whatmovesyou Show full post »
bogusbandit56
Quote:
Oh? Didn't expect to hear that about a generic piece of long-range flying equipment that ain't even real.

Thanks for the laurels.

Check this out .
https://www.rcpowers.com/community/threads/ace-combat-cfa-44-nosferatu-built.18800/
Wot, no Depron?
Quote 0 0
DualDesertEagle
Quote:
I could make it work, but having looked at the pure plan form I would have prefered to see the jet nozzles further inside the wing tips. That would allow the motor to be closer the the CoG for better weight distribution.


Well, that's kinda limited by KSP's parts. I could probably have shoved the wings further back but as u can see the center of lift is already quite a bit aft of the Center of mass, making this thing a little nose heavy. It doesn't even fly straight with the game's SAS (Stability Augmentation System) enabled.


Quote:
For the Duckbills to work you would need a transmitter capable of mixing, a good cheap one is the Flysky FSi6.


That last RTF powered glider I had came with a transmitter that can be switched between normal, Delta and V-Tail. I've been using that for my park jets, but I also have 2 of those separate servo mixers to be plugged in between the receiver and the servos. Wouldn't be a problem to put 1 of those on the plane.


Quote:
Another point would be the size of the plane, wings with a thin chords don`t work to well on small models.
How about a quick KF4 build to find out the handling characteristics first?.


That would even be what I'd want as a final model due to it being an easier build. But on the other hand a profiled wing would probably be capable of higher speeds. I'd definitely prefer the easy build any day tho. I'm more of a pilot than a builder.
So far I've only designed 1 model in my life and re-designed another, only to find out that my BF-109 shocky was too twitchy due to its too big ailerons and didn't like bank and yank at all and the Dominator, as we all know, committed suicide for being built with a flat KF2'd wing.

Go ahead and do whatever u like and need to make this work.

Quote:

This model is quite similar to one I already own, the Skywalker Falcon. This model has a broader wing but it is still prone to tip stall if flown to slowly.


And that's another thing the game doesn't simulate. That could've been the end of my test model if I'd built one. So I'm glad ur willing to try it out in my place.
The first real flying wings (At least those built in the US) were even susceptible to the wing tips breaking off when u stalled them, if I recall correctly. I think that caused several crashes and gave them a bad name in pilots' minds.
Quote 0 0
bogusbandit56
Quote:
Well, that's kinda limited by KSP's parts. I could probably have shoved the wings further back but as u can see the center of lift is already quite a bit aft of the Center of mass, making this thing a little nose heavy. It doesn't even fly straight with the game's SAS (Stability Augmentation System) enabled.




That last RTF powered glider I had came with a transmitter that can be switched between normal, Delta and V-Tail. I've been using that for my park jets, but I also have 2 of those separate servo mixers to be plugged in between the receiver and the servos. Wouldn't be a problem to put 1 of those on the plane.




That would even be what I'd want as a final model due to it being an easier build. But on the other hand a profiled wing would probably be capable of higher speeds. I'd definitely prefer the easy build any day tho. I'm more of a pilot than a builder.
So far I've only designed 1 model in my life and re-designed another, only to find out that my BF-109 shocky was too twitchy due to its too big ailerons and didn't like bank and yank at all and the Dominator, as we all know, committed suicide for being built with a flat KF2'd wing.

Go ahead and do whatever u like and need to make this work.
The Hortens had some VERY good results with their gliders.



And that's another thing the game doesn't simulate. That could've been the end of my test model if I'd built one. So I'm glad ur willing to try it out in my place.
The first real flying wings (At least those built in the US) were even susceptible to the wing tips breaking off when u stalled them, if I recall correctly. I think that caused several crashes and gave them a bad name in pilots' minds.

Jack Northrop`s build`s did tend to fall apart and he soon fell out of favour with the US government.
Wot, no Depron?
Quote 0 0
bogusbandit56
I don`t know if you have been reading the thread started by Bimo regarding KF or profile airfoils where I reported my finding with KF and true foils. Basically KF4 is slower than true airfoil but offer better stability especially at stall speeds.
I am going with KF 4 on this model to start with and a simple fuselage.
It will have a 1806 2280kva quad motor and 15 amp esc with a 1000mha 3s battery or an AN 2000kva stick mount motor.
By utilizing one sheet of depron it does have a small wing area so the weight needs to be kept to a minimum. The ailerons will be actuated by 5 gram servos.
We might get an undercambered stall preventing wing by using KF2 at the wing tip. This is something I have not tried before so it could be interesting.
Wot, no Depron?
Quote 1 0
Wildthing
Quote:
I don`t know if you have been reading the thread started by Bimo regarding KF or profile airfoils where I reported my finding with KF and true foils. Basically KF4 is slower than true airfoil but offer better stability especially at stall speeds.
I am going with KF 4 on this model to start with and a simple fuselage.
It will have a 1806 2280kva quad motor and 15 amp esc with a 1000mha 3s battery or an AN 2000kva stick mount motor.
By utilizing one sheet of depron it does have a small wing area so the weight needs to be kept to a minimum. The ailerons will be actuated by 5 gram servos.
We might get an undercambered stall preventing wing by using KF2 at the wing tip. This is something I have not tried before so it could be interesting.

See that inner computer works just fine.
Quote 0 0
XDmToter




Quote 0 0
whatmovesyou
Point, I am trying to get across is the next generation of designers is going to incorporate the use of gyros when designing a flat foamy. You may be old fashion, but when beginners want a model that resembles some fighter or what, the gyros will assist in getting it to fly without endtips involved. For instance, all pdf's(that designer's are selling) could include the settings for the receiver. Yet, you still can fly this fighter and have your fun.

If you watch the history of heli's, very few flew them because they were complicated. What sold it was gyros, now it is very popular. The same will happen to flat foamy's. Go research what is happening to programmable receivers and how simple it has become.

It is not like programming a drone with P, I's or D. Also, you can insert in the gyro's program the condition so if a crash is imminent , punch a button on your tx, and it will right itself and perhaps it will save it from you rebuilding. Being aware that there are different ways to learn. Many prefere the simple way.
I like to design and fly unique planes.
Quote 0 0