a very positive manner.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on March 04, 2009, 08:18:04 PM
Easy, easy, easy! GD? Who is GD?
I meant nothing negative in the earlier post. P30 is probably my favorite event. Its certainly one of the most populated events. My point was that its no accident that its popular. I really think most flyers are very happy with the status quo. No one can get a huge performance advantage as the rules are rather restrictive.

I do know some scale fliers who wish there was a better selection of props for scale planes but that's a different subject?

Everyone knows that the props are a limiting factor regarding the available performance. A coupe will do twice what a P30 will. The difference is in the prop.

I am on record as saying I think P30 is a perfect event.
I have written nothing derogatory about the event and I take exception to the insinuation that I have.

Again, signing my name which I have no problem revealing to anyone reading this.
Dan Berry


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on March 04, 2009, 08:28:27 PM
Gentlemen, Please don't start arguing about things. It's not worth the effort. If you need to do so, please take it into a PM or start another thread. As Jim said, this is just a simple "Show us your P-30's" In other words, show a piccie or three and tell us a little about it and how it flew/flys.

Thanks Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on March 04, 2009, 08:35:29 PM
They can all be purchased at reasonable prices and used by beginners.

I guess that sums up the ongoing appeal and popularity of P30's over all these years - everyone is on a relatively common ground with the props available to us; no matter what faults some may have in production control they do the job as intended, even for those who purchase a stock Peck. Do we really NEED a better prop for the class? I don't really think so... but this discussion would be better in its own thread, if it has to be pursued.

Show us your P-30's .. please!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on March 04, 2009, 08:51:57 PM
This is what I fly. Its a Tail Firster. Wing and stab from kit. Fuselage is rolled 1/20" balsa.
GG prop. Homemade clutch. The tips are reversed from the kit design. They look like winglets this way. It weighs 41 gms with a Walston tracker.

It doesn't fly anywhere near as good as my kit-built, box -stock version which weighs 55 gms without rubber. The heavy one centers in lift and has no problem with wind. I fly in lots of wind.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on March 04, 2009, 08:58:18 PM
Danberry, Interesting looking airplane. Is this a canard type? I think Lemuel (Matthew) would love this one if it is.  :)

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: faif2d on March 04, 2009, 09:20:10 PM
There was a free plan in Aeromodeller years ago. I built one and it flew nicely, although I never came up with a good prop freewheeling device. I was worried about the wingtip rudders but must have gotten lucky as mine flew straight off the board.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on March 04, 2009, 09:47:04 PM
Caley, it is indeed a canard. Also a pusher, which is a pain the , well, posterior to make free-wheel. remember, you can't modify the prop. Its a kit from BMJR. Laser-cut. I have built 5 kits from BMJR. They are quality kits.
The wingtip fins are foam and hold up well enough.
Upon first first seeing it, most guys are REAL skeptical. After that, they just hate to see me pull it out of the box ;D.
I REALLY enjoy flying it.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on March 04, 2009, 10:13:38 PM
Danberry, great story. Poor guys see you coming with your tail firster and run for the hills.  ;D I've a hard enough time with getting a nose firster to fly well. I think I will stay with the traditional airframe.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on March 05, 2009, 12:19:08 AM
Here's my one and only ever built P30 built in 2003. Wing and stab outline were based on SENATOR using the same wing spar positions for good turbulation. A very thin 'zip zap' airfoil used. Fuselage simply rolled 1/32 balsa tissue covered, with the bits and pieces glued on or in the case of the viscous home made timer screwed on. Model uses a long 4 strand 1/8th motor.

Model maxed out in local State Champs '03, '04 and '05.
2nd place in flyoff in '03 and 3rd place in '04 and '05.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on March 21, 2009, 05:12:24 PM
A sort of 'work in progress' photo of a "Sorta-Souper" P30 .. very slow progress as I've spent very little time at my bench for the past two years so this model just gets an occasional ten minutes as and when the 'mood' briefly strikes me :( It's also a little strange to be building something not of my own design so I've tempered that a little by making a few changes along the way. Most obvious is the pylon, which will contain the tracker bug - the antenna exits at the base, to eventually lie along the top of the fuselage .. and also the airfoiled fin which I figured .. hoped.. might be more efficient than a thin sheet balsa one. A few more odds and ends yet to do, at present it weighs in at 19 grams - not a lot of attention given to wood selection, most of this model has come out of the scrap box.

Then, of course, the prop/nose assembly to do .. should keep me occupied, now and then for another month....  ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on March 21, 2009, 05:22:38 PM
Jim, Lookin' good. A lean mean flyin'g machine. ;D Wonder why you didn't piggyback on the Souper 30 thread. You're more than welcome to, as is anyone else.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on March 21, 2009, 07:29:53 PM
I thank you for that thought and invitation, Caley .. .which you did assert when I posted a pic of my wing some time ago . .but I figured that the thread really refers to the progress of your model .. so I went to this general thread instead.... You're doing a great job there, and am encouraged to hear you're building a carriage box for Geneseo.... ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on March 31, 2009, 03:04:59 PM
Here's a couple of versions of John O'Donnells 'Teachers Pet'.
The one in the background is the first free flight model I ever built (at least that made it to the flying field - there were a couple of gliders that were damaged before ever flying) Despite weighing more than the average plumbers toolbag it has been a consistent performer over the years - normal time without lift is 1.40ish so you need to pop it in something to be sure of the max. Only change made has been a gradual move forward of the CofG which is now at 88%. Everything else as per John's original drawing.
The one in the forground is an attempt to improve the design :-\
Wing is wider with tapered tips. Fuz slightly slimmed down and weight reduced (still a heavyweight at 59gms ready to go with rubber etc.) Tried a lower pylon, CofG further forward with different wash in wash out set up (original has left tip washed out with all the other panels flat) ...not impressive so just increased pylon height, moved CofG back and reset wing warps back to original :-[

Test flights now pending...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on March 31, 2009, 06:52:36 PM
DaddyO Interesting looking design. The fuse being on its corner reminds me of the big model someone was flying in Perris. Might have been a Moffett. It's fuse was black and on edge too.

I've never hit 1:40 with my P-30's. Usually only in the 1:20's with a rare flight in the low 1:30's. I'm very happy with times like that.

Thanks for posting your P-30 piccie.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on March 31, 2009, 08:39:11 PM
The one in the forground is an attempt to improve the design

John O'D did publish some design amendments in Free Flight News at one time. I remember that upper/lower fins were employed, moved aft from the original placing, the upper acting as a d/t stop for the stab, motor peg moved forward a bay - also wing position (simpler mount?) and a Davis airfoil. He emphasised that the rectangular wing should not be changed. I'll dig through my files to see if I still have the details somewhere.

Caley, square fuselages set on edge are not uncommon ... they have the advantage of increased visibility at a distance but require pylon wingmounts of varying types.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on April 01, 2009, 04:13:27 AM
Quote
square fuselages set on edge are not uncommon

...and they are then called diamond fuselages!! ;)

The article Jim refers to was in a January issue of FFn two or three years ago, and also accompanied 3 views for John Godden's and Dennis Davitt's P30s. My copy is filed away safely, but I can't remember where!!

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on April 01, 2009, 01:00:38 PM
Cheers Caley - with these (and coupes) winding until the motor cries 'enough' - then sneaking a few hand turns on as well helps the time ;) :D (these both have 6 strand motors and 'Peck' props)

I like diamond fuz's because the 'midland' style mount is easy to set up and light. Main drawback is the blessed things don't pack in a box very well.

Peter and Jim I'd be interested in seeing what John came up with if either of you come across the info...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on April 01, 2009, 01:12:46 PM
Peter, I thought about calling it a diamond fuse, but it just looked like an "on-edge square" ;D

DaddyO, speaking of Coupes, the very nice Tom Garan sent me a couple of plans, the Connoisseur's Coupe D'Hiver and the Beau Coupe. Not sure which is the better of the two. The Beau Coupe is rolled 1/16 balsa tubes in two pieces, with the rear being tapered. Pretty difficult thing to do. Probably could use a carbon fiber rod instead of the tapered tube, and mount it on a cap that fits into the rear of the front fuse. A Coupe has been on my to do list for some time, and it may be my next project.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on April 01, 2009, 01:37:06 PM
A pool cue is a useful tool for tapered booms Caley (or you can get a local college/woodworker to make one up to the correct size... I normally fudge it myself) :)

I like the look of the Beau Coupe with its twin fins...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on April 01, 2009, 01:55:48 PM
Drifting off P30's as we are .... Caley, Coupes are taking you deeper into the realms of some complexity ... thin airfoils, folding props, skewed hinges, for example.

For the sake of 'just flying' you might consider older designs such as the 'Baron Knight' by Dave White, and Derl Morley's 'Garter Night', both of which are of simple sturdy construction and employ single-bladed folders with easy hub/fold assemblies. BN has a diamond fuselage, GN is set square. If you feel you might have ay interest I do have a spare plan of the former and can easily copy the latter. They are both good well-tried flyers..

Okay now, back to P30's anyone? I ought to do more to mine some day.. soon


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on April 01, 2009, 04:52:54 PM
Jim, Good to hear you're going to jump in and finish your SortaSouper 30. Can't wait to see it. Guess we should be seeing some finished product piccies in a day or so, HUH???? ;D

Jim, Not sure which of those you mentioned would be best for the beginner builder and flyer in the Coupe class. I could always purchase a ready to fly one, but I just cannot bring myself to do such a thing when it comes to free flight models. If you do make a copy of one, I could pick it up when I am at Geneseo. No point in spending postage when it is getting close to fun in the sun in New York. Or at least I hope it will be nice when I am there. My luck, it will rain the whole time.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on April 01, 2009, 05:03:48 PM
...piccies in a day or so, HUH?

A day or two? HUH !!

Not much to choose between the two old Coupes. They are not competitive modern state-of-the-art models, dating back to the 60's and designed for the old weight rules (lighter - but ballast could be added) but they would give a solid grounding from which to progress further. It'll be fine at Geneseo - just pack some Californian sunshine


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on April 01, 2009, 06:01:03 PM
Quote
Peter and Jim I'd be interested in seeing what John came up with if either of you come across the info . .

Paul

Although the FFn issue has yet to surface, I can actually do better than that & let you have a copy of the JGP30 plan. It's on an A3 sheet & the airfoils are full size, and wings/tail half size from memory. Andrew Longhurst has been known to call it a "born to fly sweetie pie"!!. PM me your addy & I'll pop a copy in the post (or a couple of A4 sheets to sellotape together). My later version uses a rolled balsa fus (and is heavier as a consequence) and the wings & tail have spent some weeks lurking in the undergrowth at Beaulieu, but survived and are still going strong - one of the advantages of tissue over mylar!

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on April 01, 2009, 07:10:48 PM
I have a Zipfile which has the FFN item plus 3-views of the P30's of my old flyin' mates Dennis D and John G ... too large to post here but can email direct to anyone interested in such. Also have the Davis airfoil on another sheet that J O'D refers to .. and can provide a Godden plan fullsize


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on April 02, 2009, 12:15:12 AM
...piccies in a day or so, HUH?

Okay, okay ... just for Caley ... a mock-up of the SortaSouper 30. Still a few small things to do. It's heavy ... the prop/noseblock/shaft is the culprit  :'(


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on April 02, 2009, 12:47:47 AM
Lookin' good Jim. Very nice bones.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on April 02, 2009, 05:01:16 AM
They always look greaaaaaaaaaaaaaat in da bones. Good work there. :)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: hoogie007 on April 26, 2009, 03:39:54 PM
Just a test post-my last one failed for some reason.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: hoogie007 on April 26, 2009, 03:49:53 PM
I guess my picture resolution was too high-sorry about that...

Here's a gossamer shot of my Boomer MkII P-30 kit. This model builds consistently in the 36-38 gram range when built per drawing and materials included.

Clint :)
www.cbmodeldesigns.com (http://www.cbmodeldesigns.com)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: hoogie007 on April 26, 2009, 04:00:16 PM
Here are a couple of more showing either side of the model. The fuselage is pre-built with the stab platform and incidence adjustment screw installed. The pylon is attached and ready to install the timer and wing dowels. A complete hardware kit, laser cut parts, covering, CAD drawing and construction manual with extensive trimming detail are also part of the package. One week of evening building sessions yields a top performing model!

Clint ;D
www.cbmodeldesigns.com (http://www.cbmodeldesigns.com)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: hoogie007 on April 26, 2009, 04:05:41 PM
Now the right side again-

This same model flew for a little over 3 minutes back in February at Perris, CA. The flight was early morning, with frost still on the ground-it was the monthly SCAMPS club contest (canceled that day, but I missed the notice). No wind, sun just up, temp about 57 deg F. 6 X 3/32 Supersport motor (10g) with a motor run of 1:28. Altitude was probably 150 feet.

Try it-you'll like what you see!

Clint  ;)

www.cbmodeldesigns.com (http://www.cbmodeldesigns.com)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on April 26, 2009, 04:30:11 PM
Clint, Post came through 5x5.

Sorry I haven't ordered the two kits from you yet. Money has been tight due to one thing or another. Will try to order in May.

Thanks
Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on May 11, 2009, 03:24:28 PM
Not finished yet... a frantic rush to get stuff ready for the Nationals (sorry to those watching the Stahl Mustang build) :-\

Anyway thanks to Applehoney for the plan I decided to make an upgraded Teachers Pet. Main change is the slimming of the wing section which means geodetics to keep some torsional stiffness under the mylar covering (well I like geodetics) ;D

Wing appears a darker shade because it has received a coat of thinned Evostick in preparation for the mylar (now applied!)

Will post a pic when she's finished...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on May 11, 2009, 05:04:55 PM
Hey, DaddyO, the Nationals are only once a year, or so, so you need to set priorities.  :) That's one nice looking model. Love those geodetic bones. Someday I may attempt such a challenge.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on May 11, 2009, 08:17:41 PM
Caley, they are simpler to do than you might think ... a different approach, angled joints .. and the ensuing rigidity will surprise you.

Mind you, this is a little extreme .. and certainly not a P30 ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on May 11, 2009, 08:41:13 PM
Whad'ja do? Drop a box of toothpicks on a glue puddle?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on May 11, 2009, 08:50:16 PM
Jim, There's enough wood in that tail to make a few P-30's and have some left over. ;D Definitely know that type of woodwork makes for some strong structures. Probably good on Coupe, Mulvihill and Wakefield types.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on May 13, 2009, 03:32:47 PM
Nice one Jim ;D

Thanks Caley - the weather has kind of got the better of me this year with the duration stuff; both mini vintage and Open Vintage models now need repairs as well as my other P30's and an F1A... still, it's all good fun :-\

Anyway here is the (almost) complete new P30. Lightest one yet at 37gms. I'm sticking with a fuse DT as per the previous two. Covering is tissue over mylar with just the top wing surface covered. No carbon anywhere in sight. C of G is a little further forward at 84% due to a slight goof when fitting the pylon, but I'll try that to start with.
Just need to add snuffer tube, line guides and silk patches on the dihedral joints then she's ready to go...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on May 13, 2009, 04:19:32 PM
DaddyO, Veeery nice. Love the colour scheme. Look forward to hearing the fright reports. Looks like it will fly very nicely.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on May 14, 2009, 03:16:44 AM
Quote
Looks like it will fly very nicely

Caley

His models always do, I'm deeply envious ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on May 14, 2009, 03:38:52 PM
Ah shucks PeeTee, you've got me blushing :-[ ;)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on May 14, 2009, 04:27:48 PM
It will be interesting to know how the single covered wing works for you.

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on May 14, 2009, 05:23:43 PM
Sorry Bob it's not very clear in the photos (or my description). The flying surfaces are clear mylar covered both top and bottom with tissue applied to the top only... hmmm, single surface covering, there's a thought...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on May 14, 2009, 05:33:56 PM
Well, stop thinking about it on a geodetic rib wing.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on May 14, 2009, 05:52:55 PM
Nice one Jim ;D

Covering is tissue over mylar with just the top wing surface covered. Just need to add snuffer tube, line guides and silk

???????????????????????????????????????

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on May 14, 2009, 06:19:57 PM
Hey, This is the closest thing to just flying the bones without covering. I like the bones look. Very kewl DaddyO. I'll keep a lookout for it in the air, when it thermals. ;D

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on May 15, 2009, 03:38:18 AM
Quote
It will be interesting to know how the single covered wing works for you..

Quote
hmmm, single surface covering, there's a thought .

Been there, done that - not so good in wind & turbulence.

Enthused by the Mick Farthing "Paper Bag" 1940s rubber model with single surface covered wing, I decided to build a "modern" version. I used the same McBride (?) airfoil with a 3mm carbon tube LE, hard balsa TE and carbon capped every other rib; covering was 10 micron mylar. It flew and glided beautifully in calm weather, but at speed and in wind & turbulence, it was all over the place - normally downwards. Despite the carbon capping, because the ribs are sliced & only 3mm deep there is little torsional stiffness. Those who know better than I suggested that the tips were washing out killing the lift. I tried to inprove matters by adding a latticework of kevlar cross bracing, but because of the curvature, it didn't help much (but you knew that anyway :D).

Perhaps someone else will have better luck than me!

Now back to P30s....................

Peter l'experimenteure (failed)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on May 20, 2009, 01:44:33 AM
Nothing sleek like the Boomer .. but my SortaSouper30. I didn't like the big squared off boxy wingmount on the Souper30 plan so replaced that with a light slim streamlined pylon .. substituted a built-up fin with thin symmetrical section for the 1/16" sheet one ... and added extra spars to the wing.

Though making provision to mount the pylon in same place as on the plan I later found that, complete with motor, I had to move it forward 1.5" to get the CG to the recommended position .. which meant opening up the fuselage and remaking the mounting points.... patches even before completion :'(

Have tried a spring loaded freewheel clutch ahead of the prop .. worked okay on a couple of dry runs but remains to be seen how it behaves in practice; otherwise a change to a shaft-mounted Garami will be required.

 It finally weighs in at 39gms .. without the tracker; I'd hoped to have it at 40gms with the transmitter but .. not to be. Win some, lose ..most...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on May 20, 2009, 09:16:40 AM
Very nice Jim. Wish I was able to get the weight down like you. You seem to add things and still get a good weight.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on May 20, 2009, 09:32:37 AM
Wish I was able to get the weight down like you.


Caley, without reading back over multiple postings I seem to recall that your NJAPF weighed in at an even 40gms? Many P30's do not get down to that weight .. I feel you're doing fine.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tweedy on May 20, 2009, 05:24:09 PM
I was wondering if a tracker was practcal for a P-30 size model after seeing Clint Brooks Boomer lost Sat. at Lost Hills but the cost I've seen are in the $600 range (I can build a lot of models for that) I'm thinking of a pop off wing DT.

Richard


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on May 20, 2009, 05:46:40 PM
Tweedy:

I have thought the same thing...Now picture this scenario, the wing pops off and the model D/T's into a row of corn stalks over head high and a half mile away..The tracker puts you right on it and you are back in business. No tracker and you lose a couple hours out of a contest looking for a lost model which might be only a few feet from where you last looked..
How much is your time worth?? Looking for a model or building one to replace the one you lost..Food for thought ??? ???

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on May 20, 2009, 05:59:25 PM
I tried Googling for a lost airplane tracker device, but I musn't be hitting on the correct terminology, as I'm not familiar with them. Anyone know a link I could follow to educate myself on these devices. Of course, at the amount quoted, purchasing one is a future endeavour.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on May 20, 2009, 06:39:32 PM
I tried Googling for a lost airplane tracker device, but I musn't be hitting on the correct terminology, as I'm not familiar with them. Anyone know a link I could follow to educate myself on these devices. Of course, at the amount quoted, purchasing one is a future endeavour. Caley

Caley,
here's one of the proven (and expensive, but worth it in terms of man /person hours saved) ones:

 http://www.walstonretrieval.com (http://www.walstonretrieval.com)

Pete


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on May 20, 2009, 07:04:05 PM
Pete, Thanks, I just went there and looked and got my eyes burned. Whew! Are those little thingies expensive. I will never purchase one. I encountered my first thermal, just this past week in Perris, where my Senator decided to take a little longer low level flight when it probably caught the edge and lower part of a thermal. Generally, I never find a thermal, and really never look for one, so these little expensive gadgets will never enter my life. Gee, I can go out and purchase a Porche for that price. ;D

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tweedy on May 20, 2009, 07:43:49 PM
here is another

http://txic.tripod.com/ (http://txic.tripod.com/)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on May 20, 2009, 08:24:27 PM
I use a tracker in my P30. It is noseweight, so I actually cannot fly without it.
When you can't chase in a straight line it is invaluable.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on May 20, 2009, 08:32:54 PM
I guess that if my airplane decides to go for the true gusto, I will just have to wave goodbye. I definitely won't run miles to find it. Just come back home and build another. I like it when my models. after a flight, decide to come back at me and land within feet of where I am standing. Had that happen once last week. Guess I am just lazy.  :)

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on May 20, 2009, 08:59:06 PM
Mine is a product of L.L. Electronics which has the advantage of a signal strength meter as well as the audible tone.

I purchased it some years ago from a friend no longer physically able to fly F/F - so it cost me a suitable donation to a cancer hospital rather than the full purchase price, and has repaid me many times over since that time.

Since then it has 'saved' me a number of models on many occasions - out in the boonies, deep into cornfields ... one glider many miles from the airfield. Only one lost was a P30 dropped into the depths of a large impenetrable wood - literally; I couldn't get through the undergrowth and was starting to worry about turning an ankle - or worse - where nobody knew where I might be. Replacement Tx cost $120 ..... L.L.'s service was outstanding - a phone call and it was on its way before they had received payment.

Most outstanding example of its value was when the Tx fell out of a model as a friend brought that back to me by chasebike at Geneseo last September. The tracker took us to this tiny, expensive object in the middle of the field, 'lost' in deep grass ... I was more than impressed.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on May 21, 2009, 03:28:49 AM
I've just re-equipped with the Pim Ruyter system which I can also recommend ;)

However for anyone a little more cash strapped I've also used a 'Loc8tor' which are easily available on ebay.
Mine cost £45 (inc. 2 'bugs') Now this is not the real deal and won't find your models miles away... but if you are close and "know it's round here somewhere", then it's worth considering. Bugs weigh in at 5gms ish and are a little bulkier looking than the commercial systems, but have no wire sticking out to poke you in the eye when you least expect it! Best range when tested in anger on Salisbury plain was @ 120yards. It gives a good direction indicator and then is an audible peep from the bug end which helps. Only drawback I found was the receiver turns itself off after a few minutes to save batteries if it can't find a signal.

I bought mine because without a bug of some kind dead reckoning with a compass will not help if you land in crops or woods (which surround Merryfield, where I usually fly) :-[


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on June 02, 2009, 03:54:07 PM
Recovered from the heat of this years Nats - makes a change from being soaked and blown away ;D

Did some test flights with the new P30 on the Sunday, but wasn't able to get in any comp flights with it. Despite left wing washout, right rudder and right thrust it would not co-operate with a right/right pattern instead insisting on a straightish or left power and left glide :-\ :-\

The glide however is fabulous and even on 30-50% turns it was clearly capable of more than my old faithful... Adding right thrust gave a straight climb out which needed more down to cure the power stall (right thrust at this point was getting on for 3/32")

So back to the ranch for some careful measurements - My suspicion is a left bias on one of the fins although none is obvious.
I can probably live with the left glide (although being a freewheeler I'd rather not!) but left power is a big no no in my book for a duration design... :o


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on June 02, 2009, 05:49:22 PM
DaddyO, Great to hear you are recovered from the NATS. Imagine it was hot, but muggy also, making it icky. I hope my trip to Geneseo won't get to me with humidity. I am a desert rat, where humidity is just a word, and not a reality.

Hope you can get your model into the right-right mode. I prefer that pattern. Kind of always thought that left-left was for indoors. Hopefully your problem is only in the fins, and that a micro alignment change will get things going the right way.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 03, 2009, 07:39:40 AM
 Here are my own design Saturno V3. Very strong climb on 3 loops and fine glide with its high cambered wing. 150s on dead air with peck prop and 135s with Ikara.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on July 03, 2009, 08:33:17 AM
So you think the Peck propeller is better than Ikara?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on July 03, 2009, 09:02:48 AM
Alexandre, Again, really nice looking model. Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 03, 2009, 10:13:10 AM
I do believe the best prop depend on the model flying and climbing speed. My model will climb on steeper angle but slower flying speed than most P30. Ikara climbs as high as peck on Saturno V3, but on faster discharge since it has much less area, my model fully unwound in 38s with Ikara and 52s with peck, gliding does not seem to be much different.

Ikara props are better in finish but considering my model gets extra 15s and the prop weights 1.5g less, I rather peck props. The same model flew with both props, being peck properly blasted for keeping CG position.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on July 03, 2009, 07:21:49 PM
Okay, thanks for your reply Alexandre.
The reason I ask it that I have only ever built one P30 and it has a Peck prop. on it.
It flies quite well having maxed out and placed 2nd and 3rd in flyoffs here a few years ago.
I just bought an Ikara prop. and made a new nose block with the Ikara attached just to try it out.

Will try it out one day soon to see if I can see any difference.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 03, 2009, 08:11:28 PM
Gossie:

I believe that the Ikara prop is far superior to the Peck. It has far less drag and the pitch is consistent on both blades.

The comparison of motor run times is not valid if you assume that equal altitude is achieved. The Ikara will put you higher, faster. The Peck will cruise longer at a much lower altitude.

Pick yer poison!!

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 03, 2009, 11:00:03 PM
I do not understand why the comparison is not valid. There are many climb patterns possible, some going to the same altitude in different times. The energy from rubber is the same in both cases, climb high comes from what remains from the energy in the rubber less the energy taken from flying (drag and weight shift x distance). Drag and weight shift multiplied by distance must be minimum for optimal climb. Going too fast will reduce distance (next to vertical) but increase drag and mainly weight shift a lot, going too slow will decrease drag and shift but make you fly a long distance. So there is an optimal climb path (angle and speed) that depends on the model wing area and airfoil. What is the wing area of your model? How is the airfoil, a lot of camber?

 As I said my model will climb nearly the same on both props but peck will take longer to get me there, what is good because that is extra flight time. Ikara prop is indeed far more well finished and balanced. Ikara props will discharge faster as they have less blade area but I do not know about pitch, a little more than peck I think.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on July 04, 2009, 12:24:50 AM
Gossie:
I believe that the Ikara prop is far superior to the Peck. It has far less drag and the pitch is consistent on both blades.
The comparison of motor run times is not valid if you assume that equal altitude is achieved. The Ikara will put you higher, faster. The Peck will cruise longer at a much lower altitude.

Pick yer poison!!

Bob

This old thing of mine is a REAL cruiser.....it's only ever run 4 strands of 1/8th Tan2 and so gives a VERY cruisey long run......but I will try both just to see what happens.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 04, 2009, 12:36:20 AM
Mr Cruz:

I must disagree with your assertion that either prop will deliver the SAME altitude with differing time elements involved.

The Peck prop, with a wider blade and inconsistent pitch will not get your model as high as will the Ikara with less frontal area and consistent pitch.

Obviously, the Peck prop turns more slowly (assuming equal strands and turns) and the motor run is longer because it is pitched differently AND develops more drag.

In the States, we often fly in conditions where a boundary layer of air exists maybe 100' above ground level. It is necessary to penetrate that layer to assure a reliable max. An Ikara will "punch thru" the layer with authority, a Peck will sometimes fail to make it into the layer.

Your theory of taking a longer time to reach altitude certainly works well for INDOOR models, where weather elements effect flight times, I prefer altitude as a measure of reliability.

Guru


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ricardo on July 04, 2009, 06:25:15 AM
Gentlemen, Mr. Cruz has presented evidence that the Peck works better than the Ikara on HIS model. If theory and practice differ, guess which is wrong.

Rather than denigrate his efforts, the really interesting question is

... what is it about his model that makes the Peck superior

and

.. what is it about His Guruness' model that makes the Ikara superior. Wing Area? Span? Weight?

Lets have some numbers, or better still, plans of the 2 different models.

Pontificating Prophecy .. ::)

Energy in rubber is converted to height energy, minus the energy lost along the way, drag x distance.

If 2 models of the same weight reach the same height with the same climb angle (ie the same distance travelled) but one gets there twice as fast as the other, the faster one will have used up much more energy cos greater drag.

The 2 models will have to be very different to do this. eg the slower prop will need more blade area and the model needs to be more efficient to climb on less power. But the slower model has a distinct advantage provided it is efficient enough to climb all the way to the end of its motor run.

Anyone have accurate drawings of the Peck & Ikara props?

Of course, His Guruness is perfectly justified in criticising the Peck for inconsistency and poor manufacture but that doesn't mean it might be better matched to certain models.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 04, 2009, 09:51:43 AM
That is the point Ricardo. Ikara prop will not always be best choice, that depends on the model. Going 100ft is pretty fast with the rubber torque peak and a strong launch.

I simply do not understand why can`t different patterns of climb go nearly the same height. I agree the pitch is incosistent but there is no evidence the Ikara pitch and blade area is good to my model. Actually each model would have an optimum prop, with different pitch, pitch distribuction and blade area distribuction. Peck prop does have more drag or at least requires more torque to spin however, if you decompose speed vectors on a prop flying you will see most of the torque comes from lift decomposition. Requiring more torque does not necessarly means the prop in inferior. Even more when flying rubber power where you have a limited number of prop turns not rpm or power as on engines.

If going fast is so important why F1G models will take 44s to discharge 400 turns? The prop could be done a way to discharge rubber in 10s....it is like this beacuse the model will go nearly as high and the extra 34s are important. Prop is always set up to the model for getting best combination between higher altitude and discharge time.

Thinking indoor is surely easier, outdoor there are two scenarios: sink ore raising air. In raising air it is best to discharge slower as your model will go higher, in sink is best to go faster. The point is, my model will not climb slowly, it flyes slower (climb ratio is very high). I have flown it against many P30 and it will outclimb them all, always on 3 loops.

Reaching the same altitude witth different times is not a therory of mine is fact on my model.

The main difference between my model and others is the airfoil, my model will fly with a much higher CL value, so will fly slower.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on July 04, 2009, 12:00:44 PM
I believe that there has been quite a bit of P30 prop analysis done in FFQ with both the Ikara and Peck props analyzed. If I recall, the Peck might be better for longer motor runs.

Alexandre, do you have a plan of your model?
I'm interested in the airfoil. What is the thickness and camber?

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on July 04, 2009, 12:22:02 PM
Quote
I believe that there has been quite a bit of P30 prop analysis done in FFQ

Similarly there has been a fair bit of practical testing done over here in sunny England by some of the noted P30 flyers. I'm told that the Peck has the lowest pitch (but greater blade area) and performs best with 4 or 5 strand (1/8") motors for a long run. the IGRA (ikara) prop has a higher pitch and is better suited to 6 strand motors. Last but by no means least is the Gizmo prop which is a repitched Peck, and this has the highest P/D ratio of the three; on similar turns it give a 10-15 sec longer run than the IGRA.

I'm also told by those who know better than me, that the higher pitched props create less drag in the glide. As was said in earlier posts, it'll be horses for courses, matching the prop to the model, and the motor. For what it's worth, I've only ever used IGRA and Gizmo props, and am far from being a noted P30 flyer ;D ;D

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 04, 2009, 01:17:02 PM
150s on dead air with peck prop and 135s with Ikara.
Mr Cruz offers a comparison of flight times on the same model with exchanged propellers. Using his numbers, he experienced a 9% improvement in time aloft with the Peck prop.

Several questions develop.
1.If the Ikara prop reaches altitude much faster than the Peck, i.e. the model is gliding MUCH SOONER, is the glide performance not better with the Ikara??
2.If the model reaches THE SAME ALTITUDE with the Peck prop is the glide performance not worse with the Peck??
3.For Mr Cruz theory (and practice) to work, both 1. and 2. must apply... i.e. the assumption that the model reaches the SAME ALTITUDE with either propellor, a comparison of GLIDE PERFORMANCE must be offered.
4. The question now becomes in which mode (power or gliding) is the Peck superior by 9%? Assuming the 9% difference is in the power phase only and the model reaches THE SAME ALTITUDE, the models glide performance must be the same with either prop... an assertion I cannot abide.
5.We know, from Cruz' observation that his Peck motor run is longer (undoubtedly because of the lower pitched Peck with it's wide blade) Somehow we need an explanation of how the wider blade prop with its higher drag manages to tie the smaller frontal area of the Ikara in the glide ??? ???
6.Also of interest is the observation that the altitude reached is the SAME with either prop and if the motor was wound to the same torque value for either propellor. I.E. an altitude measuring device and a torque meter??

THE CURIOUS NEED TO KNOW!!

Guru


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 04, 2009, 07:01:05 PM
As I said the altitude is nearly the same (peck may even go higher), I have nerver measured. I THINK the advantage is in climb but I just ordered an altimeter and a 50mAh battery lets measure instead of guessing. The model will be 5g heavier than minimum, that will go againt peck prop but lets see what happens....

Regarding to rubber the result is consistent since both motor were from the same date and wound with torquimeter to their maximum (competition).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ricardo on July 04, 2009, 07:16:55 PM
Mr Cruz offers a comparison of flight times on the same model with exchanged propellers. Using his numbers, he
<snip> .. loadsa questions and good stuff
If someone can get me
- accurate drawings of the Peck and IGRA
- dimensioned 3 views of the Cruz & Guru models
- rubber details. Alex, what are your 3 loops?
I'll pop them into a spreadsheet on glide & rubber performance with prop analyser and do more pseudo pontificating.

and the Gizmo prop too.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 04, 2009, 07:44:49 PM
 Saturno V3:
 -Rubber 1/8" x 3 loops (6 strands) 9.8g lubbed, 9.5g unlubbed.
 - Wing: 760mm span, 98mm chord, high cambered airfoil (CL=0.95-1.0 during glide)
 - Elevator 350mm span, 70mm chord
 - Fuselage 750mm, CG at 60%

 I do not know how will this simulation work since the main difference of my model is the airfoil. Saturno is similar (to flow) to HB-40 except for the wing airfoil and elevator size. Saturno will go 40% higher.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 04, 2009, 08:45:41 PM
Ricardo:

The "Gizmo" prop is nothing more than a Peck which has been pitched more accurately.

Here's a few pictures of my P-30 (a Bob White design.)

Guru


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 04, 2009, 08:59:56 PM
On reply #140, Cruz states that the altitudes are "nearly the same." Reply #144 "The SAME altitude is a fact." On #148 it is "nearly the same."Again in #148 "The Peck MAY GO HIGHER."
One has to wonder which statement is true ??? ???

Guru


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 04, 2009, 11:00:30 PM
Guru, I think I see where you want to get and I just use this forum for posting my experiences and learn something, not to argue. I will try to keep my posts on high level, technical only and I think you should do the same, at least when refering to me.

Once again, if it is not clear to some, I never measured using an altimeter the height my model will go with each prop. It is likely the last seconds of discharge on peck provides a cruise phase. It is hard to tell if a 30" model going 60m or more is a little higher now than in the previuos flight. We are talking about 9% in flight TIME, I can not provide accurate (at least not now) data if one is going 3m higher or cruising for 5s without climbing or gliding better. I believe you are thinking my model cruises low with peck as most do, and climbs as a rocket with Ikara. This is not true, I always fly on 6 strands and both will provide a fine climb ratio.
 
One possible reason for the difference is the fact of Ikara being too high pitched for my model and having a part of it stalled due to the slower flight speed. It is hard to keep guessing and see who has the best argument. My model will fly in the first hour of the day 2:15 on Ikara and 2:30 on Peck, both based on a very strong climb. Guru, how long does your model flies in this condition using Ikara or peck prop? This is important for comparasion.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ricardo on July 04, 2009, 11:28:56 PM
Thanks for the info on Saturno, Alex.

Duco, is there a link to a plan of your Bob White design on the web?

Are you going to provide us with your best estimates of still air times for it with Peck & IGRA props? And the height gained?

Isn't the prop in your pics a plastic Peck? What size rubber?

Anyone measured up and drawn the 2 (3 including the Gizmo) props?

Blade outline? Pitch distribution?

Gizmo certainly match the pitch on their prop but some people claim that they also increase the pitch. Anyone have evidence of this?

Lets get some useful info out of Alex's experience rather than just re-hash old prejudices.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on July 05, 2009, 09:40:23 AM
Ricardo, Duco's prop (in the pictures - lovely model by the way) appears to be an Ikara.
There is data available on pitch distribution of all 3 props mentioned in FFQ (not sure of the issue date as I lost all my issues). They have published a comprehensive P30 only compendium edition that would make a wonderful addition to any P30 flyer's library. Many, many plans and technical articles.

Alexandre, you've mentioned that your airfoil is high camber. Care to share some more details? Do you have coordinates? Or at least a drawing of the airfoil?

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 05, 2009, 10:06:16 AM
 Yes I do. The airfoil is a modified Makarov F1A airfoil:
1.000000,0.006500
0.997027,0.006857
0.992297,0.008217
0.987200,0.009678
0.981684,0.011254
0.975690,0.012960
0.969167,0.014809
0.962076,0.016811
0.954424,0.018961
0.946296,0.021233
0.938101,0.023507
0.930014,0.025732
0.921899,0.027940
0.913659,0.030153
0.905383,0.032340
0.897269,0.034446
0.889284,0.036478
0.881383,0.038450
0.873529,0.040374
0.865691,0.042257
0.857846,0.044107
0.849972,0.045928
0.842054,0.047726
0.834080,0.049503
0.826041,0.051260
0.817935,0.052999
0.809763,0.054719
0.801534,0.056418
0.793260,0.058094
0.784953,0.059744
0.776625,0.061365
0.768285,0.062955
0.759942,0.064513
0.751602,0.066037
0.743270,0.067527
0.734948,0.068981
0.726638,0.070402
0.718340,0.071787
0.710051,0.073139
0.701767,0.074457
0.693486,0.075743
0.685204,0.076997
0.676920,0.078220
0.668630,0.079413
0.660333,0.080576
0.652027,0.081709
0.643712,0.082812
0.635387,0.083887
0.627051,0.084933
0.618705,0.085950
0.610349,0.086939
0.601983,0.087899
0.593610,0.088830
0.585231,0.089733
0.576846,0.090606
0.568456,0.091451
0.560063,0.092267
0.551667,0.093053
0.543270,0.093811
0.534870,0.094539
0.526470,0.095238
0.518070,0.095907
0.509670,0.096548
0.501270,0.097159
0.492870,0.097742
0.484470,0.098294
0.476072,0.098816
0.467674,0.099307
0.459277,0.099767
0.450882,0.100194
0.442488,0.100590
0.434098,0.100952
0.425711,0.101281
0.417328,0.101575
0.408950,0.101835
0.400577,0.102060
0.392211,0.102249
0.383853,0.102400
0.375505,0.102509
0.367169,0.102575
0.358845,0.102595
0.350537,0.102567
0.342246,0.102489
0.333974,0.102359
0.325723,0.102174
0.317496,0.101932
0.309295,0.101633
0.301123,0.101273
0.292982,0.100851
0.284874,0.100366
0.276803,0.099817
0.268769,0.099202
0.260771,0.098522
0.252807,0.097774
0.244871,0.096958
0.236957,0.096071
0.229055,0.095112
0.221155,0.094077
0.213243,0.092963
0.205304,0.091765
0.197331,0.090484
0.189333,0.089123
0.181339,0.087688
0.173396,0.086191
0.165566,0.084641
0.157896,0.083032
0.150405,0.081350
0.143089,0.079582
0.135924,0.077709
0.128874,0.075718
0.121895,0.073604
0.114946,0.071366
0.107981,0.068995
0.100952,0.066482
0.093803,0.063808
0.086465,0.060951
0.078889,0.057911
0.071128,0.054742
0.063400,0.051572
0.056029,0.048559
0.049233,0.045733
0.043001,0.043022
0.037221,0.040340
0.031764,0.037599
0.026619,0.034762
0.021989,0.031932
0.018061,0.029269
0.014843,0.026859
0.012228,0.024674
0.010081,0.022640
0.008288,0.020698
0.006748,0.018839
0.005384,0.017117
0.004160,0.015578
0.003083,0.014220
0.002181,0.012991
0.001454,0.011849
0.000890,0.010766
0.000473,0.009725
0.000192,0.008716
0.000037,0.007730
0.000003,0.006757
0.000088,0.005802
0.000295,0.004896
0.000633,0.004070
0.001119,0.003357
0.001775,0.002778
0.002612,0.002322
0.003653,0.001974
0.004937,0.001721
0.006521,0.001542
0.008459,0.001380
0.010843,0.001206
0.013747,0.001050
0.016988,0.000973
0.020302,0.001026
0.023750,0.001222
0.027546,0.001570
0.032021,0.002104
0.037831,0.002905
0.045587,0.004006
0.052950,0.005061
0.060432,0.006165
0.068519,0.007422
0.075937,0.008648
0.082934,0.009853
0.089829,0.011064
0.096817,0.012290
0.104041,0.013532
0.111592,0.014776
0.119478,0.015988
0.127626,0.017155
0.135940,0.018281
0.144335,0.019375
0.152747,0.020453
0.161146,0.021536
0.169526,0.022637
0.177890,0.023759
0.186240,0.024905
0.194574,0.026076
0.202893,0.027276
0.211194,0.028501
0.219479,0.029742
0.227749,0.030988
0.236008,0.032227
0.244259,0.033450
0.252507,0.034646
0.260759,0.035805
0.269019,0.036925
0.277292,0.038009
0.285581,0.039059
0.293889,0.040076
0.302219,0.041062
0.310572,0.042019
0.318949,0.042948
0.327352,0.043851
0.335779,0.044729
0.344230,0.045583
0.352702,0.046414
0.361194,0.047223
0.369702,0.048012
0.378220,0.048781
0.386743,0.049532
0.395265,0.050265
0.403778,0.050981
0.412275,0.051680
0.420749,0.052359
0.429193,0.053013
0.437604,0.053638
0.445979,0.054229
0.454319,0.054784
0.462623,0.055298
0.470894,0.055768
0.479135,0.056191
0.487351,0.056563
0.495547,0.056882
0.503732,0.057145
0.511911,0.057350
0.520092,0.057501
0.528280,0.057598
0.536480,0.057644
0.544695,0.057639
0.552928,0.057585
0.561180,0.057484
0.569453,0.057337
0.577745,0.057145
0.586056,0.056909
0.594382,0.056632
0.602721,0.056314
0.611066,0.055958
0.619416,0.055563
0.627766,0.055131
0.636116,0.054662
0.644464,0.054158
0.652809,0.053618
0.661153,0.053043
0.669498,0.052434
0.677845,0.051792
0.686199,0.051117
0.694564,0.050408
0.702945,0.049666
0.711347,0.048892
0.719772,0.048083
0.728220,0.047242
0.736689,0.046368
0.745174,0.045462
0.753668,0.044524
0.762159,0.043558
0.770637,0.042563
0.779085,0.041544
0.787487,0.040502
0.795825,0.039440
0.804083,0.038356
0.812251,0.037250
0.820324,0.036117
0.828305,0.034955
0.836198,0.033760
0.844014,0.032528
0.851764,0.031254
0.859464,0.029933
0.867134,0.028558
0.874794,0.027121
0.882470,0.025615
0.890192,0.024027
0.897998,0.022344
0.905929,0.020559
0.914010,0.018680
0.922234,0.016727
0.930547,0.014733
0.938844,0.012745
0.946982,0.010818
0.954809,0.009006
0.962208,0.007339
0.969119,0.005820
0.975538,0.004444
0.981491,0.003198
0.987017,0.002065
0.992161,0.001033
0.996965,0.000088
1.000000,-0.000500


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Hepcat on July 05, 2009, 04:52:59 PM
Alexandre
Thank you for a lot of interesting information. I have a little more here to add to the pot. It may not suit a lot of people because it does not necessarily agree with what a lot of modellers assume; however I wonder how many of those modellers bother to test the basis of their assumptions. Actually I don't think what I have to report is proving modellers right or wrong but rather suggesting that there may be more variation in plastics propellers from batch to batch than we like to think.

I was with John O'Donnell when he was testing an Igra propeller against a Peck and the old Peck appeared to be doing better, more than could be expected from the fact that the Peck is about half a gram lighter. As I had an Igra and a Peck at home I decided to do some some checks on the blade angles of the two. The first picture below shews what I wrote on the propellers at the time: at the three quarter radius point the Igra had a blade angle of 21 degrees and the Peck a blade angle of 24 degrees. I did checks at more stations along the blade, sufficient to tell me that the blade angle distribution did not make much sense.

I think these tests must have been late 2004 because I sent the figures on the Sergio Montes. However by then Paul Rossiter had done his comprehensive article on P30 propellers for the April 2005 issue of FFQ that Tmat has already mentioned. It is interesting that Paul measured 21.5 degrees on the Igra against my 21. On the Peck he found the shaft hole was misaligned which gave differing figures for the two blades, 31 on one and 27 on the other giving 29 on each, if the shaft hole is straightened, as against my 24 degrees. You will notice that even though Paul's Peck figures are higher than mine we both agree that the Peck has a higher blade angle then the Igra which is contra to what most modellers believe.

I have rechecked my figures today using the same set up as before, shewn in the next picture. The figures have not changed on my propellers since I last tested them.

John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ricardo on July 05, 2009, 06:04:32 PM
Hepcat, is the grey prop a Peck? I thought both were the same diameter.

May I trouble someone to send me a copy of the FFQ article or at least the page with the pitch and chord distributions of the 3 props?

I think I'm far enough N in Cooktown for the crocs to protect me against a punitive expedition from the Tasmanian FF mafia ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 05, 2009, 06:57:35 PM
I will try to keep my posts on high level, technical only and I think you should do the same, at least when refering to me.
My model will fly in the first hour of the day 2:15 on Ikara and 2:30 on Peck, both based on a very strong climb. Guru, how long does your model flies in this condition using Ikara or peck prop? This is important for comparasion.

Mr Cruz: If you wish to keep this discussion on a "technical" level, you must explain the differences in altitude gained by your model using YOUR OBSERVATIONS only. From a strictly technical standpoint, there are some variations in your observations from one post to the next.

In answer to the time flown by my model in the first, second, third or fourth hour I present this "technical" observation... My P-30 continues to climb at a steep angle for over one minute, it then proceeds to glide until the D/T deploys at 2:10 at which time it descends to the ground. The time of the descent varies with the altitude gained in step #1. In all cases, the time aloft is sufficient to allow a flight time in excess of two minutes.

I have no observations on how the model might perform with a Peck propellor. I prefer the Ikara because its is drilled on center and has equal pitch distibution in both blades.

Guru


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ricardo on July 05, 2009, 07:39:17 PM
My P-30 continues to climb at a steep angle for over one minute, it then proceeds to glide until the D/T deploys at 2:10 at which time it descends to the ground. The time of the descent varies with the altitude gained in step #1. In all cases, the time aloft is sufficient to allow a flight time in excess of two minutes.
I have no observations on how the model might perform with a Peck propellor. I prefer the Ikara because its is drilled on center and has equal pitch distribution in both blades.

Thanks for this Duco. We can now put your remarks in the proper context.

Would you care to make a technical estimate of the still air time?

To investigate this further, could you oblige us with a plan or even a dimensioned 3D of your model?

What size motor do you use?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Hepcat on July 05, 2009, 07:57:32 PM
Ricardo
The camera never lies - but it does some masterly obfuscation by violent perspective when in Macro mode!

Yes, the grey propeller is the Peck and they are both 9.4" in diameter. It may, or may not, help to convince you but here is the first photograph I took and rejected because of reflected light. This time the Large Peck propeller is nearest to the camera. :)

John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 06, 2009, 12:02:51 AM
Guru, I would be nice if you could fly the model in still air, first hour of the day. It would be also nice if could use a peck prop to see what happens. As I understood you flly on 4 strands, and have not measured the time the model flies nor changed the prop to see the result. So, there are no evidences to affirm Peck prop is inferior.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 06, 2009, 04:07:51 AM
Cruz:

I am not in the least interested to "See what happens" by changing propellors on a fully trimmed model. I prefer to stay with a model that has proven to be fully reliable from one contest to the next.

As a matter of interest, I built a P-30 model designed by Fred Pearce, the rubber testing guru, several years ago. It had a thinned Benedict airfoil, turbulators, and in many respects was a scaled down Wakefield. Originally flown with a Peck prop, it was "hit or miss" on achieving a two minute max. After changing to the Czech prop, it became a consistent performer.

Sadly, it was lost a thermal after the pop up stab D/T'd... the reason I now utilize a D/T system that detaches the wing.

Guru


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ricardo on July 06, 2009, 06:34:53 AM
As I understood you fly on 4 strands ...

Duco, is this true? For both your Bob White and Fred Pearce models?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 06, 2009, 08:31:12 AM
Ricardo:

For my Bob White model, I use 3 loops of 1/8" Tan Super Sport. On my Pearce model, I used 3 loops of 1/8" Tan II.

Attachment with White version is "O-Ring." With Pearce, a miniature Crockett Hook. No blast tube with White, blast tube with Pearce. D/T with White is button timer/mousetrap w/ wing detach. On Pearce it was a fuse w/stab pop-up.

Covering on White is light Poly-Span, on Pearce, Esaki tissue. White weighs 41 grams. Pearce had to be ballasted to make minimum weight.

Guru


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 06, 2009, 08:45:39 AM
So we conclude, concerning your question: “So you think the Peck propeller is better than Ikara?”
 
My model, Saturno V3, using 6 strands:
•   Model climbs to an unknown altitude, which looks nearly the same to both props. Will measure when the altimeter is delivered.
•   Power time using Ikara is 38s, power time with Peck is 52s.
•   Total flight in still air is 135s with Ikara and 150s with Peck.

Guru’s Twin Fin, using 6 strands:
•   Model climbs to an unknown altitude, using Ikara. Peck was never flown.
•   Power time using Ikara is unknown (more than 60s). Power time with Peck has never being measured.
•   Total flight in still air is unknown (maybe more than 130s but not measured).

I feel more comfortable flying with Peck prop in my model….but I am curious now to discover why it happens.

Guru, there must be something wrong, how can Ikara discharge time be more than 60s on 6 strands? Most models will discharge this motor in less than 35s.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on July 06, 2009, 11:41:40 AM
Ok, let's hold the debate and think a second. The Peck prop has a fairly low P/D, don't remember the dimensions, but I think slightly lower than the Ikara. Thus it will give a shorter motor run, and should deliver a much higher climb rate (straight up on 6 strands, in my experience). I've no experience with the Ikara, but that's not the issue here. Now the lower P/D of the Peck will reduce glider peformance. Now with a Gizmo-modified Peck, I get a ~50 sec motor run on 6 strands, and unexceptional altitude. Now let's switch to 4 strands...I get a 95-100 sec motor run on the Gizmo with that setup, and the glide is very good, largely I think due to the high prop pitch.

Now here's the bottom line: Guru is claiming that the higher climb has the advantage. I disagree very strongly. If you're good at picking air, that's fine. I for one am not. A slow, long climb will cover a multitude of mistakes, including launching into heavy sink, because the model's climb will often outlast the sinkhole. Now if y'all want to continue this, I suggest that someone who has an Ikara, stock Peck, and Gizmo, take them all out in early morning conditions and test them out. Now there's more to it than that: try optimizing the motor to the prop: Each one of those will be best with a particular model. I would also purport to you on the currect motor setup, a clean P-30 will be optimal for the same prop, period. I understand the thought that each airplane will have a particular prop it likes, but that would probably not be the case here because we're looking at very clean airframes. After you're done with that test, see what they do when launched into bad air. I know from experience what happens with the Gizmo, and that's why I'm still using it.

My prediction is that the Gizmo will come out on top because its high pitch will allow the longest practical motor run. To get the same run with an Ikara will require a loop of 3/16 to sufficiently slow the prop, and that motor may well present some problems in the skinny fuselage of the average P-30. All of these props will cause glide inefficiency, so it's best to keep the model under power as long as possible.

Now, does anyone know how Deloach gets 2+ minute motor runs on his Polecat?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 06, 2009, 12:47:02 PM
Peck props do have a low P/D but a large amount of area so they do not discharge quickly. Of course Gizmo has the same area and more pitch so discharge is slower, as is thrust.
I have flown with 4 strands a few times (peck only) but I did not liked it. In a strong sink my model would touch the ground before the motor quits. In neutral conditions it would fly almost 2min, but could come short of the max.
I agree with Guru that a strong climb is better; the ground boundary layer is not too low if your model climbs very few meters. Thermal activity is much better from 20m or so above the ground and there. At least is much more fun to see a model very high than flying as indoors.
Motor setup is something I have to try harder. Maybe 10 1/16” strands is a good choice, since 4 1/8” did not worked that well.
I did not understand what you mean by clean airframe, does airfoil counts? In my opinion F1A and F1C are very clean airframes but do not fly the same due to their airfoils. Airfoil must count and gives a spectrum of possibilities of motor and propeller choices mainly due to flight speed.
Yes…we need to do that test in the early morning and use an altimeter if possible.

Different models, modellers, motors, props and strategies all aiming for a max no matter the weather....that what free flight is all about!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Hepcat on July 06, 2009, 01:31:28 PM
In reply #157 I reported measuring the blade angle (at three quarter radius) of an Igra propeller as 21 degrees and of a Peck propeller as 24 degrees. I also quoted the Free Flight Quarterly article by Paul Rossiter where he measured the Igra as 21.5 degrees and the Peck as 29 degrees. So in both of these very carefully taken measurements the PECK HAS A LARGER P/D RATIO THAN THE IGRA.

Will the modellers who keep saying that the Peck has a lower pitch than the Igra please supply some measurements to substantiate the claim.

John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on July 06, 2009, 03:06:58 PM
A couple of notes.
You cannot measure one Peck prop and get any useful data. Measure about 40 and average the results. That's why Olm is selling Gizmo-Geezer props, They ain't made very accurately.

DeLoach uses a 6 strand 3/32" motor. He might put 2400 turns into it. It runs close to 2 minutes.
His plane is optimized for that motor setup. He starts flying early, before any noticable lift. He can often get 4 flights in before most guys even think about flying. He's looking for lift when going for 3 minutes.
In sink or bad turbulence the Polecat has the same problems as any other plane.
He recently asked me what my plane would do in dead air. My reply--- I've no idea, i don't fly it in dead air.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 06, 2009, 05:21:08 PM
Now here's the bottom line: Guru is claiming that the higher climb has the advantage. I disagree very strongly. If you're good at picking air, that's fine. I for one am not.

That says it all! I am in full agreement with Danberry, I choose not to fly in dead air or sink... if I wanted to piddle around with very long motor runs, I would compete with indoor models. They are not on MY list of interesting modeling subjects.

Guru


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on July 06, 2009, 05:39:57 PM
Hey now.
Don's system works. I just watched him knock out 6 maxes. The first 2 before 8;45 AM and it was raining. My plane doesn't work with the long motor run. He is at minimum weight and plastic covered.
I have also seen days when he didn't make 4 or even 3.Sometimes the system doesn't work.
I fly backwards so nothing my plane does can be compared to youse guys.

If somebody is going to get serious about comparing the 3 props you need to get serious about finding an indoor site and spending several days at it. A couple of sorta early one and done flights won't level a lot of variables.

Its P30. If you can't put it into lift and keep it there, welllll, you're not gonna win a lot of events.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 06, 2009, 06:08:28 PM
P-30 is supposed to be an "entry level" simple class for SIMPLE MODELS!! I have one that meets the rules and makes it's max when I do my job.

Sorry to say, I have never been (or want to be ) an experimenter with airfoils or propellor designs. I try to use "what works" and when I find the magic bullet that hits the bullseye with any given model, I am done.

My satisfaction in modeling comes from helping the less experienced and competing against the top competitors in local and national events.

My hat is off to the experimenters and the level of success they have brought to the freeflight community; there is still much to be learned.

Guru


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on July 06, 2009, 06:13:26 PM
Duco, you've gotta be VERY careful when calling P30 an entry level event; a fast bard might take offense.
P30 is, though, a perfect event. It can only be harmed by any rule-tinkering.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on July 06, 2009, 09:49:27 PM
Bob, how do you know you've found the silver bullet without experimenting? I for one like to do a little experimenting first and see what will give the best performance. This is not tedious, and a few flights here and there with each setup will reveal a lot. I've found that 6 strands flat out does not work for me. 4 strands does, because it produces a model that will remain at least 20ft up even when launched into moderate sink. That's good enough for it to wander out and find a thermal, as my model has done many times. No, it doesn't work every time, but I don't launch into sink every time, either. As for hitting the bull's eye, my definition of the bull's eye is a model that can do at least 1.5x the max with no lift present because that's the level of performance needed to max consistently. I don't think either of us has such a thing yet for P-30, so more experimenting is in order.

Dan, didn't realize that's the setup Don is using. Will have to try that, but I still don't see how he gets a 2 minute motor run from it.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on July 06, 2009, 09:57:54 PM
6 strands 3/32 rubber is a LONG p30 motor. Not a lot of torque but a LOT of turns. Read the PoleCat construction article.
That 20 foot high plane will break when the air at Pensacola slams it to the ground.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 07, 2009, 11:02:11 AM
Josh:

The "silver bullet" with a P-30 (for ME) is when I get consistent flights over 2 minutes IN GOOD AIR. Note, in a previous post where I changed props on my Pearce P-30. It went from a so-so model to a consistant maxer.

On a scale model, the bullet (for ME) is one minute on twins and low wingers and two minutes on high wingers. The rest is air picking.

I just do not experiment a lot, and I can usually hit the numbers without a lot trimming or motor experimentation.

IMO,models trimmed with extra long motor runs and not a lot of torque are risky critters in a contest environment.

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ricardo on July 07, 2009, 05:59:38 PM
DeLoach uses a 6 strand 3/32" motor. He might put 2400 turns into it. It runs close to 2 minutes.
His plane is optimized for that motor setup .... In sink or bad turbulence the Polecat has the same problems as any other plane.
Dan, do you know what prop he uses?

Is there a link to a plan or 3 view of Polecat? I can't find the build thread for it.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on July 07, 2009, 06:20:28 PM
Don uses a Peck prop. I think its been pitched by Gizmo Geezer.
The Polecat was an article. I think it was Model Aviation. At least 3 years ago, no more than 5 years. I'll check with him.
Its a good construction article and a good treatise on his flying style. Don is a very good writer as well
as being a positive asset to the FF community.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on July 07, 2009, 09:06:52 PM
The modern, undercambered wing PoleCat is in an early '06 NFFS Digest.
The original in Model Aviation 1991 is still available. That has a flat bottom foil.
Don sells the plan for the modern one as well as laser-cut rib sets.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ricardo on July 10, 2009, 12:48:43 AM
In the absence of more detailed info, I'm going to base my analysis on Alex's model and the Igra prop. The Igra looks near MLS so I'll assume that.

Can someone measure the maximum chord of the Igra and its radial position for me? Also the tip chord?

Hepcat's single 75% radius angle measurement will have to do for a pitch distribution.

I'm going to assume the Eppler designed Goettingen 804 foil cos its the only thing I have wind tunnel data for at Re 18k - 25k. If I get some time, I'll run Xfoil on Alex's foil but G804 is not too different.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ricardo on July 21, 2009, 11:21:51 PM
Alex, I got carried away with my analysis and ended up with 7 pages after discussion with Hepcat, who is a true guru being ex-DeHavilland Propellers.

All the pontificating suggests that for Saturno ...

Use a slight smaller rubber cross-section with your Igra so that the static motor run is about the same or longer than your present Peck one.

This should give better Igra results. Maybe better than the Peck but I have no Peck data.

Download my article: P-30 Prop.pdf (http://www.hippocketaeronautics.com/downloads/P30_prop.pdf)


Ratz Edit: Added link to PDF


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on July 24, 2009, 07:52:48 PM
Ricardo I will try that, thanks.

Saturno V3 was published in El Aeromodelista in argentina and in this blog you can also see the new Saturno V4: http://p30br.blogspot.com/search/label/Projetos%20nacionais (http://p30br.blogspot.com/search/label/Projetos%20nacionais)
So far 1:08 on 450 turns (out of 1200), INDOORs!
 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on March 18, 2010, 05:09:47 AM
Okay I decided that 57gms (without rubber for a P30) is tooooooo much :o

This was my first FF model built many moons ago and has had a bit of a charmed life, always doing well in comps and has taught me a few things about trimming on the way...

It is of course John O'Donnell's Teachers Pet. I've subsequently built an updated version which I've still to trim out so since I'm supposed to be flying P30 on Sunday I made the decision to put this old bird on a serious diet (hopefully without changing the trim too wildly... :-\

It now weighs a comparatively svelt 46gms.

Changes included a new lighter tail (saving 2.5gms) with a bit of noseweight saved as a consequence as well. Hollowing the noseblock, recovering the wing tips and adding a smidge more span. The tail and wing tips are tissue over mylar on top and clear mylar only underneath. Stripping the fuz and shaving all the spacers and longerons down then recovering (tissue/mylar)... you get the general idea. Probably be easier and quicker to have built a new one :P

Anyway here she is

Refurbishmently
Paul


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on March 18, 2010, 05:37:49 AM
Well done that man, and good luck on Sunday - are you flying mini-vint as well? Sadly I have a family commitment and will miss out - a bit of a b*mmer really as the weather looks OK.

Like you, I'm into recycling of models. My JGP 30 is now on its third fuse, having lost the model & only got the wing back, and then broke a second fuse. The wings are looking a bit sorry for themselves, the dihedral ribs having deformed, and I was thinking of building a new 'un. Your post has incentivised me to just graft in a couple of new ribs & part re-cover, however, before that I have a couple of F1Qs to finish, plus a DLG for the Nats. Congrats to Julian for his win, it's obviously the way to go!

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on March 18, 2010, 08:00:11 AM
Thanks Peter

I'll pass on your best wishes to JP - what was obvious was a good big un will beat a good little un in the same air (demonstrated a couple of times on Sunday) I've decided to build a DLG too so much balsa dust will be flying shortly ;)

I'm hoping for a calmish day since I need to do some trimming before entering any classes...

Sorry you can't have a go - next time?

Glad to hear that you're into making sure that you get the most out of your models too. Looking forward to seeing your F1Q's

Paul


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on March 20, 2010, 08:50:40 PM
Okay I decided that 57gms (without rubber for a P30) is tooooooo much :o

This was my first FF model built many moons ago and has had a bit of a charmed life, always doing well in comps and has taught me a few things about trimming on the way...

It is of course John O'Donnell's Teachers Pet. I've subsequently built an updated version which I've still to trim out so since I'm supposed to be flying P30 on Sunday I made the decision to put this old bird on a serious diet (hopefully without changing the trim too wildly... :-\

It now weighs a comparatively svelt 46gms.

Changes included a new lighter tail (saving 2.5gms) with a bit of noseweight saved as a consequence as well. Hollowing the noseblock, recovering the wing tips and adding a smidge more span. The tail and wing tips are tissue over mylar on top and clear mylar only underneath. Stripping the fuz and shaving all the spacers and longerons down then recovering (tissue/mylar)... you get the general idea. Probably be easier and quicker to have built a new one :P

Anyway here she is

Refurbishmently
Paul

DaddyO, Very Nice!! Best of Luck, OTF'er


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DaddyO on March 21, 2010, 05:09:28 PM
Good grief Rickenbakker :o

(Thanks OTFlier by the way) :)

Ever had one of THOSE days?

Suffice to say I've got the TP going nicely now, but missed the flyoff thanks to the arborial decoration that surround Merryfield :P

Edited highlights appear in the been flying section...

Trainee lumberjack
Paul


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Scottl0413 on April 07, 2010, 09:52:52 AM
Well, had to replace the Super 30 I lost last summer (OOS) in Atlanta. Pic's of new one attached, finished weight without motor is 44 grams, covering is Esaki tissue with 3 coats of Nitrate cut 50/50, fuselage is covered with P/span with 3 coats of Nitrate 50/50. Have not had a chance to start trimming yet! Spring breezes are running 15-20 mph hear in central Tennessee.

Scott


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Eduardo Yamin on April 07, 2010, 10:10:06 AM
http://picasaweb.google.com.br/Eduardoyamin/SatV4#

http://picasaweb.google.com.br/Eduardoyamin/Saturno3#


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on April 07, 2010, 10:39:58 AM
WELL DONE Scott. The Souper p-30 is a great one. I have also lost one oos. Still plan to build another one soon myself.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on April 08, 2010, 09:09:27 PM
I very rarely build a model to another's design - other than in Oldtimer an Nostalgia, of course - but, last October, Alexandre Cruz tempted me with a downloadable plan of the 'Saturno V.3'

This model is my sole output for the past winter (is it past?), representing the outcome of occasional 10-15 minute spells in the workshop.  "As is" it now just requires wing and stabiliser keys, MAAC # and address tag, and a d/t line.  Pop-off wing for this model. Weight is 35 grammes so I may now add a tracker rather than put deadweight ballast at the CG

Thanks, Alex!

JM


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on April 09, 2010, 07:48:53 AM
I'm still toying with the idea to build a P-30 (AND the Senator) even though the nearest flying site for such models is still a bit out of reach. I also prefer to build from a plan rather than a kit (kit boxes take up too much room and sometimes get "lost" in the pile ::)). Where is the SATURNO available for download? (v.4 is also flying).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Scottl0413 on April 09, 2010, 09:15:38 AM
Jim, that looks like a serious competitor!! Looks like a lot of under camber.

Scott


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on April 09, 2010, 12:40:57 PM
Jim,

Nice looking airplane! A Gizmo geezer prop if I'm not mistaken eh?

Pete, try here: http://p30br.blogspot.com/search/label/Projetos%20nacionais
Should be a plan for Alex's Saturno in .pdf format

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on April 09, 2010, 01:42:52 PM
HOBOY! Lots of P-30's. Not in .pdf, but doesn't need to be as construction is straightforward (for all of them). For the SATURNO, the construction article in Spanish, is a nice plus as I can still read Spanish (I grew up in Mexico ;D).

Now, to decide what to do...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FreeFlightModeller on April 09, 2010, 03:53:44 PM
Nice work Jim :)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: HatzLymanC on April 09, 2010, 04:11:08 PM
Try here: http://p30br.blogspot.com/search/label/Projetos%20nacionais" Tmat

Great site! But some links no longer work. If any one has the plan for the "Meteoro" I would like a copy. Thanks!!

[email protected]

Lyman


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on April 09, 2010, 04:20:46 PM
Me too. I would like a plan if possible.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on April 09, 2010, 05:28:07 PM
O.k., both plans are in the FFQ P-30 survey for 2010. I'll scan and post for you P-30 fans.

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Eduardo Yamin on April 09, 2010, 07:09:35 PM
O.k., both plans are in the FFQ P-30 survey for 2010. I'll scan and post for you P-30 fans.

I´m very happy to see that Meteoro figure in FFQ 2010 survey.

More information and video about Omar´s Meteoro:

http://p30br.blogspot.com/2009/06/meteoro-p30-de-omar-grassetti.html (http://p30br.blogspot.com/2009/06/meteoro-p30-de-omar-grassetti.html)

Direct link to plans download:

http://www.e-voo.com/plantas/vl/imgs/meteoro.zip (http://www.e-voo.com/plantas/vl/imgs/meteoro.zip)

Regards,
Eduardo Yamin
http://www.eduardoyamin.blogspot.com/ (http://www.eduardoyamin.blogspot.com/)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on April 09, 2010, 07:49:02 PM
Thank you for the plans and data.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on April 10, 2010, 02:31:24 AM
Quote
Omar´s Meteoro:

Now that's a lovely looking plane - twin fins do it for me!

I have the original FFQ issues covering E30, and thus didn't bother to buy the new book....... it looks as though I'll have to talk to Paypal again :D

Just what I need, another model on the build list!

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: HatzLymanC on April 10, 2010, 09:14:32 AM
Thank you!!!

Lyman


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on April 13, 2010, 03:30:26 PM
Beautiful Saturno V3 Jim! 35g is 3g lighter than my model, I usually put the lead on the nose and move the wing forward to correct balance point.

I hope you enjoy your V3 as much as I do. I never used a Gizmo prop on mine, only Peck and Ikara on 6 1/8” strands. When possible please provide us a flight report, climb with peck is pretty strong.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on April 13, 2010, 05:05:24 PM
Thank you Alexandre.  I'll place the tracker at the CG and then make any necessary final adjustment to weight.

I'm not sure how the Gizmo will stand up to the impact of the model coming down with a pop-off wing d/t system, if any problems arise I'll change to my own Garami clutch mounted on the shaft.

I have to admit that I changed the spar arrangement a little, gusseted the ribs to that slim trailing edge - and changed the rigging in that the wing is now at -1 degree and the stabiliser trailing edge raised to retain the decalage. Works well on other models so .. we shall see ... Looking forward to getting it into the air, probably in July at Geneseo


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on April 13, 2010, 11:22:23 PM
I'm not sure how the Gizmo will stand up to the impact of the model coming down with a pop-off wing d/t system, if any problems arise I'll change to my own Garami clutch mounted on the shaft.

I have never had a problem Jim. The Gizmo stood up to it just fine. At least so far. 50+dt's


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on April 14, 2010, 12:44:46 AM
Good to hear - thanks, Derek!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on June 07, 2010, 11:05:50 AM
Just got back from the Argentina nats. The top tree places were flying Saturno, the first place was flying a V3 using a long 4 strands 1/8” rubber. I place third with my Saturno V4… I will try to post some picture tonight.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on June 07, 2010, 04:24:55 PM
Way to go, Alexandre! I have downloaded the plan for the Saturno and MAY get around to building one - among others - after I get my Gypsy (KielKraft) going (even though I do not have a good place to fly such models).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on June 07, 2010, 08:22:07 PM
I have this one from the building process before competition. I will get more with some friends...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on June 23, 2010, 11:50:26 AM
Well ... I finally got another airplane off the bench, something that doesn't seem to happen very often these days.

My "Maximus", fourth in a desultory line. It's not sophisticated, it's not elegant and it's not hi-tech ... but all its predecessors flew well enough to please me before they were lost so am hoping for similar results from this. Other than the losing part ....

The airplane carries a little more area than most P30's; previous models have had both undercamber and flat-bottom airfoils and I found little to choose between them - as expected, the flatbased wings climbed higher, the u/c a slightly better glide. I've opted to stay with the flat bottom foil for the extra altitude .. higher into thermal country.

Major differences for this model ... I switched to twin fins instead of the previous fuselage-mounted one ahead of the stab ... mainly because I like twins and a feeling that models so equipped 'groove' a little better under power. This time, rearranged the rigging, wing dropped to -1° and the TE of the stab jacked up accordingly. A full spring stop system fitted and a Garami clutch fitted to the shaft ahead of the prop, simpler than previous ones used, to conform with the rule that the prop cannot be modified. I never consider using the ramp moulded into the prop itself, too unreliable ... and it will wear away in time anyway.

Tracker is carried in a plastic housing on the fuselage side - check pharmacy shelves for small tubes of products, the plastic moulding over such can be cut for various purposes.

Total weight with tracker, batteries and Crockett hook is 38.6 grams so minimal ballast required. The 12" SBF visible in pics is some 20 yrs old .. the noseblock fits this fuselage nicely and I had thoughts of trying it with this fan and 15 grams ... but I'd have to add 5 grams of weight to the folder to bring it in line with the P30 assembly so the idea has cooled a little now.

Ratz Edit: tweaked the colour in a couple of pics


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: HatzLymanC on June 23, 2010, 12:37:05 PM
I like it. Twin fins get me every time!!

Lyman


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Scottl0413 on June 23, 2010, 02:22:49 PM
This is a picture of my second Souper 30, 1st one was taken by the thermal gods! Total weight came in at 43 grams. Have not yet had time to start the trimming process, but should be a good fun flyer.

Scott


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on June 23, 2010, 08:02:01 PM
Jim, Way to go kiddo. I like those basic designs. High tech isn't always the winner. It's the person who winds their motor the best and picks the best air. Just try not to lose this one, please.  :)

Scott, That Souper will definitely dazzle while in the air. I had one that flew away and then was found by a friend. And then when I got it home I dropped a box on it and crushed the darn thing. Best P-30 flyer I'd had to that point.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on July 18, 2010, 08:11:44 PM
OK, here's my first P-30. (Maybe my last, given the small field I use.) It's a simple design of my own I named the Baysik Bahks. Weight without rubber is 59 grams. Looking forward to trying it out, anyway.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on July 18, 2010, 08:51:16 PM
Bargle, Love the covering scheme.  Do you have a D/T on it? Beware of thermal gremlins. :)

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on July 18, 2010, 09:08:04 PM
Thanks, Caley. No DT currently, though I did run a line in the wing for a pop off DT at some future point, should I find a place where I can risk near max winds. Given the weight, the thermal gremlins probably don't want to ingest that much fat. :D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: MartinR362 on July 25, 2010, 02:15:05 AM
I have had a lot of luck with Frank Heeb's P-30 design. Using a Peck Polymer silver prop and 6 strands of 3/32" Tan II rubber the prop run is about 90 secs. I have lost several in strong thermals however. The current one has a Walston xmtr! ;D

Marty


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on July 25, 2010, 10:15:54 AM
Quote
When possible please provide us a flight report, climb with peck is pretty strong.

Alexandre, I had both the 'Maximus' and the "Saturno V3" at Geneseo for some initial trimming. The former worked out in much the same manner as its predecessors with an open sweeping climb pattern up to about 80% turns; I then switched to the Saturno and with no thrust or CG adjustment - just a 0.5mm shim under the stab TE - it was substantially outclimbing my own design on similar power. At that point both were doing over 90 seconds but the Saturno was doing it better and I'm impressed with the design.*

It was getting both breezier and "thermal'ier" so I switched then to other things but that last 20% will release a lot more torque and I look forward to flying it (both... ) at maximum power, maybe at end of next month.

* Looks better in the air also .....  :-[


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on July 25, 2010, 10:29:30 AM
Quote
Frank Heeb's P-30 design

Unfamiliar with this one. Have always liked Heeb's designs.

Hard to see but ... do you have a clutch attached to the prop?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on July 28, 2010, 12:09:11 PM
Hi

I send my photos P30´s

http://picasaweb.google.sk/100588849894345200054/P30RubberPoweredModel#


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on July 28, 2010, 12:25:50 PM
hi
I send my photos P30´s
http://picasaweb.google.sk/100588849894345200054/P30RubberPoweredModel#

Absolutely beautiful! What do they weigh?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Hepcat on July 28, 2010, 12:52:30 PM
Albisko

Attractive designs, great workmanship.

John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on July 29, 2010, 02:34:16 AM
hi, I send my photos P30´s
http://picasaweb.google.sk/100588849894345200054/P30RubberPoweredModel#
Absolutely beautiful! What do they weigh?

Our national rules accord minimal weight 50g (empty) and 10g rubber
"black centroplan" model
wing 15.7gram,airfoil Benedek 6356b modif
tail 2.2gram
fuse 20gram
head and prop 7gram
balast to minimal weight 5gram
rubber TAN super sport 9,5g 1,5x1 10 loop


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on July 29, 2010, 03:48:38 AM
Our national rules accord minimal weight 50g (empty) and 10g rubber

This is interesting, since here in Finland we also changed the minimum weight to 50 grams a couple of years ago. So I'd like to know, how long have you had that "increased" minimum weight, how did you end up with it, and how do you find it work (compared to 40 grams)?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on July 29, 2010, 05:28:06 AM
Models was built by actual rules (50g empty) no problem built 40g and I don´t know whether the minimum weigh 40g in our rules.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on July 29, 2010, 09:26:51 AM
However it works .. if P30's increase to 50 grams in North America then it will be a class I turn away from, much as I like it. Being mandated to build heavy models does not sit well with me.

That aside ... beautiful airframes, Albisko!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on July 29, 2010, 09:46:20 AM
However it works .. if P30's increase to 50 grams in North America then it will be a class I turn away from, much as I like it. Being mandated to build heavy models does not sit well with me.

That aside ... beautiful airframes, Albisko!

Especially when most of the available kits (that I am aware of) can be built UNDER 40 grams. I might just build the Saturno this year "just to see". 50 grams DOES make things easier if there is no EASILY accessible light wood, but as a MINIMUM!?! (Where is that "rules"thread?)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on July 29, 2010, 10:34:09 AM
There were two reasons to increase the minimum weight of P-30 here in Finland:

1) higher minimum makes the playfield more equal, as even beginners can build to minimum weight.
2) heavier models make them stronger, hence enabling more efficient methods for DT (bunting, folding wings up, etc.)

We have not found any ill effects to the flight performance from the higher minimum weight.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on July 29, 2010, 11:05:59 AM
At 50 grams I'd hardly call a P-30 a "heavy model" Jim. You could make the chord a bit wider and still have a low wing loading.

I'm not sure that 50 grams is really needed. 45 grams is a compromise? I'm not sure that the impetus to change to 50 grams is strong in North America.

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on July 29, 2010, 11:06:51 AM
50 grams DOES make things easier if there is no EASILY accessible light wood, but as a MINIMUM!?! (Where is that "rules"thread?)

Not really. My last P-30 weighed 28 g when finished. It could have been lighter, but I wanted the wing strong enough to handle wind (this was part of a challenge, but that's not the point). Bottom line, you could get a P-30 with VIT, AR, DPR, tracker, and pop off wing all under 40 g with no problems using a Tomy timer. We should note that they Ikara P-30 prop weighs more than the Peck and is of lower pitch. My preference is for the re-pitched Gizmo props, though, as they can give you a seriously long motor run.

By the way, for a comparison, my fuselages usually weigh 7-8 g without the front end. Not saying that Albisko isn't capable of that, as he isn't going for such low weights, but it does make an interesting comparison. As I recollect, the wing was 6-7 g, and the stab and rudder were maybe 2-3. I need to build a new wing and front end for that sucker, as both were lost in a very unfortunate flying accident last year and are sorely missed.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on July 29, 2010, 11:19:14 AM
We do need a rules discussion area...

Anyway, yeah, I'm against any change in the minimum weight. Schlosberg was indeed pushing for a 45-50 g minimum weight and got way too many behind him, IMO. It will come up again, I'm afraid.

The autosurface P-30 has little to no advantage at 40 g. 45-50g is a whole other world. Folks are saying that 4 strands of 1/8 will die with the increased minimum weight, but autosurfaces would keep it alive thanks to extra altitude from VIT/DPR, etc. I hate to impose an unnecessary ban on autosurfaces because letting folks experiment is the fun of freeflight. Raising the minimum weight would almost certainly bring that ban right on its heels, though.

If you haven't seen the ultmate P-30, here's what it looks like: http://volarlibrementerubber.blogspot.com/2010/06/rising-light-de-thurman-bowls.html

I don't know how you get a viscous damper to provide that level of precision, but that's not the point. It's a full autosurface P-30 at minimum weight, and it uses a long run motor. A 3 minute airplane at minimum...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Ratz on July 29, 2010, 11:23:40 AM
So, start a P-30 Rules discussion thread. Easy to do. ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on July 29, 2010, 11:27:18 AM
Gee, I thought the P-30 was brought about to be an entry level performance model to allow newbies to get their feet wet when it comes to competition. I think this basic rule needs to remain to allow that.

If others that are into the need for modifications and high tech materials want to petition for a P-30 advanced class, then they should do that, but please don't push out the beginners. I know you'll say that everyone needs to step up and get into the newer technology, but as I said, the P-30 rules were set to allow newcomers to learn. If they wish to progress beyond, then they can learn all the high tech stuff and get into the advanced P-30 category, if implemented. Sorry to get upset. I'll get off my soapbox. The fact is I really don't compete. Nothing in it for me. I just like to build and fly.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on July 29, 2010, 11:35:30 AM
Caley, don't worry, I agree with you. Fact is that right now, P-30 is as beginner friendly as it's gonna get, and it does that quite well. That said, there are 3 minute P-30's out there, and the proposed changes will not eliminate 3 minute P-30's, but they will make it much harder for anyone to achieve that performance, damaging the beginner friendliness of the event.

Starting next contest year, you'll be able to buy P-30's for AMA competition. That will make things interesting, IMO. Doubt it'll have much effect for the experts, though, and also none on me, since none of the current RTF P-30's have the features I want anyway.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on July 29, 2010, 12:51:47 PM
3 minute P30 s in a downer are 90 second P30s.

The rules are just fine as they are. The contest board vote sorta proves it.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on July 29, 2010, 01:56:13 PM
I even add a note:

we have flying weight 50g+10g and maximum time 100 seconds


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on July 29, 2010, 05:09:12 PM
I even add a note:

we have flying weight 50g+10g and maximum time 100 seconds

This is why the heavier model is ok,(works).... for some. Increased weight + decreased max = it becomes a different event.

Otf'er....


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on July 30, 2010, 12:31:29 AM
Incorrect. Here in Finland we increased minimum weight to 50 grams (without rubber), it did not affect the flight performance at all. We still fly with 2 min max, and the models easily do it. IMO, it does not make any observable difference to the performance whether a P-30 weight 40 or 50 grams.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Duco Guru on July 30, 2010, 12:52:35 AM
IMO, it does not make any observable difference to the performance whether a P-30 weight 40 or 50 grams.

You WILL notice a difference when a fly-off is necessary... assuming 40 gram models are allowed to compete with the 50 gram, obese models.

Guru


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on July 30, 2010, 01:08:03 AM
Incorrect. Here in Finland we increased minimum weight to 50 grams (without rubber), it did not affect the flight performance at all. We still fly with 2 min max, and the models easily do it. IMO, it does not make any observable difference to the performance whether a P-30 weight 40 or 50 grams.

If Original rules are changed, for whatever reason (this would include any sporting event) They must be changed across the board; or we are indeed flying 2 different types of the same event. What else would call it?

Otf'er...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on July 30, 2010, 01:51:42 AM
IMO, it does not make any observable difference to the performance whether a P-30 weight 40 or 50 grams.

You WILL notice a difference when a fly-off is necessary... assuming 40 gram models are allowed to compete with the 50 gram, obese models.

Of course the increased weight will cut a few seconds from the flight time, but the change is too small to observe by the visual behaviour of the model. In other words, a 50 gram P-30 does not glide like a brick, but it climbs in similar fashion than a 40 gram one, and the glide seems to be unaffected. I have the same models that were built to 40 grams, and now sport 10 grams of ballast, and they fly in the same fashion than before.

Incorrect. Here in Finland we increased minimum weight to 50 grams (without rubber), it did not affect the flight performance at all. We still fly with 2 min max, and the models easily do it. IMO, it does not make any observable difference to the performance whether a P-30 weight 40 or 50 grams.

If Original rules are changed, for whatever reason (this would include any sporting event) They must be changed across the board; or we are indeed flying 2 different types of the same event. What else would call it?

Sure. What I'm saying is that in Finland we changed the rules, and we are happy with the outcome. 50 grams minimum weight is better than 40 grams.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on July 30, 2010, 02:59:10 AM
I think that 40 grams is the weight for experts and not for "ordinary" pilots.

50 grams model is very compact, strong and resistant.

My second model (shorter motor stick - rainbow wing) was made for my 4 years old daughter and there is resistance requires :)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on July 30, 2010, 07:46:36 AM
50 gm instead of 49? Naww, a 12% weight penalty won't affect it all. ;)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on July 30, 2010, 08:46:37 AM
I think that 40 grams is the weight for experts and not for "ordinary" pilots
50 grams model is very compact, strong and resistant

As a rank beginner, I built my first P-30 with maybe 4-5 models under my belt and zero supervision on any of them. It was ugly, made from hard balsa, and had plenty of warps and way more dope than necessary. It weighed 45 g and it flew. I'd say that's proof that any beginner with a little supervision can make a 40 g P-30 and fly it competitively. Give them a carbon spar and they don't have to care what the weather is doing either. A rolled tube fuselage adds to the durability by a wide margin...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on July 30, 2010, 09:19:14 AM
Joshua, I agree the 40 gram mark is attainable by a beginner. My experience was much like yours. About 5 or 6 models build and then a couple of P-30's. My second ended up 36 grams, with me adding 4 grams to bring it up to weight.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on July 30, 2010, 09:27:17 AM
I respect your rules.

Personally, I would also 40gr min.weight but rules .....


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on July 30, 2010, 10:03:15 AM
Quote
50 gm instead of 49? Naww, a 12% weight penalty won't affect it all.

Actually ... to 50gm from 40 gm is a 25% basic weight increase. I respect Tapio's observations that it didn't make much difference in practice even though a higher wing loading/lower power ratio would suggest otherwise.

I aso agree that 40 gms is not an 'expert's class' - it's quite easily attainable. I build with 'stock' wood, nothing special and usually come out at about the correct weight, sometimes needing an extra gm or two of ballast .. sometimes not.

Throughout all my decades of involvement in modelling my credo has been 'add lightness'. Lighter models do fly better than equivalent heavy one. To add 10 gms to a P30, whether in unnecessary structure (present P30's are adequately strong) and/or ballast, turns me away completely. The present rules have been fine since inception and should remain unchanged .. other than maybe a ban on any in-flight movable surfaces.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on August 18, 2010, 10:49:22 AM
 Jim,

 I am glad you liked the Saturno V3 it is really a good climber, during Argentina nats it outclimbed all other models. It is hard to use the torque peak but if you launch correctly ( I launch left and strongly) the model will do a small vertical climb and transition to the spiral climb (right-right pattern) that shall give you some extra height. I fly using six 1/8 strands but I was beaten in Argentina by my own design using four 1/8 strands. It works well but climbs slowly, quite dangerous to drop a max it think. My best time on dawn is 2:35 using the six strands set-up.

 Concerning weight, I also do not think 40g is too light. Brazilian wood is heavy (Jim can second on that) 160kg/m^3 or more and the model weights 39g ready to fly with viscous timer. It least here nobody had left flying P30 or not entered due to weight problems...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on August 18, 2010, 11:37:01 PM
Here is a few pictures of my 8 year old nephew Jack with a Starlink "Pirate" P-30. It has a Dave Burley PST 1-function electronic timer, an Airtek (Ken Bauer) RDT receiver and a tracker bug from Pim Ruyter. Pop-off wing DT (Jack thinks that's so cool!) and a Czech prop. Powered with 6 strands of 1/8" super sport. Jack really likes the Gizmo Geezer winder with the electronic counter (and so do I!). By the way, Uncle Tony made a special aluminum half tube for the P-30 so that it could be wound outside of the airplane just like his F1B's! Works flawlessly.

The photos were taken at a recent meet at Base Borden in Ontario. It was quite windy and the Pirate flew like a champ in the wind. We waited for a lull and Jack made excellent launches and had very good flights. He took first place in the 10 gram Open Rubber event.

I'm getting him a Coupe for the next contest!

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 19, 2010, 09:20:46 AM
Tony, What a nice Uncle you are. Nice to see youngsters still interested in what many consider too low tech. Gee, if the majority of people only knew how complex some of these models can be. Way to go Jack! on your win.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on August 19, 2010, 10:22:45 AM
Jack certainly enjoyed the whole experience Caley. Base Borden is still an active Canadian military base, so that in itself was very cool to him. I took him to the excellent military museum on the base (I've been going to Base Borden for 30 years and had never been!) and he was thrilled to be able to see tanks and amphibious vehicles up close. He loved the flying, but the chasing was a bit tough (some flights went 1.5 km!). Next time we are going to bring his ATV so that he can chase himself!

And his P-30 is pretty high tech!

Incidentally, I've ordered a 2 function E-timer for my next P-30. For breezy conditions I want to use all of the initial torque for a vertical burst.

Tony
-yeah, I'm an F1B guy.....


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 19, 2010, 12:07:53 PM
Yeah, You F1B Guys have me scratching my head on how all those gizmos work. Looks too complicated for me, especially when I've an electronic timer that I still cannot figure out how it works. Looks like you and the youngster will be a good one, two punch at comps. :)

 Caley
 Mmmmm, was just thinking who'll be #1 ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on August 19, 2010, 01:14:55 PM
Yeah, me too! ;D Little guy has no fear. Now I have to teach him patience with air picking. He just wants to throw it and see it fly.

You know Caley, I got into electronic timers because they were easier to use in the field. Hook up the line(s), turn it on and throw. No winding of springs, no counting of scrolls or timing the timer to see where 2 or 3 minutes is, dead accurate DT times (and DPR times for F1B/G) and the RDT capability is just super important for flying sites with lot's of plane eating hazards like trees and crops. The toughest part is the battery management. Learning how to care and feed the little Lipos was not was I was used to. Fortunately, the youngsters these days grow up with small electronic devices and so have no trepidation regarding the hardware. It's easy and cool for them. Older folks find it daunting for sure.

What electronic timer do you have Caley?

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 19, 2010, 03:04:45 PM
The time is a Z-TRON for my Tomboy. Too much for anything else. I think you have to have a brain that thinks in binary. I've read the instructions, and the math is what's stumping me. I can do regular math, but don't throw anything else at me.

The little guy sounds like me. I'm pretty close to being able to wind a motor properly, but have no patience for waiting around to find good air. I don't want my models flying very far or high anyway. Thermal finding is for people who like competition, and a desire to say, "Look, I beat you."

Look forward to hearing more about his participation in our hobby.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: BG on August 19, 2010, 10:21:29 PM
I just want to beat myself ;D ;D
B


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 19, 2010, 10:32:11 PM
Bernard, You're like myself. Compete against what I've done before.  :)

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on August 19, 2010, 11:51:22 PM
Quote
a desire to say, "Look, I beat you."

I've never heard anyone say that in 60+ years of competition flying; I doubt it's even come to mind!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on August 20, 2010, 09:05:22 AM
Sorry Jim, You're correct about the people in our hobby. Never seen that in the short time I've been in it. But unfortunately, I've seen it in other activities. Makes me sick to see people who act that way. Thank goodness there are still activities that are done in a gentlemanly manner.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on August 20, 2010, 09:53:49 AM
Gentleperson?

;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: MartinR362 on September 04, 2010, 06:34:06 PM
I use a simple "Grammi?" system developed in the 1930's in the UK.

The attached picture should help.

Marty


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on September 04, 2010, 06:56:12 PM
"Garami" .. attributed to Louis Garami, USA, in the 30's Legal to use by UK P30 rules but in N.America all you can do to a prop is add weight for balance and bush the hub. Lashing on a Garami is a no-no - hence clutches attached to the shaft, the ramp on the prop is unreliable and soon wears down anyway.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Sechrist on September 04, 2010, 07:45:19 PM
TMat Where did you get your e-timer? I have been thinking along the same lines that auto functions would be an asset on p-30 when flying in windy conditions.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: MartinR362 on September 04, 2010, 09:56:32 PM
That's what I did, added weight and bushed the hub. I recall when clutches were "banned", now legal I guess. The system is used by others and I have never been called on it in over 20 years.

Marty


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on September 04, 2010, 10:52:49 PM
Interesting. I'm not sure if clutches attached to the prop were actually banned in the early rules but no mention now ... Garry Hunter would know, he was there at the inception of the class

"Only the following changes will be allowed: 1.4.1. Flashing may be removed. 1.4.2. Balancing by the addition of weight to one blade will be allowed. 1.4.3. Enlarging the hole of the propeller hub will be allowed in order to accept a larger diameter shaft and/or a bushing cut from metal tubing."

However they were certainly frowned upon and at least one shaft-mounted system made available commercially. Maybe the fact that Garami's have been used without being questioned is quietly leading to acceptance by default. Makes some sense for they are certainly the easiest freewheel clutch to make and install - as to use i guess much depends upon a CD's decision.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on September 19, 2010, 03:05:40 PM
My nephew Jack and I went flying early this morning (on the field just after sunrise) with the Pirate P-30. It was a lovely, calm, clear and crisp fall morning. There was traces of mist still around at the edges of the field which I love seeing in the fall.

The calm weather meant that we didn't have to go very far! I set the Burley E-timer for exactly 2 minutes and the little bird was DT'ing at about 20 to 30 feet high each flight. So I'd estimate that the still air performance is about 2:20 or so with the 1000 turns that I limit Jack to (May 09 Super Sport 6 strands of 1/8").

She certainly got up nice and high and floated around beautifully.

A nice morning and check out the grass at the field! :o

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on September 19, 2010, 03:18:23 PM
He's gonna be giving you REAL competition very soon, Tony!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on September 19, 2010, 03:23:31 PM
Tony, So happy to see a youngster having fun in our hobby. I agree with Pete. You'll be shaking his hand very soon at the winners circle.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: NeilR on September 19, 2010, 06:06:04 PM
You call that a flying field!! It has a tractor with a roller...where are the trees, the barbed wire fences, the tall grass, rabbit holes and logs hiding snakes...and the bull in the next field!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on September 19, 2010, 08:39:57 PM
Tony, the plane looks great. The flyer looks great. The fin looks .... invisible!!?!!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on September 19, 2010, 10:38:03 PM
Yeah, there's no challenge at all flying on a field like that. (Or with a model like that!)

Really great pics, field, plane, flyer, and story.

--Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 20, 2010, 01:06:33 AM
How much is the diameter of the Burley fuselage tube? How much is the weight? Does it accommodate the 6 strand motor with bunches?

The method of manufacturing seems quite neat; I suppose it is laminated on a larger diameter mold as a warped sheet (for easy removal), and then the seam with overlap is glued when the laminate has cured?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on September 20, 2010, 09:21:52 AM
Thanks guys, Jack and I had a lot of fun with the P-30, and yes, the field is tough to deal with... ;D

Tapio, I'll measure the diameter of the fuselage. It is by andre Burdov by the way. There are two versions (both the same size) one in fiberglass, and the other is Kevlar. Yes, the diameter is large enough to accommodate a 6 strand motor. Bunches? Of bananas? ;D

I'll weigh it for you too.

I'm assuming that it is molded around a male mandrel, but I suppose it could have been made from cured sheet?

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 20, 2010, 09:26:57 AM
Sorry, have been in flu, so my English has been below par. Meant Burdov of course. Bunches/knots in the rubber. And I suspect that the fuselage is molded on a round mandrel, but with the laminate between plastic sheets, so that the overlap does not laminate together, but can be opened to release the tube easily from the mandrel. Such small, thin-walled tube would be otherwise quite hard to release from the mandrel. But if the seam is open, then it is simple to take off the mandrel, only to finalize the seam later.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on September 20, 2010, 09:43:14 AM
Tapio,

I've molded some cylindrical parts with the method you describe and it is quite easy as you say. The Burdov tube might be made that way as the seam if very noticeable.

The knots and bunches are easily accommodated within the motor tube.

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on September 20, 2010, 09:53:54 AM
The fin's clear!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on September 20, 2010, 10:14:06 AM
Oh yeah, I forgot. Yes, Dan, I'll get on that as soon as possible. ;) Dan sure likes to see some color on a fin...

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on September 20, 2010, 10:21:08 AM
Actually, I like WHITE on the fin. :o


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on September 20, 2010, 10:45:43 AM
I like aluminized Mylar on the fin. It's amazing how light flashing off the fin can keep it in sight on those long maxes. If the sun is out and it is at the right angle and your timer is not blind...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on September 20, 2010, 11:00:47 AM
Isn't White a color? (well all the colors?)

Metallized mylar is both good and bad. At the right angle it can flash. At other times it becomes invisible. Maybe white on one side and metallized on the other? ;)

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on September 20, 2010, 02:10:32 PM
A mirror looks just like what it is reflecting. Any mylar will flash. I'm looking for something that shows against the treeline or the ground. Visible in the upper air isn't the problem. Low to the ground is when it's needed.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on September 20, 2010, 02:32:19 PM
I agree Dan. At the 2009 World Champs I spotted a very nice all carbon fiber F1B from a Swiss flyer. Very visible in the air overhead (as it was black). However, when the model flew against the backdrop of a mountain he was clocked off because it went invisible!

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 20, 2010, 02:50:06 PM
... or the other way around: At a World Cup just before the Euro- or World Champs, in Odesa, a local chap won the F1B contest with a gull-winged, all white F1B. I do not think the model would have been especially visible in normal conditions, but the fly-off was flown against a real dark thundercloud in the distance, and the white model just shined, unlike all the other models in those conditions...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on September 20, 2010, 02:59:54 PM
Don't get me wrong. The white fin shows up against a blue sky and a lot of clouds. When I see the Wakefields with a brown pylon and a clear fin setting up for a flyoff to the ground, I am simply amazed. There isn't much to see to begin with, help us timekeepers out with some visibility aids. Clear ain't the answer.

My CLGs now have white on the tops of the tip panels and the fin. Easy to see against the ground clutter/background.

Clear ain't the answer. You could not weigh the added mass of putting white ink on one side of a mylar fin.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on September 20, 2010, 03:23:06 PM
I use fluorescent yellow for the entire wing tip panels on my wakefields Dan. I've always felt that the surface area of the wing tips is far greater than the fin area, so I've not really bothered with the fin. However, most of my models have red fins, and my new Coupe uses a clear fin with bands of fluorescent yellow for visibility.

Visibility is something to pay attention to if you hope to be seen in a fly-off. I'm always amazed when I see a plain, natural polyspan covered model with no high visibility colors at all.

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on September 20, 2010, 05:21:05 PM
With all the variables due to visibility and visual timing, how long till somebody proposes using GPS to time flights? I know it is possible with some of the electronic timers.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on September 20, 2010, 10:22:48 PM
There has been discussion about this already with some of the flyers. Even an altimeter could work if calibrated correctly (starts when the model reaches 2 meters high and shows the time when the model touches down). Using my Airtek Altimeter (from Ken Bauer) I can time my test flights very accurately without a stop watch even if I can't see the model!

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 21, 2010, 01:31:20 AM
We had quite a terrible final fly-off for Finnish Championships in F1A earlier in March, with all models disappearing to the skies in low clouds and darkening evening. This raised quite some discussion on using altimeters to measure flight time. I ended-up taking the technology-sceptic role in the discussion, pointing out possible shortcomings in the new system, and unfortunately the promoters were not too ready to solve the problems....

The biggest concern, IMO, using on-board electronics to measure flight time is the time delay (and to lesser extend, needed equipment) to get the measurements. One may not realize it, but the big advantage of out current, visual-based time-keeping is that it is real-time: once the model lands, you immediately know the score, can compare to others, and can prepare for the (possible) next flight. If, instead, you measure time with a logger onboard, it will be a delay until you retrieve the model, possible have to find it, then bring it back, download and interpret the data. It could easily take one hour after the flight before the results are known, so the time gaps between fly-off rounds would be longer than they currently are. And then there is the question of fly-aways: how long would you wait for the guy, who took the best thermal and was first lost into the cloud, to retrieve his model and claim for victory, until you decide that he cannot find his model (and hence the logger data) in time, instead his visual time remains, leaving him last in the fly-off? What if he finds the model and comes back, but 15 minutes after the time-frame for returning data has passed?

No problem, some suggest. Let's just build a wlan onto the flying field. 10 square kilometres of wlan outdoors? Get real....

Some less serious shortcomings are:
- equipment to read the data from loggers. Every owner of a logger has this, but can it be used for contest purposes; if not, where does the contest manager get 30 units to handle data parallel?
- how to make sure that the logged data is current,, not something planted into the logger beforehand? None of the units that I know use time-stamps in the data...
- I have tried to estimate flight times, and I claim that you can get absolute accuracy of the time only to resolution of about 5 seconds. So, when you probably would use visual timing as the first method, and loggers only as secondary means in case of OOS flight, how can you then match the two methods with different resolution?
- Most loggers are based on microchips with internal resonators. At least some of these (PIC-series) have quite bad temperature stability, which means that there timing may drift a few percent when temperature changes. So I have my doubts about the accuracy of timing of these loggers. Probably for timing purposes you would need specially-made loggers, with separate clock-chips to make the timing accurate enough.

So overall I see that the visual timing can be under certain circumstances a real big problem, but unfortunately there are several problems with using loggers as surrogate that need to be solved. I am not sure if they all can be solved at all.

Sorry for taking this string seriously off topic.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on September 21, 2010, 01:37:12 AM
Sorry for taking this string seriously off topic.

My apologies as well. Hardly applies to P-30's!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on September 21, 2010, 10:31:30 AM
With all the variables due to visibility and visual timing, how long till somebody proposes using GPS to time flights? I know it is possible with some of the electronic timers.

That'l happen about 4 days before I quit the event.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on September 21, 2010, 10:50:10 AM
Very good points Tapio and good discussion material. We should move the posts to a new topic so that we don't disturb the P-30 thread. ::)

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on November 06, 2010, 05:46:19 AM
Several months ago I promised to post a pic of my "Kultasiipi" ("Golden wing") P-30. Finally, here it is.

The design dates back to yearly 1980's, the prototype was my 5th P-30. It turned out to be a good performer, so a couple of years later a friend who ran a small model airplane firm asked to kit the model, and it has been built in quite large numbers in Finland since. Unfortunately when he sold his firm the new owner does not produce it any more.

The kit had a composite fuselage (the same one that we discussed about lately, of kevlar and more lately glassfibre and carbon paper, but alas, it is not produced any more either) and the rest of the structure was balsa. The model is straightforward, with constant-chord wing. Thanks to large dihedral it is very spiral-stable; the model which I fly has no auto-surfaces, and the rudder is campered to make the glide turn, yet it shows no tendency to spiral-in. It could use VIT to make the launch less sensitive, but with careful launch attitude goes well with 6 strands of SS rubber even without.

My version of the model is home-brewn development. It uses the kitted fuselage (actually this is an old one from a model that was built from a kit), while the wing and tailplane are a bit developed further. The ribs are laser-cut, and the wing has 5.5mm Burdov carbon tube for main spar, the tips are with 3.5mm tube. Trailing edge is also "updated" to a carbon strip, therefore there are short carbon caps to support the back of the ribs. The wing is in 2 parts, with a 2mm carbon joiner. Most of all this helps to pack the wing into the model box, in one piece the wing with large dihedral was quite bulky. This version still uses Snoopy timer, but I plan to replace it with a electronic one, as all my larger models now have digital timers.

BTW, our national P-30 rules state a minimum airframe weight of 50 grams (instead of the more common 40). I feel that this rule change was a good one, now even the beginners can built their models to weight, and the slightly larger weight does not harm performance to mention (we can still easily max out with decent rubber), but makes it possible to built a little sturdier models, or add a tracker. 10 grams of additional weight does not harm the sinking speed with DT either, which is a good thing with these tiny models.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Jukka Juslin on November 11, 2010, 07:48:01 PM
Dear All,

Your P-30 planes are absolutely so cute! My P-30 was called "Robin" in early 1990's, but what I recall it was very heavy. Later I have bought RTF PeeWee's, but now I am working a little bit more "own" Peewee and Knarren incarnation.

Here in Finland we have usually in national P-30 contest usually 4 contestants and the competition is once a year. So, proof of this 50 grams concept is not that fool-proof. It is very hard to judge or decide from my point of view, if I would go 40 grams or 50 grams. Certainly I do not believe that adding 25%, which is 10 grams of weight to a light rubber powered airplane wouldn't affect the performance. This must not be true, to believe I need solid hard data with DOE setting. Another point is, that changing one point of the rules might justify changing something more also and this would become a snowball effect. It would be nice to respect the tradition of the class and stable rules, since 1970's or something (just received the FFQ P-30 survey 2010 and read something about the history).

On the other hand, I think it is extremely cool that I think it is possible now to fit Salzer beeper, RAM 3 logger, tracker and timer (burlov) in the model and make it 50 grams. This brings in my motivation for the event. Though the best motivation would be if somebody would compete in this event and fly actively. So, there are pro's and con's in any decisions. What disturbs me is the claim without presenting solid data, that the performance is not affected. But I can forgive that, no hard feelings :).

For national sport in Finland it certainly is a miss that "Kultasiipi" is not produced anymore. This was a nice collaboration with a designer and the producer. Quite rare, at least in Finland - I think. I bought one "Kultasiipi" and still have it, I think, but I never built it - and seems to be will never build it. That is not fault of the plane though :). I am not that big fan of using composites on a P-30, but since we don't practically have any hobbyists in Finland it is better little activity than no activity. What makes making really competitive F1H models for the beginner really hard is the fact that they have gone all-composite. This being said, personally I am not doing any "witch hunt" on composites, I was some sort of pioneer in vacuum bagged carbon+glass fibre wings in Finland in early 1990's. Since then my building accomplishments have been less great :).

I have been building this balsa box fuselaged P-30 and plastic covered (Indoor film, covered with a neon orange spray on the upper surface) lately. I showed my models today in a local sauna evening of the PIK aeronautics club. They thought I am crazy, grown up man building these. But, I guess it might be fun being crazy or different - then :). I don't enjoy building that much though usually and even less with composites nowadays - and chances are pretty sure that I would never finish a composite plane.

I also agree, that it might be good idea to ban moving surfaces during the flight other than the D/T.

Jukka Juslin,
From Finland


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on February 04, 2011, 02:34:25 PM
Getting ready for the Issacson

Two P30's, a Pirate and a PZaz with matching fuselages, almost ready for the Mylar. Got to love the smell of Velcro glue in the morning!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on February 04, 2011, 03:23:12 PM
Don't ya just love last minutes? ;D :o ;)

Looking good!

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on February 04, 2011, 03:38:32 PM
Don't ya just love last minutes? ;D :o ;)

Looking good!

Tony

Tell me about it! I'll probably finish one of them by the Issacson but you never know ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on February 04, 2011, 07:04:45 PM
Derek, You beat me to my question of whether one of them would fly at the Ike. Would be neat to see one in the bones and mylar/tissue. :D

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on February 04, 2011, 07:12:19 PM
Derek,

Does the Velcro glue require that you wash the bones before gluing? Haha... noticed the background.

Are the main spars carbon tubes or capped spars? I take these structures have enough torsional rigidity to just use mylar. I'm still planning what I'm going to do when I get time to build a good P-30. I'm almost certain I'm going to build Hannah's Titan--be fun to use his design--but I may modify structure to handle mylar covering.

Five more days!

--Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FF Bruce on February 04, 2011, 07:57:42 PM
Derek bring the one you don't finish the three of us might be able to complete it at the motel.Had a friend do that more times than you could count.I'll just call him Mike A.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on February 04, 2011, 11:46:02 PM
Bruce, I might do that if I don't finish one of them.

Bill, the spars are carbon tubes. The wings were on the oven under the exhaust fan. A bit cold in the garage so the velcro glue went on in the kitchen. The cool part is that I had permission from my wife to do it!

Caley, these are covered with plain old quarter mil mylar. No tissue needed.

The picture is of the two wings with mylar covering. Can you tell? ;D The black looking panel is metalized mylar. An experiment to see if it flashes as the the wing spins on dt. Both of the planes will have a pop off wing dt. I usually dye the mylar on my planes but I'm going to spray the top surface with design master spray paint tomorrow when it warms up a bit. A bit of red, a bit of black, white on the rudder (Dan you convinced me :D).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on February 05, 2011, 11:53:08 AM
Wait until you witness the Vegan Eagle in the BTV. You'll believe in the white then!

I was concerned that you were gonna leave the plane clear. ::)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on February 06, 2011, 05:30:24 PM
Wait until you witness the Vegan Eagle in the BTV. You'll believe in the white then!

I was concerned that you were gonna leave the plane clear. ::)

They would be my new stealth P30s :)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on February 06, 2011, 05:42:58 PM
Wings are finished except for my AMA number.

I sprayed them with Tamiya color Fluorescent Red on the tips and design master glossy black for the rest. To bad the fluorescent red isn't glossy. A big difference between spray painting the mylar as opposed to dye is that the paint shows off the wrinkles and sloppy edges! I also had some bleed under on my masking :-[ Oh well, nothing a bit of paint can't fix after the Issacson.

All components of each plane are finished, now to put them together!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on February 06, 2011, 06:14:38 PM
Derek,
Some people paint the bottom layer of mylar from the INSIDE before they cover the top. That way everything is glossy (cause the mylar is on the outside).

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Sunbeamtiger on February 06, 2011, 08:07:52 PM
I am now ready for this year's flying season. The yellow and blue ship is a Boomer MK2 which is kitted by Clint Brooks. It was built per the plans and using a pop-up wing. Using the supplied Czech prop and a viscous timer. The only thing I changed was that I covered with rudder with 1/4 mil silver mylar. Ready to fly, less Walston transmitter and motor she weighs in at 41.9 grams.

The purple and silver ship is a Pirate by Burdov and the kit is sold by Larry Bagalini. Again this one was built per the plans. Covered in 1/2 mil mylar (per the plans) and is using a Ikara viscous timer and the supplied Czech prop. The only thing I have done different on this is the prop is now 'true' free wheeling. RTF, less motor & transmitter weighed in at 47.7 grams.

The red and silver ship is also a Pirate but this one is using a Peck silver prop which is also free wheeling and a good old fashion fuse for the DT. This plane weighed in at 45.9 grams.

First off I want to say that the Boomer kit was wonderful, nice job Clint. And the same goes for the Pirate, great kit and very easy to build. Once again Larry is selling a quality product.
The Boomer has not seen air yet since we still have 2" of ice covered with 6" of snow. I sure wish Spring would hurry up and arrive. The red Pirate (dt fuse) saw air last year but never really got fully trimmed out due to every time at the field the wind was blowing pretty good but it looked very promising. I'm sure I will receive a lot of flak for how much the finished weights are but what can I say? I built them per the plans.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on February 06, 2011, 08:38:44 PM
Nice to see the Boomer and Pirate side-by-side (don't see them at all over here). Kinda surprising that the Pirate(s) come out heavier than the Boomer as the fuz x-section seems much smaller (Pirate) and the rest of the construction looks similar.

I'm toying with the idea of building a P-30 soon, being torn between scratch building or going the kit route - and keeping on the lookout for a decent place to fly the thing. There seems to be only one place in Germany that caters to the FAI classes (Manching in Bavaria) and the P-30 event is considered a "Junior" event. I've only found ONE event for this coming season >:(, so I'll be doing this for fun only.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on February 06, 2011, 10:00:23 PM
SBT, Very nice work. I know the Boomer is a great model. I've seen it fly, and it gets up there, very high, and then is a real floater.

Also seen the Pirate in Eloy, and it also flys very well.

I wouldn't worry about a few extra grams. Just trim it right, wind it properly, and get a good launch, and they both will do two minutes in calm air. I think my Majestyk is around 44-45 grams, and it flys very well, even with the extra grams.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on February 07, 2011, 03:48:36 AM
Sweet looking P-30's Mike! If they fly as well as they look, they will fly great!

Here is a picture of my modified Pirate. It has a different fuselage because I like the GizmoGeezer and fitting that baby into the Pirate kit fuselage is tough. All ready to check the CG and and discover that my motor stuffer sticks diameter is to big. So I need to make another one that fits. Weight right now is 39.5 grams. The dt line and swivel, and a bit of ballast will get it past the 40 gram minimum weight. The weight will increase each flight as I cover all the puncture holes in the mylar with tape ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Sunbeamtiger on February 07, 2011, 08:52:54 AM
Caley,
Thanks for the compliments on the build. The mylar covering on the Pirates aren't the best, they are what I call a 5 foot beauty. At 5 feet you can't see the flaws. I'm still not use to covering with mylar yet. Tissue and silk are no problems but then I'm dating my age. One of Pirates I flew at a local contest last year but never got in a official flight. While trimming it caught got in "boomer" and ended up off field and in the woods. How it ever managed to fall to the ground among all those trees I will never know. It would have been a lost if it wasn't for the Walston. I'm going to have to modify them for a wing pop up/off to help them come down.

After building both the Pirate and Boomer, I prefer the Pirate due to how rigid the structure is compared to the common stick structure but then it is only my opinion.

As for the weight, I'm not really concerned, I'm more into having fun. Besides, if you can pick the right air a couple of extra won't matter.

Now what did surprise me is the prop weight on the Boomer. I made both per Clint's plans, the Czech & the Gizzmo Geezer and would you believe the Gizzmo came out lighter. Anyhow it should be interesting to see how the different props perform on both designs.

COME ON SPRING TIME.
Mike in Indiana


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Sunbeamtiger on February 07, 2011, 09:13:28 AM
Derek,
Love the covering job on your Pirate.
I would have liked to use a Gizzmo on the Pirate too but I took the lazy way out, I made a Peck into a free wheeler. The one complaint I have about the Pirate is the small diameter of the fuselage, it's a pain to load a motor but on the other side it is strong. As for loading I slip a piece of music wire through the tail end and pull the motor in.
Holes in the covering..... thank you Scotch Tape, I never leaver home without it. ;D

Mike in Indiana


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on February 08, 2011, 12:45:10 AM
Here is the finished Pirate ready to go. I used Hi-Vis dacron line for the pop off wing DT line. A bit more visible than the monofilament I used in the past. Now to see if she can fly ;D If the wind cooperates tomorrow I will have time for some trimming flights before I head on down to the Issacson.

That white rudder is quite visible.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on February 08, 2011, 12:48:51 AM
Unbeatable looks, looks unbeatable!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on February 08, 2011, 02:41:24 AM
That white rudder is quite visible.

Dan B. will be so proud.... ;D

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Sunbeamtiger on February 08, 2011, 07:58:47 AM
Derek,
Looking good. Let us know how the test flights go.

Mike


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on March 14, 2011, 06:18:33 PM
Has anybody built a P-30 designed by George Perryman that he called SPARROWHAWK ? I have a plan that George signed for me but I have been afraid to build it since it looks so complicated. The Sparrowhawk that John O'Dwyer designed beat GP to the punch and then John O'dwyer had his kitted by MAL of Irving,Texas. George was a real friend. If you built it what advice can you offer especially when it comes to the curved and laminated wing tips among other parts of the model. Remember, George called his workshop the "Gloryhole" and he chased models with "Old Yellow" which is a yellow Cadillac.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on April 07, 2011, 02:38:30 PM
I present a new model with PGI system

https://picasaweb.google.com/100588849894345200054/P30BuiltAndFlying#

palo


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on April 07, 2011, 02:46:24 PM
Looks great Palo!

So how does it fly?

Tony
-inquiring minds want to know ... ;)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on April 08, 2011, 07:57:13 AM
Looks real nice, Palo! Your flying site is a free flighter's DREAM!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on April 08, 2011, 09:27:14 AM
Tony,
Model with rainbow cover wing flies perfectly! (PGI system, wing incidence -2degrees, tail -3,5degrees, motor trust -1, CofG 65% of root )
rubber is TAN2 18mm2 , 6thread 3x1, R-L setting

Second model (black centroplan) flies no good ,I edit to pylon and upper rudder. Lower pylon will have negative incidence and rudder will be underneath fuselage.

my flying place:
http://www.gliding.sk/?page=galerie
:)
palo


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on April 08, 2011, 07:04:06 PM
I present a new model with PGI system

https://picasaweb.google.com/100588849894345200054/P30BuiltAndFlying#

Nice pics and P30s Palo. :)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on April 09, 2011, 10:11:20 AM
Very Nice Models and also a very nice location. Good to see another success story.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on April 11, 2011, 06:23:50 AM
I do not show you my P-30. Instead, I show you my new winder!

I have felt that the common 1:5 ratio of winders is too slow for 6 strand P-30 motor, taking well over 1000 turns. I tried to work on my own from scratch, but fitting the gears seems to be rather hard, to make them run smooth. Then my eyes fell on the "Ikara" line winch lying on the table. ratio 1:7.8, quite sturdy gears, this might work! So I took a length of aluminum tubing, threaded inside with M5 tap to fit the axis (replacing the line drum). First attempts indicated that the standard handle is too short, making applying maximum turns too hard, so I did another one. I have already had to replace one handle of my previous winch with an aluminum one, as the plastic handle broke, so I knew that a piece of alu with a M5 thread would work. This time I made the handle twice the original length to work with rubber torque, but also added another hole halfway, so the handle would double for line winch use. All this modifications are reversible, so I can use the same winch also for towline. One thing still to add is a brass thrust washer on the output axis, to take the pull of the rubber motor.

I got a chance to test the winch on Saturday, when we had a smallish local contest, probably the last contest on frozen lake this year. The weather was warm and sunny, but the wind was high, up to 9m/s. I flew a couple of flights, with motor would to 500 g*cm. I suppose that from a fresh 6-strand SuperSport you might get peak torque of up to 800g*cm, but one of my old motors broke at 500 to 600, so I decided to stay at that. The winch took that torque quite OK.

Flying, on the other hand, was another thing with a "fixed" model (no VIT, no AR). Launching into a 6 to 8 m/s wind means that the initial speed is much faster than the model is ever trimmed for. My first launch into the wind and 40 degrees up looked OK to start with, but then the model stalled (it was not even on the back), and dived into the ground. The following 2 launches were safer, but this time I launched the right of the wind, and the models made half a turn and spend some 5 seconds of flight time flying level, before catching up with the wind and starting to climb. I think for such high winds a VIT would have helped a lot, so that the model could have tolerated such high initial speed better.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on April 11, 2011, 08:47:23 AM
Try launching left of the wind.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on April 11, 2011, 09:02:27 AM
Dan beat me to it. With fixed surface models this works surprisingly well (left of wind launch).

That said I'm all over the VIT deal. ;D

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on April 11, 2011, 09:11:05 AM
Nice mod of the line winch! I just cruised the Ikara site, but they don't seem to offer that any more (it's MUCH nicer than the one offered by GRAUPNER).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on April 11, 2011, 09:19:46 AM
Oh, sorry. It's not Ikara but Ivan Horejsi. I bought mine from Mike Woodhouse.

Also, did not want to wait to get new drums while making new towlines, so I made my own. Two 3mm lite-ply disks and one 10mm fron ordinary ply, sawn with a circular saw/drill (for circular holes), glued together and doped.

Launching to the left? Did not came to thing of that. But anyway, holding the model in any other direction than pointing towards the wind felt quite awkward, so I think I rather built the VIT and launch dead into the wind... The new model with Eggleston airfoil will for sure have a VIT and AR.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on April 11, 2011, 09:22:07 AM
Thanks Tapio. I think Mike still carries them.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: CometsGallor on April 18, 2011, 02:10:58 AM
This is a new P-30 I built and test flew a couple weeks ago. The wind got a bit strong before I could get it working well, but I did learn a few things about my design that needed to be improved. Now I am building a new fuselage and stab for version 2. I will try and refine the original as well and working on the new parts.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on April 18, 2011, 01:26:18 PM
Very neat and practical.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FF Bruce on April 18, 2011, 05:05:13 PM
I like it, what changes will you be making? I do have one question, and a lot of people do it, why the round rudder when all the other parts are square?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: CometsGallor on April 19, 2011, 02:28:23 AM
FF Bruce,

Thanks, one of the changes will be a new elliptical stab that will complement the rudder. I was trying several things I had never tried on the stab, and it is a bit heavy but I was amazed at the torsional stiffness. The outer frame is all laminated and that was a first for me, and the geodetic (sp?) construction was also a first. Both are worth further developing my skills on. I am also building a new fuselage using warren truss construction since an article in an older NFFS symposium publication suggested I might be able to build one lighter and stronger than a rolled tube. I had a fun time developing a tool to help cut all the truss pieces consistently. I will add a picture of it when the bones are done. I also needed to improve my DT wing release since it showed the potential to not fully release, and that could be a bad thing. I am not sure there is all that much science in my changes, I just really like building and trying new things.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on April 29, 2011, 03:50:56 AM
Flying, on the other hand, was another thing with a "fixed" model (no VIT, no AR). Launching into a 6 to 8 m/s wind means that the initial speed is much faster than the model is ever trimmed for. My first launch into the wind and 40 degrees up looked OK to start with, but then the model stalled (it was not even on the back), and dived into the ground. The following 2 launches were safer, but this time I launched the right of the wind, and the models made half a turn and spend some 5 seconds of flight time flying level, before catching up with the wind and starting to climb. I think for such high winds a VIT would have helped a lot, so that the model could have tolerated such high initial speed better.

Last night did some test flights with the same model, but in calm. Again, the model banked seriously during the burst. First I thought that it is only as I wind now properly (with the new torque meter), but looking more closely I noticed that my wing had warped, with wash-out on the inboard section. Bad! Luckily with a 2-piece wing I could add some packing to get it overall rather flat, and the next test flight was much better. It is funny how much more altitude you can gain when the model is climbing upwards all the climb phase! :-) A VIT might be of some help, but the trim was pretty good even with tail feathers fixed.

The towline-winch winder was working OK.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: CometsGallor on April 30, 2011, 07:34:53 PM
I finished a new version of the P-30 I started last month. I decided to make everything new but the wing and I tried lots of techniques new to me. Because one of our club members had given a great presentation on building geodetic structures, I made a new stab using that technique. I also wanted an elliptical shape so I tried laminating the outer frame. On the fuselage I wanted to try a warren truss, based on a great article in an old NFFS symposium publication. I had to make some changes to the DT release which resulted in trying to do some building with carbon fiber. Because the truss was so rigid, I covered  it with tissue not polyspan. I am hoping to start some glide testing when the wind stops, with first power flights later this month. The plane is still 12 grams heavy, so next I will work more on weight reduction, hopefully without sacrificing strength.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on April 30, 2011, 07:58:10 PM
CG, that sure is some nice work. Were you able to use lighter wood in the fuselage with that kind of structure. Sure looks like a lot of wood, and looks very strong.

Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on April 30, 2011, 08:02:39 PM
On the fuselage I wanted to try a warren truss, based on a great article in an old NFFS symposium publication.

Which sympo was the article in? Would love to take a look at it.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: CometsGallor on May 01, 2011, 09:33:31 PM
Thanks Caley, I used 7 pound wood in this model, and since it was so strong I will try another with smaller wood. I only have one piece of 6 pound wood so I will try smaller first.  The article was in the 2001 NFFS report, "Finite Element Torsional Stiffness and Buckling Analysis of Large Dawn Unlimited Rubber Model Fuselages" by Jeffery R. Annis.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on May 02, 2011, 06:30:58 AM
It looks even better than the original. I also agree that the fus looks solid. Perhaps the truss members could be lighter in one dimension or as you suggest of softer balsa leaving the longerons the same size and hardness.
That pretty eliptical tail seems to be asking for an eliptical wing of simailar AR to the present wing. It would be a pain to build though.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on May 02, 2011, 10:00:44 AM
Quote
It would be a pain to build though

Not in the slightest. I've built a lot of them - changed to thin laminated edges .... or even a strip of wetted 3/32 sq for a TE on a 30" wing ... and they're very practical and very warp resistant even with straight ribs. With geodetics they'd be totally warp proof but it could be a pain to lay out the ever-changing rib angles in such a shape.

So saying, my early P30 version of the 'Ellipsis' was the least successful of the series even though it flew well and was eventually lost to a forest. Maybe try another sometime to see if it can be improved.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on May 02, 2011, 09:32:43 PM
That does look nice and its a tempting thought.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: CometsGallor on May 02, 2011, 11:14:50 PM
I just tried a few test glides in the back yard with more tests to follow when I move to a more open space, bu the first few tests look like the plane may do ok. It at least gave me enough hope on the design to build another and try to get the weight down to the 40 gram target. I tried putting a very few turns on the motor and even with only twenty or so turns the plane wanted to hold altitude very nicely.

Applehoney: I did use 4 lamination layers of 1/32 to build the stab frame and like you said it was very rigid. The wood I used was heavier than it should have been, so I will build another with lighter wood. When you made your lamination, what type of adhesive did you use?  I think I will try one without  the geodetic, or maybe partial geodetic. I think I would like to target for a stab no more than 3.5 grams. The current one is 5.3 grams. I will also work on some elliptical outer wing panels to balance the aesthetics.  I am a bit concerned about giving up too much lifting surface and or sacrificing the aspect ratio just for the sake of looks. There seems to be a great deal of work done by many outstanding fliers that supports the higher aspect ratio configurations. Then again perhaps a new combination of airfoil / aspect ratio / plan form is capable of raising the bar. I love the sense of opportunity with this hobby.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on May 03, 2011, 12:03:06 AM
I have been working on this P-30 timer for the new model, but decided that I'll use my old model as a testbed. The idea started from clying CLG's last summer and consistently losing them in the grass, why not rig the timer with a beeper instead of a LED to show the settings and status, and then double the beeper as a locator after the flight. Also the new small linear servos from China seemed useful for the purpose. The finished prototype is a bit too heavy to use in CLG I think (or then again, maybe not, have to try!): the timer and servo weight 3.8 grams, and the 50mAh battery in the pic is 1.8 to 1.9 grams, so it is 5.7 AUW. A smaller battery could reduce the weight a little, but then I'm afraid that if the model is "lost" for a longer period, the battery would be drained below safe lower limit and damaged. There is no room to make fancy battery monitoring features to such minimal timer. This timer uses the same Palm software as my F1A and F1B timers to set the settings, there is a maximum of 7 servo positions for the flight (plus DT). In addition to a single servo, also external RDT can be connected (but I'm not sure if I want to risk a RDT RX on a P-30!).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on May 03, 2011, 12:54:43 AM
Comets - laminations made with Ambroid. Have since found that one strip of wetted 3/32sq or 1/8sq is more than sufficient for TE's on recent Mulvihill wings, dependent upon span/size..

Aspect ratio - not too much you can do on a P30 as you are limited to span and wing area is important. I find that low aspects do fly very well - check out my 'Ellipsis' in the rubber model section


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: CometsGallor on May 03, 2011, 01:12:33 AM
Applehoney: Thanks for the Ambroid tip. I will try that on my next lamination. I saw your 'Ellipsis' picture posted earlier and I really like the design alot. Some information I read in NFFS annual reports suggested that the larger root chord limited the altitude due to more drag, so I was concerned. I had started to build a larger chord wing  but decided to stick a bit closer to the models that I understood to be currently competitive. I do not have enough experience under my belt to get too radical yet. But it sounds like I would not be too likely to create a nonflying disaster. I will be and sure and post my next wing effort.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on May 10, 2011, 06:52:51 AM
my last P30


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on May 10, 2011, 07:38:32 AM
Nice looking drawings!  Have they flown?  The values shown for the wing panels, are they for wing twist?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on May 10, 2011, 08:20:39 AM
this is rear view. Tail is leaning for left glide circle.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on May 10, 2011, 08:56:41 AM
some photos


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dosco on May 10, 2011, 09:23:53 AM
some photos

I like your airfield!!



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on May 23, 2011, 01:57:23 AM
Inspired by getting the timer working, and also building a VIT system for my old model, I got onto building the new model again. The wing attaches to the pylon the same way as a larger model tailplane goes to tail holder, with the joiner pin locating into a hook on the pylon. Rubber bands will pull the wing forward against the hook, and the incidence is set at the aft of the pylon. When whole wing pivots up for DT, also the wing is in two parts to pack more compactly. In the last pic is the VIT from the old model, from 1mm carbon sheet mostly.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on May 23, 2011, 09:38:52 AM
That is a really neat setup Tapio!  Is the wing TE simlpy a carbon strip (3 x 1mm)?  I'm getting more an more stoked to try a P-30 (even tho my field will require very short DT's)!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dosco on May 23, 2011, 09:40:43 AM
That is a really neat setup Tapio!  Is the wing TE simlpy a carbon strip (3 x 1mm)?

Sure looks that way...a la Wakefield.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: CometsGallor on May 23, 2011, 09:54:43 PM
The new P-30 got it first flights this past weekend at Eloy and was doing ok. During one of the test flights I caught a nice thermal and was pleased to see it stayed in the thermal nicely and the new DT system worked perfect. So it looks like the model has enough potential for a focused effort on weight control. Unfortunately flying was cut short by a pilot error that resulted in a bent prop shaft.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on May 23, 2011, 11:39:37 PM
That is a really neat setup Tapio!  Is the wing TE simlpy a carbon strip (3 x 1mm)?

Sure looks that way...a la Wakefield.

2*1 actually. Had to buy 3*1, but I used my miniature tabletop saw (with diamond blade) to cut it down. The assembly was also quite straightforward: I had the ribs cut so that the underside part was still attached with some tiny tabs (as lasercut parts typically are), this doubled to keep the ribs together over the tubular spar, and also provide a platform for the TE (the underpart extend underneath the TE). So I put some tiny bits of tape onto the bottom part (slipped them a little between the rib and underpart) to prevent the TE being glued to the underpart, tacked the TE into ribs, added carbon caps. Then only when the whole panel is firmly glued (LE and most of all the tubular spar in place), I cut the panel loose, flipped it over, and added the underside caps.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on May 24, 2011, 06:50:13 AM
my new model for this season :)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on June 02, 2011, 05:34:11 AM
short video from test flight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbf-P5q1VBU


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dosco on June 03, 2011, 03:21:21 PM
2*1 actually. Had to buy 3*1, but I used my miniature tabletop saw (with diamond blade) to cut it down.

Tapio, I presume your horizontal stab is fabricated in a similar fashion? Are you using 2mm x 1mm for the TE of the H. stab?



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 03, 2011, 04:34:15 PM
My F1B stabs use 1.5 mm x 0.5 mm carbon fiber for the TE. For P-30 I think that even 1.0 x 0.5 mm might work. It's really determined by the shrinking force of the mylar covering. A friend of mine has used 0.8 mm diameter carbon rod for a stabilizer trailing edge and it worked perfectly. 0.25 mil (7 gm/sqr/M) mylar and no heavier for a stab.

My F1B wings use carbon sheet cut to 3.0 mm x 0.5 mm at the root, tapering to 1.5 mm x 0.5 mm at the tip.

See the attached drawing for my new P-30 structure. The trailing edges for the wing are 1.5 mm x 0.5 mm tapering to 1.0 mm x 0.5 mm. The stab is 1.0 mm x 0.5 mm only. This is more than strong enough for P-30.

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on June 04, 2011, 12:23:29 AM
2*1 actually. Had to buy 3*1, but I used my miniature tabletop saw (with diamond blade) to cut it down.

Tapio, I presume your horizontal stab is fabricated in a similar fashion? Are you using 2mm x 1mm for the TE of the H. stab?

Yes. For the current stab I use 3mm ribs at ends and middle, a couple of 1.5mm ribs in between and riblets in front. Only have caps to tie the TE at the 3mm ribs, but it seems to suffice. LE is 3*3 balsa and spar 2*2 balsa. See the left pic for details.

As Tony pointed out, it is the strength against covering shrinkage that is of importance rather than strength. Then again, would saving 100mg on your tailplane weight make the model fly better? Barely.

While covering the wings with 10 mil (F1A tailplane stuff) mylar, I ran into troubles while the covering pulled and warped the root of the wing seriously. After some tinkering around it seemed to me that it is not the ribs that give in (there is a plywood rib at the root), but rather the whole spar tube bends. In order to spread the covering loads to a larger area, I added two diagonals, and these seem to cure the problem. Of course another solution would be to use lighter mylar that does not tighten so much, but my previous model uses 5 mil mylar (F1B tail stuff), and it  tears quite easily, so this 10 mil stuff  seems to be better. As it seems to be the top side mylar that bends the wings, one option could be to use lighter mylar on top and heavier on the bottom.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on June 09, 2011, 03:20:49 AM
 ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 11, 2011, 02:37:47 AM
My only response to this thread.... What a bunch of overkill?!....

OtF'er


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 11, 2011, 11:22:01 AM
My only response to this thread.... What a bunch of overkill?!....

OtF'er


You're kidding, right? People are having fun building airplanes that will last longer, fly better, and look better, and all you can do is slam them for it?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Zeiss Ikon on June 11, 2011, 01:15:28 PM
My only response to this thread.... What a bunch of overkill?!....

OtF'er


You're kidding, right? People are having fun building airplanes that will last longer, fly better, and look better, and all you can do is slam them for it?

Actually, to a large extent I agree that extensive use of carbon in a P-30 is overkill.  What do we gain by building a wing that can double as a prybar for unsticking your Jeep when you get into the "mucky" area at the bottom of the flying field?  My 94% Sparky handily demonstrates that one can build a sturdy and very streamlined model (that actually looks like an airplane) and come in well under weight without any reinforcement from modern materials -- adding all that carbon doesn't (IMO) make the model more durable, it just makes it more expensive.  P-30 was intended as an entry level class -- but models with this much carbon (and maybe boron as well), VIT/auto-rudder/flapper setups, Gizmo Geezer front ends, etc. make it seem too complicated and expensive for beginners, who may not realize that a One Night 28 or Souper 30 can be fully competitive if there's the least bit of lift around.

The only advantage I see with extensive use of carbon fiber is that a model will hold trims better -- but if the cost and learning curve are pushing newcomers out of the class, is it really worth it?  Maybe it's time for a "Limited P-30" class -- along the lines of Limited Penny Plane, with limitations on materials and gizmos (say, no carbon fiber, Kevlar, or boron, no in-flight movable surfaces other than for DT, and only ramp freewheels) -- so the "win at any cost" mentality doesn't make the class inaccessible for those to whom a One Night 28 is still a complex and difficult model (as it would have been to me at, say, twelve years of age).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 11, 2011, 02:49:24 PM
Carbon fiber is not needed to make a competitive P30. However, I use a lot of carbon fiber simply because models stay in trim. Carbon is easy to work with, and cheap in the quantities we use. Much easier to use a little bit of carbon then to find contest grade balsa imo. And I never, ever use tissue of any kind for the same reason (models covered in mylar stay in trim).

An all composite P-30 and an all balsa P-30 of the same design are always on near equal footing because of the prop. The prop levels the playing field. That's the beauty of the class. No need to go off tilt about making new rules to keep out the experts and all that nonsense. The existing rules allow anyone to compete with virtually any model that fits within the rules. If you want an event that requires the use of stick and tissue then I'd suggest there are plenty available (FAC for example).

Don't try and take away my mylar just because you don't like it! ;D

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on June 11, 2011, 04:20:43 PM
I have to agree with Zeiss and OT'f  that P30 is being taken far from its original intention -  easy-to-build, easy-to-fly simple airplanes for the novice to produce with a good chance of success.

As Tony says rightly - the common prop is the leveller. To a degree  ...    however the higher-tech stable structures with developed airfoils that would likely be impractical in all-balsa do and will give a performance edge over the simple airplane and I feel that the newcomer could see one or two of these, look back at his first P30 and be discouraged from further involvement.

The P30 event at the September   'Great Grape Gathering'  is restricted to 'locked-down' airframes and gearboxes are banned. The likelihood of models arriving with multi-functions and gears is very slim but ... the point is made.    Maybe from this small start such restrictions will spread further afield.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 11, 2011, 05:14:21 PM
High tech structures might give a performance edge over all balsa, but not much. I don't consider Mylar "high tech", it's been in use for perhaps 50 years now? But I digress. I have no problem with a locked down event. I would lose interest if the rules of an event limited one to use only balsa and tissue. It would suit some people to a tee I'm sure. Just not me.



Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Zeiss Ikon on June 11, 2011, 05:26:43 PM
Don't try and take away my mylar just because you don't like it!

I would lose interest if the rules of an event limited one to use only balsa and tissue.

I'm not suggesting eliminating hi-tech materials and techniques from P-30 -- I'm suggesting creating a separate class with the same basic rules except banning certain expensive performance enhancements and techniques with steep learning curves.  The analogy to Penny Plane vs. Limited Penny Plane is exact; any LPP model can be flown in Penny Plane (though it's very unlikely to be competitive; times differ by around 2:1 last I checked).  Similarly, any "Limited P-30" model could fly in full-out P-30, and with better chances than LPP in Penny, since thermals and maxes can let a model with half the dead-air time win on air picking.  The point is to give beginners something where they aren't virtually certain (in a large enough contest, at least) to be beaten out on the basis of technology, and to a lesser extent to make budget less of a competitive factor (yes, contest grade balsa costs more than the R/C wood from the LHS, but not that much more in P-30 quantities).  Experts, if they choose to compete in "Limited P-30", will most likely still win -- but they (you!) will be spending most of their effort on the models that aren't legal in the beginner class, I'd hope, rather than looking at "Limited P-30" as just another place to collect trophies.

BTW, it's also discouraging to beginners to build the best model they know how and get a 45 to 50 second dead-air time, when experts are getting 90 seconds in dead air -- having a separate, limited class that's of less interest to the experts gives a less daunting initial goal...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 11, 2011, 06:26:57 PM
Carbon fiber is not needed to make a competitive P30. However, I use a lot of carbon fiber simply because models stay in trim. Carbon is easy to work with, and cheap in the quantities we use. Much easier to use a little bit of carbon then to find contest grade balsa imo. And I never, ever use tissue of any kind for the same reason (models covered in mylar stay in trim).

This is it right here. There is no extra difficulty in using the modern materials, and in fact I find it easier. There are no warps to contend with, the airplanes are stronger (this is a huge advantage--you can fly a composite P-30 in winds that would take that pretty ol' Sparky and shred it to pieces), and let's be realistic--the building time is WAAAAY shorter. OT'F constantly harps that composites and rolled tubes gain nothing. Try slamming that beloved Majestyk against a fence, then do the same with mine. One will be fit for the trash, the other goes on flying (there's no carbon in my current one either, so it's still rather weak compared to what's in this thread). The old box fuselages take forever to build, while I've been known to whip out an entire rolled tube fuse in less than two hours including the time it spends drying over the stove.

Another advantage we see in this thread is that the carbon tube spars actually negate the benefits of geodetic surfaces, so you have a 100% warp-immune wing without the fancy rib layout I personally use. All you need is a drill bit and some pins to prep the ribs for it. Side benefit is of course a spar with no webbing that is strong enough to stand on, and hence handle intense conditions (like flying in the East in spring time, or worse, the UK). And you can do all this while still weighing less than 40 g. If you're willing to sacrifice a little strength for weight, you can also throw in a timer which needs no fuse and then top it off with a cheap radio tracker unit like mine.

I'm sorry, but "Limited P-30" is a silly idea. P-30 is the most popular outdoor class on earth, and the increased use of composites is only feeding interest in that class as people see how inexpensively and easily you can build a super-durable, reliable airplane.

Those who keep building P-30's the old way are fine to do so, but please leave the rest of us alone and quit fussing that the rules should be changed. It makes about as much sense as showing up to team selection with a microfilm covered F1D and fussing at the other fliers for using plastic film on the grounds that our models don't look as pretty and involved special techniques to prep the film for use. There's a total failure to recognize that y'all are the ones who are doing it the hard way. Tissue is harder to use and less durable than mylar just as microfilm is tougher to use and less durable than polyester. The same case can be made for the other aspects involved.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 11, 2011, 06:33:12 PM
I'm not suggesting eliminating hi-tech materials and techniques from P-30 -- I'm suggesting creating a separate class with the same basic rules except banning certain expensive performance enhancements and techniques with steep learning curves.  

We do not need another outdoor beginner's class. The learning curve of these 'enhancements' is an illusion. They actually make it much easier, and if the complaining group were willing to just give these new materials a try, they'd find that it's nothing to complain about. This is not change for the sake of change. It really does have purpose. It's good and y'all need to give it a try before claiming it's beyond you, unnecessary, too expensive, or whatever. It is none of those things.

Of course the same people claim that indoor has gotten too hard, that F1D is beyond beginners, etc. I do believe I've disproven that one... :D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on June 11, 2011, 06:40:02 PM
I never mentioned mylar ......

The point is, Joshua, that P30 is progressing beyond a simple novice class.   An individual with - say - a FA Moth, Lancer or a MiniMax under his belt and with a desire to build something still simple but of better performance will not have the knowledge, access or ability to tackle a model such as you so vociferously support.  He manages his Sooper 30 okay and then finds how inferior in performance it is with your hi-tech machine ...   and likely transfers his interests elsewhere in modelling or just plain quits.  

Your statement that 'we' do not 'need' another class is'nt relevant for should such ever come into existence it would not be of any consequence to you - presumably you would have no interest in participating in such with a lowly balsa model now that you have gathered so much expertise with other materials.   However it is very possible that some of those flying in such an event would, in due course, progress further into more hi-tech airframes .. and others remain content to build and fly simple inexpensive models together on an even basis.

There is something to be said for both sides and both are worthy of consideration.  Though hardly a fair comparison one could look back at a time when a Wakefield was within the basic ability of any model builder, rather than the present lower percentage who have skills and tooling to make use of composites and/or purchase RTF models.   I could not forsee the latter being applicable to P30 in the future but I'd hate to see the class slowly diminish in attraction in a similar manner.

Please note I am NOT advocating a 'limited' all-balsa Wakefield event!   ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 11, 2011, 06:50:12 PM
There is one item that's being forgotten--kit availability. This actually is a valid problem. I know of four kits for decent P-30's--Clint Brooks', the two Burdov kits, and the Bob White design. They are all overpriced for a beginner because they are all ARF's. There is nothing to fill the gap between the outdated ladder box fuselage P-30's and the modern ones with the whole fuselage assembled and all the ribs cut out and everything else ready for glueing up or even mostly assembled. There's a 200% cost increase in most cases. We need to see a kit for a composite P-30 that gives the materials, maybe even with the fuse pre-formed and glued, but with everything else at most laser cut so that it can be cranked out for a profit at $30-35 or so. You could even just throw in the fuselage blank and some silkspan and say "follow these instructions and wrap it around a pool stick until dry."

I'm trying to think of an affordable P-30 kit I can actually recommend...I'm coming up dry...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on June 11, 2011, 07:20:02 PM
Quote
I'm trying to think of an affordable P-30 kit I can actually recommend...I'm coming up dry...

Exactly. You're thinking 'composite' and they're too expensive.  But there are a number of all-balsa kits and plans available which are affordable for the novice and general flyer and that is where a  basic interest lies.  The ladderbox fuselage may be outdated in your eyes but many are very comfortable  with it and some may well progress to rolled tubes.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 11, 2011, 08:17:56 PM
Exactly. You're thinking 'composite' and they're too expensive. 

Nope. Only a modern design. I could not find a single modern P-30 out there for less than $55 (Ikara Peewee--a zero composite P-30). As a cross check, I ran some numbers proving that I could produce a composite P-30 for $40-45 with a very, very comfortable profit margin.

The ladderbox fuselage may be outdated in your eyes but many are very comfortable  with it and some may well progress to rolled tubes.

But the point is that it's hard for a beginner to make a ladderbox fuse. They take a long time to build (at least 5 hours for me, and you know well that I build faster than almost anyone else on this forum), and require the builder to cut out a pile of sticks, tediously glue them together, join fuse halves together, and keep that whole thing fairly straight, and then the have to glue tissue all over it after they've done all that. And it requires constant patching if you fly anywhere that doesn't have lots of nice grass like Geneseo or Muncie. My point is that I cannot recommend a ladder box P-30 to a beginner. If I'm helping the beginner, I'll give him my own design, and if he's going to be on his own, I'll have to recommend an expensive modern one to ensure his success because I cannot expect today's beginner to be able to produce a P-30 like that on his own, and then he's got to deal with unstable structures, too (parallel ribs are structurally unstable..that's all there is to it).

If we want to talk about turn-offs, here's one: a spectator asks you how you get one of those cute planes. You tell him he has to build it himself, and he needs to build two fuselage sides out of these little sticks that have to be cut out, then join them together, and finally cover it up with tissue and then there's flying surfaces and fittings and a flame on the tail. I explain to my spectator that he has to build his own plane to compete, but that all he has to do is build the wings and tail, and the fuselage is just a hunk of wood that you wet and wrap around a dowel, and it only takes a couple hours to make, most of which is drying time. I further explain that it'll last for years of abuse and can go swimming without ill effect. Which one do you think is more likely to take up the hobby?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Zeiss Ikon on June 11, 2011, 08:56:00 PM
Which one do you think is more likely to take up the hobby?

I guess it depends whether their interest was drawn by a model airplane like the ones they might have built (with mixed or limited success) as kids, twenty to forty years ago or like the ones they've seen in their granddad's stash of old M.A.N. and Flying Models magazines -- or by seeing something that looks like it came out of a toy factory and they ought to be able to buy, fly, and then trash when they're tired of it.

To me, the tube fuselages and plastic coverings look like something factory-built; stick and tissue looks handmade.

BTW, those who claim composites, plastic covering, and such are easier need to explain to me why we always start by recommending a Hangar Rat, Guillow Cadet, Sig Cub, etc. as a starter model -- why would even a Lancer be any good in training to put carbon cap strips on ribs and cover with mylar?  After all, the Lancer starts with cutting loose all those die-cut parts and cutting and installing all those verticals and cross pieces, mounting parallel ribs with multiple spars, and covering with tissue -- all skills I hear being decried as obsolete and unserviceable.  No, we need to start those new kids off with $85 "kits" that require a couple hours to glue together (assuming they don't glue themselves to their model with the CA).  Budgets?  Who could possibly want to fly model airplanes if they can't afford to drop $100 a month on their hobby?  And when was the Builder of Model rule repealed?

I can still buy balsa suitable for P-30 models at the local R/C shop or even Hobby Lobby (which is mainly a craft store); I can get silkspan at the LHS, and stick it on with thinned Elmer's or glue stick; applied wet, it'll take up the most horrendous curves without wrinkling -- and the model building books in the local library cover this technique; they don't say a thing about "modern" materials or how to use or apply them (they hardly mention CA glues).  I don't have a local source for carbon strip, tube, or tow, or mylar covering film and the adhesive required to attach it -- I'd have to buy that stuff on the internet.  How's a beginner going to know where to look?  Search engines don't find the products inside a web store.

Come to that, I don't even have access to a pool cue.  Do I have to be rich enough to own my own pool table to start flying P-30 now?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 11, 2011, 10:20:31 PM
Which one do you think is more likely to take up the hobby?

I guess it depends whether their interest was drawn by a model airplane like the ones they might have built (with mixed or limited success) as kids, twenty to forty years ago or like the ones they've seen in their granddad's stash of old M.A.N. and Flying Models magazines -- or by seeing something that looks like it came out of a toy factory and they ought to be able to buy, fly, and then trash when they're tired of it.

The latter is all most people have ever seen. That's just the way it is.

BTW, those who claim composites, plastic covering, and such are easier need to explain to me why we always start by recommending a Hangar Rat, Guillow Cadet, Sig Cub, etc. as a starter model -- why would even a Lancer be any good in training to put carbon cap strips on ribs and cover with mylar?  After all, the Lancer starts with cutting loose all those die-cut parts and cutting and installing all those verticals and cross pieces, mounting parallel ribs with multiple spars, and covering with tissue -- all skills I hear being decried as obsolete and unserviceable.  

Sorry to be blunt, but I’d not recommend any of those to a beginner. The old Phantom Flash is the colsest I've come to that stuff, and I've had good success with coaching people though it. The only one I’ve ever recommended to anyone is the Rat, and those are notoriously difficult to get trimmed for reliable performance. It’s an indoor ship anyway… I have, however, recommended the Peck Prairie Bird for lack of anything else…I’m more inclined toward the DeBut these days because it’s more reliable, but we’re tracking down the road of FAC models which is most of what I coach people into and the problems I mentioned still remain with these kits. There aren’t any good kits I know of for introducing beginners to composite construction. Additionally, I don’t believe any of the P-30 kits I mentioned use cap strips, and those are not appropriate for beginners—too fiddly and structurally unnecessary. I’d recommend Starlink’s P-20 kit, but it’s a little pricey and not useful for anything other than sport flying. Definitely an easier build than the aforementioned. Half the reason you’re scared off by composites is that no one is showing how it’s done. I figured most of it out for myself after much trepidation, and much like learning spins in a Cessna, my concluding reaction was “that’s all there is to it?”
I use indoor methods for attaching mylar. It’s easy. Easier than tissue. It does wrinkle if you mess up, but I don’t much care about looks provided it flies well. I normally use produce bags for plastic covering on outdoor ships….prefer it over mylar because punctures stay isolated.

No, we need to start those new kids off with $85 "kits" that require a couple hours to glue together (assuming they don't glue themselves to their model with the CA).  Budgets?  Who could possibly want to fly model airplanes if they can't afford to drop $100 a month on their hobby?  And when was the Builder of Model rule repealed?
 

$85? That’s my modeling budget for a year! Did you not see my complaints that those kits are too expensive?

Nowhere did I mention BOM. All of the kits described are BOM compliant, including the ARF’s (unfortunately).

I can still buy balsa suitable for P-30 models at the local R/C shop or even Hobby Lobby (which is mainly a craft store); I can get silkspan at the LHS

Most people can’t. I’ve never been to a LHS that even carried silkspan, and have now seen several that didn’t even have balsa. Like it or not, internet ordering is the way it’s gonna be.

Come to that, I don't even have access to a pool cue.  Do I have to be rich enough to own my own pool table to start flying P-30 now?

It was an example of the ideal. I also mentioned dowels, or you could use a pipe, broomhandle, whatever. Don’t make this harder than it has to be.

Look, I’m on your side on this. I’m doing my level best to show why these modern airplanes are so good and demonstrate that they are not expensive or difficult. Please don’t go on the defensive. You’ve done so and missed numerous pivotal points of what I’ve been trying to say as shown above.

Bear in mind that I’m coming at this from the perspective of someone who has put a lot of mental exercize into figuring out how to make the most difficult classes of FF accessible to us mere mortals. I didn’t go and enter two of the three hardest indoor events at USIC just for my own benefit. I also wanted to see if it was possible for someone to do it cheaply. I’ve concluded that it is. Though it’s probably not of interest to you and beyond the topic here, I could have you flying F1D competitively in 6 months. Why that is important is that I’m trying to find resources and promote techniques and understanding to help you and everyone else break the sterotype of modern freeflight design so that we can introduce beginners to good modern models which will give them early success and retain them in the sport instead of turning them away as the Guillow’s products have.

This is the same reason I took the time to build a Guillow’s Typhoon as an FAC Scale model and recorded the modifications necessary to make it legal and competitive—to make it clear that this stuff isn’t as hard as people perceive it to be.

One final thought: we are marketting this hobby toward the wrong people. I've had success with only one group of people who are willing to even take up the hobby and put forth the time needed to learn--homeschoolers. The average young person will not show an interest. The average homeschooler will, and is likely to show up at the next flying session with a scratch built winder in the process.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on June 11, 2011, 10:23:51 PM
As a competent newbie at P-30, I'd like to think my opinion here should mean at least a little.  My opinion is that P-30 is just fine as it is.  There are a sufficient variety of models available to suit most people's abilities, and high-tech doesn't provide a huge advantage in performance.  There could be some easier-to-build models of modest price, perhaps, since I certainly agree that a ladder fuse is somewhat tedious--a lot of work for something that just has to handle the motor and be someplace to mount the flight surfaces.  But while time-consuming, they're not hard to build.  I managed to be somewhat competitive with my first P-30, which was an overweight One Nite 28.  I managed to get it flying good enough to eke out 2 minutes in dead air, until I created a problem and it went out of trim.

As an aside, I consider the Gizmo Geezer a simplification rather than a complication.  It makes thrust adjustments easier, and makes it easy to wind.

I've considered a number of these "arguments" in deciding what to build this year.  Living in a wet climate the mylar is attractive.  However, I'm still a bit scared of an X-rib or geodetic structure.  I don't have a drill press, but I've still considered a carbon spar.  I think I've settled on another traditional-type model with a rolled fuse, and use tissue over mylar to get weather proofing and structural stiffness, and still hopefully fit within my build capabilities.  (I'm likely going to build one of FFBruce's designs, since all his models are so good.)

Bottom line, one can be competitive in P30 with a traditional model, or one can go high tech and maybe gain a small advantage.  To me, this is a feature of the class, not a bug.  It shows beginners that they can have a good performing airplane that is fairly easy to build, and perhaps similar to what they did as a kid if they are an adult getting back into free flight.  Or, if somebody prefers high tech or ARF, that is also OK.   Beginners can be competitive with experts, if their trimming and flying skills are adequate.  And the experts are generally willing to help the beginners.

P-30 is great--a class where people of different interests and experiences can fly together, and compete together, with no particular technology having a huge advantage.  What could be better?

--Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 11, 2011, 10:47:01 PM
Very well said, Bill!!!

I've considered a number of these "arguments" in deciding what to build this year.  Living in a wet climate the mylar is attractive.  However, I'm still a bit scared of an X-rib or geodetic structure.  I don't have a drill press, but I've still considered a carbon spar.  I think I've settled on another traditional-type model with a rolled fuse, and use tissue over mylar to get weather proofing and structural stiffness, and still hopefully fit within my build capabilities.  

X-ribs/geodetic aren't hard. I cut a bunch of rib blanks the height and length of the rib set (I don't make a lot of tapered wings) and pin them together and plane them down to about the right cross section. Those that cross are split off in pairs and one each cut in half to go on either side of the other. Any tapering is done by cutting at the TE and trimming the underside of the rib. I don't care much about an exact airfoil and have yet to see any reason to change.

Carbon tube spars make things easier...no X-ribs needed, so you just cut out your blanks as before and hack them to about the right shape. I don't use a drill for such things...just use progressively larger and larger pieces of Al tubing sharpened on the end to get the right size hole going through all the ribs.

Yes, I do build like a redneck. I don't use jigs, and I build F1D wings with CA in mid air. I cover Moffetts with produce bags, leave planes full of wrinkles, cover jumbo scale models with junk tissue from Christmas, and so on. Somehow that junk will still get you a Blue Max...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on June 11, 2011, 10:52:45 PM
Quote
it's hard for a beginner to make a ladderbox fuse

If that be so then there would be far fewer of us.  Almost everyone as a novice, started with a ladderbox fuselage and we did fine. You included?

By the way I did say somewhere above that some newcomers would progress to rolled fuselages

It's probably fair to say that most F/F'ers enjoy building and I've no recent recollection of anyone complaining it's difficult or too tedious tp build a box fuselage.   Well .. maybe one   ;D



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Olbill on June 12, 2011, 12:03:52 AM
The analogy to Penny Plane vs. Limited Penny Plane is exact; any LPP model can be flown in Penny Plane (though it's very unlikely to be competitive; times differ by around 2:1 last I checked).
Not even close to 2:1!

Here are the current AMA records for LPP and Pennyplane
Cat 1 - 16:14, 16:18
Cat 2 - 12:53, 16:41
Cat 3 - 15:38, 17:45
Cat 4 - 19:04, 21:47


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 12, 2011, 08:14:27 AM
>it's hard for a beginner to make a ladderbox fuse

If that be so then there would be far fewer of us.  

I think the few of us there are bears out my point...

Almost everyone as a novice, started with a ladderbox fuselage and we did fine. You included?

By the way I did say somewhere above that some newcomers would progress to rolled fuselages

Yes, I did start that way. I almost gave up over it, having no glue how to get a straight fuselage. I still have no idea how to get  a straight fuselage, but it doesn't bother me anymore.

It would be much easier to progress the other way. A practically one-piece fuselage is a lot easier to deal with than one with 50-100 pieces.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on June 12, 2011, 10:20:38 AM
Quote
I think the few of us there are bears out my point...

Not at all.  My reference was that there would be far fewer modellers in general if basic box fuselages were difficult to build - not to the number here on this forum or even thread - most of whom are quite comfortable with such anyway.

Quote
I still have no idea how to get  a straight fuselage,

Strange ...  with a few supporting triangles, etc I find no problem with - for example - a 3' Mulvihill fuselage.    Back in the dimmer past some built 5'-6' fuselages for Wakefield and obviously they were straight.    A little patience is all that is required

Quote
A practically one-piece fuselage is a lot easier to deal with than one with 50-100 pieces.

I'm sure it is. But some of us are in less of a hurry and actually like to build .. .to take pride in one's ability to produce an excellent result regardless of effort involved.
 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Zeiss Ikon on June 12, 2011, 11:51:07 AM
Whatever you consider easier, there's still a technique to be learned.  With stick-built fuselages, the techniques are cutting/sanding to exact fit, building side frames on top of each other and with matched longerons (consecutive strips from the same sheet are usually just right), and getting the formers or cross braces aligned correctly so the tail end pulls together straight.  I've almost got that mastered after building about five such models in the past twenty-five years --  I expect my next one, number three if you discount the two in the 1980s, to be near-perfect.  By contrast, the one time I've tried to roll a fuselage I wound up with a tube that weighed several times what a ladder-built fuselage does (even after covering), not perfectly straight by any stretch, and with no good way to attach the tail surfaces without adding a lot of extra weight where it's least welcome, and it took me about six hours to build -- I can do a ladder-built P-30 fuselage in under three, not counting breaks for glue to dry, but including time to strip the wood from sheet (which takes about ten minutes for all the wood I need).  If I were building the same design repeatedly, cutting fixtures and a frame jig would very roughly cut the time in half.  The only advantage I see to a rolled fuselage is it's less prone to damage if I break a motor, but a blast tube solves that problem nicely.

The main advantage of recommending traditional models to beginners is that we can also recommend books that give very good detail on how to build them -- Bill Winter, Keith Laumer, Don Ross, all show details and techniques for stick-built frames.  I don't recall ever seeing a publication I might expect to find in a library on how to roll a fuselage or how to apply Mylar -- for that matter, I've only seen about one web page for each, the latter without any explanation of what's better about Mylar or tissue over Mylar compared to straight Esaki with doped-in adjustments, and web pages are hard to recommend at a flying site (my cell phone may be able to load the page, but won't allow me to forward a link).  I honestly think no one has been writing this stuff down since about the time plastic coverings and rolled fuselages came along; almost the only way to even learn these techniques exist is to see a model built with them, and then you pretty well have to ask the builder how it was done (and try to remember the explanation well enough over a period of days or weeks to reproduce the technique).

BTW, I won't argue that Gizmo Geezer doesn't simplify building and trimming -- but it does make a propeller (including thrust bearing, nose block, and hook) cost $10 (or much more if you're outside the USA), compared to under $3 for propeller, bearing, button, and commercial shaft (save fifty cents if you buy music wire and bend your own shaft).  I can build an entire P-30 the old way for about $10 in wood, tissue, wire, etc., and on my budget, money is more important than time.  And I can build a wing, stab, and rudder(s) with 1940s techniques that will hold its warps over a season or two or three (it's mostly a matter of doping in the warps and using dope that doesn't continue to shrink over time, which method is well documented over the past seventy years).

I don't think stick-built techniques are keeping people out of our hobby; I think that's mainly due to the blister-pack and video game "entertain me" attitude we've built up over the past forty years or less.  Kids now want to be able to unwrap a toy and play with it, then throw it away when it breaks, or spend twenty or thirty hours "beating" a video game instead of building a couple models that they'll still be able to fly in a year.  It's not a fault of our hobby, it's a fault of our society, and rolled fuselages, mylar covering, and carbon fiber aren't going to fix it.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: T Newton Morgan on June 12, 2011, 09:24:57 PM
Well said, Zeis Ikon.

Tom


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 13, 2011, 01:10:07 AM
There is one item that's being forgotten--kit availability. This actually is a valid problem. I know of four kits for decent P-30's--Clint Brooks', the two Burdov kits, and the Bob White design. They are all overpriced for a beginner because they are all ARF's. There is nothing to fill the gap between the outdated ladder box fuselage P-30's and the modern ones with the whole fuselage assembled and all the ribs cut out and everything else ready for glueing up or even mostly assembled. There's a 200% cost increase in most cases. We need to see a kit for a composite P-30 that gives the materials, maybe even with the fuse pre-formed and glued, but with everything else at most laser cut so that it can be cranked out for a profit at $30-35 or so. You could even just throw in the fuselage blank and some silkspan and say "follow these instructions and wrap it around a pool stick until dry."

I'm trying to think of an affordable P-30 kit I can actually recommend...I'm coming up dry...

This is not a valid problem for anyone that I know of, except YOU! ........ Wake-up Joshua, you're having a wet dream.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 13, 2011, 01:14:24 AM
My only response to this thread.... What a bunch of overkill?!....

OtF'er


You're kidding, right? People are having fun building airplanes that will last longer, fly better, and look better, and all you can do is slam them for it?

Not a slam, a fact!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 13, 2011, 01:43:17 AM
Carbon fiber is not needed to make a competitive P30. However, I use a lot of carbon fiber simply because models stay in trim. Carbon is easy to work with, and cheap in the quantities we use. Much easier to use a little bit of carbon then to find contest grade balsa imo. And I never, ever use tissue of any kind for the same reason (models covered in mylar stay in trim).

This is it right here. There is no extra difficulty in using the modern materials, and in fact I find it easier. There are no warps to contend with, the airplanes are stronger (this is a huge advantage--you can fly a composite P-30 in winds that would take that pretty ol' Sparky and shred it to pieces), and let's be realistic--the building time is WAAAAY shorter.  OT'F constantly harps that composites and rolled tubes gain nothing. (This is pure Joshua BS) Try slamming that beloved Majestyk against a fence, then do the same with mine. One will be fit for the trash, the other goes on flying (there's no carbon in my current one either, so it's still rather weak compared to what's in this thread). The old box fuselages take forever to build, while I've been known to whip out an entire rolled tube fuse in less than two hours including the time it spends drying over the stove.


Let's not forget that so called ("Beloved") piece of trash and it's flyer, held the National Open P-30 Record for 12 years... (DIP poop!)... Plus the current record holder, didn't fly a compsite constructed model to set the newest one either!!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on June 13, 2011, 01:53:29 AM
A nice tangent this thread is taking. Ok, here is my two cents under the title "overkill". The model is still waiting for the final touches, I need to figure out the pylon position (by low power flights) before glueing it on, but could not start that until I built a few timers during the weekend. Looks like the model will end up around 45 to 46 grams with the digital timer and tracker, so I can pack in a larger battery and even squeeze in the RDT receiver before meeting the 50 grams minimum weight we have here in Finland.

But, by the spirit of the tangent, I'll now step onto the soapbox. Some have said before that using carbon is nonsense and a overkill. I strongly disagree here; in my opinion (and as already mentioned above) building with carbon structures is easier than with balsa. No need for diagonals, just slip the ribs (preferably laser-cut to precise dimensions!) to the carbon tube, drop of cyano and yo are done. With carbon trailing edge, no painstaking triangulating the balsa strip nor numbers of gussets to reinforce the joints, simply tack the TE in place and add small strips oc carbon caps to support the back of the rigs and the rib to TE joint.

Further, some say that gadgets should be banned. I disagree here, too. I find it much easier to trim a model with VIT. No need for hassling with thrust angles, moving CG back to reduce decalage, just keep the tailplane down for 4 seconds, and you get your model climb rather straight for the burst, after that the rest of the climb is easy when the burst is done. Also the gatgetry is dead easy, I recall reading in Aeromodelled in the late 80's, how Dave Hipperson made the VIT hammer from a single piece of piano wire. The bottom had a couple of loops to make it a spring, then a straight sections and a right angle to form the hammer for the tailplane to rest against. Should take a minute to bend and maybe 30 minutes to install.

Finally, did I mention 50 grams minimum weight? We have had that rule here in Finland for maybe 5 years now, and it was the wisest decision we have made in years. adding 10 grams does not harm the performance of the models to mention, but helps to build much sturdier models, and most of all, even beginners are competitive with their models, as they can quite easily meet that target (while building a strong model to 40 grams is much more a challenge).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 13, 2011, 02:10:56 AM
Carbon fiber is not needed to make a competitive P30. However, I use a lot of carbon fiber simply because models stay in trim. Carbon is easy to work with, and cheap in the quantities we use. Much easier to use a little bit of carbon then to find contest grade balsa imo. And I never, ever use tissue of any kind for the same reason (models covered in mylar stay in trim).

This is it right here. There is no extra difficulty in using the modern materials, and in fact I find it easier. There are no warps to contend with, the airplanes are stronger (this is a huge advantage--you can fly a composite P-30 in winds that would take that pretty ol' Sparky and shred it to pieces), and let's be realistic--the building time is WAAAAY shorter.  OT'F constantly harps that composites and rolled tubes gain nothing. (This is pure Joshua BS) Try slamming that beloved Majestyk against a fence, then do the same with mine. One will be fit for the trash, the other goes on flying (there's no carbon in my current one either, so it's still rather weak compared to what's in this thread). The old box fuselages take forever to build, while I've been known to whip out an entire rolled tube fuse in less than two hours including the time it spends drying over the stove.


Let's not forget that so called ("Beloved") piece of trash and it's flyer, held the National Open P-30 Record for 12 years... (DIP poop!)... Plus the current record holder, didn't fly a compsite constructed model to set the newest one either!! I WROTE DIP poop AND I MEANT IT!!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on June 13, 2011, 02:31:07 AM
Hey Thom, how about posting some pictures of your latest P30? I would love to see how you built it.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on June 13, 2011, 06:30:47 AM
Hey guys,
build what turns your crank, fly it and enjoy it as long as it fits the rules...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 13, 2011, 09:22:12 AM
Let's not forget that so called ("Beloved") piece of trash and it's flyer, held the National Open P-30 Record for 12 years... (DIP poop!)... Plus the current record holder, didn't fly a compsite constructed model to set the newest one either!! I WROTE DIP poop AND I MEANT IT!!

About as logical as saying that since the Supersweep held the Cat IV IHLG record for 36 years that we should keep building JLG's an forget composite DLG designs.

Even more so than indoors, outdoor records are about having a good field, good conditions, and being able to pick air. There's a huge luck factor too, and having a particular model doesn't make much difference. Interesting to note that the Nats P-30 winners are much more technologically advanced...

I'm with Tony--quit bashing us and post some photos of your planes.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 13, 2011, 10:04:16 AM
Put me firmly in the "overkill" camp!  ;D ;)
Tapio, your new model looks great! Can't wait to hear about how it flies.

The discussion is interesting, but it sounds as if there are two camps and both have their own opinions. I agree with Joshua, the thread is titled "show us YOUR P-30's", and I for one like to see a wide variety of approaches. Overkill or not....  ::)


Tmat
-overkiller, first class...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 13, 2011, 02:40:48 PM
Let's not forget that so called ("Beloved") piece of trash and it's flyer, held the National Open P-30 Record for 12 years... (DIP S**T!)... Plus the current record holder, didn't fly a compsite constructed model to set the newest one either!!

About as logical as saying that since the Supersweep held the Cat IV IHLG record for 36 years that we should keep building JLG's an forget composite DLG designs.

Even more so than indoors, outdoor records are about having a good field, good conditions, and being able to pick air. There's a huge luck factor too, and having a particular model doesn't make much difference. Interesting to note that the Nats P-30 winners are much more technologically advanced...

I'm with Tony--quit bashing us and post some photos of your planes.

The typical response when we can no longer defend our position. (change the subject) Furthermore Joshua, there was no bashing of us. (others) My bashing was directed strickly to you! You are clearly a Legend... in your own mind.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on June 13, 2011, 03:09:34 PM
I was considering doing the first test hops first before finalizing the gadgets, but got carried away. I eyeballed that there is slight backsweep in the wing, so that if I put the CG at 70% of root rib, I will end up with something like 60+%. Set it there, screwed in decalage that looked about right, and went to the back yard for a couple of hand tosses. Nice floating flight with a gentle hint of right turn, just perfect. So back to the shop to measure: 4mm decalage for 70mm tailplane, which is a tad over 3 degrees. Perfect! So I glued the pylon on, and installed the VIT hammer. While working on it, I also built the AR, so the model is now set for the first test flights. If the wing would just calm down... May be until Saturday that I have time to do any flying, will be busy with other stuff until then.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 13, 2011, 03:25:32 PM
The typical response when we can no longer defend our position. (change the subject) Furthermore Joshua, there was no bashing of us. (others) My bashing was directed strickly to you! You are clearly a Legend... in your own mind.

I did not change the subject. It was merely a continuation of my conflict with your logic. You changed the subject by talking about records, and I simply made a statement about your use of that subject. Please do not blame me for what you did. I was perfectly ok with your changing the subject. Please show me at least some of the respect you expect me to show.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on June 13, 2011, 04:10:00 PM
  Here's a pic of my one and only P-30, a "Rodger Dodger" by Larry Kruse, Flying Models Magazine, NOV. '79.
 I had no touble building it to a decent weight-~ 41.5g, with the extra weight mostly due to the clutch I used which weighs 1.4g. This is a 'Crockett' item sold by lee Campbell. See attachment.
 Built mostly to plan, the only mods I made was to build the pylon with no incidence, use a small, metric, nylon bolt (from Mike Woodhouse) under the stab for adjustments and move the peg location ~ 3 inches aft. A fly-off wing is also used. With this set-up I needed very little down thrust and the Model is a fantastic flyer having turned in many 4 minute+ flights at both Geneseo and Muncie in 2007. The flights at Geneseo were 'warm up' flights for Muncie a week or so hence. At Muncie, my first flight was an EASY MAX with the Model reaching the ground after 4 minutes and 28 seconds. A subsequent migraine took me out of the competition.
 I'm using a 1/8" fuse, from Woodhouse again, that took some getting used to which partly explains the long flights.

 This what Lee Campbell had to say about this Model-"The design is sound and flies well. Some of it's ideas were used in the design process for the souper 30.

Bill Barr had great success with this design.

Lee Campbell

P-30 Afficianado"

 I'd recommend this Model to anyone wanting to build a simple, well designed P-30.

 Dave Andreski
 Key West,FL


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: T Newton Morgan on June 13, 2011, 05:35:48 PM
All this talk about balsa tube vs. stick and tissue has been interesting.    I haven't seen any mention of the SparrowHawk  P-30 anywhere  on this forum... As many of you know, it is tube job.     I have had trouble keeping the wieight down using that tube.   They do fly well.   Several of them have flown away.

Any comments on the SparowHawk?

Tom


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on June 13, 2011, 05:43:43 PM
The Sparrowhawk (MAL) was one that I wanted, but waited too long due to the limited area I have to fly in my local area.  Would STILL like to have one.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on June 13, 2011, 06:08:36 PM
  More "Rodger Dodger" info...
    Hook to peg is about 24 inches allowing me to use barely slack motors 4 X .155" or 6 X .105" all cut from 1/4" (.260" actual) TAN SS. I have one of the so-called 'Polish' Rubber strippers bought from Ed Liem about 12-13 years ago. Great bargain at $85 including an extra set of cutting wheels.
  No braiding needed, no shifting of CG with this set-up.
  An o-ring is used on the 4 strand motor and the appropriate 'Crockett Hook' on the 6 strander.
   Attached is the winder I use. It's 10:1, cost $50, is lightweight and smooth but after a 're-call' for gear replacement was admonished to limit torque to about 20 in/oz, a disappointment after initial claims were ~ 40 in/oz. Live and learn I guess.

    Dave , low tech for now, Andreski


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 13, 2011, 06:27:07 PM
Dave,

 That's disappointing about that winder. Glad I didn't order one...I was seriously looking at it at one time.

 Your removal of the wing incidence is of interest...can you give a further explanation? Additionally, have you had any exposure to Thurman Bowls' trim schemes? I know he takes PGI pretty seriously and that the reduced wing incidence is a trademark.

 How does the f/w clutch attach to the shaft? Any trouble with it coming loose?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Zeiss Ikon on June 13, 2011, 06:41:59 PM
I'd recommend this Model to anyone wanting to build a simple, well designed P-30.

That looks like a nice, basic stick-and-tissue P-30, Dave -- where might one find plans (or a kit)?  Google couldn't find 'em for me...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 13, 2011, 07:08:06 PM
Dave, nice model!
I looked at that winder too. 20 in/oz is more than enough for P-30 as you know (12 to 13 in/oz is about max for 6 strands of 1/8" I think). But it's not much good for anything else that's bigger. I was hoping that my Gizmo Geezer P-30 winder (up to 24 in/oz) would work for Coupe but I'm getting about 40 in/oz on my latest Coupe motors (Jan 2011 Super Sport) and have invested in a dedicated Coupe winder. Can't have too many winders I guess!  ;)

Joshua, Jean Wantzenreither wrote many, many articles on the basics of PGI trim (and the improved TOP variant) that I could share with you if you want. PM me.



Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pappy on June 13, 2011, 08:44:10 PM
Tony and the rest of you Gentlemen,

Bear with me, this is my 1st post. The attached photos are of my most successful P30 so far, dubbed e-Pirate as the wing and stab are from the very popular Pirate P30 kit. The fuselage is made from balsa and Depron plastic. The Depron is lube proof (at least with the lube I am using) so the inside of the fuselage needs no finish. The balsa longerons were pre-finished with Nitrate and allowed to very thoroughly dry before assembly (wet Nitrate eats Depron!).

Stab is covered with ¼ mil Mylar, Wing is covered with Microlight, pylon is covered with Esaki, fuselage is painted with acrylic. Electronics are home-brew, integrating the timer, RDT and recovery beacon on one PCB. All up weight less motor is about 45 gms. I fly 5 loops or 1/16th TAN SS on about 1500 turns.

Dawn trim flights are around 125 seconds. Based on P30 notes from Don Deloach, I am short at least 20 seconds on “dead air” performance compared to a good P30. So, I look forward to any advice you might offer. For example, would replacing the Teflon thrust bearing with a good ball bearing likely help? What effect does the large drag of a P30’s prop have on choice of airfoil, wing aspect ratio, wing area, etc.

Mine is a familiar story. Flew duration FF in my 20’s, put my models away to raise a family and travel the world on business, and now have resumed FF duration in my maturity. The P30 event was not around when I quit modeling, so I decided to build a P30 to get started again. Boy what a shock! This is nothing like a coupe or Mulvihill to get going well. I have found the comments on this forum of great help in catching up on 35 years of duration FF refinement. Thanks

Pappy


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on June 13, 2011, 09:39:26 PM
Thats an interesting contrast to Dave's model - innovative use of depron. Those mylar covered wings and tail look neat as well. Any nicely built model will grab my attention - new or old technology.
Tony I'm curious about the PGI method of trimming - is it possible to get a copy of the description of it?
Thanks
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dosco on June 13, 2011, 09:52:23 PM
Electronics are home-brew, integrating the timer, RDT and recovery beacon on one PCB.

Homebrew CCA? Those look like surface mount components...do you work at an electronics fab house?

Nice looking model!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dosco on June 13, 2011, 09:55:48 PM
Google came up with  this URL to PGI trim. (http://www.hippocketaeronautics.com/hpa_forum/index.php?topic=3376.25;wap2)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 13, 2011, 09:56:46 PM
Pappy,
Very nice model!
I'm very interested in your electronics. What does it all weigh? Is there a servo for the DT?
With a locked down model I think that a timer can be eliminated and just use RDT (if the range is sufficient of course). The only reason I can see to use a timer with RDT on a P-30 is for the option of auto surfaces.

Anyways, how to get more performance?
Two ways, get the weight down closer to 40 grams. And the second is rubber. My estimate for the maximum number of turns with 10 strands of 1/16" super sport (depending on the batch) is closer to 1700 turns rather than 1500. I don't know if you have a torque meter but you should be able to get 9 to 10 in/oz with 2010 or 2011 Super Sport. The extra energy will get you higher and the lower weight will help you glide better.
Also, the batch of rubber makes a difference. Some of the top P-30 flyers will use TanII for morning flights which has a lot of energy. But some of the best batches of Super Sport are close to the better batches of TanII. May/June 2009, Sept 2009, July 2010 and Jan 2011 are all high energy batches of Super Sport.

Ball bearings help, but not very much (but every little bit helps).

Despite the simplicity of a square box fuselage I think that there is a drag penalty when compared with a small diameter rolled tube. Look at Deloach's Pole cat Mk 10 or Dave Sechrist's Marie Super Skinny-E. Both are very clean models, built right down to the minimum weight. In Don's Polecat article he cautions against trying a long run motor with a model that weighs over 44 grams and suggests you try 6 strands of 1/8". Also, both of these excellent flyers are using the Peck Polymer's prop not the Ikara prop as used on the Pirate. the Gizmo Geezer prop is also very good. I think that the Ikara prop is very good for a shorter motor run (6 strands) but not as efficient with long motor runs. Others may have different experiences.

I strongly suggest that you order a copy of Free Fight Quarterly's 2010 P-30 survay. A ton of plans and articles on P-30 and many discusions and ideas from the best P-30s in the world. Well worth the money imo.http://freeflightquarterly.com/wordpress/?page_id=5#Books

On your current model I think you can gain some still air time with some better winding, and fine tuning of the trim.

Good luck!

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 13, 2011, 10:06:42 PM
Dosco,
Thanks for reminding me about my earlier comments on PGI trim for locked down F1B models. The same comments apply to P-30. The basic ideas of PGI (and the details of course) are available from FFQ. From the earlier thread I had this - There is an excellent book available from FFQ that covers many of Jean's articles that outlines his thinking. http://www.freeflightquarterly.com/ffqcurrent.html

The collection of Jean Wantzenriether's articles are now available in one place from FFQ and for this I must thank them. They are always worth a read and a re-read every few years as a refresher course!

Tony




Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pappy on June 13, 2011, 10:26:58 PM
Hi Tony,

Thanks much for the P30 advice. The whole electronics package is shown in the photo.
This was last year's model. This year's design is about 4.75 gm. I am operating the RDT/recovery
beacon radio using my ham license in the 400 MHz ham band. I get to use a smaller antenna than is
typical with the animal tracking type beacons, but get similar range by running a bit more power.

I guess I am a little chicken winding the TAN SS. I will work on this next.

Pappy


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 14, 2011, 12:08:46 AM
Pappy,
I see a 30 mah Lipo, and what looks to be a pager motor for DT actuation? And I see s start switch and an LED?. Looks like a nice package to me.

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on June 14, 2011, 03:10:45 AM
Tony and Dosco - thanks for the PGI link. That electronics package is interesting - good luck with it Pappy. You obviously like tinkering as well as flying - that's a good combination.
John

PS I have just read Tony's article - typically informative. Thanks again Tony. as an old Rc glider flyer(F3B and thermal mainly) with an ongoing interest in Free Flight, I find all this stuff fascinating.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on June 14, 2011, 06:20:20 AM
When I started flying F1B in the early 1980's, there was a boom of PGI models going on in Finland. Maybe 1/2, or even 2/3 of the fliers flew with that setup. The thinking was that gadgets are unreliable, and that a F1B should not have any other moving parts than the prop. My experience (by looking at the others, I built only one model with PGI setup, and never got that working) was that with the minimal decalage, the models were extremely touchy to trim, and even worse, unsensitive to lift. I feel that if a model has 3 to 4 degrees of decalage, it much better slows down when entering a thermal and stays there, while the PGi models which were rather stable longitudinally, just kept flying through the lift... So give me that large decalage and VIT, thanks! :-)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 14, 2011, 07:26:28 AM
I never found my PGI models were insensitive to lift Tapio. We were able to fly them with aprox 2.0 degrees of decalage. With plenty of dihedral and Lindner warps they were excellent thermal sniffing machines. What I did notice was that they didn't exploit the lift quite as efficiently as the VIT models (didn't get as high in the thermal for example) but then again they often "found" lift that other models didn't so the trade off was useful. The biggest drawback was that they didn't fly as well in windy conditions. The VIT models could be launched vertically in wind and get high in the burst. The PGI models would get blown sideways a bit before they got going in the climb. Thus the windy weather performance was inferior. In calm conditions there was very little to choose between the two types though.

The other drawback was that it took longer to get a high performance trim from the PGI models. Every adjustment affected another portion of the climb or glide so you had to work carefully to maintain a balance.

But the simplicity of no moving parts (except the prop of course) was enticing!


Tony



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on June 14, 2011, 12:47:05 PM
I'd recommend this Model to anyone wanting to build a simple, well designed P-30.

That looks like a nice, basic stick-and-tissue P-30, Dave -- where might one find plans (or a kit)?  Google couldn't find 'em for me...
  Zeiss,
   PM me your e-mail addy. If you don't want to do that, I'll print it out and send it 'snail mail'.
 Can't post it 'cause  it's 'owned' by Flying Models.

  Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on June 14, 2011, 02:10:38 PM
Some pics of my RTF model:

1) Details of the wing hold-down, this pulls it forward so that the wing joiner rests in the groove in the pylon.
2) the VIT, AR and DT trigger lines. Initial setup VIT at 3.5 secs, AR at 20. The thick wire is pulled forward by the servo, releasing the triggers at desired times.
3) The timer is flush against the pylon side. Start button forward bottom corner. Programming connectors behind it.
4) AR details. The rudder rests against the end of the bolt and the nut.
5) This is my super-simple freewheeler, and the rubber band to hold the mose block in place.
6) There is still plenty of room in the pylon, in addition to the servo in the front, battery and beacon in the aft. Could fit the RDT RX under the wing, if I dared to put it to a model that DT's real slow...  


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pappy on June 14, 2011, 08:41:08 PM
Good Evening Gentlemen,

dosco, I do work in electronics but don’t work for an assembly shop.
I use a hot plate to reflow solder my SMD circuit boards in my shop
here at home. There are some excellent tutorials on YouTube that
show how this is done.

Tony, you identified everything correctly in the photo of the P30
electronics. The circuit can optionally drive a small servo such as
a SPEKTRUM AS2000 1.5 gm servo rather than the 0.8 gm actuator
motor shown in the photo.

OZPATH, thanks for the kind words about the P30. My building skills
are starting to come back a bit now that I have built a couple of new
FF models.

I guess FF electronics is turning out to be a hobby within a hobby. After
the flying season is over here in Texas (early October), I am going to take
a crack at building a 3 gm timer/beacon/altimeter compatible with a Midcat,
Pathfinder, etc., size CLG. I built one of Stan’s Pathfinder kits and I am
finally starting to get the hang of launching it, but our DFW flying site really
likes to “eat” small airplanes and a tracker beacon would be most helpful.

Thermals,

Pappy


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: betocastrucci on June 14, 2011, 08:52:54 PM
My collection of Saturnos, designed by Alex Cruz.
It´s an old fashioned stick & tissue construction, ladder box fuselage. They're very light, have to put some ballast to be over 40g. Viscous timer for D/T.
I left the auto everything and electronics for the F1Bs and F1Gs...

Beto Castrucci


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on June 14, 2011, 09:31:07 PM
Very nice models Beto. How do they fly?
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on June 14, 2011, 09:32:37 PM
Dave,


 Your removal of the wing incidence is of interest...can you give a further explanation? Additionally, have you had any exposure to Thurman Bowls' trim schemes? I know he takes PGI pretty seriously and that the reduced wing incidence is a trademark.

 How does the f/w clutch attach to the shaft? Any trouble with it coming loose?

 Josh,
  I tried this trim set-up after reading Bob Isaacks's (Duco Guru) advice for the Gollywock ll on SFA. -
  
  "Dave:

Wing at zero, stab at -3, 1 degree down (approx.) +3 right thrust, cambered (built-up) rudder for left turn.. Wing leading edge sharp (not rounded) 12" prop to Bill Henns layout. All up weight (W/O rubber) 54 grams..  C.G. @ 90%.

Bob Isaacks  SFA"

  He indicated that others were doing this on a variety of endurance ships. I thought I'd give it a try. Though the pylon is at zero, the wing has a small amount of incidence and I think you know why.
  I'm only vaguely familiar with Thurman Bowls.
  The clutch is soldered on using silver bearing solder from Radio Shack. No chance of it coming loose at these low torque numbers.
  
  The little white prop retainer is a Du-Bro product sold as a Micro Wheel Retainer for .047" wire, product # 868, 8 pieces for about $1.19. I really like them.

  Dave Andreski
  Key West, FL


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on June 14, 2011, 09:54:27 PM
Dave, nice model!
I looked at that winder too. 20 in/oz is more than enough for P-30 as you know (12 to 13 in/oz is about max for 6 strands of 1/8" I think). But it's not much good for anything else that's bigger. I was hoping that my Gizmo Geezer P-30 winder (up to 24 in/oz) would work for Coupe but I'm getting about 40 in/oz on my latest Coupe motors (Jan 2011 Super Sport) and have invested in a dedicated Coupe winder. Can't have too many winders I guess!  ;)




Tony

 Tony,
   I have several winders too. I have an OLD Sterling 5:1 with a brake, a K&P 15:1, the Adams 10:1 shown above and an FAI Model Supply 'Sidewinder' with the 'Russian?' style torque meter. See attached.

   Dave Andreski

   


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: betocastrucci on June 14, 2011, 10:23:22 PM
Very nice models Beto. How do they fly?
John

The Saturno can do easily 2:30 in dead air. With 6 x 1/8" it climbs very high, it´s my choice. But can fly a lot with 4 x 1/8", as the 2010 argentinian champion did. I wanna try 10 x 1/16".
The plan of this model was published at FFQ #33, if you like the stick & tissue aproach I recommend it.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on June 15, 2011, 12:02:10 AM
Quote from: Pappy
... I am going to take a crack at building a 3 gm timer/beacon/altimeter compatible with a Midcat, Pathfinder, etc., size CLG.

What do you plan to use for the DT actuator?

In a quest to make light timers (P-30 and more recently for CLG) I have tried various things, with a variable success. It seems to me that solenoids (magnetic actuators) are a pain to adjust, as they produce quite a weak force, so the rest of the linkage must be light. Pager motors work somewhat, especially the geared ones, but they weight almost as much as the lightest servos. Have not tried to rubber band burners, but the large current consumption to make the wire glow worries me. My current choise (for P-30 at least) is the light, cheap linear servo from Hobby King, but that is a tad too heavy for CLG. Servo is about 1.5 grams, the battery (50mAh) about two grams, and the timer itself with onboard beeper another 1.5g. Adds up to 5...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on June 15, 2011, 12:21:46 AM
Quote
if you like the stick & tissue aproach I recommend it.

I second that.  My 'Saturno' trimmed out easily, climbs very strongly and does well.   Maxed out easily in its first contest  ... posted one max in the second event but was then damaged when the motor blew AFTER the blast tube had been removed    :'(

Now ready to go again.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 15, 2011, 12:59:03 AM
Tony and the rest of you Gentlemen,

Bear with me, this is my 1st post. The attached photos are of my most successful P30 so far, dubbed e-Pirate as the wing and stab are from the very popular Pirate P30 kit. The fuselage is made from balsa and Depron plastic. The Depron is lube proof (at least with the lube I am using) so the inside of the fuselage needs no finish. The balsa longerons were pre-finished with Nitrate and allowed to very thoroughly dry before assembly (wet Nitrate eats Depron!).

Stab is covered with ¼ mil Mylar, Wing is covered with Microlight, pylon is covered with Esaki, fuselage is painted with acrylic. Electronics are home-brew, integrating the timer, RDT and recovery beacon on one PCB. All up weight less motor is about 45 gms. I fly 5 loops or 1/16th TAN SS on about 1500 turns.

Dawn trim flights are around 125 seconds. Based on P30 notes from Don Deloach, I am short at least 20 seconds on “dead air” performance compared to a good P30. So, I look forward to any advice you might offer. For example, would replacing the Teflon thrust bearing with a good ball bearing likely help? What effect does the large drag of a P30’s prop have on choice of airfoil, wing aspect ratio, wing area, etc.

Mine is a familiar story. Flew duration FF in my 20’s, put my models away to raise a family and travel the world on business, and now have resumed FF duration in my maturity. The P30 event was not around when I quit modeling, so I decided to build a P30 to get started again. Boy what a shock! This is nothing like a coupe or Mulvihill to get going well. I have found the comments on this forum of great help in catching up on 35 years of duration FF refinement. Thanks

Pappy


I gotta have one. Any thoughts on selling a completeted model/kit? Or at least making the electronics available?

OtF'er


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 15, 2011, 03:11:28 PM
What do you plan to use for the DT actuator?

 Have not tried to rubber band burners, but the large current consumption to make the wire glow worries me.
I too am interested in this project Pappy (small timer for clg with beacon/altimeter) and await further details with saliva dripping on the keyboard.... ;D
My opinion is that a timer is unneccessary for clg and a RDT is far more useful. Being able to chose when you DT has proven to be very useful for tip launch gliders and most RDt equipped birds now have no timer, just use a signal from the RDT to actuate the DT (servo or pager motor). The Burley band burner is a very lightweight mechanism that works very well. (see attached photo). Weight is 1.4 grams with battery.
The power consumption of the burning circuit is not that great Tapio because it only requires a few milliseconds (I'm guessing) to heat the wire and burn through the band.

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pappy on June 15, 2011, 07:55:34 PM
Good Evening Gentlemen,

Tapio, I have done an initial follow-up on Jerry Murphy’s suggestion in his 2008 NFFS symposium article to use Muscle Wire (Flexinol)
as a DT actuator. This looks very promising. This stuff weighs almost nothing. The diameters that look suitable for our purposes require
roughly the same current as a 1.5 gm servo to actuate. I plan to do more work with this material during the winter building season.
Please let me know your results if you try it out before I can get to it.

OtF’er, I am still pretty overloaded with work, etc., but maybe I can kick back in a few years and have the time to offer some electronics
to the free flight community. However, I really hope some of the existing suppliers will offer an integrated timer/RDT/beacon product for
small models in near future. Starting with the RDT receiver function, it takes very little to add the timer and transmitter beacon
functionality. Perhaps this discussion here will get them thinking.

Tmat, I just scanned over your F1B article in May-June issue of the NFFS Digest. Awesome. I timed Jan Langelius several times at our May
contest and I noted he is now using RDT on his TLG’s just as you describe. Even the smallest TLG I have seen can easily carry a 5 gm
electronics package. My dilemma concerning a MidMat size CLG is the allowable electronics weight for a nominal 20 gm glider. A beacon
transmitter-timer-altimeter can be made really small and lightweight. Adding the RDT receiver is a major increase in size and weight. That
reminds me, I saw one of your photos where you put a fulcrum under the desired CG location and a scale under the end of the glider’s tail
to obtain the inch-grams (love those mixed imperial-metric units) needed in front of the CG for balance. Do you happen to recall what a
typical value is for a MidMat? The electronics are going to have to comprise most of the nose weight. If you need, say, only 10 inch-grams
for balance, adding the receiver would probably be dead weight. If you need 20 inch-grams to balance, the receiver can go along for the
ride with little overall impact on the glider’s weight. I am guessing the receiver can ride OK in a large CLG, but might be iffy for the popular
16 to 18 inch span gliders.

Thermals,

Pappy


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on June 16, 2011, 03:56:17 AM
I add some "hi-tech" photos to my picasa  ;D

https://picasaweb.google.com/100588849894345200054/P30BuiltAndFlying#5618698867492845554

palo


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on June 17, 2011, 12:53:12 PM
Good pics palo and good looking models.Very steep launches as well. How does the low mtd fin model compare to the conventional models.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on June 19, 2011, 01:07:33 PM
We had a small national contest yesterday night, in flat calm conditions and occasional slight drizzle. The airfield that the contest was held on is small (only one runway), so when the drift is not along the runway you are likely to fly into the woods. The good thing is that the "woods" is a swamp, and the trees are small and sparse. Of my three contest flights, every one was out of the runway, but only one in a tree, and that one was 1m tall :-)

But before the contest started I test-flew the new model. Was not quite in a trim, but flew straight downwind for the climb, to enter the woods. And hit a pine tree, more than 20 meters high. Had to leave it there for the contest. After the contest, with the help of a local junior, we managed to throw a towline over the shoot where the model rested, and managed to shake the model down with only minor damage. But not much trimming of that model on that occasion.

The older model was also equipped with VIT, and this was the first occasion I managed to fly it in calm condition. What can I say, wow what a difference. The model tended to be sensitive for launch, and after I built a torque meter the problems were even more severe. Not any more! I wound the 6-strand motors to 600g*cm (it might bear 800, but decided not to break any motors on this occasion), and with the VIT no trim problems whatsoever, just a firm launch straight up, and the model made a steep half-turn spiral before the VIT triggered and the normal spiral climb continued. Even better, I can not throw the model, as the launch position is not as sensitive as it used to be.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Hepcat on June 19, 2011, 03:41:06 PM
Tapio
Thanks for the informative postings that you so often give us.  However just to be absolutely clear in reply #429, am I right in thinking that 'not' in the penultimate line should be 'now'?
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on June 19, 2011, 11:50:26 PM
Quite right; it should be "now" (the first one, the second "not" is correct). I.e. it should read:

"Even better, I can now throw the model, as the launch position is not as sensitive as it used to be."

The reason is that without VIT, the model was very sensitive to launch position; launch it too flat or too much bank and it would turn to the right and dive towards the ground before settling to spiral climb while the power fades from burst to cruise. Or launch too steep and you end up on the back after half a loop. WITH the VIT the pitching up is gone, so when launched straight up the model keeps going that way until the power fades off. Towards the end of the burst the prop right pitch starts to kick in, so that even if the launch was slightly to the left, it will start to rotate to the right and establish the right-hand spiral climb. A P-30 has such a small prop that it is practically impossible to have the prop stall, and this helps a lot keeping the model going throught the burst and attaining the proper position for the spiral phase. Also, even at my burst setting, the model is not totally ballistic, but rather I had a couple of flight where the actuator servo jammed (hope to have fixed that now), the tailplane stayed in climb position all the time. The climb seemed a little flatter than normal towards the end of the climb and the glide was steep, slightly diving. But no vertical dive-of-death. SO even during the initial phase the trim of the model is positively stable (meaning that the model corrects errors in the attitude), but due to reduced decalage the looping tendency at higher initial speed is controlled.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 20, 2011, 12:35:36 AM
Tapio,
Do you know how much decalage your P-30 has for the burst and glide?


Tony
-enquiring minds you know.... ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on June 20, 2011, 01:35:33 AM
Do not have the model here at work, but I'd guess about 3 degrees for the glide. In the new model it was 4mm under tailplane that is 70mm wide, i.e. 3.2 degrees. The VIT movement is less than four, maybe 2.5 to 3mm, which means that the decalage will be reduced close to 1 degree for the burst. I can measure later today.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on June 20, 2011, 03:11:26 PM
The glide decalage of both models is about 3.5mm per 70mm wide tailplane, roughly 3 degrees (measured along the botton tangent of the airfoils, but the LE radius for wing and tail is about the same, so not much difference). For the old model the VIT down incidence is about 2mm = 1.5 degrees, for the new one it is 1mm = 0.8 degrees. However, the latter is not fully trimmed, so the setting may change once I get the right amount of right thrust so that I can get the climb turn right. But the current initial climb with slight left rotation goes straight, so I gather the decalage is about right.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 20, 2011, 03:20:37 PM
Does that mean that for the new one you only reduce the decalage for the climb by 0.8 degrees from the glide setting? That sounds like a very small amount to me. The older model sounds about right to me.


Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on June 20, 2011, 11:56:15 PM
No, the incidence is 1mm = 0.8 degrees, i.e. less incidence than in the old models.  But as the trim is not finished, it might be that changes in thrust angle may still dictate a change in that angle.

I plotted some climb patterns from the two flights I did with the old model where the VIT did not seem to trigger (although I'm not sure of the first one, as that was not coming too fast down in the glide), but anyway the overall altitude did not seem to differ much between the two, and the overall height (50-52 meters) was comparable to climbs with proper incidence. I started to wonder if a much longer VIT setting would work, seems like up to 20 seconds the climb speed was as good or better with VIT down as up. Hm, this suggest a rather different setup from my F1B's where even with step-less transition I run the VIT from burst to glide until 8 seconds. Ok, a F1B has a much larger prop relative to the model size than a P-30.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on June 21, 2011, 06:41:18 AM
more in picasa...



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on June 21, 2011, 07:13:54 AM
Nice! What is the covering?

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on June 21, 2011, 07:20:14 AM
cover is litespan/airspan ,glued balsaloc

http://www.horejsi.cz/Pages/ListProdukt.aspx?kategorie=9&subkategorie=51&fraze=


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on June 22, 2011, 03:55:06 AM
new photo :) from airfield , model no.3

PGI system is a brilliant set (right-left)
prop -2degrees
wing -2degrees
tail -4degrees
(relative to centre line)
CG 65% of root chord
rubber 3x1mm 6strands


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on June 22, 2011, 05:45:48 AM
Its interesting to see that you have chosen to use the PGI trim approach after reading tapio's comments. I'm still a student of PGI and i'm wondering what the still air difference would be between your model and the VIT one of Tapio. Both models are fairly similar otherwise. Very nice looking model.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on June 27, 2011, 04:43:18 AM
I won Slovak national championship 2011 in category P30 :)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on June 27, 2011, 05:09:21 AM
Congratulations. Nice looking model, and I  just love underfins. Any chance of publishing a plan or  dimensioned 3 view in the plans section...please ;D

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on June 27, 2011, 06:27:12 AM
Peter,
fuselage,underfin and tail are the same as the previous plans
only  change is in wing dihedral ,centroplan 5degrees and tip 20degrees (relative to centronplan)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on June 27, 2011, 06:51:23 AM
Pavol

Many thanks

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: CometsGallor on September 17, 2011, 12:06:13 AM
Here is version III of "O' Sugar" P-30. I keep making changes to hopefully improve looks, weight and performance. I am within a few grams of the 40 gram target, and already I have some new ideas for the next version. If it is calm tomorrow it will get its first test glides. Hopefully first flights this Sunday at Eloy AZ for the first contest of our season (to hot to fly during the summer). The fuselage is 1/16 warren truss covered with Microlight. The Stab frame  and wing tips are laminated 1/32.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 17, 2011, 01:11:28 AM
All elliptic, that is pretty!

Is the wing saddle similar to glider tailplane attachment, rubber bands pull the wing forward to a slot in the pylon, and at DT it rotates TE up?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: CometsGallor on September 17, 2011, 03:08:12 PM
Tapio,

Thanks I have always liked elliptical shaped wings and stabs.  The DT system uses a drop off wing tethered to the fuselage because here in Arizona we get some very strong thermals and a pop-up tail may not be effective on light models. I have attached a couple detail photos of the pylon. The orange loop is pulled forward which then will pull the white nylon piece in the front snug against the pylon. The wing hold-down rubber bands connect onto the white nylon. When the fuse (in the front of the plane) releases the orange loop, the tension holding the white nylon against the pylon is released and it pivots to release the wing bands.

Bruce


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Eduardo Yamin on September 18, 2011, 07:26:14 PM
... Jean Wantzenreither wrote many, many articles on the basics of PGI trim (and the improved TOP variant)...

Tony if you allow me to.

Since the FAI worlds occurred in Embalse i am fully involved to PGI technics by Edgardo Figueroa, perhaps the most dedicated student of Jeans´s materia. I just began to post in my blog some information about it. Just put in (poor) google translator,hope it helps:

My way to view PGI method
 (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=pt&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Feduardoyamin.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F07%2Fpgi-introducao.html)

My first experience (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=pt&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Feduardoyamin.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F07%2Fpgi-primeira-experiencia.html)

Elements in the design and trimming (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=pt&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Feduardoyamin.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F08%2Fpgi-elementos-em-desenho-e-trimagem.html)

As you can see in this short period i already am an enthusiast and fully satisfied with the results of this technique, I intend to apply it whenever possible in my future models. Incredible not see more of these models flying around ...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 20, 2011, 12:49:58 AM
Had a nice weather on Sunday morning to eventually log the sinking speed on my new P-30. Well, so I thought. It was flat calm, overcast in the morning then patches of sun, but the flight profiles did not indicate lift until at noon. The logs, however, show some variation in the sinking speed, so I really do not know how reliable these are.

After my previous problems with the digital timers I had re-built the triggers to get maximum movement from the servos, this way trying to overcome there less-than-perfect resolution. This had worked with my older model, that had worked OK for the Finnish Champs a few weeks ago, did not fly the new model there. So it was time to sort that out.

Got 4 or 5 flight ok with the new one, sorted the climb pattern. The logs still suggest maximum climb altitude with 6 strand motors to be a little short of 50 meters, so about the same as the old one does. The glide had a tendency to stall, had to reduse the decalage, and when I got a stable glide is seems to be sinking around 50cm/s. Again about the same as the old one! So it looks like my fancy new model, with elliptical lift distribution and Eggleston profile is no better than the old, with constant wing chord, USA-5 airfoil, and designed some 25 years ago. Phuueiy! After the successfull flights my timer (or servo, rather) started acting up, failing to trigger anything, so the last flights were with straight rudder and no VIT. No DT either, but luckily it was not lifting!

To finalize, I tested the model with a 5 strand motor and no gadgets, flying in "glide" settings. The initial climb was a little too "turny", but after that the model flew OK. Climbed almost 90 meters (2nd pic), and glided in after almost 5 minutes, landing 5 meters away from the start site. Super trims? Naah, from the log you can see that it climbed for 100 seconds, while with a 5-strander the motor run should be 70. Must have been a bubble of lift taking the model that last 30 seconds up, and who knows how much extra it gave for the rest of the climb?

In the picture legends "II" refers to old model, "III" to the new, and the numbers (5s or 6s) give the motor strands. The flight with the old model is given on both graphs as a reference.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on September 20, 2011, 02:36:48 AM
Tapio

Sounds as though you had the best of the weather on Sunday (England - wind 15+ mph & rain). Thanks for posting the information, even though it makes slightly depressing reading after all your efforts. I'm about to cover a wing with a 6% version of one of the Eggleston foils and am beginning to wonder if I should have bothered. For P30 sized models perhaps there is more to the USA 5 and NACA 6409 foils than we think - or the prop is a great leveller ;)

Once again, thanks for the info.

Cheers

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: RalphS on September 22, 2011, 11:26:48 AM
Lots of people flying P30's it seems.  Lots of variety.  Put any of them into lift and they go up - but can take a time to come down.  My present stable is an old large area model "SE" and a less old (not new!) "No 4 ".  Both have had some successes.  I fly them on 4 strands of 1/8" wound to about 2000 turns.  Wind them tight and they climb well with a nice long motor run.  Both models use the Peck propeller that seems well suited to 4 strands.  The downside of 4 strands is the number of turns needed.  To cut down the winding time I made my winder.  It has a 2:1 gearing above the usual ancient donor drill gear set.  I guess that the time spent making the winder has not yet recovered the time saved on winding - but it is a hobby.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ricardo on September 22, 2011, 06:32:22 PM
Tapio, I give up.  How do you do the logging?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 23, 2011, 12:03:24 AM
RAM3 (SoaringCircuits.com) onboard. Taking the power from the digital timer battery, and replacing the tracking beacon (for fair weather only - no risk of flyways!), so no weight penalty. We have a minimum airframe weight of 50 grams here in Finland, so you can use a bit more gadgets in the model than with 40 grams minimum.

Ps, nice looking winder (and the models, of course). That extra 2:1 gear to the standard hand-drill gear is a great idea!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on September 23, 2011, 12:58:41 AM
Quote
To cut down the winding time

I use the standard 10:1 yellow case winder for P30's ... takes a 6 strand motor up to 1100/1200 before it starts to grunt, depending upon rubber


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 23, 2011, 02:16:09 AM
I hate it when the winder starts to grunt.... My winder (about 1:8) modified from Horejsi line winch has served me well this summer, the "shortcoming" is that it has similar tran gear as indoor winders, meaning that you stand sideways to the model. This seems OK indoor but feels unnatural outdoors, so I should get/make one similar to that of Spadge to get into "natural" outdoors winding position. Facing the model and the wind.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on November 20, 2011, 10:12:27 AM
Looks like I need to modify my P-30 props to have a pressure washer, as with tightly-would motors there may be bunching that keeps the rubber tight also during glide - no pro turning. The problem is how to attach the washer? If it is soft-soldered, the joint tends to break loose. If I use silver, the shaft gets hardened and brittle. I would not dare grinding a slot to the shaft to grimp a piece of brass tube onto it. Any other solutions?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on November 20, 2011, 10:30:20 AM
Hmm, unusual.   I use spring stops on my P30's (as with all rubber models) and soldering a tiny piece of brass tube to the shaft behind the prop, to free it from motor tension, has never given me any problem.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on November 20, 2011, 10:43:02 AM
With Igra props I've always used a short piece of brass tube (soft soldered) with a cup washer behind it. I must have made the best part of 100 flights over the years and it's still OK. I now use Gizmo front ends which obviate the need, but they are  rather coarse pitch for 4 strands (I get about a minute motor run with 6 strands of 1/8" SS).

It occurs to me that a tube in a tube used by some on vintage freewheel props might also work. I've never used this method so can't speak from experience.

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on November 20, 2011, 11:04:35 AM
Ok, maybe a piece of tube does the trick instead of a washer.

I think I have also seen use of tightly wound spiral of piano wire, that needs to be slightly opened to slip the shaft in, and the let tighten to grip the shaft?




Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on November 20, 2011, 04:39:47 PM
The coil spring deal is often a wire wheel retainer and probably works. I would prefer to use that as a prop retainer only though. I've used an aluminum wheel collar (1.57 mm I.D or 1/16") and a small flat filed on the side of the shaft instead of brass tubing. It works perfect and is allows me to easily replace the shaft if necessary.
http://www.radicalrc.com/category/Wheel-Collars-263


Tony



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on November 21, 2011, 12:38:45 AM
Ah, neat. When the shaft is replaceable, it does not harm even if the flat part makes the shaft bend more easily. But with a spring retaining the prop, there is no room for the winding loop, so you need to wind without the prop?

What size of shaft are you using? 1mm dia or thicker?



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on November 21, 2011, 02:53:25 AM
I use 18 swg (1.2mm). I like to sleeve the prop with brass tube, and anything thicker than 18swg takes too much meat off the prop hub for my liking.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on November 21, 2011, 08:26:41 AM
Winding loop?
You mean you don't wind with a half tube? ;D
Seriously, I do use a half tube (home made) for winding my P-30, but regardless I'd still wind without the prop.
I use 1/16" (1.6 mm) wire for the shaft and it leaves enough meat imo for a bushing in the prop Pete. I just got some teeny tiny 1.5 mm diameter ball bearings for a new prop hub next year so I'll be switching to 1.5 mm wire for the shaft.

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on November 21, 2011, 11:15:22 AM
No, I do not wind even my F1B's with a winding tube. I do not seem to need one, as I do not tend to break my motors (even though I wind them tight enough that they break several strands on the second wind-up), but I prefer to be ready to launch the model quickly in the fly-off. Therefore I have decided not to adopt the tube. Same with P-30, although there I would on some occasions prefer to have the model protected from the wind...

I have used 1mm shaft for P-30 and it seems to suffice, but would not take the flat for locking the washer. Maybe I should use a larger/longer tube-washer to support the shaft over the flat spot.... Could use carbon for that purpose?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Hepcat on November 21, 2011, 04:38:12 PM
On the matter of the spiral of piano wire to grip on a propeller shaft;  way back, around the early 1940s, many top English flyers used a ‘buckle’ type of freewheel, often fitted behind the propeller, inside a spinner.  As in my sketch below although for convenience my indication of the spinner and noseblock are much too small.

The buckle wire is wound tightly onto the propeller shaft and in such a direction that when the torque load is applied to the buckle it is such as to tighten the coils even more.  The wisdom at the time was that these buckles should not be soldered to the shaft because that would solder the coils together , that would prevent the coils from moving and tightening on the shaft and leave the soldering to take all the load.

I have used this principle on release arms on a Tomy timer winding shaft.  (The type where the arm releases a thread when the shaft has unwound so far.)  The arm can be adjusted for its rotary position by twisting it round the shaft in one direction, in the other direction it locks as the coils wind up.  However the loads in the Tomy application are tiny compared to the torque of a rubber motor and I have never tried an unsoldered freewheel mechanism.  I forgot to mention that locking the buckle against rotation also allows it to take end loads, which are usually much lower than the torques.

John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on November 22, 2011, 02:20:52 AM
Thanks John,

I think this was the stuff I was trying to recall. Interesting, will have to try that. I also have used the same thing on Tomy timers (even two arms as their relative positions are easy to adjust, the coil is rather free to rotate when twisted to "open" it. Just wonder if it would grip tight enough to take the torque and pull of a P-30 motor?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on November 25, 2011, 07:07:26 PM
Been fiddling with my ON28...Caley had suggested removing the 7 grams of solder I had stuck in the nose of my ON28 to make it balance at the point suggested on the plans.  So I did that, and cut off the back half of the fuselage, and made another rear half, 2.5 inches longer, so that, when I move the wing back to a balance point (with no nose weight), there is more room between the wing and the tail.  So the first pic is the new rear fuz half, compared to the old half, and I also made it wide enough in the back to install the fuse tube without having to cut through the vertical sticks, as I had previously, which left the rear of the fuz too flexy.  Now I also had room to glue in a tiny nylon screw for adjusting the stab.  The last two pics show the reassembled ON28, longer, with the wing moved back until it balances at the point along the wing chord as suggested by the plans.  I also moved the rear motor peg forward one bay. Weight is 43.5 gms without a motor; I stuck in an 8 gram 4 x 3/32 (rubber from the kit) while I'm waiting for the gizmo geezer to arrive and I'll put in a proper length/weight motor.

I took it out this evening for some low power test flights, up to 300 winds.  I could get 30 seconds from 300 winds.  All seems to be in relative order.  I'm hoping to try a new sports park a couple miles down the road, which has 6 back to back soccer fields; it looks to have around 800 x 1000 feet of open space.  Still tight, but maybe a little better for low power test flights until I find a big field.

I tried my Square Eagle out again at the community college across the street, Thanksgiving morning early, as it was quite calm out.  Got 1:10 on 550 winds of the 6 x 1/8, so it seems to be OK so far at half power.  That GG winder I ordered should be here any day now...can't wait to to try it out at full winds.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on November 25, 2011, 08:03:46 PM
Victor,  I did say to remove the nose weight and slide the wing back and forth on the fuselage until it balanced.  But I didn't say to cut the end of the fuse off and add more length.  That is clairification to those who might have thought I told you to cut the thing up and add things.
  Kind of late now, but one thing about having a tail heavy model is usually the tail feathers are heavy.  You have to build light, but still be strong.  That is where wood selection comes in.  You can get some fairly light wood, that still has good strength.  If you cannot get good wood, there are those who build from kits, Guillow's to mention one brand that usually comes with some pretty poor quality wood, or at least used to.  What you can do is sand down the wood a little to lighten things.
   But the problem might not be the wood alone.  You may have to just put one coat on of dope to keep things light.  I've done that.
  But I know others can provide better advice to help you skinny things down on the tail feathers.  I can't remember exactly, but there is a formula that says that for every gram of tail heaviness, you have to add 4 grams of nose weight.  Might be three grams, not sure.  So you don't need to lose a lot of weight in the rear to reduce needed nose weight.  I am still puzzled as to how you got such a heavy tail weight model.  My ON28 was around 55 grams.  Of course, it was one of the very first models I ever built, and I didn't know a thing about wood.  But, if I remember correctly, I never had to add nose weight.  I just moved the wing until it balanced, and it flew just fine, though probably never got more than 90 seconds.
  Good luck on the new version of the ON28.  Hoping you get your G-G soon, as I can tell you are frothing at the bit to wind things up and toss.   ;D  Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on November 25, 2011, 08:26:05 PM
Ha!  Yep, cutting off the rear half was my idea...  I noticed the fuz was about 3 inches shorter than my Square Eagle, and I wondered if that was part of the problem...I wonder if it was really meant to balance (at the point located on the plans) with the shorter motor option.  But since my fuz was already so torn up, with about a dozen patches from the blown motor, and the unfinished rear half, which was now having pieces work loose because it wasn't very rigid, I decided it would be a good time to experiment.  I also removed the 1/8" shim under the wing LE, and put it on the fuz flat, like the Square Eagle, which then gave me room to use the rear of the stab to adjust decalage.  I wonder if the only reason that the ON28 had the shim under the wing LE, was because the plan showed the stab glued down flat on the fuz.  So I thought I would experiment with that, too.  We'll see how this all works out, hopefully tomorrow.

Next project will be to tackle the Majestyk; I already have the kit, just need to get started.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on November 25, 2011, 08:54:30 PM
Victor, I think I now know one of the problems.  I do believe the ON28 was originally designed with wire and wheels landing gear.  That is a couple of grams right there.  By leaving that off, it was much easier for the model to become tail heavy.  Of course, the ON28 is probably a better flyer without that landing gear.  If the kit came with the LG, keep the wire and wheels for some other project requiring it.
  I will say that you definitely have a better brain for this than I did at your point.  You are thinking about things like differences in design and trying changes to the model.  I never did that for probably my first five years.  Too busy trying to build things properly.   ;D
  Look forward to your Majestyk.  As I said before, it is a very good flyer.  Build everything staight.  Make sure you follow the instructions for the way to build the wing.  That is a key.  Just to let you know, in dead, and I mean dead air, you should be able to achieve very close to two minutes with a well wound motor.  I typically get 1:53 to 1:57 in those conditions.  Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on November 26, 2011, 09:03:48 AM
Caley,
Yes, the plane did come with wire and a wheel for landing gear, which I left off.  I'm fiddling with the ON28 design primarily because it didn't have the sort of features that the Square Eagle has, and I was seeing if I could retrofit those sorts of things like adjustable stab, stab stop, fuse, nylon stab trim screw, etc. onto the ON28 design.  I'm still making plenty of building errors, too; hopefully not repeating too many of them.

If I make the Square Eagle again, the one thing I would change would be to have the rear of the fuz stay just wide enough to hold the fuse tube, so I wouldn't have to cut into the rear of the fuz to install the fuse tube, as the current plan shows.  That way, I could also install a nylon stab trim screw, too, in that gap, like I did for this ON28 mod.  I noticed the Majestyk plans show the rear of the fuz just wide enough to hold the fuse tube, instead of coming to a point, too.  But I can't complain at all about the Square Eagle, so far it has been a very consistent and smooth flier.  Everything I've read says that the undercamber wings, like on the Majestyk, have a better float than the flat bottom wings; but as slow as this Square Eagle floats down, with its flat bottom wing, it is hard to imagine something floating better.  Will see shortly when I try out the Majestyk, and try to make this my best built model yet, and have it right at 40 gms.

This morning's flight at the new location, a sportsplex field, went well with the ON28.  After a few trimming flights (I needed to add a 1/64th ply "plate" under the rear of the stab, and add an extra dental band to reduce the pressure of the nylon screw on the bottom of the stab, which had been boring a hole in the bottom of the stab, and not holding trim) I hand wound it to 500 winds and got a nice 55 second flight, and able to catch it a few feet from where I launched it.  It was starting off too steep, so it wasn't an optimal trim for the climb, but it didn't stall, and the glide seems good now.  I broke a motor again, trying to wind it up again, so back to the building board for some fuz repairs.  But overall, it seems to be going in the right direction.  The sportsplex field, about two miles from my house, has about 1000 x 1000 feet of open area, but with soccer goals dotting the field.  But that is better than trees.

Victor

 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on November 26, 2011, 01:07:16 PM
Victor,  You gotta get or make a blast tube so you don't have to keep repairing things.  Well, unless you really enjoy repairing things.   ;D
  Even making a tube from thick cardstock and using scotch tape around it to hold would be better than nothing.  Do that if funds are short for purchasing those clear plastic aquarium tubes you heard about elsewhere.  Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on November 27, 2011, 09:49:37 AM
Here is my Square Eagle.  My Gizmo Geezer winder and prop unit arrived yesterday, so, for the first time, I was able to wind it up beyond just a few hundred winds.

I put in 6 strands of 3/32, and worked up to 1600 winds.  Got a couple 2:05 flights at 1600.  It was just starting to get into the power burst on launch, and I had to make some tweaks to the GG.  But further fiddling will have to wait until I make up a blast tube set up.  A nice morning out here, started at about 30 degrees with frost on the ground, no thermals, and almost no wind; maybe a half a mile an hour drift.  A nice morning for trimming flights.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 03, 2011, 12:05:24 PM
Well I cobbled up a blast tube, from a couple sections of my crappie pole that I broke earlier, getting the ON28 out of a tree.  Now I need to get a longer, and stronger pole for "fishing" planes out of trees.  This time I tried a 4 strand 1/8" motor.  Started off with 1000 winds to see if there was any breeze or thermals (I'm avoiding them, given the small field), and got a 1:10 flight on that, with the Square Eagle hitting a soccer goal post on the way down, but no harm done.  Then I wanted to try a 2000 wind, but I think my technique was a little off, I felt like I had to stop at 1800, given the torque noticeably going up.  Probably needed to stretch longer before starting to walk in.  Anyways, there definitely was a bit of power burst, but I know 4 strands should be able to get wound up to 2000-2200, from what I read.  But it worked well, got a 2:30 flight out of that, for an early morning (half hour after dawn) flight.  I didn't fiddle with the trim, I'll wait until I get a full power wind up, and see how it handles it. So far things are looking OK.  I stopped after that, as there was a hint of a little wind starting up, so I decided to wait for another dawn.  This field is pretty small, about 1000 ft. square, so starting in the middle of the field, even a couple miles an hour drift could move the plane into the trees pretty quick, if you get over a two minute flight.  The last flight drifted about 200 feet, which, with 1mph being about 88 feet/minute, shows almost a 1mph drift.  And it drifted in a different direction that the first flight ten minutes earlier, so it wasn't acting too predictable, otherwise I would just launch at one end of the field, and plan on 800 feet of drifting room.  But I'm happy I have a field a couple miles down the road from the house.

Now to start up again with the ON28, I'm going to make some more mods, and will post a picture of it once it is done.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on December 03, 2011, 01:43:00 PM
Victor,  good to hear things are going well.  If the rubber you used is the stuff I sent, then that is why you are feeling that it is very tight.  I doubt it will take more than 2000 turns, and probably less.  But it will deliver more torque than the old rubber.  Another thing about the rubber.  Once you've wound the motor once to high torque, it will not perform quite as well if used the second time.  That is why I usually will add more turns.  That is the way I wound my motor for my Coupe.  First use was at 430 turns, then I went up to 450, and finally 470, to get the same torque.  2.5 was my goal on the torquementer each time, and the rubber needed those extra turns to achieve that torque.  Not scientific, but it worked.
  Look forward to seeing you pseudo ON28.  :) Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 03, 2011, 09:16:04 PM
Caley,
Yes, that is the rubber you sent me, and you're right, that might be close to the max.  When I went to replace the motor, I found that it had actually broke, with maybe a couple hundred winds left in it, a little bunched up in the back.  So that last wind was a max effort.  I'm sure better winding form would have allowed me to pack more in earlier, but I guess I was right to stop when I did.

I'll keep experimenting with the 4 strand 1/8, and the 6 strand 3/32, and see which works best.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on December 03, 2011, 10:09:16 PM
Victor,  I'm not too up on this, but here goes.  If you are going to use the equivalent of four strands of 1/8 rubber, then you probably can remove a little of the downthrust to compensate for the shallower climbout.  But you need to be careful that you don't put it into a power stall.  I think you just need to play around with the prop incidence until you find the best climbout for the motor you are using. 
  The problem with the longer motor is exactly what you mentioned, bunching towards the rear on some flights.  Did you get any kind of stalling effect on the glide?  If not, then things must be ok.  I use a bobbin over my rear motor peg.  What I use is a piece of aluminum tube that the rear motor tube slides through.  From what I hear, that helps the motor unwind a bit more evenly.  Other, more experienced people can tell you exactly what happens when using a bobbin.  Caley
 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 04, 2011, 09:06:43 AM
Caley,
I went out this morning, with a fresh 4 strand motor.  I've never had the plane properly trimmed yet for the burst, as I never felt like I had a full wind up to see how it would handle it.  With 1000 winds to start, got 1:15.  Second time, I got up to 1750 winds, and got a 2:15 flight.  It seemed to almost stall on the burst, so I checked again.  Third flight I got in 1900 winds, it seemed to work out like you said, at the near max winds the rubber needed a few more turns to reach the same torque.  This time I could clearly see that the plane was climbing too steeply during the burst, as it almost came to a stop, dipped down to horizontal, then started climbing again.  Nothing dramatic like standing on the tail (it can't with only the 4 strand oomph), but clearly needs more down trim.  I don't think it needs any more right trim, as right now the right hand turn during the power phase is about twice as sharp as the turn during the glide (15 second circles under power, and about 30 second circles just gliding). And it is turning, even during the burst, as I was able to see it do the mild stall when it had done a quarter turn and was sideways to me. 

I am having bunching problems, as the third flight saw the plane coming down pretty early, around 1:40.  I looked in the fuz, and saw the motor all bunched up in big knots, near the tail - there was lots of power left, but stuck.  That might explain the couple times I saw the plane bobble, start to bob a little... otherwise, as it was dawn, and there was fog on the ground and almost no air movement at all - the plane was very stable, and circling like clockwork.  So the uneven unwinding is causing some bobbling, it would appear.  I've included a couple pictures, and you can see I forgot to light the fuse for the last flight, but didn't need it luckily.

I thought 4 strands might be a little weak anyways, but wanted to toy with the long run to see how it worked.  I was getting 2 minute motor runs with the 4 strand. Next weekend I'll start back to trimming for the 6 strand 3/32, with a little more down thrust. 

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on December 04, 2011, 09:31:57 AM
Sounds like your trim is right on.  Great to hear you having so much success.

  I know of one person who flys the qualifying rounds using a four strand motor because of that very long motor run,  He gets a max each time just on the motor run.  For the flyoffs, he changes to a six strand motor which turns his model into a rocket.  He gets it quite high on the initial burst, and then just hopes.  Of course he has wond quite a few contests with this method, club types that is.

Sounds like you're really having fun.  Keep playing with things.  That is the fun of it all.  Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on December 05, 2011, 08:21:47 AM
Hey Victor it sounds like you are having a lot of fun.Thanks for the indepth reports, they are very interesting. On the flying field a 1/2 hr after dawn with frost and 30deg. Thats keen - good on you.
I once built a ON28 for some rels kids in limerick  in Ireland on a holiday. I had to use nail polish(clear) for dope as it couldn't be found for love or money! It was just a little thick as i didn't have a good thinner and the tissue covering was very stiff. It flew well.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: RalphS on December 05, 2011, 11:22:26 AM
clearly see that the plane was climbing too steeply during the burst, as it almost came to a stop, dipped down to horizontal, then started climbing again.  Nothing dramatic like standing on the tail (it can't with only the 4 strand oomph), but clearly needs more down trim. 
 
Victor  -  not trying to cut in on your talk with Caley but I wonder if just a touch of extra downthrust would cure that problem.  A fully wound 4 strand motor will still provide a good initial climb out depending on the state of the rubber, etc.

I am having bunching problems, as the third flight saw the plane coming down pretty early, around 1:40.  I looked in the fuz, and saw the motor all bunched up in big knots, near the tail - there was lots of power left, but stuck. 

I have found that this problem is usually cured by pre-tensioning the motor.  Are you doing this?

Ralph


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 05, 2011, 07:04:25 PM
Hello Ralph,

All info, thoughts and observations are appreciated.  Yes, I'm going to try more downthrust, until I see that the plane isn't stalling on the initial burst.  With any luck, I may get out tomorrow morning to try some more.

Not sure what you mean by pre-tensioning, is that the stretch when you first start winding?

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on December 05, 2011, 07:18:09 PM
Try a bit of right thrust instead of the down thrust.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on December 05, 2011, 11:06:59 PM
Victor, What Dan is saying is that a tad more right thrust will take it out of the more straight ahead line, causing the model to spriral up.  Just visualise a corkscrew.  That is what your airplane will do on the initial power burst, then it will come out of that into a normal powered flight.  Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: RalphS on December 06, 2011, 05:29:46 AM
Try a bit of right thrust instead of the down thrust.

Victor said the power turn was fairly tight already.  As downthrust is less "powerful" than side thrust I would still try it first.
We all know that a combination of down and side thrust is usually needed to overcome the burst.  It is getting it just right that takes us years of practice to get right.  So Victor, why not try both?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: RalphS on December 06, 2011, 05:47:23 AM
Not sure what you mean by pre-tensioning, is that the stretch when you first start winding?

Hello Victor.  This difficult to explain without using hands!  In the simplest form - as you make the motor up you start with your 4 strands and put the bobbin or tube in place and hold tightly with a rubber band.  Put the motor in the stooge and you should have 2 loops each with 2 strands. In the case of a 4 strand P30 motor wind 100 turns on one loop and attach to the front hook.  Making sure the first loop cannot unwind put 100 turns on the second loop and attach this to the front hook.  Now apply the winder to the front hook, stretch the motor about 50% and allow the motor to unwind itself against the winder pressure and move the winder towards the motor to return to the original length.  This braids the motor into one of the most beautiful sights in aeromodelling.  What it does is to allow the fully wound motor to unwind, but keep tight between front hook and rear fixing in the model, without going slack.  Different models and different motors need different pre-tension turns.   

I bet that somewhere on here there is a better description.   Hope this helps.
Ralph


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on December 06, 2011, 10:23:02 AM
Quote
downthrust is less "powerful" than side thrust I would still try it first.


Hehe .. amazing how approaches diiffer.  Me .. I'd try sidethrust first !

Take your choice    !!      ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on December 06, 2011, 11:27:56 AM
Ralph,  Thanks for explaining pretensioning.  You did it just fine.  Yes, braiding a motor can help to prevent motor bunching.  Just a matter of practise to find out the correct number of turns on the motor for braiding.  Caley 

PS,  Victor, it is a good idea to lube your motor before braiding, but not totally necessary. I've gotten both points of view from others. 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on December 06, 2011, 03:27:25 PM
But ... it's so fiddly and time consuming doing it to all your motors - and to my mind not as easy to keep them fully lubed thereafter - whereas a few minutes work incorporating a spring stop to the shaft when making the 'front end' takes care of everything.  

Which doesn't help Victor right now, I know .. but something for him to consider for the future


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on December 06, 2011, 06:17:07 PM
I really think a 4 strand motor on that plane isn't tghe way to go. The peg to hook distance isn't long enough. The guys using 4 strands and the long motor run are using long fuselages. Also, the plane MUST be at absolute minimum weight to optimize the long run.

A 6 strand motor won't give the bunching problems and will haul the plane up faster. The extra right thrust will pull it through that power stall. Launch it left of the wind.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 06, 2011, 10:38:52 PM
Thanks everyone for the helpful comments and the explanations.  In this case, my Square Eagle has a Gizmo Geezer, so that accomplishes the pre-tensioning, right?  There definitely is a bit of slack to take up with the 4 strand.  The positive side is that I get a two minute motor run, so 2:30 flights are a bit easy (if the motor doesn't bunch up).  On the other hand, it really doesn't get that far up, so it probably isn't a good winning strategy for working a thermal.  But we'll see once it is properly trimmed.  The 4 strand doesn't have a rocket burst, so if you don't use it to full efficiency, you are left with a slow climb for my overweight plane.  In my particular tiny field, I like the "stepping my toe in the water" ability to launch a half-max wind flight, make sure there aren't any strong breezes, then do a full wind up, where the model doesn't really fly up too high, and it can land in the field.  I'm trying to avoid any thermals or surprise winds, so I'm usually flying right after dawn, like this morning.

I got out this morning with a 6 strand 3/32 motor, which is probably about the right length...about two or three inches longer than the hook to peg length, and the GG needs slack to function.  A 6 strand 1/8 is actually a little snug, and won't free wheel.  It started raining, and I went ahead and launched it with 1600 winds, after putting in a little more downthrust.  It climbed out better, looked like about the best climbout yet (for these two motor sizes I've been trying).  But I think it got pretty wet, and I noticed it started to do mild stalls during the glide, so it came down pretty fast for the glide phase, for a total of 2 minutes.  It was all wet, so I suspect that that affected the trim.  I got home and weighed it, and after the ride home, it still weighed an extra five grams.  The water was beaded up, so it wasn't making everything soggy, but it definitely was completely covered with beaded up water drops.  I'll wait until dry weather and try again before making a judgment on the current trim.  Funny, on the cold mornings with fog and frost, when it wasn't raining, the tissue did get a little wrinkly and loose (in two spots primarily, the center sections of the stab and wing, where I used the stock tissue from the ON28 kit instead of Esaki.)  The Esaki definitely handles the humidity better than the other tissue.  Dry, this plane weighs 56.2 g with the motor, so it is a bit overweight; but I like how stable and predictable it seems to fly, and respond to trimming adjustments.  

It still turns in 15 second circles under power, I'm not sure if you want it circling any tighter than that; but if I understand the principle right, if given a choice, right thrust doesn't slow down the cruise/climb as much as down thrust, so if you are just trying to handle the initial burst, try to use right thrust, right?

It is fun having a model that flies.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on December 07, 2011, 09:14:01 AM
Correct on the right thrust. It jist pulls through the stall.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on December 07, 2011, 09:15:53 AM
Thanks everyone for the helpful comments and the explanations.  In this case, my Square Eagle has a Gizmo Geezer, so that accomplishes the pre-tensioning, right?  

I got out this morning with a 6 strand 3/32 motor, which is probably about the right length...about two or three inches longer than the hook to peg length, and the GG needs slack to function.  A 6 strand 1/8 is actually a little snug, and won't free wheel.
Victor

The gizmo geezer does not pre tension the motor. It works independently of the tension of the motor. Therefore it does not need slack to work. If the GG is not freewheeling under tension there is something wrong with it.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 11, 2011, 09:47:54 AM
This will be my last post in this thread, which is supposed to be about pictures.  But to close this trimming issue out, I got out yesterday at dawn with a 6 x 3/32 motor.  With 1750 winds, I got a nice strong burst, with a tailstand, and a loss of altitude in the stall recovery.  So clearly needed adjustment. Still got around a two minute flight.  The glide is fine again, so the mild stalling last time out was from the plane getting wet.  I put in some downthrust, and got a very mild stall on the second flight, and around a 2:15 flight.  That last flight showed a broken motor, so I put in a fresh one, and it broke right at 1740, so it was very nice to have made that blast tube; first time it has come in handy like that.

This morning, with my last section of 3/32 rubber, and a little more downthrust, got a 2:40 flight; a second one on that motor reached 2:20, but I saw that the motor had broke.  I had brought along a replacement 4 x 1/8, to see if the slightly milder torque might work fine with this trim (and all I have now is 1/8 rubber).  For some reason, it seemed about as tight as the 6 x 3/32, it seemed to be fully wound up at around 1700; I was hoping to get closer to 2000.  So I made two flights with the 4 strand, both around 2:30.  In both cases, the initial burst gave a nice climb, but probably still a touch too steep.  There wasn't a loss of altitude, but a hesitation at the end of the burst, and a lowering of the nose to level flight, until it gained speed and started to climb again.  So it is getting close.  I'd like to see what this plane could do if it was only 40 grams.  I'll probably build a second one, and try to do better.  There are a few things I could do better.

I've got my Majestyk about half done; I'll post some pics when it is finished, in a week or two.  It definitely is more challenging to build than the Square Eagle; and there are a few things I could do better a second time around on that one, too.  But I'm excited to see the Majestyk fly.  It definitely is a lighter plane, and from what I've read, should come out at 40 grams if I do things right.

Derek, I haven't tried the 6 x 1/8 with this Gizmo Geezer; I had one in it while I was waiting for the GG and the winder to arrive.  According to the GG instructions, it is supposed to have some slack for the mechanism to work, but I haven't tried the 6 x 1/8 with the GG, and probably will stick with the 3/32 motor, once I order some more rubber.  

I would like to experiment with tissue over mylar at some stage; all these dawn flights I see some mild slackening of the tissue; even if the mylar/tissue doesn't cure the slackening, it does make me wonder how much humidity change is occurring inside the models and wondering if that could affect trim in the long run.  Maybe I need to put more dope on the tissue, though.  I think I had two coats.  Lots of things to experiment with and learn here.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on December 11, 2011, 10:50:00 AM


Derek, I haven't tried the 6 x 1/8 with this Gizmo Geezer; I had one in it while I was waiting for the GG and the winder to arrive.  According to the GG instructions, it is supposed to have some slack for the mechanism to work, but I haven't tried the 6 x 1/8 with the GG, and probably will stick with the 3/32 motor, once I order some more rubber.  


Victor

Interesting, I have used the GG since they came out. My 6x1/8 motors in a Majestic have always been shorter than the motor peg to front end distance. Never had a problem. I bet it's because they stretch and get longer on the first wind. I don't pre-stretch the motor most of the time. With the stretch of the winding it must have enough slack for the free wheel mechanism to work.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on December 11, 2011, 11:21:02 AM
The amount of "slack" needed for the Gizmo is a bit misleading for some.  There should not be TENSION on the rubber (when it is COMPLETELY unwound) when initially loaded (unless it has not already been broken in = stretched).  If you look at the motor after the prop has gone into the FW mode, you will see that there are a number of turns left - probably about 50.  These last few turns do very little, if ANYTHING, toward prolonging the flight time and are "sensed" by the GG mechanism, allowing the freewheel to kick in.

The instructions do a very good job of explaining how the system works and can be found/downloaded from the GG website for those who might have "misplaced" them (speaking from personal experience ::)).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 17, 2011, 12:24:29 PM
Here is my Majestyk, about 99 percent.  I used polyspan for the bottom, along the length of the motor; all the rest is Esaki.  I left some front bays open, in case after weighing empty, and checking the balance with a motor, I needed to add weight, then I would add it along the front in the form of sheeting, assuming that it would most likely be tail heavy.  It turned out to be almost perfectly balanced, just needed maybe a half a gram along the front half, so I am closing it up the way it is.  It turned out to weigh 34.6 grams, with the GG installed and everything in place except for the motor.  I'll just fly it the way it is, 4-5 grams underweight, as I'd make another one if I wanted to compete, and do a better build job.  I have 3 coats of 50/50 dope on the fuse, and 2 coats on everything else.

I can see now where it is all about balsa selection at these low weights; I think the longerons are too flimsy, as it has definite bowing in between the verticals; so for Majestyk number two, I would keep all the rest of the balsa weights the same, but have much stiffer longerons, and since that would add a touch more weight behind the center of gravity, I would make up for it with a little more sheeting along the nose area.  But I can easily see where, with just slight changes in balsa selection, I could have been 5 grams over as easily as 5 grams under.  This was made from the Campbell's kit.

The weather has been a touch windy, so I haven't been out flying; but tomorrow at dawn is supposed to be calm again.  I hope to get out and start some trimming with this, as well as continuing to fiddle with the Square Eagle.

Derek, I installed a 6 x 1/8 for the balance check, and the GG does work that way for me, also; there is mild tension with a fresh motor, but not enough to stop it from working.  Its nice to know I have that option to try for this plane.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on December 17, 2011, 12:44:48 PM
Victor,
Very nice job on your Majestyk!
Can we assume that you're happy with the kit from Lee Campbell?
Thanks,
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 17, 2011, 01:13:10 PM
Hello Dave,
Yes, I'm very happy with the kit.  But since this is just my third model build, everything is a learning experience, so I don't know enough about balsa weights, and what is sufficient, or overbuilt, or underbuilt, for a given design, to have any sense of how things will turn out when it is all put together. But I could certainly tell that it was a much lighter plane than the square eagle; it turned out about about 10 grams lighter.  My square eagle is 46 grams, but I don't think it claims to be a 40 gram plane.  The Square Eagle flies great, and it was the easiest to build of the three planes I've built so far.

But I'm looking forward to seeing the Majestyk fly.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on December 17, 2011, 01:33:08 PM
Congratulations!    Not many P30's  turn out at such a light weight.     For competition - should you so desire - you could always bring it up to 40 gms with some ballast as the established CG

Nice work!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 17, 2011, 01:42:13 PM
Thanks applehoney, but the credit for the light weight would have to go to Lee Campbell, for the balsa selection, as well as the plane designer. I did manage to avoid any obvious weight mistakes in building this plane - for the Square Eagle, I used epoxy to attach the three wing sections at the dihedrals.  Unfortunately, I had installed the dihedral ribs with a bit of concavity, although they were at the right angle.  So I ended up using epoxy as filler for the concavity.  Probably added a few grams right there!  But should the Square Eagle happen to get run over by a truck, at least the dihedral ribs would be salvageable.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 17, 2011, 05:12:50 PM
In looking at the longerons again, I think I'm the problem...I'm squeezing the fuse when I'm putting the rubber bands on for the wing hold downs, the stab, and installing the motor peg.  That is where the longerons are becoming banana-like.

I took the Majestyk out for a quick ballpark check, just a few hand glides and one with 100 winds, to get the stab in the right neighborhood.  Got it close to gliding right, so I brought it back to make a proper lift for the stab, add a little more stab tilt, and put keys on the wing, which I needed to do before serious trim. 

I also found that the stab was starting to curl upwards at the ends; I think that is my fault for taking it off the board a couple days ago after a few hours of drying; I think I read that the tissue continues to shrink for a couple days or so.  So, I decided to add a third coat of dope, and will leave it on the magnet board overnight, so it can take a new set. 

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on December 17, 2011, 05:54:47 PM
In looking at the longerons again, I think I'm the problem...I'm squeezing the fuse when I'm putting the rubber bands on for the wing hold downs, the stab, and installing the motor peg.  That is where the longerons are becoming banana-like.

Victor
Victor, I put a 1/16 square cross piece half way along the bay just behind the wing mount (sometimes in front as well) to reinforce it. Very little weight added, but no more bent/cracked longerons from my fumbly fingers. You might consider adding them on your next build.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on December 17, 2011, 07:53:38 PM
Hey Victor,  Nice Majestyk, and a super low weight. 
  Remember I mentioned a while back about storing your stab flat between some firm foam and a piece of wood or thick foam to prevent warping.  Stabs are the most prone part of the model to warping, and keeping them fixed in that kind of jig when not using is the best thing you can do to prevent aggravation.  I do all my stabs that way.  Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 17, 2011, 09:59:10 PM
Caley, that sounds like a good idea.  I need to make storage boxes, so I'll add some stab storage boxes, too.

Bargle, that is a good idea.  Right now, with the wing tabs installed, and with a half gram of lead in the nose, its AUW is 46.4 grams, so there would be room for a little more balsa, which I'll remember for the next one.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 18, 2011, 10:02:52 AM
This morning was a perfect morning for getting the planes out - below freezing, so there wasn't any mud; overcast, and no wind at all.  I got in right as the sportsplex opened at dawn, which gives me an hour before all the soccer players arrive to use the fields.

I tried the Majestyk at 100 winds (6 x 1/8), to check my adjustments from yesterday - the added stab tilt and a new riser for the rear of the stab.  It was gliding fast, so I added a couple layers of card stock under the stab.  Checked it at 200 winds, and it was now floating nicely.  Wound it up to 700 winds, got a tail stand, but it is so light, that the stall recovery only had it go to level flight (didn't lose altitude) and then it kept going up.  It still went as high as the Square Eagle has ever gone, and it definitely glides better; a slower sink.   The GG had some right thrust, but no down yet, so I added some down thrust and wound it up to 800.  This got me a 2:10 flight, and it went a lot higher.  Now started to see something I hadn't seen before (but this is my first time trimming a P-30 with a 6 x 1/8 motor, too).  On release, it zooms with a mild curve to the left, but at a nice steep angle, then straightens out to straight ahead, climbing steeply, then transitions to a cruise climb in a nice RH circle.  Glide is also a nice RH circle with almost no perceptible change, except the plane does seem to slow down once the thrust is gone.

Then I wound it up to 900, and got more of the same, the same fast start in a mild left curve, then going straight at a very steep angle, then curving into the RH cruise climb.  It got much higher than I had ever seen with the square eagle, and I was nervous about unknown winds at altitude, but it was a still morning so it didn't drift as it circled up high.  Unlike the square eagle with the 2 minute motor run, and a 30 second glide (the tail end of the long motor run has the eagle already in a slow descent) the Majestyk with the 6 x 1/8 had a 50 second motor run, and a 1:30 glide, for a total of 2:20 for that flight.  I called that good enough for the morning, I'll replace the card stock with ply shim and fine tune the glide.  But overall very happy with how the Majestyk flies.   I think it can take more turns, and there is room for more tweaking of the climb and the glide.  I'll also experiment with other motors, too. A fun morning.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on December 18, 2011, 10:26:12 AM
I think I'll quit P30.   This guy's too good for me ....       :(

Doing great, Victor!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 18, 2011, 02:22:57 PM
HA!
thanks AH, but it will be several years before I catch up with anyone, if ever...one step forward with the Majestyk this morning, and a step back with the Square Eagle...the nose block was getting loose, so I tried to shore up the soft balsa with cya; but it ended up affecting how it set into the fuse, so all my power trim adjustments were gone.  So I learned that I need to face it all with some ply, and maybe add some sort of retention rubber band, so it sits flat and consistent in the fuse.

Since I built the Majestyk planning on the GG unit, I didn't put any shims in the nose block or fuse, so it sits flat and square off the bat, and less likely to work loose.  But I suspect unless I upgrade the nose block now, after a few dozen uses, and the nose block getting knocked out and twisting around on every landing, that it will work loose also, just like it has on the square eagle, and will affect my ability to have close tolerances on the thrust angle.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on December 19, 2011, 08:30:57 AM
I always harden the noseblock area with thin CyA. It does tend wallow out with time unless I do so.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on December 31, 2011, 10:33:47 AM
One of my Christmas orders came in, including a Kiwi-Koop (for my first coupe, and folding prop) and some 3/32 and 1/16 rubber, to experiment with different motors in the Majestyk.

Went out yesterday am briefly and tried a 4 x 1/8 in the Majestyk; got a 1:55 motor run, and a 1 minute glide; but didn't get as high as it did with the 6 x 1/8; I broke the motor during the second wind and so I put it away and went off to work.

This morning, with the new rubber that arrived, I tried a 10 x 1/16; for 1000 turns I got around 1:40, then wound it up to 1300 and got a 2:40, but with the plane up around 30 feet or so in a tree at the edge of the field.  I was glad it only ended up that high, as there are lots of 100 footers that would have been the end of the Majestyk, and it had been circling around the big trees outside the field, but luckily it circled around to end up in a shorter tree.  I went off to Wally's and got a golf ball retriever, and duct taped a painting pole extension, which was enough to fish the model out.

I knocked the fin off, but otherwise it seems to be OK, although a bit wet, as it had rained during the night, and the tree branches were all dripping wet.

It looked like the 10 x 1/16 got the plane up as high as the 6 x 1/8 did, but with a longer motor run, increasing the overall time, but will have to try some repeats; I'll also try the 6 x 3/32, too.  Now back to building the Koop.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Valderramos on January 06, 2012, 08:26:44 PM
Hi All!

This is my first design and construction of Power Rubber P30.

The model is 44.8 g, all in balsa and tissue, intend to start trimming this weekend ...

Regards


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: spacerod on January 06, 2012, 08:56:38 PM
Very nice looking P-30. Keep us informed as to how
it flies.

Charlie


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on January 06, 2012, 09:41:30 PM
I like that covering job, that is very sharp. I hope we can see pictures of it in the air.

Victor


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Valderramos on January 13, 2012, 10:07:36 AM
In the Air on the first day of trimming:


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on January 13, 2012, 11:07:00 AM
Looks very nice, well done!

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on January 13, 2012, 06:56:08 PM
Nice looking model,Valderramos. Hope it flies well.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alvaro Sala on January 14, 2012, 01:30:16 PM
Valderramos,
Very nice P-30!
Sorry but I can't say the same about your hat... ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Valderramos on January 23, 2012, 01:20:54 PM
One simple video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F790QhPOqts&feature=player_embedded#!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: mooman on February 12, 2012, 04:04:46 PM
these look cool :D , I want to build one, any recommendations for a first P-30 to build?

Jackson


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on February 12, 2012, 05:59:13 PM
Jackson,  There are so many good kits out there, if that is what you want.  Of course, you can build off of plans also.  But for a very basic, easy to build and fly P-30, Al Lidberg's Not Just Another Pretty Face (NJAPF) is great.  That was my first P-30, which I still have, and it flys great.
  A more advanced, with a bit more building skill required is the Majestyk, and wonderful flyer.
  I also had another P-30 called a Souper 30 that liked to fly.  In fact I lost it to the big updraft.
  I'm sure others will give you some more recommendations.  Look at all the suggestions and pick one or two, and have lots of fun.  Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on February 12, 2012, 06:27:52 PM
Jackson,
Try this one. Can't get any simpler.
Uses a 'STICK' fuse and all 'sheet' flying surfaces.
Not sure about any 'enclosed motor' rule though.
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: mooman on February 13, 2012, 06:10:57 AM
Thats about as simple as you could get... nice one Dave :D

Jackson


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on February 15, 2012, 04:49:40 PM
Here is my Tail Firster P30.  Just back from a testing session at the sod farm.  It flew well and glided ok, even though the CG is still too far forward.  Oddly, it hooked a little thermal, and went up like someone was pulling it up on a string.  It appeared to levitate horizontally.  It was an odd looking climb. 
I only got up to 700 turns, but it went well.   

Hopefully, the handy picture re-sizer will have done it's magic work, and you will be able to see a picture of it.   


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on February 15, 2012, 05:04:52 PM
First try at second picture wouldn't load.  I'll try again.  "UP" arrow is to keep me from making my usual blunders on launch.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on February 15, 2012, 06:13:58 PM
Thats an interesting canard pusher and it looks neat. How have you trimmed it?
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on February 15, 2012, 06:35:42 PM
It needed down thrust, which eliminated a slight power stall.  I need more right thrust, which I'll put in the next time I fly it. I used a Gizmo Geezer thrust button, which means no shims.
The model is a kit by BMJR.  It is still sold, and supposed to be a good flier. It looked like a good flier today, on partial winds.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on February 16, 2012, 08:41:01 AM
Looks really nice Dohrm.
I  wouldn't mind seeing a detail of the prop freewheeler set up.
Thanks,
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on February 16, 2012, 09:12:36 AM
I used the modified instructions included in the kit.  It does involve soldering, but that isn't that big of a deal.  I'll try to get a good close up picture of it for you.   The freewheeler works well.  However, as with all these freewheelers using snarky bits of wire for the freewheeler latch, you have to watch out when you hook it up, as it will slice you up good if it slips. 

You also have to wind the thing up correctly. [backwards].  I did not on my first attempt, and had to do it all over again.  Oops........... winding it up wrong guarantees you a close encounter of the worst kind with the snarky bits of wire.   


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on February 16, 2012, 09:57:58 AM
Thanks Dohrm,
NO rush on the close ups.
ALL good advice regarding snarky bits of wire too.
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on February 16, 2012, 09:31:26 PM
I look forward to seeing the canard in flight.  Post some video!  I've always liked canards, just as something relatively unusual.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on February 16, 2012, 09:58:33 PM
Weather permitting, I am going to fly it down at the Wintercoupe contest in Pensacola this weekend.  I'll try to get some video.  Hopefully the sun will be out.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on February 19, 2012, 06:11:21 PM
Just finished up this one today. The design is called the Banana Fritter. I don't know how I did it, but this one came out pretty light by my standards. Just a smidge over 41grams. I seem to have built something that will actually need a DT.   ???   Retrofitting shouldn't be too hard, I just didn't think I'd really need it, given how heavy my stuff usually comes out.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on February 19, 2012, 07:51:44 PM
Great looking airplane!  Nice work.  Yeah, you'll need that DT-shame to waste all that effort, and watch it sail away.

Pop up stabs won't bring it down every time, and if you use a pop-off wing, it is a major problem if it comes down in a tree.  However, I have only seen one fly away with a pop off wing. All the others have come down.

Let us know how it flies.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on February 19, 2012, 08:31:44 PM
Great looking airplane!  Nice work.  Yeah, you'll need that DT-shame to waste all that effort, and watch it sail away.

Pop up stabs won't bring it down every time, and if you use a pop-off wing, it is a major problem if it comes down in a tree.  However, I have only seen one fly away with a pop off wing. All the others have come down.

Let us know how it flies.
Will do. Thanks.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: crashcaley on February 19, 2012, 09:47:52 PM
Bargle,  That's snazzy lookin' airplane.  Yes, get a D/T on that.  You probably know that the thermal critters know when you either don't have one, or forgot to use the one you have installed.  That is certainly the case with a few I've tossed up.  Makes for some very long chases.  Caley


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on February 20, 2012, 12:49:55 AM
Very nice Bargle. What have you done at the poly breaks on the wing? It looks like you have overlapped the tissue at the join.
Happy flying.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on February 20, 2012, 06:42:18 AM
Um, covering up a goof. I used the 'doubled ribs at the breaks' building method on it. I didn't use stiff enough ribs at the break and they distorted slightly when I shrank the tissue before joining the sections. Rather than take the ribs back out and replace them, I took the lazy approach and fitted some tapered filler pieces in the gaps, then covered over them with the strip of tissue.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on February 21, 2012, 04:14:38 PM
Well it looks good and is no doubt stronger. i was curious because I would have trouble handling the covering at the poly breaks.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on February 21, 2012, 04:27:46 PM
I flew the Tail Firster canard down at the Pensacola Wintercoupe contest this past weekend.  It was rainy the first day, and really windy the second.  The planes would drift almost a mile in 2 minutes. 

I flew it anyway, with short fuses on the DT.  It handled the gusty winds quite well, and seemed to glide OK. It climbed out well, except for one launch that was a mistake on my part.  I still haven't gotten full turns on it, as I only flew enough to see if it would hack some wind.  I was more worried about it being wrecked after landing, if it got tumbling around. 

If any of you are in driving distance from Pensacola, you should get down there for a contest.  It is one of the best fields in the USA, being a mile square.   


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on February 21, 2012, 07:06:05 PM
Well it looks good and is no doubt stronger. i was curious because I would have trouble handling the covering at the poly breaks.
John
It certainly gives me problems. I've considered starting a thread asking for tips about that part of covering. I seem to be at least tolerable on the other parts, but the breaks always give me trouble.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on February 21, 2012, 09:18:14 PM
I was lucky enough to have someone tell me of an excellent way to cover poly breaks. Before that, it was a continual horror show.  An ugly horror show.
This is pretty easy, and ends up looking good.  I'll be happy to post it if you start a thread, or tell you about it right here.
No more French curves!
Once you get the hang of it, the tips will look very nice.

This may not be in strict adherence to this thread,but what the heck. 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Saint Alfonzo on February 22, 2012, 05:13:18 AM
I would be interested in this too..:)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on February 22, 2012, 05:51:30 AM
Me, three ;D!   It's one of the reasons I "prefer" models with only one break in the middle.  I was also considering building a "SATURNO" (minus holes), but time is getting too short (in more ways than one plus too many outside projects) to think of scratching one, so I will be ordering an IKARA "Pee Wee" (http://www.ikara.eu/index.php?nid=6259&lid=en&oid=941333).  It's available as a kit, ARF, and RTF - I'll probably get the kit (I'm NOT Bill Gates and I prefer to build).  A few more tips on covering the wing would be helpful (I've actually FORGOTTEN a lot of "how too's").


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on February 22, 2012, 06:45:20 AM
OK, I'll start a thread this evening.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on February 22, 2012, 11:49:42 AM
OK, I'll start a thread this evening.
I may have something to contribute!
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on February 22, 2012, 07:14:52 PM
OK, new thread is started. Link below. Looking forward to what Dave and dohrmc and anyone else have to say. :)

http://www.hippocketaeronautics.com/hpa_forum/index.php?topic=11493.0


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on February 25, 2012, 06:06:22 PM
Finished another one. This time it's my Baysik Bahks Mk. II. only real change from the first one is a relocated rear rubber peg and resultant longer upsweep at the rear of the fuselage. Something's going right for me on these. This one came in at 43.2 grams. For comparison, my Mk. 1 came in at 60 grams.
That's 2 at a reasonable weight now. I'm either building better, picking better wood,  getting lucky or all 3.   :D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on February 25, 2012, 07:20:21 PM
Nicely done! A good thermal awaits you.  Let us know how it flies.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on February 25, 2012, 09:22:38 PM
Thanks, dohrmc. Will do.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Victor on February 25, 2012, 09:33:59 PM
That looks real nice, Bargle.... what kind of motor do you plan on using with it?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on February 25, 2012, 09:44:35 PM
Oh, and by the way, that covering job is very nice.  It looks very smooth.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on February 26, 2012, 09:50:58 AM
That looks real nice, Bargle.... what kind of motor do you plan on using with it?
It'll be 10 grams of 3/16. I've got a fair amount of that. I made up a motor before I settled on the rear peg position. I set the peg mount where there's an inch or so of slack with an unwound motor. I don't remember how many loops that ended up being.

Oh, and by the way, that covering job is very nice.  It looks very smooth.

The wrinkles just didn't show up in the pictures. Trust me, they're there.  ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: goodeye on March 02, 2012, 07:41:36 PM
Just about ready to cover my Boomer. This weighs 27 grams as shown in the photo. Not sure if that is good or bad at this stage since this is my first P30 model. Seems a little heavy though with only 13 grams left to make the 40 gram limit ready to fly minus rubber... Built it stock using Ambroid glue. Don't know how I could build it any lighter. Not complaining though, I'm happy with it!

Greg


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on March 02, 2012, 09:17:28 PM
I bet you have to add ballast. Nice job!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on March 02, 2012, 09:19:18 PM
Forgot to ask, looks like aBoomer?  Never seen one, but that's my guess.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: goodeye on March 02, 2012, 10:35:50 PM
Yep, Boomer..


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on March 03, 2012, 10:32:15 AM
I see you don't have a prop on it.  If you don't use a Gizmo Geezer unit on it, by all means get some Gizmo thrust buttons. You'll never put shims on a plane again. I am not an expert, but no shims is much better than any of the other choices. You don't need no steenkin' shims!  You'll have to bush a prop to use the .047 wire-or bush the thrust button, but still the best choice.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: BG on March 10, 2012, 04:22:35 PM
Here is my new Pirate p30....41g with DT, still in the trimming phase.

B


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Wout Moerman on March 10, 2012, 04:48:27 PM
Bernard
very nice looking P30! I love the colours and the weight is very good.

Wout


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on March 10, 2012, 07:35:43 PM
Looks great, BG. Looking forward to flight pictures.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Sunbeamtiger on March 11, 2012, 10:29:47 AM
Bernard,
Nice looking Pirate, Great Job!
I have two of them and I can tell you one thing....You will love their performance and durability. The Pirate is great "windy weather" due to it's strength. The only problem you might run into will the nose button has a tendency to fall out. That has happened several times on both my birds over the years. I know of several people who have had the same problem. I haven't really solved the issue or really given it much thought since it doesn't happen that often but one day it will cause me to miss that max. :( I suppose I will solve the problem then. ;D

Thermals
Mike


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on March 11, 2012, 12:46:02 PM
Here is my new Pirate p30....41g with DT, still in the trimming phase.

B
GOOD looking ship BG!
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: BG on March 11, 2012, 01:54:25 PM
THanks Guys,
I still have to optimize her....hoping to use a PGI TOP trim to get max performance out of her with minimal gadgetry.
B


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on March 11, 2012, 05:26:46 PM
The only problem you might run into will the nose button has a tendency to fall out.
Mike, I had that problem too and actually did miss a max!
So I was forced to solve the problem. See the slightly out of focus pic (sorry about that) to see what I did. I made a wire hook out of 0.020" wire and glued it to the top of the fuselage secured with a few wrappings of thread. A small rubber band goes down under the noseblock bearing support and back up to the hook. Simple and foolproof.

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on March 11, 2012, 05:48:56 PM
Quote
A small rubber band goes down under the noseblock

In England, it's known as a 'duffer's band', but that obviously doesn't apply to you Tony ::)

I too suffered the same problem, but changing to the Gizmo hub and prop makes it a thing of the past.

I'm about to build some new wings for my P30, as some years ago they spent a few weeks out in the rain, and subsequent damage means that they are now beyond redemption.

Bernard, that's a very nicely finished model, congratulations.

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pete R on March 12, 2012, 02:58:30 AM
RE: loose nose plug on the Pirate.
Larry B told me the cure was a dab of J B Weld on the inside of the hook to beef it up a little.
Then grind to proifile with your Dremel.
It'll make the hook fit a little tighter and is much stronger
I did it on mine and no more problems.

Cheers!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on March 12, 2012, 03:26:22 AM
I have used for ages a rather similar rubber band as Tony shows. Simply put one 16mm (2/3") rubber band around the motor tube. The tube has two hooks on opposite sides, and the front bearing another two at 90 degrees to the hooks in the tube. So after installing the front bearing, I pull the rubber to the hooks in the bearing, and the rubber band then makes a zig-zag between the hooks. Keeps the nose block firmly in place.

 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: SHigSpeed on March 14, 2012, 12:05:51 AM
Just finished up this one today. The design is called the Banana Fritter. I don't know how I did it, but this one came out pretty light by my standards. Just a smidge over 41grams. I seem to have built something that will actually need a DT.   ???   Retrofitting shouldn't be too hard, I just didn't think I'd really need it, given how heavy my stuff usually comes out.

Hey Bargle,

The Fritter usually has a thru-fuze wing.  I even see the vestigial structure where it should go.  Why did you chose to top mount it?

_SHig


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on March 14, 2012, 01:05:46 AM
Well.. maybe because it made more sense.

Putting the wing through a fuselage slot will likely damage either or both in a heavy impact ....  it will likely fly better wth the wing atop ....  and there's no requirement for it to be built as per plan as in Oldtimer/vintage.   

Looks better to me than Twomey's design!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: SHigSpeed on March 14, 2012, 01:45:10 AM
Well.. maybe because it made more sense.

Putting the wing through a fuselage slot will likely damage either or both in a heavy impact ....  it will likely fly better wth the wing atop ....  and there's no requirement for it to be built as per plan as in Oldtimer/vintage.   

Looks better to me than Twomey's design!

Makes sense to me!  Did you chose to modify after building out the fuse?  I guess you need to be sure to leave a nice flat "land" at the wing loc instead of the banana curve (or compensate with complex rails I guess...)

Definitely on my "to build" list, and I'll most likely do as you did!

_SHig


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on March 14, 2012, 06:42:39 AM
It was a combination of factors including those mentioned by Applehoney. I'm not the lightest builder, so the ability to adjust the CG without adding weight was a strong influence and yes, I did decide on the change after I had the fuselage mostly built. I decided to leave the structure as is. However, the CG ended up at just about the stock wing location, so I got no real benefit in that respect.  :-\
I did have to make some curved pieces to get the rails up enough to sit flat. I built up a couple of layers of square stock, then sanded them off flat before adding the rails. I was careful to make the area parallel to the original mounting section. I really like the graceful curve of the fuselage and wanted to retain it.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: SHigSpeed on March 14, 2012, 10:29:41 AM
It was a combination of factors including those mentioned by Applehoney. I'm not the lightest builder, so the ability to adjust the CG without adding weight was a strong influence and yes, I did decide on the change after I had the fuselage mostly built. I decided to leave the structure as is. However, the CG ended up at just about the stock wing location, so I got no real benefit in that respect.  :-\
I did have to make some curved pieces to get the rails up enough to sit flat. I built up a couple of layers of square stock, then sanded them off flat before adding the rails. I was careful to make the area parallel to the original mounting section. I really like the graceful curve of the fuselage and wanted to retain it.

With a flat center panel, I'm considering putting the peg rail within the fuze and only adding a very low profile set of rails above if not just biting the bullet and flattening the top and using the top of the wing to continue the curve visually.

One question, do you think that 1/8"x1/16" diagonals could be used to reduce weight and make fitting the ends a bit easier?

_SHig


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Sunbeamtiger on March 14, 2012, 07:13:12 PM
The only problem you might run into will the nose button has a tendency to fall out.
[/quote]
Mike, I had that problem too and actually did miss a max!
So I was forced to solve the problem. See the slightly out of focus pic (sorry about that) to see what I did. I made a wire hook out of 0.020" wire and glued it to the top of the fuselage secured with a few wrappings of thread. A small rubber band goes down under the noseblock bearing support and back up to the hook. Simple and foolproof.

Tony

[/quote]

Tony,
Thanks for the fool proof idea. That's pretty much what I had in mind and something I should be doing before the flying season arrives. My brother Marty is framing one up now (a xmas present from a kind brother). He was impressed with it's performance during the past Nats, even though I didn't do well he could see advantage in the design. One thing he doesn't like and makes fun of me is that I load the motor from the rear. Might sound strange but it works for me.
Mike


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Sunbeamtiger on March 14, 2012, 07:20:07 PM

RE: loose nose plug on the Pirate.
Larry B told me the cure was a dab of J B Weld on the inside of the hook to beef it up a little.
Then grind to proifile with your Dremel.
It'll make the hook fit a little tighter and is much stronger
I did it on mine and no more problems.

Cheers!

Pete,
Now that you mention that, I recall Larry telling me the same thing. Of course silly me didn't do that. What I did try, which I forgot I did, was to lengthen the slot in the nose button so it would have to travel a bit more to fall out. Don't know if it worked or not since I have put that many flights up since then.

Mike


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on March 14, 2012, 07:53:09 PM
With a flat center panel, I'm considering putting the peg rail within the fuze and only adding a very low profile set of rails above if not just biting the bullet and flattening the top and using the top of the wing to continue the curve visually.

One question, do you think that 1/8"x1/16" diagonals could be used to reduce weight and make fitting the ends a bit easier?

_SHig
I don't know if it would be lighter, my building experience is too limited to say. FWIW, I will say that fitting the 3/32" sq. diagonals wasn't bothersome for me. I am going to have to reposition the rear motor mount. It's too far from the nose for a motor made of 3/16" rubber. Only after a couple of stretch windings was it long enough to let the freewheel work reliably. It may be OK with a 1/8" motor. I don't have much 1/8", so I'm loathe to waste it on a trial motor.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: kittyfritters on April 05, 2012, 05:01:53 PM
This is my new P-30 design, working name "Unintended".  It started out as an all balsa, Jedelsky wing, indoor, towline glider.  (See post in Indoor Glider section.)  When someone suggested that I, "Put a motor on it!", my first thought was to simply put a nose bearing and a prop hook on the boom and make a sort of oversized ROG stick. 

Then I remembered that I had broken the wing on my Vector.  I took the motor tube off of the Vector and glued it onto the boom of the glider.  I glided nicely, but the powered flight was somewhat less than stable.  Remembering that the glider's fuselage boom was a tad shorter than a P-30's fuselage I grafted another ten inches into the boom.  Now, it flies rather nicely, at least in the low power tests I have been performing.  I won't be able to take it somewhere that has the room to max it until tomorrow morning.

It will need a bit of ballast to get to rules weight since it currently weighs 34 grams with the motor.  (The glider, in it's final incarnation, weighed 14 grams.)  When I have verified all the proportions I will build another one, built for the job, with a build post, and compete with it.  If it does well I'll do formal plans.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on April 05, 2012, 06:17:44 PM
Interesting!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on April 05, 2012, 08:27:04 PM
Agreed. Looking forward to a build thread.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: kittyfritters on April 06, 2012, 02:29:37 PM
I had hoped to give my "Unintended" a real test this morning in the dead air when the on shore breezes give way to the off shore winds.  I left for the field just as the on shore wind was dying, but in the ten minute drive to the "Grassy Knoll" the dead air lasted about a minute.  When I arrived the off shore winds had gotten up to 15 miles per hour with gusts to 30.  I didn't even try to take it out of the car.  This weekend is socially crammed and the weather report for next week looks bleak, so it looks like I won't get to give it a real test until the following weekend.  I'll keep you posted.

Howard


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: goodeye on April 06, 2012, 08:45:19 PM
I'm finally ready to install the button timer and rig the pop up wing and tail on my Boomer. The instructions just say to 'install the timer' so my question is "how"? What type of glue are you using to attach plastic to balsa?
Thanks,
Greg


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: goodeye on April 09, 2012, 02:56:30 PM
Almost done with my Boomer. Just have to install the prop. I decided to incorporate the pop-up wing and tail. As pictured it weighs 37 grams (without prop) so it might be just a tad heavy. This is my first P-30 and I'm happy with it. The fuselage covering are individual color bands that are butted up to each other so in theory the weight should be the same as if it was all one piece of tissue. I tried to give it the 'coral snake' look (red on yellow kill a fellow). The pylon and last red band on the fuselage tail is floral paint. These photos were all taken with the D/T armed and 'hot'. Had to keep resetting the timer before it let go...

Mark


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on April 09, 2012, 03:12:29 PM
Wow, nice job, it is a handsome plane.  I bet it flies like a bird. 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on April 09, 2012, 06:49:44 PM
Mark,
GREAT looking ship!
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alvaro Sala on April 09, 2012, 07:56:16 PM
I made a video of Rafael Valderramos P30 in flight (The Urubu shown in reply # 513).
He used a short fuse due to the small field, so the flight was little more than one minute, but we can see how high the DT worked. It could easily fly for two minutes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0ejJYMa5m4


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on April 09, 2012, 08:05:32 PM
Mark, you should be happy with it. You did a fine job. The snake color scheme came out very nice.  :)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on April 09, 2012, 08:49:10 PM
Put some eyes on that thing!  It will look great, and it will terrify the other P 30s.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: goodeye on April 09, 2012, 10:16:29 PM
Which prop should I use... Czech or Peck? I also have a Gizmo Geezer but I have decided not to use it on this model. The nose block is already finished for a non Gizmo prop. So the question is just which one... Czech or Peck?

Thanks,
Mark


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on April 09, 2012, 10:41:20 PM
One of my club flying buddies, David Mills, has competed in p30 at the Nats for a long time. He has come in at every place from 2nd to 6th, and is a very, very good P30 flier.  He uses the Peck prop. He has been a little unlucky not to win, but it's really hard to win P30 at the Nats.
You will find people willing to argue about it, but I would be interested in seeing what the top fliers are using.  Except for David, I have no idea how it breaks out.  I know David's planes climb extremely well.
I like the Gizmo unit, but then, I am a p30 hack.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on April 09, 2012, 11:14:38 PM
Beautiful airplane.  I, too, really like the color scheme.

I, too, am a P-30 hack.  I think the choice of prop is really airframe and motor-dependent, since the prop efficiency is going to be related to pitch, prop speed, and airplane speed over the powered part of the flight envelope.  I have my theories, but I'm too new and haven't tested them, except putting my choice of configuration on my Titan.

--Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: kittyfritters on April 10, 2012, 02:08:27 PM
There was some dead air, this morning, so I decided to take the "Unintended" to the Grassy Knoll.  As soon as I started the car a slight breeze came up.  I figured that it would be howling by the time I got to the Basin so I decided to go to the soccer fields a few blocks from my house.  The area is three regulation soccer fields, side by side, with a spectator area and a small parking lot, bounded by two major streets, the 170 freeway, and a line of trees.  Obviously, I would have to keep the power down.   Anything over a minute even in dead air, and I would loose the model.

I used a single loop of 3/16", F.A.I., tan, sport rubber weighing 4 grams.  The model was ballasted to 40 grams without the rubber using modeling clay.  On 1000 turns I was getting flights from 35 seconds to a minute. A minute flight carried it all the way to the trees with the slight breeze blowing.  Just when I was thinking that the configuration was validated it just quit flying.  I couldn't get over 20 seconds for the next two flights.   A closer examination showed that the nose plug had de-laminated just behind the thrust button.  A drop of C/A fixed it and the next flight was almost off the field on 1200 turns.

Although I have not tested this cobbled together version on 10 grams of rubber (I'll have to wait until the two storms coming in this week pass.) I think the configuration is validated, and it's time to draw up formal plans (The original plans for the glider are a dimensioned sketch on a yellow pad.) and start a build thread for it.  Of course there is always the possibility that one built straight will not fly as well as the cobbled together version, but my karma has been a bit better than that lately.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: hoogie007 on April 10, 2012, 02:16:57 PM
G-your Boomer looks fabulous as we have discussed off line.  I didn't realize you were sharing here or I would have answered your timer installation question.  On the Badge or Button you simply thread into the plywood adapter plates provided in the kit using the screws that come with the timer.  On the Ikarra version I have attached these with cellulose cement or even better-silicone adhesive.  The silicone is good for any of these if you want to skip the micro screw installation-just apply a thin film and place in position, allow to cure.  I've never had one of the Ikarra timers break off under use as a bonded in place installation.

A note on the Ikarra-the spring provided in the kit provides a bit too much pull for that particular one.  I've never managed to get one to go past two minutes, and most of the time it's about 1:30 or so.  Good for small fields or short D/T sessions, but pretty frustrating if you plan to fly contests.  The rubber stock include in that timer kit seems to work best but it has the shortcoming of eventually rotting or changing with use so you will be faced with maintenance problems there.  If you can find a very light tension spring to replace the kit one you may have better luck.  The kit spring is great with the other two timers noted.

Good luck on the test flights!

Clint


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: goodeye on April 10, 2012, 03:05:08 PM
I figured out how to mount the timer by looking at the drawing (that's a novel thought). I made a 1/32 ply mount plate for the timer, glued it to the pylon with Ambroid and then used 2 very tiny screws to mount the timer to the ply. I used the kit spring and yes, it was very tedious to get a 2 minute trip. I'm in the 2:15 range right now. I had to keep adjusting the string at the bung in VERY minute amounts to get it right. Almost imperceivable movements of the thread through the bung plug. I don't want to touch it anymore!

Mark


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on April 11, 2012, 01:53:38 AM
Alvaro - great flight by Rafael's Urubu. Good thing it went past the soccer players though. I like the nice right/right pattern and good transition. what rubber is Rafael using and how many turns did you have on for that flight?
Re the Boomer - it should definitely have eyes. ;D
The Unintended looks interesting for a Jedelsky wing P30.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on April 18, 2012, 08:05:21 PM
Which prop for P-30 ?

Czeck 1st choice over PP unles the GGeezer has repitched the blades to match


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: lincoln on April 29, 2012, 12:18:45 AM
Let's hope no one like my mother is around when you're flying it. She would have killed it instantly before noticing it wasn't a snake!
snip
I tried to give it the 'coral snake' look (red on yellow kill a fellow).
snip

Mark


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: goodeye on May 16, 2012, 12:17:23 PM
I'm finally getting ready to travel to Muncie (for a autogyro fly-in) and I'm building motors and such for my Boomer. I found a 'deck mop' at Wal-Mart for $1.32 which has a thin wall (.010) steel tube handle not quite 7/8" in diameter. I cut a section off and made a blast tube. It slides right into the Boomer with about 1/32" clearance all around.

Ok, I have a dumb question so try not to make fun of me.... How the heck do you install the rubber motor into a closed end tube?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on May 16, 2012, 12:27:59 PM
No such thing as dumb questions!
You make a "stuffing stick". A piece of wood or tube or what have you that holds the motor in a stretched state so that you can load it into the motor tube with the blast tube in place.
Or, you can make a piece of wire that fits onto the front hook, that you can drop down the aluminum tube and pull the motor through with. To do that would require a rear tube that fits over the rear peg that the motor could be attached to first.  I've seen people make up multiple blast tubes pre-loaded with rubber motors that can be inserted into the motor tube at a moments notice.
Lot's of ways to skin the cat! ;)

Oh, and I think you need to slot the rear hole of your blast tube so that you can pull it out after winding. You don't want to have to remove the rear peg with a fully wound motor do you! :o

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: craig h on May 16, 2012, 08:26:18 PM
 I hope this works...here is a blow tube that was on the orgnial plan of the Champion P-30..note the notches for the motor pin..which allows the tube to be slightly twisted to be removed.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on May 17, 2012, 03:12:22 AM
For what it's worth, I've always put the bayonet cut-out on the other side of the slot. Winding in the usual clockwise direction means that any rubber movement tends to keep the blast tube locked in position, rather than unlocking it.

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Broken Strands on May 17, 2012, 11:11:13 PM
My initial thoughts as well Peter, then after I read the building manual for that design Mr. Schroedter explains that the locking slots are seemingly backwards to keep the blast tube solidly in place in the event of a blown motor.  A tight fit will keep it in place during winding when the rubbing forces of the motor are relatively small.  

Sounds good to me, I'll give it a try.  Bill  


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Broken Strands on May 17, 2012, 11:30:06 PM
Me and my Campbell P-30 in one hand and my OFB's Pirate in the other.  This is Pahrump, Nevada;  about an hour and a half west of Las Vegas.  In fact, just behind those mountains on the horizon is Las Vegas.  Pahrump is kind of a retirement community and that's where my buddy lives.  We were fine-tuning our planes for the Las Vegas club contest this coming Saturday.  The dry-lake just east of Las Vegas, where the contest will be held, is even bigger! 

100 degrees in Vegas today!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Broken Strands on May 17, 2012, 11:44:23 PM
Nonsense in the desert.  Pay no attention to the annoying man with the Iphone slurring his words.  Doing my best to distract my buddy as he preps his fancy schmancy composite prebuilt Pirate P-30.  Notice how I succeed and he screws up his launch. :D

Meanwhile my low-tech Campbell Soup puts in max after max...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pLaiemPxyM


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: goodeye on May 21, 2012, 04:56:01 PM
Just finished building a winding stooge. Has an adjustable foam cushion and hooks for hanging the winder and blast tube removal wire. 3/32" fiberglass CNC cut forks with the pin attached via a lanyard. The wood is poplar and the hardware is 95% stainless. Now for the 'stuff stick'...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: SHigSpeed on May 21, 2012, 05:44:39 PM
Just finished building a winding stooge. Has an adjustable foam cushion and hooks for hanging the winder and blast tube removal wire. 3/32" fiberglass CNC cut forks with the pin attached via a lanyard. The wood is poplar and the hardware is 95% stainless. Now for the 'stuff stick'...

Pretty!

_SHig


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: goodeye on May 21, 2012, 06:15:24 PM
Made a 'stuff stick' by modifying a metal thimble and attaching it to a carbon fiber arrow shaft with epoxy glue and a sheet metal screw going through the thimble into the shaft.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: kittyfritters on May 22, 2012, 06:18:10 PM
Just finished building a winding stooge. Has an adjustable foam cushion and hooks for hanging the winder and blast tube removal wire. 3/32" fiberglass CNC cut forks with the pin attached via a lanyard. The wood is poplar and the hardware is 95% stainless. Now for the 'stuff stick'...

I like the ideas of hanging hooks for the winders and the "Oh, Oh! wire".

Here's my version of a stuffing stick made from leftover Guillow's spars.  Works with drapery ring rear loops too.

(http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o207/kittyfritters/000_0559.jpg)

(http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o207/kittyfritters/000_0560.jpg)

(http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o207/kittyfritters/Pusher_stick.jpg)



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Sandgroper on June 20, 2012, 06:40:25 PM
I haven`t flown P30 for years but with entries dwindling I decided I had to do my bit to keep it alive,my first P30 was the ICER 2 which flew well and managed a second place in our state champs in 1996-gosh that long ago.
The twin fins were a little troublesome for my clumsy paws so it was given an underfin and flew just as well.After that the wings and tail sat in the rack until recently when I stripped the old PP tissue off and recovered it with some iron on mylar from Dr Diesel,the fuselage was damaged so I formed a new one based on the ICER 1 from 1/32 balsa soaked in water and wrapped around a broomstick.After drying the seam is superglued and covered with Sig Koverall applied with thinned dope,I pull a dope filled sponge through the tube a couple of times to seal the inside.I machined a alloy nose ring and epoxied it in,the timer is a Tomy mounted on a alloy faceplate with a on/off switch.
After endless problems with free wheel devices I found the rear drive unit in the freewheeler postings on this site and made one up and an alloy nose button.
All up weight is 70g-shock horror but the test flights on hand winds are very promising.

Phil


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on August 09, 2012, 08:22:25 PM
I finally bit the bullet and picked up an IKARA "Pee Wee" from Benjamin in Belgium.  The German distributor for IKARA no longer carries model airplanes, so I had been faced with ordering directly - then Benjamin decided to make room in his cupboard...

I didn't hesitate...

Not sure if it's the RTF or ARF, but it comes with everything one needs except rubber (not sure about that, tho).  It's apparently designed to the European 50 gram rule, but that won't bother me as I seriously doubt if I'll get to a contest in the States.  At least I can get my "feet wet" before building some of the other neat models.

Should have it by the beginning of next week and will post pics then.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alvaro Sala on August 09, 2012, 10:01:41 PM
The "Cometa" was a 24" wing span kit from Casa Aerobrás. 1943 design and it was the first rubber powered airmodel I made good flights about 30 years ago.
Now I decided to enlarge the plan to 30" with some modifications.
I don't belive it will be a winner in a contest. I built just becouse I love the vintage look.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on August 12, 2012, 08:00:13 PM
Thats a nice looking model Alvaro.Sandgroper is that washout in the right wing or just camera distortion?

John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on August 17, 2012, 09:12:40 AM
My IKARA "Pee Wee" arrived yesterday ;D!  It's the ARF version - very well packed and totally complete :o!  I will probably cover the tail in mylar instead of the supplied Super Light ESAKI so I'll have to order some from Mike W.

There IS some construction that still has to be done, and the flying surfaces then have to be sanded (LE) and covered.  The tissue (orange on mine) does seem lighter by feel than the orange "ESAKI Light" that I had from Shorty's Basement.  Included is a completely assembled, adjustable front end, Ikara viscous timer and ALL the itty-bits needed to get the model IN the air (yes, there is a good hank of TAN SS with "O"-ring).

I would even now NOT hesitate to recommend this P-30 to anyone!  It appears similar to a BOOMER (and many other "tube fuz" P-30's), and the list price, considering what's in the box, is quite acceptable.  There is some distortion in the photos due to the angle and the macro focusing mode, but rest assured, the parts are straight!



Short edit to the above: You have to supply your own glue and dope >:( ;).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dosco on August 17, 2012, 11:18:43 AM
Pit:
Very nice. Is the boom supposed to be glued to the tube, or is it removable for tranportation purposes? I'm curious.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on August 17, 2012, 11:33:26 AM
I've only glanced at the instruction sheet, but the joiner is balsa so I'd bet it is glued permanently.  If I start atually reading the instructions, unroll the plan, that means I'm in trouble...  It IS trying to seduce me :-X, whispering "Hey, I'm almost ready... further along than most of your `finish me finally´models...", "just a few parts to glue and a bit of sanding..."

I'm resisting...


resisting...



resis...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Ding on August 17, 2012, 01:05:19 PM
The "Cometa" was a 24" wing span kit from Casa Aerobrás. 1943 design and it was the first rubber powered airmodel I made good flights about 30 years ago.
...I built just becouse I love the vintage look.

Alvaro,
I really like the lines of your P30 'COMETA'.  They are truly appealing and worthy of emulation.  I can also see your love for the design with the way you covered it.  Really colorful.  It sure looks like a winner to me.
Ding

P-30 is the right size for me.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dosco on August 17, 2012, 05:06:19 PM
I've only glanced at the instruction sheet, but the joiner is balsa so I'd bet it is glued permanently.  If I start atually reading the instructions, unroll the plan, that means I'm in trouble...  It IS trying to seduce me :-X, whispering "Hey, I'm almost ready... further along than most of your `finish me finally´models...", "just a few parts to glue and a bit of sanding..."

I'm resisting...

resisting...

resis...

<borg> RESISTANCE IS FUTILE! </borg>


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on August 17, 2012, 06:46:21 PM
PFFFT!! :P :P     ;)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pete R on August 17, 2012, 07:30:45 PM
PFFFT!
Does that mean youre thinkin' Jetex assited P-30?
cheers!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: CometsGallor on September 01, 2012, 01:58:56 PM
The "Cometa" was a 24" wing span kit from Casa Aerobrás. 1943 design and it was the first rubber powered airmodel I made good flights about 30 years ago.
Now I decided to enlarge the plan to 30" with some modifications.
I don't belive it will be a winner in a contest. I built just becouse I love the vintage look.

Alvaro, 

I love the design, and your craftsmanship is excellent. Winning the contest is not the total objective of this hobby, at least for some like myself, but the joy of building and flying a beautiful model is a great measure of success.  I may have to use the design as an inspiration for future P-30s. Thanks for sharing.

Bruce


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alvaro Sala on September 02, 2012, 09:27:31 PM
Thanks John, Ding and Bruce.

Video of the flight with 600 turns. After this I made a flight with little less side thrust and 900 turns. Thanks to DT I still have the Cometa.
http://youtu.be/mYh33WvdVq8


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on September 17, 2012, 09:51:18 PM
P30 fleet ready for competition:

Saturno V5 (14mm, homebuilt fiberglass fuselage, GG unit, composite wing and HT)

Saturno V3.8 (14mm, homebuilt glass and carbon fuselage, GG unit, balsa V3 wing and tail, vertical made using carbon rods)

Saturno V3.5 no pylon (balsa fuselage, wing and tails)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alvaro Sala on September 17, 2012, 10:09:11 PM
What Alexandre Cruz Didn't tell:
Next sunday, september 23th we'll make a contest - P-30.
My humble Cometa will face his fleet of Saturnos.
Wish me luck!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 18, 2012, 03:47:02 AM
Talking about P-30's, we flew out Finnish "championships" on Sunday, in really harsh conditions. 7m/s wind across the small (700m; 1/2 mile) field meant that we had to be close to a band of small trees, and the weather was really turbulent all over the field. F1H's, that launched to 60+ meters were in smoother air and some even cought some thermals, but most P-30's struggled in the ground turbulence and never really got altitude.

I have been working on VIT and torque meter lately, and had my models trimmed for strong, straight burst on 6 strand motors. In better conditions you can climb 30 meters, half the overall height, in less than 10 seconds with a fully-wound motor. On Sunday, this approach did not work, but the turbulence threw the model all over the place, resulting in bad climbs and even crashes during the initial flight. On the other hand, guys with slower climbs were not doing much better, with the turbulence shaking their models up and down. So the question really is, how should one trim a P-30 for such heavy turbulence? Or is it just a no-go, no feasible way to fly such small models in such heavy conditions?

 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on September 18, 2012, 12:20:56 PM
 We had the same problem this year in Argentina, very strong wind, even too much for F1H to be properly towed.

 My best result was using an intermediate motor run (10 strands of 1/16") and waiting for a good spot to launch so the first seconds could take the model high enough to scape the turbulence.

 I cant tell if a shorter motor would be better as I also saw many crashes that day.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: flydean1 on September 18, 2012, 08:03:23 PM
Tapio,

To your question of flying P30's in rough weather.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: flydean1 on September 18, 2012, 08:17:38 PM
Ok, I hit the wrong button.   ::)

Ahem!  flying P-30's in rough weather.  I/ve seen it done successfully with a model which is designed for the conditions.  Basically, it takes a shorter motor--8 or more strands of 1/8.   Short but powerful burst and a model which can control it.  Wing needs to be tapered such that the tips are light, and the motor tube is short with a light tail boom coupled with a short nose moment.  In other words, light extremeties (sp?).

There was just such a model featured in an obscure puplication circulated amongst dedicated nut-case Free Flighters known as the Free Flight Quarterly.  Jim Mayes was the designer and the model was his Accipiter design.  It was part of one of the special dedicated P-30 Special Issues. 

Jim didn't address the rough weather performance in the article, but I saw him fly it in wind velocities in the region of 7 m/sec as you experienced.  It had a very short prop run, but it would climb very rapidly and punch through the ground turbulence.  He was able to launch in lulls between the stronger gusts.  I helped  him chase using GPS, maps and good binoculars.  No tracker!  It would go about half a mile in 2 minutes.  His main challenge was lighting the fuse when the wind abated.  Sometimes it just didn't happen.  A non-fuse DT would have fixed that problem.

Check out the article.   ;D



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on September 18, 2012, 09:21:45 PM
Here's the Accipiter plan NOT full size.
I've also seen the Model fly. It gets up fast and seems to stay there.
Dave Andreski


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dosco on September 19, 2012, 08:39:13 AM
Here's the Accipiter plan NOT full size.
I've also seen the Model fly. It gets up fast and seems to stay there.
Dave Andreski

Can you upload to the plans page?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 19, 2012, 09:08:59 AM
I remember the Accipiter (actually the wing planform shows some resemblance to my latest model). However, on Sunday I was not happy with attempts of straight initial climb. Maybe with 6 strands the model is not fast enought, but I should try at 8... Would the greater speed make the model less sensitive to turbulence, or is it just so that a small model gets thrown around in big turbulence? If the latter is true, then the 8 strands would not help, just make more spectacular crashes... :-)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on September 19, 2012, 10:55:17 AM
Dave,
Sorry, I don't own a full size plan. The posted image was taken from the FFQ P-30 disc.
Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: bedowinn on October 21, 2012, 02:03:36 AM
2nd Boomer
Wing and stab DT Gizmo 9.5" prop. Both Boomer kits were excellent quality, plans and instructions were easy to follow and very detailed. The Boomer trimmed out in about 15 flights (with Clint's help).
First one flew away at Lost Hills FF contest. 1st flight in anger it rode a nice column of air that a partial DT could not conquer.
I like to think it's still flying, past Hawaii, and AF, heading for Tokyo. BTW, AF's desalination plant down.
Hopefully I've improved the DT system on this one.
Mass 47.8g.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: hoogie007 on October 22, 2012, 02:48:02 PM
Nice job Mike-this one looks like it will do justice to the lost one in the Pacific.

Looking forward to your trim sessions at Perris-give me a call.

Clint


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: bedowinn on October 24, 2012, 01:01:44 AM
Nice job Mike-this one looks like it will do justice to the lost one in the Pacific.

Looking forward to your trim sessions at Perris-give me a call.

Clint

Thanks Clint,
My favorite part of the build is slicing the wing spars. This one is 1 to 1.5g lighter.
Hope to fly it this Sat. I think I have a decent DT setup this time. Ran the timer for 1 to 5 minutes.
Is the next contest in Jan??

Mike


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: hoogie007 on October 24, 2012, 02:37:20 PM
The next major contest that includes P-30 is the SWR in Eloy-check the NFFS master calendar to find the dates.

I guess the time warp reference to AF did not hit a nerve...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on October 24, 2012, 04:37:50 PM
The next major contest that includes P-30 is the SWR in Eloy-check the NFFS master calendar to find the dates.

I guess the time warp reference to AF did not hit a nerve...
  I caught the reference to Midway... We sure were lucky way back then


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: bedowinn on October 26, 2012, 12:09:37 AM
The next major contest that includes P-30 is the SWR in Eloy-check the NFFS master calendar to find the dates.

I guess the time warp reference to AF did not hit a nerve...
  I caught the reference to Midway... We sure were lucky way back then

It still sends a shiver up my spine to read about those days in June. Some of the after action reports are online. Just 5 months after Pearl Harbor a bunch of guys drove their Army Air Corp bombers off the Hornet to attack Japan. And 7 months after Pearl Harbor the fate of the war in the pacific was cast.
What those guys did out there......just incredible. I know I'm pontificating here, but our hobby is a link to these historical events.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: RomSGN on December 03, 2012, 01:43:07 PM
This is my first P30 with which I begin ... ;)
This is the PEE WEE of Ikara.d  :D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: 151-30 on December 06, 2012, 04:10:30 PM
I  just opened a dusty old box of mine in my workshop full of balsa, spruce, music wire , jap covering and some good old 1986 orange pirelli rubber.....
why not building a P30 for fun ?
I stopped free flight contests since 25 years....just before mylar and carbon age. So first classic (just mylar covering) building to experiment. It seem I
 have not lost my building skill.

triming in flight next spring .....


 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alvaro Sala on February 17, 2013, 09:27:28 PM
I don't belive it will be a winner in a contest.

Well...
This morning I did win a local contest with the Cometa (shown in reply #610).
We were 10 competitors.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on February 18, 2013, 09:57:29 AM
Congratulations, Alvaro -   and with a very elegant airplane, too.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Ding on February 19, 2013, 06:19:12 PM
A beautiful P-30 Cometa wins in a Brazilian winter.  Good work, Alvaro!  Now you can be really proud. 

Here's a tip:  Walt Ghio says that the FAI SS from 2009 has been the best so far because of the new formula.  I have been using Jan 2011 which has a thickness of 0.046 in. and has served me well.  It gives me more than a thousand turns on 6 strands 1/8 to a torque of 8 oz-in.

Ding


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alvaro Sala on February 19, 2013, 07:56:31 PM
Thanks Ding and Jim.

I'm really proud, especially because the Cometa beat three Saturnos (Superb design by Alexandre Cruz, winner of a few competitions in Argentina. I guess Jim has built one).
I used 6 strans of SS FAI 1/8 with 1.100 turns, don't know the year of the crop.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dtriano on March 16, 2013, 05:08:16 PM
Hello, by way of introduction here is my first P-30. The last time I built any type of free flight aircraft was in 1989, when I made a few Pennyplanes and Ornithopters...... but one day about two months ago I remembered what fun building model aircraft was, and decided to see what the hobby had been up to for the last 24 years. I found this excellent web site, and the P-30 aircraft appealed to me as a good way to 'get my feet wet' again. Also, I must say that the civilized and jovial nature of the discussions here was a main reason why I decided to build again... I have had enough of ugly internet 'expert' hit-and-run discussions that take place in other hobbies.
So, I carefully canvassed the internet for P-30 information, ordered the 'FFQ P-30 Survey 2010', and read every post in this forum. I decided to approach this by finding out what 'state-of-the-art' is, and then diving in with a plans-built design to see if my building skills were up to par. To satisfy the first part (right or wrong, I am sure many people have many favorites) I ordered a 'Pirate' from Mike at StarLink that was built but not covered, assembled, or rigged... it certainly helped to show me the weights involved, and the level of build that would result in a good flying P-30. For the second part of the equation I ordered a short kit (laser cut ribs for wing and stab) for the 'Polecat X' from Don DeLoach.
Here are some shots of the 95% finished Polecat X. I definitely tried to keep most of the salient aspects of Mr. DeLoach's design,but couldn't resist doing things 'my way' in a few areas (which probably cost me another 6 grams or so)! I had some fun learning how to roll a balsa tube fuselage (never done that before), and I ended up with a pretty good result (I think). It is a neat shape, it is a steady circumference for about the first 16" and then tapers smoothly to the tail. Yes, this was somewhat difficult to figure out how to make, I went through 6 of them before I got one that I feel was up to par, straight, and light enough. I used an old ski pole for a mandrel.
I used .05" unidirectional carbon reinforcement where I thought I needed it (probably overkill), and the pylon is carbon/S glass hybrid cloth in Aeropoxy 2032 resin over a 1/64" balsa base shape. It has a basic viscous Badge timer to engage the full-wing DT, and I made the little lever and hinge assembly from carbon stock that I had around the shop. It works great, and is very reliable in testing. The wing was fun to build, but came out a bit heavy and I tried to lighten it by healthy use of a diamond hole saw on my dremel, don't think I would do this again as it didn't really make much difference. I also left off the shaped balsa wingtips. The wing and stab are covered in 1/4 mil mylar, with glo-orange and black accents on the wing. No chrome on this one yet, but I may add a strip of chrome tape here and there for flash.
Gizmo Geezer front end and prop, and I am waiting for my Gizmo Geezer winder, counter, and torque meter to arrive. Here in Lake Tahoe it has been a steady cold winter, so I won't be flying for a while. I will likely be flying on one of my many trips out to the Black Rock Desert, one of my favorite places.

Total weight as it sits right now, minus rubber, is 48 grams. So, it's heavy, but from what I read here it should fly just fine. Anyways, happy to meet you all, and please be kind with my first attempt---:)

Best regards- Dave Triano



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on March 16, 2013, 05:50:17 PM
Dave,
Very nice workmanship all around.
It sounds like you enjoyed the build and I hope you enjoy the flying even more.
Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dtriano on March 16, 2013, 06:06:50 PM
Thank you Dave---

Here are some shots of the Pirate. The quality of the fuselage was most surprising, and it weighs only 7 grams with the front aluminum ring and motor peg in the back...! As I said, this is a 'covering exercise' as it is mostly pre-built, but I am also having a bit more fun with the full-wing DT... this one uses the 'band burner', and a 'mousetrap' device to release the rubber band. I haven't installed the DT yet, but I couldn't wait to see what it looked like together! All 1/4 mil mylar with glo-yellow on the left wingtip (and Jolly Roger!), with a subtle Blue Candy fade in the middle of the wing and stab. The rudder is covered in a neat iridescent mylar that I had around here from a rocket project about 10 years ago, it's about as heavy as Monokote but it sure gives a neat flash and coloration.
The most shocking thing about the aircraft to me is shown in the second shot.... it is of the whole aircraft on my trusty triple-beam balance scale, and the whole enchilada (minus rubber but with Band Burner, hinges, mousetrap, etc.) weighs 28.5 grams!!! After the heavy build on my Polecat I really appreciate the difference, it's really not that easy to build a very light, very strong P-30, quite a challenge.
So, how should I fatten this up? Just add lead ballast at the CG?

DT


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on March 16, 2013, 07:33:03 PM
You might weigh a 25 cent coin and if it weighs in ok just tape it to the nose somewhere.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: jswain on March 17, 2013, 03:00:40 AM
Here are some shots of the Pirate....weighs 28.5 grams!!! DT
Hi Dave T.

If you get a chance, would you share the individaul weights of the other parts of the Pirate model - stab = x gms, wing = y gms, hub/prop assy = z gms, .....etc. ?
I'm always interested what a  component *can* get to - the only other way to know with the Pirate is to ask an owner or buy one :-\
The ohaus triple beam has been a fixture at my house also since about 1988 +/-, many models have sat upon its shiny metal plate, needs no batteries to operate either ....
john s.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on March 17, 2013, 08:55:13 AM
"So, how should I fatten this up? Just add lead ballast at the CG"?

Dave,
Yes, after loading the 10g motor. Better to have the 'ballast' adjustable until things get trimmed out.

Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on March 17, 2013, 10:33:20 AM
I've never built the "Pirate" P-30,so my perspective maybe wrong here.The 28.5 gram weight is no doubt due to being all mylar covered. Your photos do show a carbon tube wing spar and a carbon fiber L.E. on the stab. Both, good as far as resistant to flexing. What I don't see is any torsional rigidity from using mylar covering only. Covering with tissue would have increased the weight 8-10 grams and ridigity.
Just my 2cents,  Thom


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on March 17, 2013, 10:42:47 AM
The last P30 I built was the Pirate. I didn't use the Fiberglas fuselage because I had a left over rolled Balsa one. Mine is covered entirely with quarter mil Mylar. The torsion rigidity is adequate for P30 flying. My DT system is a bit tough on the wing center joint. If I build another one I would strengthen that part. I use a full pop off wing for DT.

The Pirate is an excellent plane. 29 grams is light! Personally I would add some extra gussets and such to the wing but yours is already covered so get it to weight and have fun flying it.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dtriano on March 17, 2013, 11:15:26 AM
Thank you all for your comments, I agree the 1/4 mil mylar is a major factor in the low weight, and I have no way of knowing whether the torsional rigidity will be 'good enough' as I have never flown a P-30 before... your point is well taken, and I could always add tissue to the wing (over the mylar) to add rigidity if needed. I just covered it as instructed by the plans, so we will see.
I got up early this morning to weigh the individual components, so here goes: The first image is of the Czech prop and hub assembly, it weighs 9 grams. The fuselage with rudder, band burner and battery, pylon, crockett hook, lever and mousetrap weighs 9.75 grams. The wing weighs 7.75 grams, and the stab weighs an even 2 grams. Photos attached.
As I said before, the fuselage being so light was what was surprising to me. I have a pretty deep experience level in advanced composite materials, and I gave two attempts at making a similar tube, one from carbon tissue and one from kevlar tissue with uni carbon reinforcement. Both came out heavier and not as refined as the one that StarLink makes. I really respect that level of build, it's darn tough to do. I could probably get to the same weight and stiffness as the one they sell, but it would cost me quite a bit more in time and materials to do. The pylon is also darn light, compared to my elephantine attempt on the Polecat.

DT



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on March 17, 2013, 11:54:49 AM
DT,
I have another take on this. Your weight can't be right. I have a Pirate P-30 built from the kit and with all 1/4 mil mylar covering it weighs over 40 grams. I have the Burley band burner timer also and the pop-off wing DT. I know what all the parts of that airplane weigh and it can't possibly come to 28.6 grams! Check your scale. I'd believe 38 grams or even 48 grams but no way is it 28 grams. My stock nose block with Czech prop weighs 11.2 grams. My complete fuselage (same as yours with fiberglass tube and pylon) with pylon rudder and timer weighs 14.25 grams. That's already over 25 grams.
I've seen quite a few of these Pirate P-30's and they are rarely under 40 grams. So something is wrong with your scales!


Tmat
-if not then he has helium in the wings! :o


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dtriano on March 17, 2013, 12:00:15 PM
AHA!!!

I found a chunk of lint in the hinge assembly of the scale that was probably hanging it up. I now weigh a 2005 US Quarter at 5.5 grams, can anyone tell me if this is accurate?
So, after the 'Great Lint Scandal', the Pirate now weighs in at 44 grams all up! And my Polecat is at 49 grams, so I don't feel so bad for making it terribly heavy......

Sorry for the false alarm on weights, it pays to check the scales before posting.....:)

Now that that seems to be solved, on the Polecat plans it says in the trim notes 'Stab Tilt for Right Glide'. Sorry for my ignorance, but which way should the stab tilt to achieve right glide?


DT


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on March 17, 2013, 05:38:40 PM
My scale is only good to 0.1 grams, and I get 5.5 or 5.6 grams for a recent US quarter.

--Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: jswain on March 17, 2013, 06:48:06 PM
Stone the Crow!!!

How funny DT, I would have blamed the ohause's old batteries or my public school education first :D

I have 5.6g and 5.7g for two different US quarters on my 3-beamer Ohaus so your in the ballpark.

To turn the model "right"  in glide circle pattern the stabilizer is tilted (as seen from behind the model) with the left hand side of the stab tip slightly below the normally seen level stab line and the right stab side tip is now slightly higher.

Now the model will gently yaw around to the right in glide mode. No rudder trim needed.

On a P-30 start with 1/8" difference per side relative to dead-straight level on the stab platform is a good starting point..

For right power/left glide model, tilt the left stab tip higher than right and model yaws around to the left.




Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on March 17, 2013, 06:55:51 PM
John, (jswain)
is correct of course.
Here's a simple diagram, somewhat exagerrated.

Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dtriano on March 17, 2013, 10:53:14 PM
Thank you John and Dave, that's what I needed to know, completely helpful. John, I haven't heard that saying in quite a while, had an old Brit buddy who used to say 'Stone the Crows' all the time...:) The Ohaus is now running on all cylinders, happy to say. I inherited it from my best friend who passed away two years ago, he was a rocket propellant scientist and many wonderful chemicals danced on its polished platen--

Spent the afternoon rigging the pylon on the Pirate, it uses the band burner with dental rubber attach to the pivot, then back to a turn-around a couple of inches aft mounted to the fuselage (with tension spring in-line) and forward to the lever arm at the front of the pylon. Also in the pictures is the pylon from the Polecat, with viscous Badge timer, tension spring in-line to a turn-around right at the aft end of the pylon, going forward to a tiny carbon lever at the front.

Both pylons are not yet attached, I want to work out the CG and basic trim before I set them on the fuselages. I'm going to set them up just as on the plans, with longitudinal dihedral (I guess most here call this 'decalage'?) and other tweaks to be adjusted in testing, what seems to be a whole new world of info to assimilate.

Thanks again! - DT



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on March 18, 2013, 12:52:42 PM
John, (jswain)
is correct of course.
Here's a simple diagram, somewhat exagerrated.

Dave

Why are we gliding left??


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on March 18, 2013, 01:49:47 PM
Why are we gliding left??
I think the view is from the rear??


Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on March 18, 2013, 02:40:33 PM
YES,
From the rear per jswain's explanation in reply # 655.
Sorry for the confusion.
Dave A.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on March 18, 2013, 02:44:12 PM
Reply 655 said:

Quote
For right power/left glide model, tilt the left stab tip higher than right and model yaws around to the left.



So I assume that's why Dave produced the sketch as he did.  I've only flown P30s right/right, as do all the other people I know who fly the class - but perhaps it was just an example of tail tilt. (which it was when I read all of the message :-[)

PT


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on March 18, 2013, 02:52:10 PM
Sorry again!
I should have referenced sentence #3 in reply  # 655.
Dave A.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: sweepettelee on March 18, 2013, 03:05:16 PM
Re adding ballast to bring to required or goal weight:
Since you still have pylon to secure, it is my practice to mount them such that the ballast can be in front, not behind the wing.
That is so the wing-to-stab dimension is on the longish side. Glide and stability are likely to be enhanced by so doing.
That is a Bob White rule of trimming during the final build details.  He always put such ballast on bottom of his bodies with red electrical tape.

Leeper


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on March 18, 2013, 03:11:00 PM
Lee,
Thanks for that little tidbit.
Dave A.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Ding on March 18, 2013, 11:06:00 PM
D


DT,  et al,
In summary therefore the right stab higher gives a right turn contribution. I have to go by this because I am ALWAYS confused myself.
I also checked a new US quarter in my reliable OHaus scale and it read 5.7 to 5.8.

Ding


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dtriano on March 19, 2013, 07:59:21 PM
Thank you ALL for the great help. I'm going to go back through the resources on this thread about testing and trimming, and come up with a basic plan for the first glide tests.

-DT



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on May 23, 2013, 03:16:49 PM
It's our FF Nationals this coming wet and windy weekend ::) Sorting out my models to take I realised that I had no spare P30. Probably not a problem with light breezes, but knowing my luck the model would get blown into the crops, only to emerge when the combine harvester got to it :o

So, rummaging around in my bits box I found a rolled balsa fuselage I'd made many years ago, and a tail from the John Godden JGP30 design. In another box I found the wings for a RAFF V vintage model someone had given me; slightly oversize and the top tissue covering was so brittle that it split as soon as I looked at it. The 30" span was achieved by re-making the tips with planed down kebab skewers and the upper surface plus underside of the tips covered with 5 micron mylar.

It's grossly overweight, but I'm hoping that it won't matter if it's windy, bad weather is a great leveller ;) I fitted a Tomy as I like the certainty compared with a lighter viscous damper.

Test glides and hand turns in the park revealed a reasonable state of trim, only needing a 1/32" packing under the tail TE. I'm almost tempted to use it in preference to my supposedly best model - we shall see. A few photos are attached.

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on May 23, 2013, 04:18:05 PM
Pretty cool!
Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: 151-30 on May 26, 2013, 04:07:30 PM
finished at last.....too heavy at 56 gr (prop:15,6 tail:3 wing:17,4 fus: 20)

waiting some spare time to test fly, intended for PGI trim with no wraps......and 4 strands of vintage 1/4 1986 pirreli

no carbon.....


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on May 26, 2013, 07:04:40 PM
Good luck with it. Vintage Pirelli - it should be interesting, especially with PGI and a fast climb.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: jose on May 26, 2013, 07:58:25 PM
hi friends, I'm looking propellers for my P - 30 I advise dosnde as good and compare them. here in Argentina are not obtained. Regards Jose


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: jswain on May 27, 2013, 12:22:29 AM
hi friends, I'm looking propellers for my P - 30 I advise dosnde as good and compare them. here in Argentina are not obtained. Regards Jose
Hi Jose.
Here are some web links to p30 type mail-order supplies.
best wishes, john

prop1 => http://www.a2zcorp.us/store/ProductDetailNP.asp?Cguid={B84A184B-D0FC-4399-AD5B-D3D127475E45}&ProductID=3917&Category=ModelSupplies:Propeller (http://www.a2zcorp.us/store/ProductDetailNP.asp?Cguid={B84A184B-D0FC-4399-AD5B-D3D127475E45}&ProductID=3917&Category=ModelSupplies:Propeller)
prop2 => http://www.a2zcorp.us/store/ProductDetailNP.asp?Cguid={B84A184B-D0FC-4399-AD5B-D3D127475E45}&ProductID=1516&Category=ModelSupplies:Propeller (http://www.a2zcorp.us/store/ProductDetailNP.asp?Cguid={B84A184B-D0FC-4399-AD5B-D3D127475E45}&ProductID=1516&Category=ModelSupplies:Propeller)
rubber 1/8 & 3/16 => http://www.a2zcorp.us/store/category.asp?Cguid={B84A184B-D0FC-4399-AD5B-D3D127475E45}&Category=ModelSupplies:Rubber (http://www.a2zcorp.us/store/category.asp?Cguid={B84A184B-D0FC-4399-AD5B-D3D127475E45}&Category=ModelSupplies:Rubber)



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on May 27, 2013, 08:56:47 AM
finished at last.....too heavy at 56 gr (prop:15,6 tail:3 wing:17,4 fus: 20)

waiting some spare time to test fly, intended for PGI trim with no wraps......and 4 strands of vintage 1/4 1986 pirreli

no carbon.....
Are you flying to the 40gm or 50gm minimum weight?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on May 27, 2013, 07:45:42 PM
hi friends, I'm looking propellers for my P - 30 I advise dosnde as good and compare them. here in Argentina are not obtained. Regards Jose

Hi Jose, yo puedo hablar un poquito Espanol. Si quieres ayuda para optener helices por P30 envia a mi un mesaje personal en este foro.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: rbrpwr on May 28, 2013, 12:50:26 PM
From the US Mint website:
Denomination  Cent   Nickel    Dime      Quarter Dollar  Half Dollar    Presidential $1  Native American $1 Coin 
       Weight  2.500 g  5.000 g  2.268 g   5.670 g             11.340 g      8.1 g                 8.1 g 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on May 28, 2013, 01:03:04 PM
From the US Mint website:
Denomination  Cent   Nickel    Dime      Quarter Dollar  Half Dollar    Presidential $1  Native American $1 Coin 
       Weight  2.500 g  5.000 g  2.268 g   5.670 g             11.340 g      8.1 g                 8.1 g 

Selling coins and precious metals to balance your P-30's with ???
Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: rbrpwr on May 29, 2013, 12:49:39 PM
They were weighing quarters to calibrate their scales.  I thought they might as well have a reference.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on May 29, 2013, 12:59:35 PM
They were weighing quarters to calibrate their scales.  I thought they might as well have a reference.
I understand now. Cool.
Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dephela on May 29, 2013, 06:50:32 PM
An ounce is 28.35g, interesting that 5 quarters equal 28.35g!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: jose on May 30, 2013, 07:08:19 PM
To DerekMc
DerekMc I ask for help with my P30 helices because here not achieved any material imported by the restrictions to enter the country unless the mail with paypal buying them that well come. Regards Jose
Para DerekMc
DerekMc te pido ayuda con las hélices para mis P30 ya que aquí no se consigue ningun material importado por las restricciones a introducir al pais salvo comprandolas por correo con paypal que asi entran. Saludos José 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: 151-30 on May 31, 2013, 06:13:05 AM
finished at last.....too heavy at 56 gr (prop:15,6 tail:3 wing:17,4 fus: 20)

waiting some spare time to test fly, intended for PGI trim with no wraps......and 4 strands of vintage 1/4 1986 pirreli

no carbon.....
Are you flying to the 40gm or 50gm minimum weight?
in France, P30 is only for spécial events as "coupe d'hiver" contests (2 or 3 a year with no more than 10 contestants it seems).
I built it with 50 gr rule in mind because it is more easy to build and fly for beginners. I think that 40 gr is an "builder expert contest"

I have not gone to a free flight contest for at last 10 Years. And I have no more contacts with free flight modellers. If some french modellers have interest in this class I would be happy to contact them.

I buid this P30  to remind "good old time" but i am now infected again by the virus and I am now testing carbon building but with only  home made parts (it is so easy to make a tubular carbon spar 3,5 mm diam at 0,25 gr/dm ... so why  buying it ? perhaps I will explain  it to you soon ).

my only problem is to find time and space for flying, not for experiment building technics. 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: atesus on June 07, 2013, 02:28:26 AM
This is my last build and the first P-30 in my hangar. Fantastik P-30 built from an Atalar Model kit. A little on the heavy side (50g) due to the tissue I used (Coverlite) but flies pretty good...

--Ates


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Richard Ewing on June 27, 2013, 03:49:38 PM
My big geared P-30 project.  It ended up as a development project for raised leading edge wing construction using home made D boxes. 

I started with the balsa wing and stab but was very disappointed with them after applying the 1/4 mil mylar covering.  They warped a lot.

So I built the slightly heavier carbon surfaces, and switched the wing airfoils to "sorta Low Drag" shapes to both lower the camber, and try building with raised leading edge, that fairs smoothly back to the spar.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: jim_buxton on July 18, 2013, 12:05:56 PM
Dan,
This is a picture from the NATS this year.  Is this the P-30 you flew to second place? 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on July 18, 2013, 12:18:35 PM
As I recall, Dan had a conventional model that he flew for all but the last flight as he lost his #1 model on the previous flight. Thus he had to fly the canard. Which flew very well by the way!


Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: jim_buxton on July 18, 2013, 12:31:26 PM
Ah, that makes sense. I saw him launch a conventional one that went up like a rocket at around 1:00 pm or so.  That had to be the one he lost, it was going up like a homesick angel even after the power was off.  What was the design and power combo on your primary, Dan?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on July 18, 2013, 01:37:44 PM
Hey now.
Here's the thing: I flew a regular plane for 5 flights. It's been a work in progress. The new wing covered in tissue has made a big difference. I cut a 4 1/2 minute fuse to make the 3 minute max. It went over the river and beyond a pond. It took about 10 minutes to decide it wasn't up a tree on a little peninsula in the pond. I was knee-deep in poison ivy. Once I decided it was across the pond I came back and pulled out the canard. The canard has always used the tracker for noseweight. however, it used the tracker with small batteries which is in Texas. I made a guess on moving the bigger tracker back to compensate and guessed .... poorly. It was nose-down in the glide and couldn't do two. I do believe there was good air for the canard but it just drove through after the power ran out. Ah well.
Got the plane after trophy time. Easy get. It was at the edge of a gravel drive about 7 feet up the weeds. The lady of the house was very nice. Same area Larry davidson went to the day prior.

The canard weighs 55 gms without rubber. It does fine in windy thermals but it was nose heavy. Haven't flown it in almost two years.
It may also have lost it's washout. Without washout it will glide out od f a thermal. I forgot to check but I had no plans to fly it.

Ah well. Say " La Vee".


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: jim_buxton on July 18, 2013, 02:02:31 PM
lets see a pic of theat second place model!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on July 18, 2013, 02:13:53 PM
I don't know if I have one.
It looks a LOT like Hatschek's Goblin. Different wing structure and pylon. Bottom fin (it's white).
About 42gms without the tracker.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pappy on July 18, 2013, 08:06:50 PM
Dan and David made this a great P30 contest.
Attached photo shows Dan launching his new
P30.

Pappy


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: jim_buxton on July 18, 2013, 10:13:32 PM
Dan: You ready Bob?
Bob: What?

Must be one loud P-30 you have there Dan.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on July 19, 2013, 08:56:52 AM
Quiet airplane. Loud shirt.
Gotta maintain a balance.
Always check that your timer is alert to a launch.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on July 22, 2013, 04:24:27 AM
My previous "new design" [ http://www.hippocketaeronautics.com/hpa_forum/index.php?topic=861.msg56594#msg56594 , http://www.hippocketaeronautics.com/hpa_forum/index.php?topic=861.msg56776#msg56776 , http://www.hippocketaeronautics.com/hpa_forum/index.php?topic=5069 ] did not turn out to be so good; even though XFLR simulations suggested much better glide than my older models, the actual measured sinking speeds of the models were rather similar. Maybe that big drag disk (= propeller) in front of the plane equalizes things so that all models glide the same?

With that in mind, I decided to take another approach for P-30. Instead of trying to improve the glide, aimed for a model that would climb better. Thus a new design, with a smallish area wing, simple tips that are not too narrow, and low-drag airfoil. The resulting wing has 10cm wide constant-width center sections and slightly tapering tips, and sports a Midic LDA airfoil. Wing structure has tubular spars that have proved to work OK for P-30. Attached a couple of pics.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on July 26, 2013, 03:30:16 AM

Covered the wing. Center sections with 10 mils mylar (F1A tailplane covering), tips with 5 mils stuff, that was painted on the inside with fluorescent paint before covering. All-up weight (with 2mm carbon joiner) is 14 grams (the wing is in two halves for ease of transport). The pylon is the same one used in my previous models, with laser-cut sides and balsa bulkheads. The pylon is shaped so that the wing joiner fits in a pivot/fork in the same manner as F1A tailplanes (cut-out in the forward-center section of the wing), this gives a positive locating of the wing and also enables building a wing-pop-up DT if needed. But I think I'll start with conventional pop-up tail. It remains to be seen if wing wiggler would be needed, but I'll start without one.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Yak 52 on July 26, 2013, 05:16:18 AM
Looks good Tapio.

My previous "new design" did not turn out to be so good; even though XFLR simulations suggested much better glide than my older models, the actual measured sinking speeds of the models were rather similar. Maybe that big drag disk (= propeller) in front of the plane equalizes things so that all models glide the same?

I don't believe XFLR5 is that trustworthy when it comes to evaluating planforms. It appears that changing panel density can affect span efficiencies so a complex wing tip shape may give optimistic results:

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1576925

I've been looking at profile drag at low Re and I was surprised at just how important this is (apparently far more important than planform - especially with fixed span) So my P20 design ended up low aspect ratio to keep the Re up, with a similar planform to yours.

Any chance you could provide coordinates or a .dat file for the Midic airfoil? It looks quite low camber.


Ates, the Fantastik looks great. What size wood is the fuselage construction?


Cheers
Jon


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Ross J on July 27, 2013, 12:24:05 AM
A note to Richard Ewing:

The 2001 NFFS Sympo contains a paper by John O'Dwyer in which he tested three sizes of p-30, large, like yours or the Window Plane by Art Ellis, normal sized and small.  Overall the small model was best because it got more altitude than it lost in sink speed, and it was easier to build to 40g.  Since that article I've made my models smaller and they perform better. I will try to post some photos.

Ross


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: atesus on July 27, 2013, 03:15:35 AM
Jon, thanks  :). The fuselage of Fantastik uses 3mm square longerons with 3x1.5 mm2 cross members and diagonals (not sure what the proper terms are for those  :-[)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Yak 52 on July 27, 2013, 04:08:44 AM
Thanks Ates. That's what I'd call 'em too  ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on July 29, 2013, 05:22:25 AM
Any chance you could provide coordinates or a .dat file for the Midic airfoil? It looks quite low camber.

I could not recall where I got the coordinates so I thought if I should ask for permission first, but then thought to look at the 'net. And bumped into this link: http://tracfoil.free.fr/airfoils/profils/dat/mid103.dat




Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Yak 52 on July 29, 2013, 05:28:13 AM
Ah Tracfoil - should have looked there first  :-[
Excellent, thanks Tapio.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on July 30, 2013, 03:53:30 AM
Actually looking at my files and drawings, the 'foil seems to be MID-109; I'll look for the coordinates and ask mr. Midic if I can post them here....



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: skyrocket on July 30, 2013, 07:48:29 AM
attached is my P30...benedek 6356b3 airfoil


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: craig h on July 30, 2013, 08:59:56 AM
 Nice build Isismk2..hope we get to see some flights of it or a report how it flew..

Thank you for sharing..I also use the benedek airfoils..


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on August 06, 2013, 03:48:21 PM
Finished the new LDA model, and made first test flight on Saturday. Best climbs were 56 meters and sinking speed 56cm/s, but the climb was fast (only 35 seconds), so the model may still be somewhat under-elevated, and I will also need to try some turbulator on top of the airfoil. For reference, my conventional model climbs 50 meters, and the very best climbs have been 55 meters, taking up to 50 seconds (on 6 strands of 3mm/ 1/8" rubber).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on August 06, 2013, 07:13:25 PM
Very intersting Tapio.
How does the sinking speed of this LDA version compare with the other version of your P30?
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on August 07, 2013, 12:52:59 AM
On this first outing it was sinking slightly faster, at 56 cm/s, as the old ones have been typically 46 to 50 cm/s. But if it was under-elevated (which I suspect as it did not make a single stall, while a friend flew his conventional model trimmed for calm and was stalling occasionally) it might be about the same. My previous attempts to design a wing for minimum sink have failed; I think the freewheeling prop equals out all designs, therefore I'd expect to get the same sinking speed also from this model.

The climb time was also short, 35 secs compared to 45 of a conventional model (on 6 strands). This also suggest under-elevation, and adding decalage might produce also more altitude.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on August 08, 2013, 04:55:42 PM
I had another session with the new model, and it turned out that the first one was indeed quite under-elevated. I had to add decalage many times until I eventually got the model to stall, then backed off a little. A log of the final flight is attached, had to DT at 90 secs due to a small field (but calm, around sunset, so not much thermal activity). Interestingly, the sinking speed was not that much affected, got to 52cm/s now, still a bit faster than with conventional model (but I need to fly the two back to back to eliminate the effect of weather). However, compared to the previous session I now got 10 meters more height, going to 66 meters at best.

From the previous session I had added a tape-zig-zag -turbulator to the wing (at 50 to 60% chord), but I'm not sure of that made much difference, or if it was just the added decalage that affected.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on August 08, 2013, 07:56:31 PM
Thanks very interesting Tapio. i'm looking forard to a comaoprison with the other model in the same conditions and the performance without turbulators would be interesting.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on August 09, 2013, 02:10:07 AM
A couple more pictures:
-Wing has zigzag-turbulator of thin tape
-In the pylon there is room for timer, battery, servo, tracker and the chinese altitude logger
-3 levers for VIT, AR and DT
-VIT have of carbon sheet (home-laminated) with nylon adjustment screws
-AR is adjusted between nylon bolt and nut (bottom of the rudder rests against the bolt head or nut)
-Finally a comparison between my old conventional model and the new one (different years, sites etc.) Looks like the new model initially climbs some 7 meters / 20 feet higher in burst, and then gains another 3 meters / 10 feet during the rest of the climb.

I'll try to do head-to-head with the old model the next time the air is calm enough (would like to see the difference in sinking speed, if there is any). However, tests without the turbulator will have to wait until I build another wing with that airfoil, I do not think that the tape comes easily off the mylar.... and it seems to work ok, I do not think that it harms the glide any, and climb seems ok also.
 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Hepcat on August 09, 2013, 12:35:14 PM
Tapio,

I am not a P30 fan because I refuse to build aeroplanes to rules that say I must buy the propeller!  However I cannot resist saying how much I like your latest one – a very attractive machine.

Whilst writing I would also like to say a little more.  You give a lot of thought to aeromodelling matters, rubber testing, model design, VP propellers and much more such that if I see the name Tapio Linkosalo at the top of a contribution I know it will be worth a read because you openly give to the rest of us the results of all the hard work that you obviously put in.

Tapio, a big ‘Thank You’
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on August 09, 2013, 07:46:46 PM
Thanks again Tapio for all that info - I also agree with John - your posts are always worth reading.
Its a very interesting way to go with a P30 and it seems to have a good still air performance.
Your timer/servo system looks neat.
Happy flying
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on August 13, 2013, 03:32:40 AM
Actually looking at my files and drawings, the 'foil seems to be MID-109; I'll look for the coordinates and ask mr. Midic if I can post them here....

One more try. The airfoil is Mid-309, and with permission from mr. Slobodan Midic himself, here are the coordinates. The airfoil is less-cambered that those used in F1A, but this seems ok in P-30. The back of the airfoil is somewhat thickened (on top) so that it accommodates the 0.5mm thick trailing edge.


Quote
MID 309
     1.000000   0.00000
     0.993509    0.001112
     0.980064    0.003343
     0.964374    0.005795
     0.948224    0.008153
     0.931962    0.010379
     0.915665    0.012480
     0.899354    0.014481
     0.883033    0.016401
     0.866707    0.018265
     0.850382    0.020093
     0.834059    0.021907
     0.817742    0.023718
     0.801429    0.025535
     0.785131    0.027369
     0.768848    0.029228
     0.752571    0.031127
     0.736308    0.033033
     0.720049    0.034906
     0.703794    0.036748
     0.687554    0.038552
     0.671317    0.040314
     0.655084    0.042033
     0.638860    0.043704
     0.622633    0.045326
     0.606413    0.046898
     0.590203    0.048414
     0.573993    0.049870
     0.557787    0.051266
     0.541586    0.052597
     0.525380    0.053864
     0.509179    0.055065
     0.492987    0.056196
     0.476795    0.057253
     0.460613    0.058236
     0.444438    0.059137
     0.428264    0.059956
     0.412100    0.060690
     0.395946    0.061333
     0.379800    0.061882
     0.363672    0.062333
     0.347558    0.062676
     0.331460    0.062909
     0.315385    0.063024
     0.299328    0.063014
     0.283303    0.062874
     0.267309    0.062589
     0.251343    0.062153
     0.235429    0.061556
     0.219558    0.060781
     0.203748    0.059819
     0.188002    0.058645
     0.172325    0.057254
     0.156781    0.055620
     0.141371    0.053707
     0.126143    0.051493
     0.111115    0.048933
     0.096316    0.045989
     0.081761    0.042620
     0.067548    0.038816
     0.053882    0.034564
     0.040991    0.029841
     0.029350    0.024785
     0.019792    0.019814
     0.012806    0.015437
     0.008071    0.011899
     0.004894    0.008980
     0.002735    0.006459
     0.001282    0.004229
     0.000390    0.002213
     0.000016    0.000381
     0.000171   -0.001348
     0.000995   -0.002972
     0.002553   -0.004356
     0.004811   -0.005520
     0.007895   -0.006626
     0.012209   -0.007765
     0.018535   -0.008937
     0.027898   -0.010111
     0.040436   -0.011134
     0.054842   -0.011868
     0.070019   -0.012297
     0.085585   -0.012492
     0.101330   -0.012501
     0.117185   -0.012353
     0.133123   -0.012064
     0.149177   -0.011658
     0.165361   -0.011183
     0.181589   -0.010670
     0.197825   -0.010115
     0.214077   -0.009524
     0.230337   -0.008898
     0.246610   -0.008238
     0.262896   -0.007549
     0.279193   -0.006833
     0.295513   -0.006096
     0.311846   -0.005345
     0.328192   -0.004582
     0.344562   -0.003813
     0.360948   -0.003048
     0.377341   -0.002290
     0.393730   -0.001545
     0.410111   -0.000816
     0.426484   -0.000107
     0.442848    0.000581
     0.459207    0.001243
     0.475561    0.001880
     0.491907    0.002488
     0.508250    0.003066
     0.524588    0.003612
     0.540920    0.004124
     0.557250    0.004601
     0.573575    0.005041
     0.589895    0.005444
     0.606213    0.005806
     0.622527    0.006128
     0.638837    0.006408
     0.655144    0.006645
     0.671449    0.006837
     0.687750    0.006983
     0.704049    0.007083
     0.720345    0.007136
     0.736638    0.007141
     0.752928    0.007097
     0.769217    0.007009
     0.785503    0.006878
     0.801787    0.006700
     0.818069    0.006476
     0.834349    0.006201
     0.850627    0.005878
     0.866903    0.005501
     0.883177    0.005069
     0.899448    0.004579
     0.915715    0.004030
     0.931975    0.003415
     0.948218    0.002730
     0.964386    0.001977
     0.980072    0.001168
     0.993474    0.000408
     1.000000    0.00000


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Yak 52 on August 13, 2013, 04:09:01 AM
Excellent, thanks Tapio. And Mr Midic...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: flydean1 on August 13, 2013, 04:15:40 PM
I need a little help here with the coordinates.  I see only two columns of numbers which denote the upper and lower surfaces of the airfoil.  Where are the points along the chord that these two sets of numbers refer to?  Or is this one of those things that "everyone" knows. ;)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Yak 52 on August 13, 2013, 04:42:52 PM
This is the format that you can use in Xfoil/XFLR5/Profili as a '.dat' file.

The numbers in the left column are chordwise decimals counting down from the upper surface trailing edge (1.00000) to the LE (0.00000) and then along the lower surface back to the TE again. The numbers in the right column are the airfoil thicknesses - positive numbers are above the mean chord line and negative numbers below it.

There is a visual explanation here:
http://tracfoil.com/tracfoil/en/airfoilsE.html


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: betocastrucci on August 18, 2013, 03:37:50 PM
Just finished two new Saturnos, a V3 and a V4. Traditional stick & tissue, Gizmo Geezer front end and viscous timer.

Saturno V3, 37 g, Esaki paper less fuse that is Litex:
(http://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-f-VZ5G2FMRc/UhEZH6wYvuI/AAAAAAAAA4U/XHYwOpXwHck/w950-h577-no/satv3_11.jpg)

(http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-QenyDhayBnw/UhEZF-PN6ZI/AAAAAAAAA4M/2kykWnjmy38/w917-h551-no/satv3_12.jpg)

(http://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-S4AEHE_q59o/UhEZJGNdRiI/AAAAAAAAA4c/yZq0SPntuDg/w1043-h402-no/satv3_13.jpg)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: betocastrucci on August 18, 2013, 03:40:06 PM
Saturno V4, all Esaki paper, 35 g less rubber:

(http://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-aw6IYD8u9DI/UhEZ4aG6lUI/AAAAAAAAA5w/xkaZvN3fFp8/w1003-h577-no/satv4_22.jpg)

(http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-ZDU3zO6aAeY/UhEZ3Mc7JUI/AAAAAAAAA5o/KRZtvqusK1g/w868-h577-no/satv4_21.jpg)

(http://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-LMf6CZQqAN0/UhEZzcTQOaI/AAAAAAAAA5g/oCjj7hfG0Co/w1044-h407-no/satv4_23.jpg)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on August 18, 2013, 03:49:17 PM
Nice pair, Beto.     Hope to have mine back in the air this weekend to try out the 3/32" motor you recommended.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on August 31, 2013, 03:53:34 AM
Another trim session in calm summer evening. I first reduced decalage slightly (1/2 turn of M2 bolt = 0.2mm unter tailplane) and the model veered strongly to left. Interesting coupling of pitch and roll! Sorted that out with some added right thrust, changed a fresh motor would to max torque, and made a new record to 69 meters. Another flight with same settings was only 62 meters, on same motor. But the difference was not just motor fatique, as there was considerable difference also in sinking speed. The first was sinking 36cm/s, and the latter 63cm/s. I think there was some boyancy on the first flight, as I feel that it would not be possible to make a P-30 sink less than 45 cm/s without some lift present. Anyway, 69 meters is my best so far, and now the model trim is quite as I want to to be, rudder is slightly offset to left for climb, compensated by right thrust, and this produces vertical initial climb that veers slightly to the right as speed declines; then a tight spiral safely upwards.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on August 31, 2013, 04:03:02 AM
Tapio,
you mentioned that the altimeter you used is the one from HK.  Is that the Eagle Tree used in the "stand-alone" configuration?  Would the extra drag/weight (tho minimal) have any effect on the flight, or was the unit mounted in the pylon?

Pete


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on August 31, 2013, 05:50:45 AM
No! Not the huge Eagle Tree logger, but the HobbyKing copy/licence version of the Flight Dream Altimeter, http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__22630__Hobbyking_Altimeter.html . The flying part weights 1.3 grams and indeed fits in the pylon. It taps power from the timer battery, so no extra battery is needed. In my previous/conventional model I have taped the logger on top of the fuselage, behind the pylon, and I think there the logger did not affect performance at all either. Actually in the message #709 there is a picture inside the pylon. Towards the left end is battery on top of radio beacon, and quite in the middle of the pylon the logger.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on August 31, 2013, 04:52:25 PM
The Eagle Tree (http://www.eagletreesystems.com/Standalone/standalone.htm) altimeter is only 4 grams, including the readout.  It can be used as a stand-alone unit OR in conjunction with the v4 logger.  Same resolution as the HK one but with the readout and without the temp and time graphing.  Costs only a few dollars more but less than the list direct from E-T.

It is also listed on HK (http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__7837__Altitude_MicroSensor_standalone_or_e_logger_V4.html).  The negative of the H-K for me is the requirement to download to a confuser.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on August 31, 2013, 05:03:10 PM
Fly Dream make a Bluetooth adapter for the HK altimeter that allows your to download the data to an Android phone or tablet device. That's what I plan to try next myself. Don't feel like lugging a laptop or netbook to the field either Pete!

http://www.fd-rc.com/Showcpzs.asp?id=917

See the attached photos for the arrangement of the two devices and the plotting on an Android phone.

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on August 31, 2013, 05:17:46 PM
For the contest geeks, the temp/time graphing is a good thing to have, and the gizmo IS physically smaller than the Eagle T.  The extra cost of the interface (GREAT addition) might be a big minus point.  Is it also in the HK lineup?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: betocastrucci on August 31, 2013, 05:36:36 PM
I use the same altimeter, but in my P30 with a 50 mAh 1 cell lipo (big for it), total weight 4.9g (altimeter + batt + cables + conectors). I carry an old netbook to flying field 8) but I liked this interface to android, looking for it.
Today I was trimming my new Saturno V4, also lda = lots of drag airfoil :D , with 1/16" (much thinner than normal) x 6 loops (53 cm motor length). I wounded 1000 turns for the flight in the graph, the maximum with this motor is 1400. Got some help from hot air. Tomorrow I'll wind it to maximum.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on August 31, 2013, 06:00:06 PM
For the contest geeks, the temp/time graphing is a good thing to have, and the gizmo IS physically smaller than the Eagle T.  The extra cost of the interface (GREAT addition) might be a big minus point.  Is it also in the HK lineup?
It's not in the HK line-up. For non contest geeks why bother at all?? For sport flying who cares how high you are getting? Spend your money on something else.
But it is only $17.16 for the Bluetooth adapter. So it's not really very expensive.
I bought it from here: http://www.himodel.com/FPV_Telemetry/Bluetooth_Module_for_FD-Altimeter_Altitude_Data_Logger.html

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on August 31, 2013, 06:15:47 PM
We have a 150 meter "ceiling" in our area is the main reason I'm in the market for such a gizmo.  I don't have telemetry on my radio and a stand-alone tele system costs almost as much as my DSX-11 cost.  I'd like to get a visual relation for my planes at altitude, and a unit that is small and light enough for the 30"+ FF models is icing on the cake.

I AM interested in how high I get (my planes, that is ::))...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on August 31, 2013, 09:40:36 PM
MID390 airfoil is 7% thick and 3% camber. Camber seems low, but for P30 Re is probably about right.
Plotted it out and attached the drawing below.

Should need a turbulator to perform best in the glide, or a rough upper surface finish.
Certainly will be "low drag".


Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on August 31, 2013, 10:24:01 PM
Some of my rocketry buddies have very small and light recording altimeters. I will see if I can chase down the specs. For them.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on August 31, 2013, 11:24:26 PM
There is a very small Polish altimeter that the rocketry guys use here Derek. I have one, but again it needs a laptop to download the data.
This is the one I have: http://www.adrel.com.pl/altimeter.html

Tmat
-has too many doodads and geegaws for his own good  ;D


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on August 31, 2013, 11:29:37 PM
Tony. That's one of them. I'll check with my altimeter guru friend about the others.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on August 31, 2013, 11:56:22 PM
Fly Dream make a Bluetooth adapter for the HK altimeter that allows your to download the data to an Android phone or tablet device. That's what I plan to try next myself. Don't feel like lugging a laptop or netbook to the field either Pete!

If I want to plot the data on field, I use the Altitude Analysis  (http://koti.welho.com/pkuikka/aa/)software on my Palm handheld (unpublished version under construction adds support to FD-A). Then again, most of the time I´m too busy flying, it is just cool afterwards to see how the flights went.

Tony, please be aware that if the FD Android software is made by the same team as the PC software, it is - errrr - not quite perfect. At least the PC version does not take temperature into account (the logger measures it, the software plots it, but does not account for it when calculating the altitudes!). Temperature affects the readings in two ways. First it accounts the signal you get from the pressure sensor, and the sensors typically automatically deal with that. But in addition, the dependence of air pressure on altitude also varies with temperature, and if this is not compensated for, you get several meters of error (up to 10m per 100 meter when it is freezing) for your altitude readings. Needless to say, the Altitude Analysis and my Excel macro which I use to calculate altitude graph from the data I import to PC take the temperature into account... :-)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on September 01, 2013, 10:33:14 AM
Good points Tapio. Thanks.


Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on September 02, 2013, 11:49:55 PM
Here's my TitanK2, adapted from a Bruce Hannah design and replacing TitanK1 which was lost due to DT operator error.  (Yeah, stupid me.)

Airplane flew great right off the board, with just a bit of downthrust added.  I'm now fine tuning but haven't got up to full torque yet.  I think I'll be removing some of the right thrust, and possibly a tiny bit of incidence.  There are incidence adjustment screws for both the wing and the stab.

I'm going to try and post some video from today a bit later.

--Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on September 03, 2013, 12:01:11 AM
Very nice Bill! Looks like you have a winner there.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 03, 2013, 12:37:14 AM
MID390 airfoil is 7% thick and 3% camber. Camber seems low, but for P30 Re is probably about right.
Plotted it out and attached the drawing below.

Should need a turbulator to perform best in the glide, or a rough upper surface finish.
Certainly will be "low drag".

Mid-309. Yes, it is low camber, but seems to work ok. The P-30 has such low wing loading, that not much camber is needed. Also, the first session without a turbulator went ok, albeit a bit under-elevated. I then added a zigzag tape to 50-60%, and now it glides fine. Maybe a bit faster than conventional ships, but measured sinking rate is in the same ball park. In my latest fly session there was some turbulence as the evening breeze came in, but the model was stalling ever so gently, and about to settle again, no serious/violent stall.

 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 03, 2013, 02:07:25 AM
Bill, Titan looks like an interesting model. Semi-symmetrical airfoil and PGI trim? Should have spectacular power burst!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on September 03, 2013, 06:13:04 PM
Derek, thanks for the nice comment.

Tapio, thanks also. the airfoil isn't really what I would consider semi-symettrical, although I suppose it really is with the Phillips entry and otherwise nearly flat bottom.  The Phillips is probably a bit excessive near the wing root, and exaggerated by the picture.  This is only the second plane I've built from scratch, TitanK1 being the first.

The airfoil is RSG-29 (8.66% thickness, 4.33% camber) at the root tapering to RSG-82 (7.58% thickness, 3.79% camber) at the tip.  This was the closest match I found in Profili to Bruce's airfoil shown on the plan.

I am attempting to use PGI trim as the basis, although since I am doing this on my own and know of PGI only through these forums and internet, it is not pure PGI.  The original Titan design had a pylon, didn't use PGI, and used a shorter heavier motor.)  I think the plane does have a pretty sprightly climb for a long motor run P-30, but I don't have a lot to compare to and as I said I haven't gotten to full torque with this one yet.  Motor run for TitanK1 was about 1:40.  Motor is six strands of 3/32 (2.4 mm), lightly braided.

--Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FF Bruce on September 03, 2013, 08:55:06 PM
Very nice Bill,looking forward to see it go in a couple weeks


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: didierlouis on September 10, 2013, 12:51:10 PM
Tapio,
I appreciate your search for a better flying P30. (and in general your contributions are very value added ; many thanks).
In the P30 class the constraints due to the prop and to the small dimensions force us to look for directions unknown in F1B or G! It is good for our mind!
My first P30 when returning to modeling 4 years ago was an Ikara PeeWee; unfortunately I broke all what could be broken: balsa tube, wings, nose...
I decided to test high tech building with my P30 Addict 2: (relatively) high  A/R wings with an LDA captured in FFQ, MID 102 (see first pictures).
The climb was good but glide a disaster!
These same wings proved to be much more effective on my first F1K where the engine runs for 2 mn!
After testing a model built by Serge Millet, I derived from his design the P30 Addict 3: large area wings and an airfoil quite thick with little undercamber.
It glides beautifully and climbs quite high if not fast.
It was flown at the last Coupe d'Hiver in Viabon (winter conditions and a lot of wind) and would have won if not being hidden to the timekeeper by the hangar at the last flight.
A sketch is attached. Let me find a picture to be posted later.
You can also see on the wings picture  that we share the construction method.
My conclusion is that with the drag induced by the propeller on gliding, we have better to select  a slow gliding airfoil, a good surface (thanks to carbon!) and a reasonably fast climb.
With a 40g limit, I prefer save on the mechanism which could control the burst (and loose a little of altitude) and add surface.
Take care.
Didier


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 17, 2013, 01:45:08 PM

It's not in the HK line-up. For non contest geeks why bother at all?? For sport flying who cares how high you are getting? Spend your money on something else.
But it is only $17.16 for the Bluetooth adapter. So it's not really very expensive.
I bought it from here: http://www.himodel.com/FPV_Telemetry/Bluetooth_Module_for_FD-Altimeter_Altitude_Data_Logger.html



I managed to get one BT adapter from Himodel, after I placed the order, the next morning it was "discontinued" (which I suppose is "out of stock", as I think this BT device is just a new one and will be more widely available when the factory produces more units...)

Really bad instructions, just says "install the software to your Android device" (yeah, how, so far I have only installed applications from Google Shop, and even trying to download the software from FD-A web page to my mobile fails....).

But! I have already built the support of FD-A to my Palm software, and also for trial had set up the software to support serial-over-bluetooth (and tested that with RAM3 logger). So, I thought I had the needed components... Powered up the BT dongle, paired it with Palm, went to my logging software where I chose BT port instead of copper serial, pressed "upload data", and.... data started to load! Voila!

(the pic shows logger to the right underneath the Palm, then the BT dongle and battery to the left. The log is a pathetic flight on P-30)
 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: didierlouis on September 26, 2013, 12:05:40 PM
To complete my previous post, find  enclosed below a picture of the full model.
Didierlouis


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on September 26, 2013, 12:57:20 PM
Didier

I hope that photo wasn't taken in Beaujolais at the end of November :o

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: didierlouis on September 26, 2013, 07:12:10 PM
Hi Peter
Coupe d'hiver des Alpes du Sud, Sisteron, this winter.
Take care
Didier


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 27, 2013, 01:28:25 AM
We had a contest here in Finland the past Sunday; there my best climb with the LDA was 70 meters. However, the air was boyant, in the glide the model was coming down, but more slowly than normal. Then again, in light lift my old, conventional model also climbed almost 70 meters...

Throughout the day the model seemed quite sensitive to rudder trim. A bit too much to the left, and in the initial burst the model would roll to the left. Reduce the left rudder, and now the model banked to the right when VIT triggered and climbed more slowly until torque burned down. It seems that banked high-speed turn was due to glide cedalage coming in too early, so that the model could benefit from 2-stage VIT. But would that be then too complex? I just wonder if I should try to build the model for PGI trim, would that made the climb more straightforward to trim? Then again, I do not like PGI that much (at least on F1B)...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on September 27, 2013, 11:57:37 AM
Maybe your rudder is a bit big Tapio?

Tmat
-just a guess


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on November 05, 2013, 02:26:51 AM
The rudder is only 5 to 7 mm wide, so quite narrow. I think the sensitivity is also/mostly due to the high initial speed in the power burst. Low drag on the wing, VIT enabling straight initial climb, and motor wound to high torque means much higher initial speed at ballistic trim. Also the model shows the typical feature of nose up/down trim coupling to sideways move (too little decalage -> model turns left, and vice versa).

To another subject: the motor tubes shows on my models were laminated by company "Kultasiivet", but when this moved to Estonia the mandrels were lost in the move. So, as I attended "open evening school for adults" and class "techical work" there this autumn, I got the opportunity to use a metal lathe. There I turned my very own mandrel for P-30 fuselages. After several evenings of first turning the mandrel and then filing and sandons the surface smooth, I molded the first test tube out of glassfibre last night. Glass is good, as you can easily follow the release while it progresses from the thick end to the thin. I'm glad to report that despite the mandrel surface seems quite scratched, actually the file marks are shallow and do not feel if you glide your fingernail over them, and the glass tube released easily off the mandrel. So next thing is to laminate some tubes from kevlar and/or carbon.  This tube is 24mm diameter at the thicker end, so thicketr than e.g. Burdov tubes, but this means that I can use a shorter motor-to-peg -distance (without problems of motor bunching) and have less inertia in the pitch direction. The glass tube is less than 13 grams (100g/m2 front section and 50g/m2 rear), so I suppose with kevlar/carbon you could squeeze it weight closer to 10 grams.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on November 06, 2013, 05:43:58 PM
That looks interesting Tapio. I'm curious as to how you release the moulded tube . Do you use inner wraps of plastic and perhaps vaseline to ensure release?
It also looks like you may have wrapped the outside of the glass with tape or similar.
Nice work anyway.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on November 07, 2013, 05:57:27 AM
The release agent is carnauba wax. I use Simoniz car wax in the yellow tin, but "official" mold wax is the same stuff. Add some 5 layers polishing inbetween, so the laminate does not stick onto the mold. Another important feature is that the mold is slightly conical (the motor tube part tapers from 24mm diameter to 22mm), and there are absolutely no grooves in the mold, where the laminate could stick into. The scratches in the previous pictures seem coarse, but actually they are not, if you slide your fingernail over them, you can barely notice them. But with the surface smooth ( I first used a file to even out all the marks from the lathe cutter, then moved from coarser sandpaper to finer, finishing with #800), the tube does not catch, but can be tapped off the mold.

The method of release is such that I mold a "lump" (a ring of thicker material) to the thick end of the tube. Once the tube has cured, I slip a piece of tubing over the thick end of mandrel so that the tube leans against the lump. The tap the tube (in practice fall the whole mandrel-laminate-tube a few cm against concrete floor) to the tubing, so that the slight shock is delivered to the thicker laminate ring and the laminated tube. This tries to push the laminate off the mandrel, and the linear shock probably ever so slightly expands the laminate, releasing it off the mandrel. In practice you can see (from glass laminate) how every tap looses 5 to 10cm of the laminate off the mandrel, until after some 10 taps the mandrel drops off from within the tube. Then you just saw the thicker ring off the laminate (and put it aside, as it can be recycled for the next laminate!)

I do not think that vaseline or plastic sheet would work, as for a good tubing the lamination needs to be made against a solid surface. Here the waxed steel works good. The kevlar cloth is wetter and wrapped tightly against the mandrel, then pulled tight by wrapping with a tape (used computer data tape); this pushes the laminate tight against the mandrel and squeezes off all extra epoxy. If there was plastic or vaseline against the mandrel, it would just twist around while the tape is pulled, and the cloth would wrinkle this way and that.

I made the first "real" tube yesterday. Motor tube 90g/m2 russian kevlar, tailboom 60g/m2 kevlar, with 3 layers of 100g/m2 glass cloth to reinforce the peg and nose. 430mm motortube and 260mm tailboom, weight 11.5 grams. As strong as my old ones, so good for use.     


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on November 07, 2013, 07:22:37 AM
Thanks for all that information Tapio.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Broken Strands on November 25, 2013, 01:38:58 PM
New Campbell's Souper P-30 to replace the old one, still need to add all the fiddly bits.  It was modified with a 5-panel wing and twin rudders, mostly for looks.  Even went so far as to build a sexy, airfoiled pylon for it but it looked out of place on the otherwise square airframe so the stock "doorstop" pylon was put back into service.

Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on November 25, 2013, 04:41:47 PM
Looks good - but then, twin fins always do !

I figured the basic boxy pylon was kind of heavy for a weight-limited model so just used a simple one in its stead.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Broken Strands on November 25, 2013, 08:17:12 PM
The stock Souper 30 uses a flat, 1/16" balsa slab for the rudder.  I kept knocking the dang thing off! (Being less ham-handed is something I've always aspired to but have yet to attain.). Slapping two rudders on the ends of the perfectly square tip ribs was kind of the cave man's answer to the problem.  Your built-up rudder looks like a more elegant solution!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on November 25, 2013, 08:27:34 PM
This looks Souper to me. Did you hear from Lee Campbell yet? I like this modification.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on November 25, 2013, 08:58:43 PM
The Souper 30 was one of Caleys first models way back and I built this one alongside as a sort of moral encouragement.  Not that she needed it ...

Other than the changed wing mount I went to a built-up fin, being a little wary of a sheet one warping over time, and added an extra spar to the wing in the hope of some turbulation to the relatively thin flat-bottom airfoil.    Drop-off stab for D/T, tracker hides inside pylon.

Flys well, climbs fast with the slim foil but glides surprisingly well


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: jim_buxton on December 11, 2013, 02:15:06 PM
Added a Boomer Mark III to keep my Mark II company.  Fantastic kit from CB Model Designs, built out to 39 grams!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: martynk on December 16, 2013, 12:14:47 PM
Bootiful..
Very nice indeed.

Martyn


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: betocastrucci on December 26, 2013, 09:20:17 AM
New Saturnos, V3 and V4, ready for Lost Hills:

(http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-el2kj9cX1kY/Urw4LwDleHI/AAAAAAAABIs/MnSdwDtui0A/w508-h576-no/satv3_21.jpg)

(http://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-2G_ayDeiJWQ/Urw4KEMRzHI/AAAAAAAABIs/2NbxaOYtd7M/w912-h476-no/satv3_22.jpg)

Peg moved rearward, to use longer motor with 3/32" SS rubber:

(http://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-myQb_Kct8G8/Urw4J17O85I/AAAAAAAABIs/cfnDBrFyeDY/w962-h576-no/satv3_20.jpg)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on December 26, 2013, 10:08:51 AM
Where is Lost Hills ? Might be California ? Would like to see pictures if possible.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on December 26, 2013, 04:35:12 PM
Beautiful models -Jim and Beto.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on December 26, 2013, 06:34:06 PM
Beautiful models -Jim and Beto.
John

I agree.
Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on December 26, 2013, 06:41:09 PM
Where is Lost Hills ? Might be California ? Would like to see pictures if possible.

Allen,
Click on the lower link here-
http://www.hippocketaeronautics.com/hpa_forum/index.php?topic=15836.msg128140#msg128140
for Pics at Lost Hills.
Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on January 04, 2014, 05:39:27 PM
Beto,

Those models look like winners--they fit my belief/understanding of a great P-30 design.  Obviously the Saturnos were already great designs, and your modifications make sense to me.  What do they weigh?

Since you mentioned Lost Hills, are you coming to the Isaacson in February?  I'd look forward to flying P-30 with you.

--Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: BG on January 04, 2014, 06:15:19 PM
Dave Lost Hills is in southern California not too far to the west of Bakersfield. Google map it.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: betocastrucci on January 04, 2014, 07:06:16 PM
Beto,

Those models look like winners--they fit my belief/understanding of a great P-30 design.  Obviously the Saturnos were already great designs, and your modifications make sense to me.  What do they weigh?

Since you mentioned Lost Hills, are you coming to the Isaacson in February?  I'd look forward to flying P-30 with you.

--Bill

They weighed 36 to 37 grams, so they can carry a tracker (mine weighs 4 grams). Finnalized trimming of #6 today, it's already in the "Ready Models" box :D :D
I expect to go to Lost Hills in a month, AA tickets already bougth, motel 6 reserved, passport and visa ok... These P30s will fly at Isaacson (I'll fly F1B, F1G and CLG also :shock: ), it will be very nice to meet many HPA members there.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: betocastrucci on January 06, 2014, 09:28:36 AM
For the contest geeks, the temp/time graphing is a good thing to have, and the gizmo IS physically smaller than the Eagle T.  The extra cost of the interface (GREAT addition) might be a big minus point.  Is it also in the HK lineup?
It's not in the HK line-up. For non contest geeks why bother at all?? For sport flying who cares how high you are getting? Spend your money on something else.
But it is only $17.16 for the Bluetooth adapter. So it's not really very expensive.
I bought it from here: http://www.himodel.com/FPV_Telemetry/Bluetooth_Module_for_FD-Altimeter_Altitude_Data_Logger.html

Tmat

Returning to altimeter, I bought the bluetooth interface from HK weeks ago, but just tested it today. Wow!!! Downloaded the Android software from Play Store and it ran ok! No more need to carry an old note to field, and to get the altimeter out of the plane. It weighs 3.4 grams, instead of 1.2g of the cables that it substitute, so just add more 2.2 grams to the system.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on January 06, 2014, 01:32:47 PM
Beto,
The altimeter itself can store many, many flights. So it is not necessary to leave the Bluetooth adapter always attached. You could fly all day with the altimeter, then attach the Bluetooth adapter and read the results of each flight if you desire.

So how high does your Saturno model climb and what is the sinking speed?

Tony


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: betocastrucci on January 06, 2014, 07:00:17 PM
Beto,
The altimeter itself can store many, many flights. So it is not necessary to leave the Bluetooth adapter always attached. You could fly all day with the altimeter, then attach the Bluetooth adapter and read the results of each flight if you desire.

So how high does your Saturno model climb and what is the sinking speed?

Tony

I know that I can fly without the bluetooth, and for a P30 2 grams more is too much. But it's possible for a F1B and my other R/C models to fly with the interface and get the data without taking the altimeter out of the plane.
I've lost the P30, that was not well trimmed, with the altimeter, and after that I've not used the other. As I changed the d/t to wing pop off, I think the impact to the ground can damage the altimeter. Many fligths measured 35 m after 1:15 (end of motor) and sink at 0.5 m/s.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: albisko on January 08, 2014, 09:08:49 AM
 :)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Alexandre Cruz on January 16, 2014, 01:47:04 PM
Beautiful Saturnos Beto!

V3 does go higher that V4. I have recorded many consistent flights with V3 at 53m climb in 52s using Peck standard prop and 6x1/8", glide was the same as yours. As you know initial power is hard to trim if you load the motor to the limit and required me launching to the left almost at 90º, not the best...

Maybe you can take some more flight time of these using 4x 1/8" as we saw Miguel in Argentina (almost 2 min motor run, 20m climb), I remember he was won that contest but it was really risky and did not worked in the next year when we had strong winds. Have you tried changing the props from Gizmo to original Peck? They should give some more punch in initial climb but motor time and glide.

Alex


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: betocastrucci on January 16, 2014, 04:55:15 PM
I compared the Gizmo prop with Peck, and visually they are the same, same blades, same pitch. But 1 mm can make much difference.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on January 16, 2014, 05:15:38 PM
My experience has been that the Czech prop works better with shorter motors (6 x 1/8") and the Gizmo is better for the longer motors. And may I suggest using 1/16" rubber to get 10 strands (equivalent to 5 strands of 1/8")? It's a very good compromise between 4 and 6 strands of 1/8". With longer motors, the minimum weight of the model becomes much more important.

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: betocastrucci on January 16, 2014, 07:34:44 PM
In basis of /32, we have:

weaker (and longer)
4 x 1/8" = 16/32
6 x 3/32 = 18
10 x 1/16 = 20
6 x 1/8 = 24
8 x 3/32 = 24
12 x 1/16 = 24
stronger (and shorter)

I've tried 10 x 1/16, I prefer than 6 x 1/8. But I had better results with 6 x 3/32.
For those longer motors, the model Must weight at the minimum. Mine Saturnos weighs 35~37 grams. There's space for a tracker or a altimeter.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Starduster on January 25, 2014, 02:26:46 PM
I had mentioned this airplane in an earlier thread.

I designed and built this P-30 many years ago (about 15) I flew it a few times, but then stopped flying competition Freeflight.

It is fully elliptical and high aspect ratio (18/1). The wing is traditional balsa and tissue, with a regular old modified Clarke Y.

The fuselage is rolled balsa, and the prop is a Czech "Yellow"

The only CF is some cap strips on the horizontal stab.

I will post a couple of pictures of my DT set up in the P-30 DT Thread.



For anyone who is interested, I am putting the finishing touches on a new drawing. I should have it in the Plans Gallery by the end of the week



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Starduster on January 31, 2014, 11:04:51 AM
I have up-loaded the drawing for my elliptical P-30 to the Plans Gallery.

Give it a little while for Ratz to approve and take a look. Any and all suggestions are welcome.

The airplane flys a lot better than you might think....


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave9129 on February 18, 2014, 10:10:14 PM
Could someone tell me how much the leash effects the flight performance of the pop off wing dt system ?  Seems like a lot of drag out there assymetrically situated.

Thanks
I love this site btw

Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on February 18, 2014, 10:21:28 PM
Could someone tell me how much the leash effects the flight performance of the pop off wing dt system ?  Seems like a lot of drag out there assymetrically situated.

Thanks
I love this site btw

Dave

Dave, I've flown the same plane with regular stab DT and then switched it to the pop off wing. I didn't notice any change in performance other than shorter retrieves from big boomers!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave9129 on February 18, 2014, 10:53:07 PM
Well, I'll admit I'm a little confused by this small Reynolds number stuff.  I'm considering a pop off wing on the Sinbad ,sorry I know that's off topic, I'm finishing up. Guess I'll go ahead and give it a shot. Maybe on the side opposite the rudder bias hoping the drag will cancel each other out during the tow...........

Thanks for the input Derek,

Dave




Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: atesus on February 23, 2014, 10:29:30 PM
My Fantastik P-30 went through a weight reduction program. Here it is now covered with Esaki tissue and has a slimmer/lighter fuselage. The weight is still higher than min at 46g (airframe) however the first test flights looked quite promising.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: taltalx2 on March 19, 2014, 08:13:35 AM
My P-30 -

(http://s28.postimg.org/h3hix5f8p/2014_02_25_19_21_42.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/h3hix5f8p/)

(http://s28.postimg.org/btck5uuzt/2014_02_25_19_28_33.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/btck5uuzt/)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: bentodd on March 20, 2014, 12:13:29 AM
I thought I would present my study in alternative materials, blue foam.   I made the wing from fan-fold by putting in creases on the underside and bending in some under-camber.  The dihedral joints lock in the curve.  Added a little carbon uni-directional, covered it with jap tissue glued on with water based paint.  Heavy at 15.6 grams for a 81 in^2 wing.  Foam worked a lot better for the pylon at 2.2 grams.  (I always found balsa ones very hard to make).  H. stab was 3.2 grams.  All up weight is 47 grams so a little on the heavy side, but not bad for 2 nights of work.

First test flights showed promise once I got the incidence of the h. stab worked out.  I had issues with repeatably since I had only taped on the wing pylon and issues with the nose block.  I used Al plate in the front and back for bearings and bolted on the back one so I could make some adjustment.  But I couldn't keep it tight and the prop angle changed every time it landed. 

Will fix those and try again

Ben


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: duration on March 20, 2014, 06:57:51 AM
Ben:

Great to see your experiment with foam construction.  The reduction in construction time not only solves the replacement problem for a model category that is prone to thermal losses, but also allows someone to build or kit low-cost, low construction time models to encourage beginners in free flight.

Have you seen the replacement molded foam wings available in some hobby shops? These are for some sort of ready-to-fly R/C powered glider and have an under cambered airfoil and some dihedral.  Also have you considered a Jedelisky-style wing with a curved upper surface and a flat lower surface running from leading edge to about 40% back? A balsa spar could be fitted in the space between. Several recent issues of Free Flight Quarterly have featured a very interesting series of French Coupes using this type of wing construction.

Please keep us informed of your efforts.

Louis


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: duration on March 20, 2014, 07:03:59 AM
Ben:

I also should have mentioned Ron St. Jean's experiments about 20 years ago with tissue over foam construction. I believed he used very dilute white glue to attach. You could even add diagonal strips of tissue, silkspan, Kevlar thread, or even 1K carbon tow top and bottom for torsional strength.  Lots of room for experimentation.

Louis


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Ross J on July 10, 2014, 01:43:15 AM
Louis, I bought one of those R/C wings thinking it might work for FF. they are VERY heavy, and the one I got had about .2" of wash-in in both tips! They have a coating of some sort that forms a harder skin, like the Airhog wing.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on July 23, 2014, 08:23:11 PM
Here's my newest P-30. It's my second Banana Fritter. Once again I've mounted the wing above the fuselage and made it adjustable fore and aft for balance. Also once again it has balanced right where it should with the wing directly above the regular location. Weight without rubber is 40.5 grams. You can see that the purple tissue smeared a bit during finishing.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: or_sh on August 28, 2014, 07:23:56 AM
My P-30


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on August 28, 2014, 07:50:50 AM
That's absolutely beautiful. What's the weight?

Also, what did you use for that nose assembly? It looks like turned delrin to me, and if so, bravo for some great machining!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on August 28, 2014, 10:57:34 PM
I like the Kevlar motor tube!
What are the weights like?

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: or_sh on August 31, 2014, 04:25:19 AM
Hey,
maxout
The front end is delrin you are correct. my friend make me the delrin, and i put inside bearing and make it all the rest, i make it exactly for Stepan nose ring F1G

Tony,
The motor tube is kevlar 180 grams , i make it just because the texture that he have, you can make it with lighter kevlar.
The model wight 45, i think if you don't need it so shine you can make it lighter, and you can make the wing in one part.

I want to build now three models with different wings but it's will take time 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on August 31, 2014, 07:13:43 AM
90 gram (per sq m) kevlar (1 layer) is strong enough for P-30 motor tube...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: or_sh on September 01, 2014, 08:57:32 AM
90 gram (per sq m) kevlar (1 layer) is strong enough for P-30 motor tube...

Hi,
I know that is strong , like i say i make 180g just because the texture that i get.
It's carbon with Kevlar?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on September 01, 2014, 11:20:10 AM
No, plain kevlar. The front fuselage is 90 gram Russian material bought years ago from Alex A. Same stuff that many current F1B and F1G fuselages are made of. Tailboom aft of rubber peg is 60 grams kevlar, from a western source and of much lighter color.


 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on September 26, 2014, 04:51:31 PM
Building my first P30 (motivation is that I now have some RC systems that are below 8 grams). I decided to try Don DeLoach's Polecat with some modifications, NOT to improve performance, but to suit my needs - shortened the fuselage to 21.5" to get a rapid climb version (I'm flying in a small field surrounded by trees) instead of the contest-winning long motor version, changed the rudder slightly because it's RC rudder only (the whole rudder pivots). First time I've tried using rib caps, took some time to get the hang of it but I thought it came out OK, plus it was interesting to see that it really did stiffen the wing quite a bit.

After using the half-tube system for my Coupes, Wakes, and Oldtimers, I just can't go back to winding in the plane (I don't even use a stooge anymore, I just use the fence!), so I made some half-tubes, a real pia, but at least now I've got two. The Piserchio hooks I use for my Coupes work perfectly with the P30 half-tubes. Just have to get to covering and make the pylon and it will be ready to go! Larry


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on October 13, 2014, 08:57:05 PM
Finally got the wing covered. I used 1/2 mil mylar (instead of 1/4) to see how that can deal with trees. I usually just use uhu glue stick for mylar, and was happy to see that there were no problems at all with it pulling off the wing undercamber, kind of shown in the second photo. In fact in some tests I found that even if it pulls off, a heating iron seems to re-activate it (you can actually see it turn color again) and you can then simply re-stick it. I like using non-toxic glues like UHU, so this encourages me to try mylar and caps on my coupe wing (already use it on the stab and rudder), this was a useful dry run for that.

I think both the balsa d-box and the rib capping might be a little overkill, wing is really really stiff (and so you can use 1/4 mil mylar), if I did it again on this model (the polecat) I'd use 1/32" ribs instead of 1/16" and 1mm or 1.5mm (what the plan calls for) caps, the 2mm were clearly too much. Should be able to take a beating though!

Going to spray the bottom of the wingtips with Tamiya, for visibility, keeping my fingers crossed that that works OK.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on October 14, 2014, 12:35:00 AM
Would it be better to spray the topside; the added roughness of the paint might do better for the aerodynamics there? I often spray the covering (clear mylar or clear Micafilm) on the inside before covering, for added durability.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on October 14, 2014, 01:40:04 PM
Thanks Tapio you're right, that's a good suggestion, I'll spray the top of the wingtips! I've never sprayed mylar before, so I hope I don't ruin it. I'm also thinking about just using tissue on the tips, but the spraying seems easier and I found a place in town that sells Tamiya paint, which was one of the recommended paints in another post. That's interesting about spraying it on the inside before covering, I thought the heat shrinking might crack or mess up the paint, I guess not? and you're saying it adds strength, interesting.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tapio Linkosalo on October 14, 2014, 03:19:13 PM
In my experience the paint inside the foil is not harmed by the heating and shrinking of the mylar. A thin coat is not thick enough to crack, the paint may get slightly darker color when ironing, but should return to normal when cooling off.

By durability I mean that the color holds better inside, does not scratch as easily as it would on the outside.

I recommend painting also the centre section. I use a mist of fluorescent color on the top leading edge of my P-30 wings and tailplanes for also larger models. The slight texture it adds seems to improve the aerodynamics; I do not need other turbulator on P-30 wings.

   


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on October 15, 2014, 08:51:42 AM
If I had known about painting the inside, I would have tried that on the tips (too late now). Interesting idea about spraying the center section, do you or anyone know how that compares to instead using a turbulator (sticking on the turbulator is easier)?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: pburress on October 22, 2014, 08:53:20 PM
Here's my Dragonfly P30 from the BMJR kit.  It weighs right at 44.5g without motor.  It came out nose heavy so I added more CF to the pylon rails in order to move the wing back at least 1/2" from the location on the plan.  Still trimming it out but it has a nice flat glide.  I'm using two loops of 1/8 braided.  The motor peg is way back there and the motor run is long, without a lot of torque.  Not sure if this will be ideal in breezy conditions.  I'm thinking of making a three loop motor of 3/32 and seeing how that does. 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dosco on October 24, 2014, 08:22:05 AM
Here's my Dragonfly P30 from the BMJR kit.  It weighs right at 44.5g without motor.  It came out nose heavy so I added more CF to the pylon rails in order to move the wing back at least 1/2" from the location on the plan.  Still trimming it out but it has a nice flat glide.  I'm using two loops of 1/8 braided.  The motor peg is way back there and the motor run is long, without a lot of torque.  Not sure if this will be ideal in breezy conditions.  I'm thinking of making a three loop motor of 3/32 and seeing how that does. 

Perhaps you can add a motor peg mount somewhere closer to the nose so you have the option for a shorter motor?

You'd probably have to re-balance the airplane if you used the shorter motor ... presumably done by shifting the wing forward or aft ...

-Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on October 24, 2014, 01:45:58 PM
Couple of comments to pburess:

You said it was nose heavy but you were going to move the wing back?  Sounds opposite to me.

The weight is good, but the long-motor-run approach really is best with a model near minimum weight.  At 44.5 g, I think the 2 loops of 1/8 is much too light, and even the 3 loops of 3/32 may be marginal.  It will climb well at full torque, but it may not climb much during cruise.  Of course, the propeller you use will have an impact on both motor run and how well it climbs.

This is based on my experience flying at 42.5 g.

--Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: pburress on November 07, 2014, 12:13:17 AM
Sorry for the delayed reply.  I mis-typed earlier- it came out tail heavy, not nose heavy.  I have since flown it with the 3 loop 3/32" motor and it did well- 1:40 on 1200 winds at dusk with no thermals around.  I've since acquired a torque meter and wound a similar motor to breaking, and determined that I should be able to go to at lease 1500 winds on this motor. There is a contest this weekend in Perry, OK and I am planning on heading down there.  Weather permitting, I will put the Dragonfly to the test. 

Bill, your observations about my motor choices are accurate- climb is modest at 1200 winds on the 3 loop 3/32" motor.  If it's breezy this may not be ideal.  Maybe I will make up a shorter 3 loop 1/8" motor for a stronger burst in the wind.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on November 08, 2014, 09:12:29 PM
Finally finished my Polecat P30 shown in post #793, thought I'd post some pictures. Have a very light (5.3 g) RC receiver/servo in it. Sprayed the tips with design master floral paint, I liked the fuschia, first time I've sprayed mylar, it went on nice! I think I'll also do the wing leading edge as Tapio recommended, but I first want to get in some test flights without anything, then maybe with a turbulator. so that I can make some comparisons. Monday so far is predicted to be one of the calmest in quite a while so I'm looking forward to flying it, it was a lot of fun to build!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on November 10, 2014, 05:04:44 PM
Flew the Polecat today, the first P30 I've ever flown. What a surprise, it's pretty heavy (65g + equip) because I overbuilt the wing and fuselage (but it's darn sturdy), and with that big freewheeler I thought it was going to have a lousy glide, but it was actually surprisingly good! Did some test glides, then two flights with about 100 hand winds, then 400 winds, and finally 950 winds, the last flight got up 122 ft. and was 1:47, not too bad, I think I can easily do 2 min if I crank in some more winds. The advice given here with regards to downthrust is spot on, you really need it. It was thrilling to watch it circle the field, also the gizmogeezer held up OK on the astroturf/concrete field - came in very level most flights so no problem there, bumped the ground on one flight but the noseblock just popped out and again no damage. Will try a turbulator on the wing next time. Pivoting rudder worked nice, it was also not difficult to keep such a small plane in the tiny field. Sorry for gushing but I'm thrilled, now I understand why this event is so popular!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on November 10, 2014, 06:58:20 PM
Interesting to see that a P30 will still perform well with simple RC.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on November 11, 2014, 09:10:07 AM
I have to say, that's a really nice looking model, and I'm quite impressed with the R/C rubber power work you're doing. You're one of only two people I know of who have built successful R/C rubber models. Looks like another item for my own bucket list. ;)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dosco on November 11, 2014, 09:14:52 AM
Building my first P30 (motivation is that I now have some RC systems that are below 8 grams).

Larry:
What are the details on your RC gear?

-Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on November 11, 2014, 02:01:42 PM
Thanks John and Maxout, thanks to RC I'm flying rubber power every week! It also kind of spoils you, I've had 10 minute flights where the plane landed a few feet away, yea! I'm thrilled that I've gotten down to P30 size for RC, it's just a lot easier to keep a small plane in a small field, plus the performance of the P30 was much better than I expected. I put up a building video, nothing new in it for anyone here, but I did put a link to this thread, which is really helpful, and some kits. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yof6TwjyZ5Y&list=UUJ4EgSJhWkhuycvXmEg2caw

Larry:
What are the details on your RC gear?

-Dave

Hi Dave - I'm using an Orange R415 receiver (2 g) and a Hobbyking HKM282A servo (2.7g), so far so good. I've also been using a Lemon receiver, I posted a video on some of the details:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V-bxTQrTdQ&list=UUJ4EgSJhWkhuycvXmEg2caw

Looking forward to the next not-too-windy day!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on December 13, 2014, 03:43:49 AM
My Souper 30 is 99.5% finished. 40.6 grams. Still needs my AMA numbers along with the swivel and line for the wing pop off DT. I think it will be just under 43 grams ready to fly. I built the fuselage. The flying surfaces are by FFBruce.

(http://i1139.photobucket.com/albums/n542/derekmc777/fc8f660415604ac46993b9f18ac31261_zps99dbd873.jpg)

First contest should be the 2015 IKE at Lost Hills. 40 years of P30!  They are fun airplanes.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: calgoddard on December 13, 2014, 11:32:02 AM
Nice job DerekMc.

Close to minimum weight, very nice.

Your airplane looks a bit like a Square Eagle except it has a wing pylon.

My next P-30 will have a pop-off wing DT.  That set up gives you a better chance of recovery.

I have had great results with my P-30s that use the GizmoGeezer prop assembly.

Good luck at Lost Hills.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on December 13, 2014, 12:56:48 PM
Looking forward to flying with you again, Derek.  It's not fair having 2 masters cooperate on one plane, though!  With your air-picking skills, maybe there is somebody who can compete with Clint Brooks.  This coming Fab Feb will be my first time there with a trimmed P30, assuming it is still on trim at that time, so I should at least get a few maxes.  I'm still not confident in picking air for P30--the timing seems different than for glider.

--Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on December 13, 2014, 02:46:46 PM
Likewise Bill. Beating Clint would be tough. His planes fly great. As for being a Master, you exaggerate. Bruce definitely, me, I'm an experienced duffer.
I agree that picking air for glider is different than rubber. I think the thermal window is longer for rubber due to the motor run. Many times I have launched into suspect air and the plane kept climbing long enough to find lift. Glider require more precision. I'm lousy at glider air picking.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: flyinryans on December 14, 2014, 07:31:55 PM
Just finished up my Sparrowhawk today. Can't wait to see it fly.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on December 14, 2014, 08:21:01 PM
Flyinryans,

Good looking Sparrowhawk!  If you're in the west, you should come fly it at Feb Feb in Lost Hills!

--Bill


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Rewinged on December 14, 2014, 08:24:44 PM
Derek, it's weird but I find it easier to pick air with a glider.  I think part of it is flying a long motor run P30.  While it climbs decently quick in the brief burst, and climbs much higher than my gliders, the gliders--especially a CLG--get their altitude immediately.  The rubber ship takes awhile, which seems to mess up my timing.  Fortunately it is possible in p30 to pick up some maxes before their is much vertical air movement.  But even that has been risky, because while it has seemed calm I've hit both really good air and some not-so-good air.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: flyinryans on December 15, 2014, 05:38:54 AM
Hey thanks Bill. I live in Georgia so I wont be able to get out there for that event. Although I will be in Dallas for training in Feb.

Joe


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on December 22, 2014, 07:41:54 PM
Given that the first one has been a lot of fun, I'm building another P30, my own design this time, will post some pictures after I make more progress. I'm using a 3/4" carbon fiber tube from Mike Woodhouse this time for the fuselage. This also gave me an opportunity to do some weight comparisons, there's also useful info about P30 motor tube weights in this link (I thought it would be more relevant to post my comparisons in the P30 section):

http://www.hippocketaeronautics.com/hpa_forum/index.php?topic=18136.0

The tube on the right is my 'standard' P30 balsa tube. It's 1/32 balsa (from the art store, so not in the 4-6 lb range). It has 3 coats of 50% thinned nitrate dope on the inside, then it's glued end to end, then I dope on wet Esaki tissue. When that's dry I put on a second coat of dope on the tissue. Finally, it has 1/64" ply reinforcers at both the front and the rear ends. Total  weight is 7.4 grams, which seems to be pretty good.

To the left is the carbon fiber tube. I glued in 1/64" ply reinforcers at the front and rear, so there isn't much to do. Total weight is 7.3 grams. So either way seems to work nice. The part I like about using the carbon fiber is that I can then build the complete P30 without any doping, given that I don't really have a good space for doping! Back to work. Larry



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on January 04, 2015, 01:12:01 PM
I've been doing a lot of winter flying and recently got a video of my Polecat P30 (shown in posts #803 and #804) in action:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3f5D3OM1EU&feature=youtu.be

It's enormous fun, a great flyer! With the small size, I haven't had any problems keeping it in the tiny field so far (probably shouldn't have said that!) Larry


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: atesus on January 04, 2015, 03:29:42 PM
Very nice -and gutsy- flight!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on January 04, 2015, 05:05:59 PM
Thanks! It's actually pretty relaxing and fun to fly. I think flying a wakefield in this field is much gutsier! At the end of my Bob White wakefield flying video (where I avoided the trees and almost hit the goal post) you can hear my filming friend say 'nerve wracking'.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on January 04, 2015, 06:56:42 PM
Thats pretty amazing - what about turbulence form the surrounding buildings? It looks fun.
John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Tmat on January 04, 2015, 07:47:37 PM
To the left is the carbon fiber tube. I glued in 1/64" ply reinforcers at the front and rear, so there isn't much to do. Total weight is 7.3 grams.
Is the carbon tube from Woodhouse tapered? I like the little balsa cone you made and the smaller tube for the rear.
Very neat.

Tmat


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on January 04, 2015, 08:01:40 PM
Thats pretty amazing - what about turbulence form the surrounding buildings? It looks fun.
John

Yes, I think there is turbulence from the buildings. I've noticed over the years that there's a 'ground boundary layer' in this field - once you get up 100 feet or more the air is pretty smooth, but below that it can be like Mr. Toad's wild ride! I think there are airstreams coming down the streets between the buildings, which create all sorts of cross currents. I've also noticed that there are two 'death zones' in two corners of the field - the plane drops like a rock when you hit those areas (I have one example on video) so I've learned to try to stay far away from those regions!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on January 04, 2015, 08:08:06 PM
Is the carbon tube from Woodhouse tapered? I like the little balsa cone you made and the smaller tube for the rear.
Very neat.

Tmat
Thanks Tony, no the tube is not tapered, it's constant. The small tube tail boom worked well on the first model, so if it ain't broke...


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on January 21, 2015, 12:42:18 PM
Building very slowly (on purpose), but I finally got the wing built. It's got a 3.2mm carbon spar, 1mm rib caps, except 3mm at the dihedral and 2mm at the center rib. I think it's stiff enough, we'll find out when I cover it!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on January 31, 2015, 02:39:50 PM
Got all the surfaces covered, used 1/4 mil mylar for the stab and rudder, I chickened out a little and used 3/8 mylar for the wing (instead of 1/4). Came out nice and smooth, also seems stiff enough. I really like using UHU for covering, you can re-position the mylar to get it pretty smooth so you don't have to shrink it too much, I think that's why I've never had problems so far with it pulling off from the undercamber. Just have to paint the tips without messing it up, get the equip in, and mount the pylon, not in a rush because it's supposed to be pretty windy next week so no flying for another week, darn!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: bigrip74 on January 31, 2015, 03:36:26 PM
Flyguy, that is a really nice build so far. I have never thought of using a carbon spar, what is the weight difference to balsa and where do I order from. I have a crazy to test out a dime scale wing with the carbon spar.

Bob


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on January 31, 2015, 04:30:31 PM
Thanks Bob, no major goof ups and the covering job came out really nice this time. The wing builds pretty fast with the spar approach; it's also a useful test run for my next Coupe, where I'm planning on building the same type of wing. The completed wing weights 13.4 grams, and from what I can tell comparing to the weights given for a bunch of P30s in FF Quarterly (both balsa and hi-tec), that seems to be pretty good. I got the spars from Mike Woodhouse, http://www.freeflightsupplies.co.uk/ , it's under Hi-Tec materials. Don't get (unless you want to save money) the pultruded (or micro) tubes, those are heavier (I got some of all of them so that I could compare the weights), you want the ones under the Tubular Carbon Spars section, the 3.2mm one I used was the 800mm long version (listed as tail spars!) and Mike reports a weight of 1.6 grams, which I think is pretty good considering it's 31.5" long; I checked against a 1/8" sq. hard spar (probably would have used 1/16 by 1/8 top and bottom) and that was over 3g, so it's pretty light, yet much stiffer and stronger, I was impressed when I got them. I also got the fuselage, shown in an earlier post, from Mike, it's listed as 'lightweight carbon fiber tubes', and I got the rib caps from Mike as well. If anyone knows where one can get the same tubular CF spars in the states, please let me know, that would save on shipping! (although Mike is very responsive and great to order from)  Larry


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on January 31, 2015, 04:38:22 PM
If anyone knows where one can get the same tubular CF spars in the states, please let me know, that would save on shipping! (although Mike is very responsive and great to order from)  Larry

I've bought tubular carbon spars of various sizes from Starlink in the past. Don't know if they still carry them or not. Just checked and they have them listed here:

http://www.starlink-flitetech.com/product-list


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on January 31, 2015, 05:05:52 PM
Thanks, that's funny you mention Starlink, I just received a bunch of Coupe half-tubes from them (i.e., Mike P) today! dammit I should have ordered a few of the spars to check them out (do you remember about what the price was?). So are they from unidirectional cloth, like Mike W's, or something like that, and not pultruded, I wasn't sure? I'm impressed with how light they are. I think FAI model supply also used to have them, but I don't see them listed now. thank goodness I bought a bunch, enough for a few planes.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: DerekMc on January 31, 2015, 05:10:46 PM
Sorry, i don't remember the cost. They are the light, not the pultruted type. They are the ones used in the Starlink P30 kits. Very nice.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on January 31, 2015, 06:03:50 PM
Thanks! I'll check them out next time I place an order.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: steveair2 on January 31, 2015, 10:06:50 PM
Flyguy,  I used to have much fun flying my P-30 Hawk.  Very much enjoy watching your videos and what you are building and flying. Very cool!

Thanks


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on January 31, 2015, 11:01:10 PM
Thank you! I hope it gets you building and flying as well. Your comment encourages me to finish the video I have on the p30 build I outlined here, which has been done piecemeal over months. I guess I'm moving somewhat slowly these days, I have too many planes to fly! Plus there appear to be age limitations - 1 hour of building and my back is sore; 3 hours of flying and I feel like someone punched me in the face! wasn't like that when I was a kid


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on February 07, 2015, 03:54:31 PM
Finally finished my second P30, shown below. This one came out very light, the total weight, not including the pylon, was 38.5 grams! So with a small 2 gram or less pylon for free flight, it just clears the 40g minimum, so I'm pretty happy. The RC version needs a much larger (taller and wider) pylon to hold the equipment, which came out to 4.4 grams, so the total is 42.9 grams, not bad for an RC version. The only ways I can think of to further lighten it would be to use 4-6 pound contest balsa for the ribs, wing mount, and pylon (I used 8-12 lb. art store balsa), and 1/4 mil mylar for the wing (I used 3/8 mil), which should lighten it a few more grams. I'm also thinking of ways to redesign the pylon so that it's smaller. The equipment weighs 6.3 grams, so the final total flying weight is around 50 grams, which is the minimum weight in some countries. I tried using a Kevlar pull-pull system this time, shown in the last photo, and was relieved to find that it appears to work well. Given that this P30 is 20 grams lighter than my last one, which flies great, I'm expecting some nice flying! I put up a building video here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jwc3eGVWm-o&list=UUJ4EgSJhWkhuycvXmEg2caw
On to the next project (even smaller RC rubber)! I'm really going have to give away some planes to make room!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on February 08, 2015, 03:25:08 PM
Flyguy,
GREAT looking P-30's!
Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on February 08, 2015, 04:36:28 PM
Thanks Dave, you always have nice things to say!
Now if this damn wind would just die down a little I could get out and fly! Larry


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: bentodd on February 08, 2015, 08:35:40 PM
Beautiful mylar covering job.  Can't see a single wrinkle.

On my last plane, the there were lots of little wrinkles along each of the of the ribs.

followed your lead and used glue stick.  Finding that special glue and thinning it down sounds like a pain.

do you shrink the mylar with an iron or a hot air gun?  If you use an iron, what temperature do you set it to.

PS, I admire your work bench.  It would take me days to clean it up like that.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on February 08, 2015, 10:09:23 PM
Thank you. This covering job was really satisfying, I really limited the screw-ups! I know what you're talking about because I've had that wrinkle-at-the-rib problem as well. I try to get it on smoother and tighter across the ribs, you can work the mylar a little with the uhu. Basically, my procedure is: I put uhu around the outline (and on the undercamber for the bottom, with a double coat), then I hold the mylar pretty taught and place it on the structure (could use a frame as an alternative), getting it positioned. You can always pull it up if it's not right and just apply more uhu, that's what I like about the glue stick. After it's positioned, I pull on the edges all around the frame to get it pretty smooth, you have a small window with the uhu to shift it around a little. Let it dry at least an hour, then I trim off the excess, then make another pass with the uhu over the edges, smoothing it down with my finger. After that dries I use a hot iron set pretty high to shrink it down and smooth it along the edges. Finally, when top and bottom are covered, I use a hot air gun to shrink the mylar. I know each has their own way, but I really like the air gun over the iron for shrinking mylar - you can just shrink a little by keeping it further away and blast areas that need shrinking by moving it in, so you can control the heat more precisely, at least for my clumsy hands. You can also get rid of the rib wrinkles that way if you're careful.

The workbench is only not too bad for pictures, otherwise it's a mess the rest of the time!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: bentodd on February 08, 2015, 11:02:59 PM
Thanks for the tips.  Gon'na have to practice more.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on February 11, 2015, 11:40:52 PM
Just finished a P30.  Weight 42 grams.

Esaki tissue covering.  Long motor.....4 strands of 1/8th Tan2 from front to rear.

  Fuselage 1in square box 3/32 longerons with 1/16th x 1/16th warren girder spacers.

Wing 1/16th X 1/16th geodetic on bottom with undercamber, 1/8th X 1/8th spar, then 1/16th X 1/16 cracked ribs on top.  Turbulator spar on top behind leading edge.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on February 11, 2015, 11:57:37 PM
Beautiful P30, nice to have some new pictures! Good weight too, nice.

So the tissue is Esaki, and it looks like the center section is orange?, but what about the tips? I like the colors. That's a 9.5" yellow Czech prop right?

I think a turbulator right behind the leading edge is at maybe 4%? I'm wondering because mine is closer to 10% and so is clearly behind the 1/8" sq leading edge. keep us posted on the flying part!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on February 12, 2015, 03:56:26 AM
Thanks.

Esaki orange all over except tips that are Esaki red.   Pic is a bit washed out looking.

Yes yellow Czech prop.  Some love these props, but I'm not sure.   I have another rolled boom P30 pictured very early in this thread that uses a gray prop. and even at close to 45G? or so with 4 strands of 1/8th in it it's always flown well.
I did at one stage a while back fit the yellow Czech prop. with a new nose block so I could try out both props in it, and I feel the gray one was best.

Had the yellow one on hand so built this new P30 to use it........Can always get hold of a new gray one in the future to experiment if I feel like it I guess.

Turbulator spar is about 5% behind the LE.........I actually just made the model up as I went without a plan except in my old head.
I just wanted it as light as I could build it with enough strength in it to survive, a fraction under 30in span, with a wide chord for lots of area, 1/3rd area stab, and long fuselage to take 4 strands of rubber.
Rolled boom fuselage model I wind the motor in it, and if it busts no problem, but this new one I will need to find a plastic tube to use as a blast tube, or the fuselage if the motor goes bang will be back to "kit form".

I'll probably take it up to the park for a spot of trimming to see how it goes on a calm morning.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on February 12, 2015, 06:46:00 PM
Very nice Gossie.

John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ricardo on February 12, 2015, 10:48:08 PM
Wing 1/16th X 1/16th geodetic on bottom with undercamber ...
Gossie, are these bent 1/16 sticks or cut from 1/16 sheet?

And what are "1/16th X 1/16 cracked ribs on top"?



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: gossie on February 12, 2015, 10:55:01 PM
Wing 1/16th X 1/16th geodetic on bottom with undercamber ...
Gossie, are these bent 1/16 sticks or cut from 1/16 sheet?

And what are "1/16th X 1/16 cracked ribs on top"?




Under ribs cut to shape from 1/16th sheet.  Glued to LE & TE.   Spar glued on.
Upper ribs 1/16th X 1/16th strips cut to length from LE to TE and cracked where you can see them cracked in the pic.  Glued to LE, spar and TE.
Turbulator spar glued on top.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: calgoddard on April 22, 2015, 02:30:56 PM
I built a HOT BOX P - 30 to fly in the John Oldenkamp memorial contest this Sunday in Otay Mesa, California, located just south of San Diego.

Today I did some test flights. After one minor adjustment (1/32" shim under the stab) and one repair (broken longeron) she put up a couple of good flights.

John originated the P - 30 class, along with one other gentleman.  He published this design in Model Builder magazine in 1977.

He was a great flier, an innovative designer, and a fun person to be around.  John was also very generous with his time.  His last passion in airplane modeling appeared to be the E - 36 class.

John will be sorely missed by the free flight community.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: climber on May 03, 2015, 09:08:27 PM
My first modern P-30.

Stab and fin have carbon fibre capped balsa ribs, carbon tube leading edge, carbon strip trailing edge and are made to one of Tony Mathews plans. 

The wing is actually from my E-30.  I'll build a proper wing after flying it for a while as it puts the whole thing way over the minimum weight. 

D/T is electronic with a pop-off wing.  The stab is removable and incident adjustments are made with a nylon bolt in the rear. 

The fuse and tail boom are made from rolled balsa laminated with tissue.  I actually made the fuse and boom about 15 years ago so I guess one could say it's "modern-ish." 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: climber on May 03, 2015, 09:22:46 PM
That's a great looking Hot Box!

It was a photo of that airplane in Model Builder that dragged me back into the world of FreeFlight.  I saw it while browsing some magazines in a used book store in the early 90's.  I was instantly hooked. 

A few weeks later I scoured all of the used book stores in Victoria B.C. where I was living at the time and scooped up pretty much every single magazine or book that had any kind of Free Flight material in it in the entire city.   I then called all of the model stores looking for building materials or kits.  There was little to be had.  A place up island about an hour away had some tissue and kits so off I went.  All they actually had was some brown domestic tissue, boxes of old Sig rubber, a couple of Guillows kits, and some bits and parts of Peck stuff. 

That was enough.

One thing that surprises me, I don't actually have a copy of the Hotbox plans and have never built one. 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on May 04, 2015, 09:13:59 PM
That's not a bad looking P30 Climber. I also think the Hotbox looks neat and remember seeing it in MB as well - how did it go in the contest?

John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: calgoddard on May 06, 2015, 11:25:10 AM
John -

I finished third in the John Oldenkamp memorial on April 26, 2015 with my HOT BOX.  

On one of my official flights during the contest, my HOT BOX caught a thermal, and due to inaccuracies in the viscous timer button, the DT did not activate until over three minutes had elapsed. I almost lost the airplane as it was way high when the DT finally triggered.

The fuselage of my HOT BOX is covered in Polyspan, the wings and stab are covered in MicroLite plastic film and the twin fins are made of Depron foam (to avoid warping).  I used a 9 1/2" GizmoGeezer prop assembly.

All up weight of my HOT BOX is 49 grams without the Walston RF transmitter and batteries that I install (3 grams) before flying. I was not careful with wood selection and accidentally added extra ribs to the wing as a result of misreading the plan.

So my HOT BOX is overweight but she is strong.  An expert told me not to worry about the weight.  He said that trim and picking good air are more important.

There is another John Oldenkamp Memorial P-30 event at Lost Hills, CA on May 16 and 17, 2015.  Again it is limited to the HOT BOX design.  I am hoping to give my HOT BOX another go at that contest.

I am attaching pictures of two tissue covered HOT BOX models built by friends. They have a more traditional look.  The all yellow one flew away at an earlier contest in Lost Hills, even after its DT activated.  It could not be found despite having a Walston transmitter on board with batteries that had been checked (for charge).

Climber -

The HOT BOX plan is available through AMA's Plans Service - Plan #773, at 5161 E. Memorial Drive, Muncie, IN 47302.  You can also try www.modelaircraft.org/plans.aspx.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Flyguy on May 25, 2015, 04:54:34 PM
Have had some really nice flights with my Hell's Kitchen P30, shown in posts #817 and finished in #835. Photo below shows a field shot, here's a flying video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdtXlUn5LDk  (I also put a link to a BW Coupe flight in the 'went flying' section at HPA)

I have to say that the wingtips were Bob White inspired and here's why. I've been flying my modified BW wake for about 1 1/2 years now (and still have a lot to learn!) and also the Prima. They both fly very nice, but I just got the impression after many flying sessions that the BW wake is more stable overall. I built the BW and Prima wings so that they are very similar, the main difference is that the Prima has square tips but the BW has swept-back elliptical tips, which made me think that it might be that the swept-back tips add stability.

Also noticed this with my Coupes - they both fly very well, but I again get the impression after a lot of flying that the BW Coupe is more stable, and again the BW Coupe has swept-back tips whereas my other Coupe has more square tips.

Of course it could all just be in my mind, but nevertheless when I designed the P30, I wanted to use swept-back tips (elliptical ones like Bob's because I like the way they look, also laminated tips are very strong and stiff). Now my square-tip P30 flies very nicely, but the first time out with the HK P30 I was blown away by how stable it appears to be, even in windy conditions, every time I fly it I'm going 'wow'! Maybe its actually a combo of factors or I'm just delusional, but I'm sticking to the current hypothesis and am using the same type of tips on my next plane! (I'm thinking maybe a P20 or another Coupe? I like the mulling it over part)




Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: randoloid on June 07, 2015, 04:28:53 PM
Just finished my Majestyk from Campbell's Custom Kits

Haven't weighed it but it does have a beautiful glide.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 07, 2015, 04:35:57 PM
"[email protected]@KS FANTASTIC"

OtF'er......


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on June 07, 2015, 05:46:01 PM
Very, very nice!
Great job on the tissue printing.
Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: atesus on June 07, 2015, 06:17:20 PM
Wow, very nice!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on June 08, 2015, 11:00:28 AM
Manalive that is one BEAUTIFUUL bird. Good Luck on getting it down before someone else claiming it.

WOW :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: randoloid on June 08, 2015, 02:04:53 PM
Thanks everyone for the compliments.  This was a real fun build.  I have the artwork that includes all the major sponsor logos of the Stewart Haas Mobil 1 Chevrolet but decided last minute that there may be issue if / when I entered competition.

I just hope I can get the trim dialed in without damaging anything.  The only change to the kit other than printing the tissue was switching to a gizmo geezer prop which is heavier so at the moment it's nose heavy. 

My thinking was that the performance gain would outweigh (pun intended) the extra grams but now I'm having second thoughts.  Because I'm still new to building I can't rely on my experience. I've read that it's really bad to add weight to the tail of a plane. Other than the obvious solution of adding weight to the rear, what are other options for getting better balance?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on June 08, 2015, 02:11:20 PM
Move the wing.
CG is considered relative to the wing chord.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 08, 2015, 04:17:53 PM
Move the wing.
CG is considered relative to the wing chord.


The fuselage shape is not designed for wing movement. At this point you'll have to live with you're decision to go Gizmo.

OtF'er.....





Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: randoloid on June 08, 2015, 04:30:07 PM
Move the wing.
CG is considered relative to the wing chord.


The fuselage shape is not designed for wing movement. At this point you'll have to live with you're decision to go Gizmo.

OtF'er.....





OR make another nose block and use the prop that came with / designed for the kit. ... which is most likely what I'll do  ;)


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on June 08, 2015, 04:53:23 PM
That's the right move!!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on June 08, 2015, 06:52:03 PM
C'mon.
Add wedgy rails to the fuselage and move the wing. This isn't rocket surgery or brain science.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Maxout on June 09, 2015, 09:48:34 AM
C'mon.
Add wedgy rails to the fuselage and move the wing. This isn't rocket surgery or brain science.

I second that motion. P-30's aren't exactly aerodynamically clean. It's worth the effort to move the wing forward. I've used Gizmos a good bit...they're more than worth the trouble.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ILM Tarheel on June 20, 2015, 10:35:55 PM
Here is my latest P-30 - John Oldenkamp's Sand Box. The Sand Box is one of John's many predecessors to the Hot Box. The most noticeable differences to me are the slightly different wing outlines and the structural design of the wing and stab.

There were several reasons why I wanted to build the Sand Box. 1) It is said to be the first published P-30 design although only as a 3-view, so I would have to draw my own plans. I had never done that before. 2) The wing is built using the cracked rib method, I had never built a wing that way before. 3) As a token of thanks to John for founding one of my favorite classes of model aeroplanes.

Early glide and low power trim flights have shown great promise. I'm looking forward to getting to the field for some real flights!

Jimmy J


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on June 21, 2015, 10:35:05 AM
Jimmy,
Very nice aircraft.
Thanks for the 3-view.
Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: ILM Tarheel on June 21, 2015, 12:43:58 PM
Dave,

Thank you.

One note about the 3-view. The stab chord is shown as 2.3". That must be a mistake because it is just too narrow. Instinct and "that looks about right" told me that the numbers must be transposed. I made mine 3.2" and it appears to have worked fine.

Jimmy J


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Dave Andreski on June 22, 2015, 06:07:51 PM
Jimmy J.
I agree and see that you've made the proper adjustment.
Thanks again.
Dave


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: didierlouis on July 01, 2015, 07:55:06 AM
Hello P30 Addicts!
A new version targetting exactly 40g incl. timer.
Simplified wings with simple break (2 breaks on previous version).
8.2 g before mylarbut with carbon joiner.
More later.
Thermals!
Didier


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on July 01, 2015, 08:53:13 AM
Hello Didier

The wing looks good. Did you make the tubular spar yourself? More importantly, will it be ready for Beauvoir, or are you flying F1K/E36 ;D?

Cheers

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: didierlouis on July 01, 2015, 05:32:29 PM
Hi Peter
Home made spars (small diameter; 3mm and 2.5 mm internal).
The motor tube is full lengh for receiving long motors. Aready below 10g in carbon-kevlar.
Target is 2.5g for the stab.
Priority to F1G and E 36 this summer.
See you soon.
Didier


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: calgoddard on July 06, 2015, 03:56:45 PM
Jimmy J -

You built a very nice Sand Box P-30. Let us know how it flies in full power flights.

John Oldenkamp was a great free flight designer, enthusiast and competitor. In his later years he mostly flew E-36.  He was always kind and helpful to me.

Here is a picture of John launching his Peanut not long before he passed away.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Essem73 on July 24, 2015, 12:04:58 PM
Some pics of my almost completed Ikara Pee Wee P30. Probably the best quality kit I've ever built. I hope it flies as well as it went together! Only issue was the fin, which warped like a dried up autumn leaf. I ended up using slightly thicker wood, and then just water shrinking it, no dope. The rest of the flying surfaces were bog standard esaki liteflite, and shrinking dope, 3 thin coats of. I will weigh it tonight. I don't think it will be far off the target.

Happy days

Essem.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: calgoddard on July 24, 2015, 01:09:37 PM
Essem.

Nice job!

What's the source of the DT timer on the fuselage?  

It looks like a viscous timer button.

I'm always looking for a reliable, inexpensive DT set up.

Also, let us know the AUW and how she flies.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Essem73 on July 24, 2015, 01:36:39 PM
Hi and thank you! The D/T timer is indeed a viscous timer that was supplied with the kit. I think Mike Woodhouse sells something very similar. I will post pics of the completed D/T setup when I have it sorted as it wasn't easy to visualise (for me) and caused me a little head scratching. If I can help somebody else then that's cool.
I really recommend this kit, I'm not an experienced hand, and it was very straightforward, apart from the aforementioned D/T. The quality of the materials is superb.
They come RTF and ARTF too, but I thought I'd get the kit as A) I'm a cheapskate, and B) I thought I'd learn more, and I did.
If anyone wants any more photos or info, of the model or plan etc, just let me know.

Essem.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Essem73 on July 24, 2015, 02:04:43 PM
Just weighed it. 46g as it stands at the moment, just need to add the D/T line and a few rubber bands, so say a gram tops? then 10g motor brings me to 57g. Not bad for a first P30 I suppose. There is room for improvement, but I think that will come with time, maybe substituting some wood for lighter stuff, and perhaps one less coat of dope. The prop and hub aren't the lightest things either.
Just need to get off my bum and turn up at a competition now!

Essem.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bredehoft on July 24, 2015, 02:34:01 PM
that is the Ikara viscous DT.  I have a few of those - haven't tried them yet (and don't have them on the site yet).

--george


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on July 25, 2015, 04:32:44 AM
Nice PEE WEE, Essem73!  Your weight is almost the same as the Pee Wee I'm finally getting done (42 grams with just the wing to cover).  I covered my tail surfaces with mylar to try to cut the weight a bit, but will use Esaki for the wing.  I'm hoping to have it finished and trimmed for Marcelo's P-30 Postal on the 6th (which is also the date for an F1abc contest over here).

The DT setup is what caused me to temporarily shelve the model (started almost exactly three years ago), but finally figured it out last month.  Let us know if you have any hang-ups with the slide.  Yeah, that ten gram plus front end does hurt the all-up weight - I wonder if a Gizmo setup would be lighter (would need a nose plug).


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Essem73 on July 25, 2015, 04:49:24 AM
Thanks Pit! Yes, the slide...I'm not convinced with that idea, but having attached a few D/T bands to it and let it go it pings back nicely. I'll just make sure everything moves freely and maybe give it a thin coat of sanding sealer and a rub with some fine sandpaper to make sure it's smooth.
The hub is a bit of a boat anchor isn't it, but I guess it's all about air picking with these things, I'm not too worried about the weight really at my stage of the game.
I'll let you know how the trimming process goes.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: PeeTee on July 25, 2015, 06:54:21 AM
Chaps

Gizmos - I don't have one to hand at the moment to weigh, but looking at my notes of a clubmate's Gizmo front ends, they are between 9.6 and 10.2g apiece. I don't know if that includes the nose plug.

The other thing to bear in mind is that if the pylon is glued on place and the model is balanced, you'll likely need to replace the weight saved with lead :(

Peter


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Essem73 on July 25, 2015, 09:58:52 AM
Good point PeeTee, I will leave mine alone and go with what I've got. Will see if it will survive the initial trimming flights on my blasted heath of a flying site, complete with marshes, bushes, cackling old crones, and oh yes, wind turbines...



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on July 26, 2015, 10:21:04 AM
Good point about the probable weight difference, Peter.  My model is one of the semi pre-built ones with the pylon already glued on.  Since I've covered the tail surfaces wit 5mil mylar instead of the supplied Esaki, I'll have to remember to verify the CG - might now end up a bit nose heavy with the stock front end.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: applehoney on July 26, 2015, 10:39:17 AM
>9.6 and 10.2g apiece

Mine is 10.3g with noseblock


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on July 26, 2015, 11:39:43 AM
Essentially, not enough diff to make any matter - unless one wants to consider the differences in prop performance, if any.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: calgoddard on July 27, 2015, 09:35:15 PM
I weighed a relatively new 9 1/2 inch GizmoGeezer prop assembly with the adjustable nose button and free wheeler hardware with a conical nose.  See the attached picture for the weight which came out to be 9.48 grams.

This GizmoGeezer prop assembly is legal for P - 30.  The legality was settled long ago.

I really like the free wheeling of this device and the adjustable thrust line.  I have used it in many models, including scale models.

However, in my Pirate P - 30 the fuselage is very narrow and when I put in enough down thrust the sleeved clevis of the GizmoGeezer prop assembly rubbed against the interior of the fuselage.  So I made up a round wooden nose plug with the GizmoGeezer nose button and used the new 9 1/2 inch orange Chinese prop from Volare Products and a short prop shaft with a conventional hook.  The orange Chinese prop has cool looking scimitar-shaped blades. See the attached picture.  

I make up convential P - 30 rubber motors out of 6 strands (3 loops) of 1/8 inch rubber that come out to about 19 niches, so the orange Chinese prop free wheels based on the conventional ramp. I really like this set up. See another thread on HPA about my latest P - 30 contest results.  I recommend ordering some orange props from George Bredehoft at Volare Procduts. I ordered a bunch from George in various sizes.  I couldn't believe how reasonable the prices are.  We want to keep people like George that supply our niche hobby in business.  

An unexpected benefit of the Chinese prop is that the bright orange color helps you find your airplane in the brush.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: randoloid on October 09, 2015, 09:24:37 PM
My latest build... Really pleased with how well it looks, now all I have to get it to fly... Yes it's another Majestyk.  ;D

I did some experimenting and didn't have the heart to recover the stab... which looks horribly out of place now.  oh well.



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: cd_webb on October 09, 2015, 09:41:31 PM
That's some nice work! The more I see of the Majestyk, the more I see to like. What was your final weight?

CD


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: randoloid on October 09, 2015, 11:42:33 PM
That's some nice work! The more I see of the Majestyk, the more I see to like. What was your final weight?

CD

Balanced to CG and ready for the air she weighs in at 54.4 :(  I have built the same plane at 50.6 but I tried to build strong-- not to mention I went a lil crazy on the printing.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on October 10, 2015, 02:08:58 AM
My latest build... Really pleased with how well it looks, now all I have to get it to fly... Yes it's another Majestyk.  ;D

I did some experimenting and didn't have the heart to recover the stab... which looks horribly out of place now.  oh well.



Nice Rando!!

OTF'er....


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on October 22, 2015, 07:50:18 PM
Working on a new P-30 design right now. In covering stage at the moment. I will post pics in a day or two. This will be my model for the 2016 P-30 postal competition. Her name, "Maybe Baby."

OTF'er.....


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: randoloid on October 22, 2015, 08:16:55 PM
Working on a new P-30 design right now. In covering stage at the moment. I will post pics in a day or two. This will be my model for the 2016 P-30 postal competition. Her name, "Maybe Baby."

OTF'er.....


Don't wait too long...  Can't wait to see it!


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on October 25, 2015, 07:09:05 PM
Working on a new P-30 design right now. In covering stage at the moment. I will post pics in a day or two. This will be my model for the 2016 P-30 postal competition. Her name, "Maybe Baby."

OTF'er.....


Don't wait too long...  Can't wait to see it!

Not quite finished yet. I'm using an old Majestyk fuselage, ( needs some recovering) different wing tip shape, a little larger stab, different rudder with added sub fin. Might just fly.....

OTF'er......


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Pit on October 26, 2015, 09:43:03 AM
VERY NICE, OTF!  A bit of "Urubu" in the wing shape?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on October 29, 2015, 11:06:37 PM
VERY NICE, OTF!  A bit of "Urubu" in the wing shape?

Yes, a bit of the vulture.

OTF'er....


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: mrwokn on December 01, 2016, 10:52:06 AM
Here is my Majestyk.  I want to compete in a postal contest but this one only weighs 30g airframe only.  I plan on building my 3rd Majestyk.  Should I use CA instead of ambroid next build.  I have an Ikara P30 I want to build next but I am trying to perfect some of my build techniques to reach the target weights before I start opening up new kits. 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: randoloid on December 01, 2016, 11:31:07 AM
I love the Majestyk!  I think it's glide when trimmed out is about the prettiest thing I've seen.

Although I've built several, (only one of which flew away) I've never came close building one @30g!    Yours certainly looks well constructed from the photo. Have you flown it yet?


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: mrwokn on December 01, 2016, 12:41:39 PM
No unfortunately not yet, I need to set aside some time and search for a suitable area to fly it.  I completed the plane last year but had to rebuild a completely new wing after the wind knocked an empty cardboard box on top of it. 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on December 03, 2016, 02:55:31 AM
Here is my Majestyk.  I want to compete in a postal contest but this one only weighs 30g airframe only.  I plan on building my 3rd Majestyk.  Should I use CA instead of ambroid next build.  I have an Ikara P30 I want to build next but I am trying to perfect some of my build techniques to reach the target weights before I start opening up new kits.  

Hi mrwokn,

I'm curious? Did you build this from a kit? I had the luxury picking my own wood, which you wouldn't be able to do using the kit version. I build the 1st original model to just a tad over 37 grams. (less rubber) The remaining few grams were added as nose weight coming out under 41 grams. If you are if fact at 30 grams now, you'll have to add weight at the C/G. I would put the weight on top the fuselage under the wing. Once the motor is installed you will need some nose weight to correct C/G. What's left over would be added at that point under the wing.

Otf'er............


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: mrwokn on December 04, 2016, 12:45:23 AM
I built the short kit. I didn't know how to add weight and balance at cg.  Adding weight to the fuse under and the wing makes sense thanks for the help. I had planned on flying it underweight. 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on December 04, 2016, 01:31:39 AM
I built the short kit. I didn't know how to add weight and balance at cg.  Adding weight to the fuse under and the wing makes sense thanks for the help. I had planned on flying it underweight. 

Add weight to the nose first with the 10 gram motor installed. It will take at least some of the 10 grams you're under weight to balance at the C/G. (As noted on the plans) Then add the remaining left over under the wing at the C/G.
Thank you for building the"Majestyk."

Otf'er.......



Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: FLYACE1946 on December 06, 2016, 06:42:33 PM
After final assembly is accomplished and the model still comes out too lite then I suggest you add rubber bands to get the weight total you need. I had to do that on a Majestyk several years ago. It still flew OOS.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Oldtime Flyer on December 08, 2016, 12:39:30 AM
After final assembly is accomplished and the model still comes out too lite then I suggest you add rubber bands to get the weight total you need. I had to do that on a Majestyk several years ago. It still flew OOS.

After you have the model balanced at the correct C/G which is more important than any other issue.

Otf'er......


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Bargle on April 22, 2018, 09:45:42 AM
Here we go. Banana Fritter #3. Weight without rubber is 46 grams, my heaviest BF so far. Still expect it will fly well enough for my small field.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on August 30, 2018, 03:10:26 PM
Lost my modified Pirate at the last contest. She sleeps with the fishes in the Chattahoochee now. So I got out my old Square Eagle Kit and built it. Always wanted to build it, and so I did.
Test flew it yesterday at the sod farm, and it flew right off the board, no clay needed. It’s a little under 44 grams, which is not bad for a stock kit, and a Gizmo Geezer on the pointy end.
6 strands of 1/8” will be its steady diet.
A big rain shower forced me to cut short my trim session, but I’ll finish it next week, and should have a fine P30 to fill out the next contest roster.

I’ve never seen a Square Eagle that did not fly well.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on August 30, 2018, 03:23:16 PM
While I’m posting pictures, I found this photo of my Tail Firster. A good flying plane! 


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: Scottl0413 on September 01, 2018, 07:57:58 PM
Dorhm, looks great!! There just something about those old models that just fly right off of the Bd. I.e. Super 30 and Majestics!

Scott


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on September 01, 2018, 10:00:36 PM
Thanks!
I have a Really nice Majestic I finished also. Initial tests are great. Need to get a picture posted. 40.2 grams, so I imagine it will be the 3/32” one.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: OZPAF on September 02, 2018, 01:59:21 AM
Nice models DO. 44 gms sounds pretty good to me for your Square Eagle. how well di the Tail Firster fly?

John


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: dohrmc on September 02, 2018, 06:46:30 PM
The Tail Firster flies very well under power and glides well. It has done quite a few maxes, but I wasn’t very focused on learning how to fly it well.
I am going to fly a lot more in P30, so I intend to get more squared away. Maybe I can get it going better.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: danberry on September 02, 2018, 07:31:19 PM
They fly just fine.


Title: Re: Show us your P-30's
Post by: duration on September 03, 2018, 06:48:17 AM
The canard layout might have an advantage in rubber-powered events such as P-30 that do not allow folding props. A freewheeling prop at the rear would seem to have less drag than one in front, since the rear-mounted prop would be working in the "dirty" air behind the wing. A horizontally-stopped aft prop might be even better. (The rules only bans folding or feathered props.)

A conventional layout with the stab mounted on two booms and a pusher prop just behind the wing would work, but only if a short motor and gears were used to get the CG in the right spot.

Louis