Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
June 19, 2019, 10:51:55 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with email, password and session length
 
Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Yashinskiy F1N  (Read 2681 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 92
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,717


Topic starter
WWW

Ignore
« on: October 29, 2018, 10:51:08 AM »

These are flat out awesome. I bought one when Bill imported a bunch of them. I really like the build quality. Take a look at the build video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvp-o9ddgZA

Also, photos and plans:
http://jhaerospace.com/build-review-of-the-mihkail-yashinskiy-f1n-with-plans/
Attached files Thumbnail(s):
Yashinskiy F1N
Logged
-John-
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 2
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 180



Ignore
« Reply #1 on: October 30, 2018, 10:48:11 PM »

Thanks Josh, that looks like a really nice design. Will you all be flying it at St. Luke's in the near future?
Logged
Olbill
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 61
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,497



Ignore
« Reply #2 on: October 30, 2018, 11:28:37 PM »

Next event is Nov. 17. I'll bring mine and see if I can throw it.
Logged
-John-
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 2
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 180



Ignore
« Reply #3 on: October 31, 2018, 08:57:36 PM »

Hi Bill, you have built many low ceiling gliders, what is your overall opinion of the model?
Logged
Olbill
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 61
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,497



Ignore
« Reply #4 on: October 31, 2018, 11:10:21 PM »

Indoor gliders need to be built for the venue where they're going to be flown. For St. Lukes you need to get into the high part and that requires a glider than can fly small circles and have pinpoint accuracy on launch. I don't think this is an ideal glider for St. Lukes.

In a more wide open site I've seen some amazing flights with this and similar gliders. Times in the low 50's have been flown in sites around 12 meters. This is comparable to the best UCLG flights at Rantoul which is a little higher.

But so far I haven't seen any Cat 1 flights that rivaled either Stan's AMA HLG record or the F1N World Record.

There's all kinds of info on Facebook in the Everything About F1N group.
Logged
piecost
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 7
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 400



Ignore
« Reply #5 on: January 06, 2019, 05:04:07 PM »

Can someone please tell me if this is a discus or javelin launched model?
Logged
Olbill
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 61
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,497



Ignore
« Reply #6 on: January 06, 2019, 06:19:02 PM »

Either. If you want to javelin launch you'll need to add something for your finger. Or you can grip it at the pylon.
Logged
Mefot
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 7
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 293




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: January 06, 2019, 06:24:49 PM »

Can someone please tell me if this is a discus or javelin launched model?

Looking at the plan, which has no finger tab I would deduce that this is a discus launched glider. I suspect it would work with either method but having recently watched a lot of F1N videos on YouTube I would plump for discus launch. I only wish I was supple/fit enough to fly either method !!!  Grin
Logged
Olbill
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 61
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,497



Ignore
« Reply #8 on: January 06, 2019, 06:53:50 PM »

If you watch enough videos you can see people javelin launching Yashinskiy gliders. The most successful launches I've seen are the underhand tip launch. My two are set up for catapult launch. I can do a sidearm tip launch but not very successfully yet. My lighter one was turning 40+ second flights in a Cat 1 site a few weeks ago.
Logged
piecost
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 7
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 400



Ignore
« Reply #9 on: January 06, 2019, 09:07:42 PM »

Thanks chaps
Logged
cglynn
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 8
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 351



Ignore
« Reply #10 on: January 07, 2019, 12:12:44 PM »

Quick F1N report from last nights' flying session. We fly in a Cat 1 gymnasium, with about 24 usable feet of ceiling height.  Gliders flown were a 93% Upstart, Big Bul, and the TIT.

 My 93% Upstart didn't turn out any stellar times, but it did launch and transition very well.  Best time was 27s.  The flaps on that model were very stiff-probably to the point where they didn't act like flaps in reality.  The model appeared to behave more like a locked in glider as opposed to a flapped one, so undoubtedly gave up some time there.  That said, I got some good experience in consistent launching, so it was good as a learning tool.  I then tried my Big Bul F1N.  I messed up the incidence when I built it, and set the wing too negative.  I also put in a bit too much dihedral in the wings.  In order to make it fly, the model required a ton of positive incidence on the flaps, and a lot of negative incidence in the stab, and 3/16" of rudder deflection to turn.  The glide was great.  Extremely slow and floaty.  On the other hand, the really important part, the launch and transition was sketchy, and resulted in much breakage of the balsa/carbon fuse.  The model would get to the ceiling just fine, but the excessive flap deflection would cause a bunt, the model would stop mid air, nose over, and dive into the floor.  I finally figured out that if I only threw the model to 18 feet, the softer launch would not result in the extreme bunt at the top, and I would get a reasonable transition.  This resulted in flights in the high 20's.  This was encouraging as the sink rate and glide trim was very good.  Just need to get the launch worked out.

The model was taken home, wing removed, dihedral angle reduced, and the pylon sanded to provide a much more reasonable incidence.  We will try again next time and see how it goes.

Don S brought his TIT to the gym and tried a variety of launches.  The classic javelin style resulted in the best transition and flight time, just over 40 seconds.  A side arm discuss launch was used, and resulted in a good transition, but would't get all the way to the ceiling.  The underhand discuss launch was used as well, and resulted in plenty of height, hitting the ceiling numerous times.  The transition on that launch style however, just wasn't working, so was abandoned in favor of other techniques.

Don, feel free to add anything you feel I missed, as I certainly don't want to speak for you too much here.

Based on observations from that session, is apparent that the underhand discuss launch is the most efficient.  It takes very little physical effort to get the model to altitude so is very attractive.  One question I have about that launch style is what should the transition look like?  Is it a typical flop type transition as the model stalls at the top, or is it more of a bunt transition?  I am thinking the later, as the underhand sling results in a high velocity launch, which to me, mimics a straight up catapult launch, which would result in a bunting transition (or is trimmed to do as such). 

The other thing I was thinking about that is that, if I am correct, the bunt transition requires a good bit of launch velocity in order to work.  I have found if the model is not moving fast enough during the bunt, it just about stops, and then nose dives.  So for low ceiling, in order to make underhand sling work, the model has to be lighter than 7g.  At 7g with a full power underhand sling, the model will hit the ceiling, and obviously, that doesn't result in the desired transition.  So I think reducing weight to around 5 grams would work.  Or is the excessive bunt at lower launch speed caused by flaps that are too stiff?

Any insight is always appreciated.

Thanks
~Chris
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 92
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,717


Topic starter
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #11 on: January 07, 2019, 12:24:52 PM »

Neat that all the attention is focusing on this glider! Here's my flight review of it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMymNf9rAcA
Logged
Olbill
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 61
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,497



Ignore
« Reply #12 on: January 07, 2019, 04:51:46 PM »

Chris
In nearly all of the underhand launches that I've seen there is a bunt into the glide. In the video posted in the composite F1N thread you can see this clearly. Some of the gliders bunt too early and don't get enough altitude. If I have too much bunt I usually try to correct by adding incidence or using more initial flap deflection. Lazar Lacimic says that you can reduce bunting by reducing flap camber. I don't think any of us totally understand what goes on.
Logged
cglynn
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 8
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 351



Ignore
« Reply #13 on: January 07, 2019, 09:10:50 PM »

Thanks Bill.  I watched that video after I posted, and saw the launch you are referring to.  That was the first time I had seen in the transition from an underhand fling, and indeed, the model bunted into glide.  It appears that launch works best when the glider is at a weight that will just get to the ceiling or slightly under, as it works best with a high velocity throw.  In a lower ceiling where a full power underhand fling is not required nor doable, the model would not transition at all.  Also noted is that Yashinskiy builds one heck of a strong fuse.  That thing took the abuse of more than several nose dives (without the foam earplug on the front) and was no worse for wear by the end of the day.   

Good to know I am not alone in understanding gliders.  If my limited glider flying has taught me anything it’s that philosophically gliders should be treated like any other indoor event...build, test, fly, modify, and repeat until the thing flies how you want it to.  One can start with ideas and theories in mind, but only building and flying will actually help to increase performance.

Fortunately gliders are both enjoyable to build and fun to fly.
Logged
dslusarc
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 23
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 764



Ignore
« Reply #14 on: January 08, 2019, 12:40:55 AM »

I quite enjoyed flying that glider. It has sparked my interest mainly as it is a glider that lasted more than a few hours :-) I was amazed how many nose ins it took and kept on going. I did break the wing at the pylon twice but I used CA building it so the CA fractured. I want to make more but stuck on how to make the carbon tapered boom at the moment. I have ideas but never did anything like that before. 

Don 
Logged
Skymon
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 8
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 241


fly it



Ignore
« Reply #15 on: January 08, 2019, 04:29:50 AM »

Don
If you are not building up composite tubes just yet then you should consider using the pre-made fishing pole tips.
They are beautifully made, easily strong enough and reasonably light.
There are significant benefits from hand made glider specific parts, but the fishing pole tips provide and easy entry point and are pretty cheap.

I got mine from Aliexpress but there are several retails on line...
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Fishing-rod-tip-Spare-tip-360-degree-rotation-tips-Fishing-Tackle-parts-full-size-Solid-and/32724388464.html


Best regards
Si
Logged
dslusarc
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 23
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 764



Ignore
« Reply #16 on: January 08, 2019, 08:19:00 AM »

Thanks. I was searching yesterday for rod tips and kept finding just the eyelet that goes on the end. I will look around Aliexpress.
Logged
Olbill
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 61
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,497



Ignore
« Reply #17 on: January 08, 2019, 09:54:47 AM »

Don
If you are not building up composite tubes just yet then you should consider using the pre-made fishing pole tips.
They are beautifully made, easily strong enough and reasonably light.
There are significant benefits from hand made glider specific parts, but the fishing pole tips provide and easy entry point and are pretty cheap.

I got mine from Aliexpress but there are several retails on line...
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Fishing-rod-tip-Spare-tip-360-degree-rotation-tips-Fishing-Tackle-parts-full-size-Solid-and/32724388464.html


Best regards
Si

I bought several tubes from the same seller. They aren't as light as the ones Mikhail makes but are very nice. Ordering is pretty confusing since they don't specify the small end diameter so I bought several different sizes.
Logged
piecost
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 7
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 400



Ignore
« Reply #18 on: January 08, 2019, 10:49:01 AM »

I too have bought a number of sizes from them (thanks to Si for the recommendation) and am interested in poeples experience with their stiffness. I will try various sizes myself and see.

I was considering making a lighter tube using carbon sock over one of the Ali express rods as a mandrell. Does it look as if Yashinskiy uses a sock or does he spiral wrap tow to make his tubes?

Thanks to Maxout for the video. I habe watched it several times.
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 92
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,717


Topic starter
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #19 on: January 14, 2019, 08:16:27 AM »

I've been working on an alternative to the Yashinskiy glider to give newbies an F1N that they can try out without the import process. The result is definitely a satisfying airplane. Also, Vector Board has tremendous potential for use on these airplanes. You can also use 1mm Depron if you don't want to fuss with ordering from Lindinger.


Enjoy the flying shenanigans:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gx0zdr1OIag

And how to build one of these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT2LFkAr6fo

I was considering making a lighter tube using carbon sock over one of the Ali express rods as a mandrell. Does it look as if Yashinskiy uses a sock or does he spiral wrap tow to make his tubes?

Mikhail's fuselages are made from some sort of really light carbon sock. I wish I could tell you more but that's the limit of what I've been able to figure out.
Logged
Mefot
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 7
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 293




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: January 14, 2019, 11:25:37 AM »

That looks like a really nice kit Maxout. Can I ask what thickness of Vector board you are using for the wing flaps ? Having knocked up a few little profile models with this material I can attest to how tough it is. While it isn't indestructible it will accept a lot of punishment. Certainly more than the rest of an indoor glider will survive !!!  Smiley
Logged
dslusarc
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 23
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 764



Ignore
« Reply #21 on: January 14, 2019, 12:52:41 PM »

Josh, kit looks good :-) I can put info in the Indoor column if you want to send some specs. 

I have tried to get some available carbon rod sizes from that aliexpress seller but so far no reply on that topic. I messaged and asked for sizes (told approx sizes I wanted) they replied they will "go look" but no reply since. Those that have bought from that suppler, what size did you order for indoor F1N for Cat 1 or Cat 2 ceiling? 

Don
Logged
piecost
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 7
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 400



Ignore
« Reply #22 on: January 14, 2019, 01:28:31 PM »

Don,

I tried 2.6mm and 3.6mm Ali express type 4 tubes. They had 144mm cut off from their thin ends to give 651mm length. Their small ends were 1.37mm and 1.72mm aftre trimming, masses 1.267g and 2.631g.repectively. The thin tube seemed too flexible, the thicker one better, but my experience is not high enough to be definative. I have a couple of intermediate sizes that I haven't flown.

Tim
Logged
Maxout
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 92
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 2,717


Topic starter
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #23 on: January 15, 2019, 11:10:08 AM »

Don,

I tried 2.6mm and 3.6mm Ali express type 4 tubes. They had 144mm cut off from their thin ends to give 651mm length. Their small ends were 1.37mm and 1.72mm aftre trimming, masses 1.267g and 2.631g.repectively. The thin tube seemed too flexible, the thicker one better, but my experience is not high enough to be definative. I have a couple of intermediate sizes that I haven't flown.

Tim

How do you specify the size on those orders? Is it really a pack of 3 for only $12?
Logged
Skymon
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 8
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 241


fly it



Ignore
« Reply #24 on: January 15, 2019, 11:49:56 AM »

Just add the type and sizes needed in the comments for the order.
Regards
S
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

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