Guillotine/Winder Fun

[Darwin Ulledahl]

Bringing back the old G21 day's for me. Thought I would try again, being how I can't get out for much stunt practice. So the question is, were should the CG's be for these? I find the Winder very nose heavy and the plans aren't showing CG location. The Guillotine CG looks ok I think. Please advise?


Darwin

[Dave_Trible]

Hi Darwin.  I can't say we ever worried about the CG on the Guillotine.  We wanted tightest turn and they always delivered.  Many other airplane/pilots in the day fastened lead to the tail booms to get whatever turn they could nurse out of the airframe.  That's a part why the booms got longer- to add leverage.  The Winder is pretty much the opposite extreme.  It was made more for speed than turn and was liked by the bellcrank-shot guys.  Not much turn.  By comparison it will always feel nose heavy.  Not much lift/buoyancy in that thin wing.  One thing for sure- never saw anybody ever add nose weight to a combat ship! If it would have been practical to mount the engine inside the wing they'd have done it to get the CG back.  Many DID knotch out the leading edge at their peril.

Dave

[Paul Smith]

I think about 20% of the chord is a good CG for combat.  In practice you would add more tail weight until you couldn't hold it level inverted.  If it's too stable it will be slow and sluggish.

I flew some award-winning F2D planes in Europe in the 70's.  I couldn't hold them level at all.  They really set 'em up jumpy.

[Darwin Ulledahl]

Yep, I was thinking 20% would be about right and have added tail weight to the Winder already. The Guillotine came out ok no weight added. Dave, I have a strong remembrance back in 1970 at Swope Park, Bill Moore mentoring me and him and someone else flying Winders with excellent fast and stable performance. I'd like to see if I can duplicate that. Test flights may be this Friday.

Thanks guy's Darwin