Pete n' Poke
Sunny_B
type winged airplane before and this one is really giving me fits. It acts
like it is under powered with the 56. Like it's hanging just ready to stall,
with no spare power for emergencies. Does any one fly this plane and if so
with what motor? Any suggestions will be appreciated.
Normen Strobel
flies. They originally ran on a Ford Model A engine. We have a club member
who likes to fly over our field and park it there.
But as far as your little R/C version, I can't imagine why the saito 56
would be under powered. What size prop are you using? How's the incidence
of the wing?
"Sunny_B" <mud...@cybersurfers.net> wrote in message
news:3e17...@news.antelecom.net...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
A.T.
and such a low wing loading. Alternatively, the wing incidence is a little
out.
With fuel tank empty, try suspending the model with a cord secured over the
CG position.
http://www.northlandflyer.com/Tips__n__Techniques/CG_Sling/body_cg_sling.htm
l
The model should hang slightly nose down, not level, good check for lateral
level also. ( email me for a copy of the "CG Sling & Balance beam "Vanessa"
Zip file." in need)
Refer to page 31 section 11 of construction manual, incidence is critical on
this floater. If an incidence meter is not available, place a block under
tailplane and use a spirit level to check tailplane is level with table
surface, then measure vertical distance between both the leading edge of the
wing and the trailing edge of the wing = should show 1 degree (1/16")
positive incidence.
(True also of the 80" Pietenpol model in my shed and the typical Boddington
Barnstormers which were assisted with flying tailplanes).
Elevator on this model will need to be trimmed as speed changes as speed
increases so will need for increased down elevator trim to negate the
ballooning effect which is why all versions of the Barnstormers have
airfoiled tailplanes - an easy conversion for your model..
regards
Alan T.
Alan's Hobby Web Links
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~atong/
..............................................................
"Sunny_B" <mud...@cybersurfers.net> wrote in message
news:3e17...@news.antelecom.net...
Ted Campanelli
I fly a parasol wing warbird (Stosser FW-56).
My first choice is the incidence, second is the balance.
What I have found out (the hard way) is that the following need to be right on
or the plane doesn't fly right.
1: The distance of the leading edge of the wing from the firewall.
2. The incidence. Do not do it from a datum line, set the incidence from the
elevator. Since the plane is already assembled, block the plane up until the
elevator is level (use a small level, NOT the eyeball) and check/set the
incidence of the main wing. MOST parasol wing planes use 0 to +2 degrees. If
the plans/instructions do not state the incidence go with 0 or 1 degree and see
how it flies.
3. The C/G for balancing. When you balance the plane you want it SLIGHTLY nose
heavy.
If any of the above are off the plane flies like sh*t.
You definitely need to check the incidence (do not depend on the pre made
cabanes for the incidence) and the balance. If they are correct, check the
distance from the firewall to the leading edge. If that is off, correct it and
redo the incidence and balance.
Roger Guinn
full tank of fuel. Actually NEEDs the wings....
Sunny_B wrote:
--
Roger W Guinn
Roswell, NM
the spam is getting out of hand...
knock off the bull to reply!
Mathew Kirsch
What prop are you using, and what RPM is the engine turning? I'm
wondering if the engine's not running right.
A parasol-type wing will be a bit more floaty and draggy than what
you're probably used to. Get it up high and back off on the throttle,
just to see what happens. It may be that the airspeed difference
between 1/3 throttle and full throttle is a big fat zero. Cubs are
like that, IMHO. You can add all the throttle you want, but it ain't
goin' any faster...
Tord
It is actually the wing profile that's to blame on most of these
planes, as drag increases dramatically with speed, with planes that has
a thick, cambered airfoil - helps a bit if the wing's incidence is
adjustable in flight, so that's how I'm going to make my Pete n' Poke!
Tord S Eriksson,
tord At tord dot nu
--
Tord
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tord's Profile: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/member.php?u=5392
View this thread: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82826
gwinhh
try putting in a little more downthrust.
hwoell
--
gwinhh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
gwinhh's Profile: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/member.php?u=44256
jokker
Hi,
I have a pete n poke I built myself a few years ago, didn't have time to
fly it until now. So I put an OS .56 alpha engine on it, did the
break-in on it as the instructions says. Checked the CG of the plane as
Great Planes recommends: 98mm from the leading edge. I got it up in the
air and "oh my goodness!!!" just almost impossible to fly, barely
holding and seems like it is going to stall any second. The 56alpha
though is WAY enough, hit the gaz and I can pretty much stabilize the
bird vertically like some 3D guys do (got a 13x7 prop on it). So the
great planes CG is bullcrap. I just switched my 108gr 4.8V 2Ah reception
battery pack with a 308gr 6V 4Ah. The CG is now about 40mm form the
leading edge. Will try this new setting when the wind calms down a bit
and keep you posted.
Hope this will help some poor pilots like me.
Cheers.
--
jokker
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jokker's Profile: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/member.php?u=400191