What I did was find a picture on the web shown below.

---

---

Then I took it into Photoshop and scaled it up 150% so that from the back of the spinner to the end of the rudder was 41 inches long. I saved it as a PDF and took it to Kinko's to have copies made. Laid them on the bench and they are in eyeball perfect form for a stunt-er .

---

The wing plan form is constent cord and for ease of math its 10 inch root 44 inches long. It will have a six inch radius tip for a total. So a 6 inch radius circle has 113 squares and a 2 inch flap 44 inches long has 88 with 440 squares in the wing. Total them up and we have 661 minus whatever the fuse takes up so I figure around 640-650 squares.

2.25 spinner and a 10.5 nose with 16.5 tail. The battery will stand straight up in front of the wing and split tether line. The motor 2826/12 AXI is above tether so the ESC and timer will rest below that line. Fuse at leading edge will be 3 inches wide and top and bottoms will be molded.

We shall see what a box of wood and a idea yield's.

60 days seeing as I am working again.

First days progress 10/21-2013.

Laid out and stab and rudder cut and sanded. I will get my fuse wood tomorrow and I will have that laid up by Friday. I might do the rough tip layout today as well.


I do not normally work from drawings this large but I wanted scale and I also needed to balance out the CONCENTRAITED Mass.

Good to hear that you're employed again!  Steve

 Cool.

ditto .
 





real live very one .

made a fatter pair of floats for mine , for appearances sake . or in case theres waves .
have to testem yet . With the skinny ones it flys like its on rails .No adverse affects .
Unless its blowwing , then it weaves in gusts with the forward area forward .

 



http://www.modelbrouwers.nl/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=183&t=36813



Should be a few of them in he bottom of that lake still somewhere , if anyones got a snorkle & flippers .

Great site thanks I can make it more scale like now. Im going to use Al Rabe tricks for detail.

 



http://www.modelbrouwers.nl/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=183&t=36813



Should be a few of them in he bottom of that lake still somewhere , if anyones got a snorkle & flippers .

And I gotta ask, why is the registration number "N 12366"? I thought "N" was for USA (for some reason I don't understand either) use only? I know "C" is for Canada, and would think "I" would be for Italia, etc. Whazzup with that?  Steve 

  Looks like a good prototype. Are you going to move the wing up, or put in dihedral?  And what is the "tether line"?

    Brett

Tether line is the exact center of the bell crank location. Mass but be evenly distributed above and below that line. It does matter! Ask Yatsinko. Of coarse I could follow the other lead and design this plane with the 10 ounce battery in the belly. Heck it might be a world beater then.

 "No mater what any one says point of tether is not at the wing tip. Its at bellcrank pivot. Some with higher learning and math skills may dazzle you with some equation or theory but from extensive building and testing I know it does matter and many others do as well.

If your bell crank is located above or below the center line of the wing tether line will fall there as well and you will need to adjust the mass accordingly to that line and not the center line of the wing. Centrifugal force will try to make all these thing line up. This is a point most forget. Flying in a circle is far different and more complex than one thinks there are no pi times radius square formulas that apply. "

What is incredibly important is that the Lead out position on the tip be in the correct place, not too high or low for the plane's CG , if it is too high or low the plane will roll in or out depending on location. This will drive many crazy trying to make the plane fly right !The LO has to be in line with the verticle CG.
Addressing the Bellcrank location, "if" you put it too far forward, backwards, up, or down, you can run into bad problems with drag...  and excessive lead out wear, in my mind, I am with Sparky in putting it as close to the CG as possible, matter of fact what I do is put the BC on the exact spot that I think the CG will be, then move it 3/8 inch forward, this helps with drag and wear.

Randy

Flying in a circle is far different and more complex than one thinks there are no pi times radius square formulas that apply.

Any variance can make a simple thing more complex to analyze, but flying in a circle of itself is simple and there are simple equations that do apply. However, this particular analysis depends simply on Newton's basic laws of motion. Randy and Howard are quite correct. This is extremely elementary. While it is advantageous to place the bellcrank near and slightly ahead of the c.g., as Randy says, so that the leadouts exit the wing tip without having to bend and rub to accomodate aerodynamic line rake, the thing can be placed anywhere. All that is necessary is for the wings to be held level and fuselage tangent to the circle by coordinating c.g. location and line positioning at the tip, which then falls along the radius from the handle to the c.g. Then any misalignment will cause unbalanced forces via the lines at the wing tip that Newton's first two laws dictate will restore the wing to alignment (edited to fix dumb wording). Building a simple hanging model made from popsicle sticks, pins, and string will verify this, and the same analysis goes for up-down as fore-aft bellcrank positions. It is not and never has been "rocket science."

Mathematics (not needed in this argument), is simply a way of allowing us to use common sense without confusing ourselves. If that is not understood, then feel-good myths about math deficiencies will continue to abound to the detriment and confusion of all. Math is not "formulas". Formulas are short-hand ways of remembering and expressing relationships that are known from measurement, observation, and logical reasoning - nothing more. Again, they're not relevant here - unless one needs to prove what can already be reasoned out.

SK

Oh, thanks for the link, Robert. I Googled for "Yatsinko" and found a tree stump grinding service in Connecticut and a Dermatologist with a website.    Steve

No mater what any one says point of tether is not at the wing tip. Its at bellcrank pivot. Some with higher learning and math skills may dazzle you with some equation or theory but from extensive building and testing I know it does matter and many others do as well.

Oh boy!!!  Here it goes again.  For those who want to drink the well water of ignorance, go ahead and disregard all that has been written and previously proved that the bellcrank can be located anywhere.  What is important is the leadout guides relative to the CG of the aircraft, understanding that the CG is at one location on the vertical and horizontal axis of the airplane.  Yes, it makes sense to position the bellcrank where it makes sense structurally to do so as well as to align the leadouts from their guide to bellcrank to minimize friction and wear of the guides and leadout wires.

I will quote Bill Netzeband who wrote in his Control Line Capers column in the October 1962 issue of American Modeler - "Next time a guy tells you to locate your CG forward of the BC or in front of the lead out, shun him.  He don't know the facts.  The CG comes first, all else is related to it."  The physics of behind what was written 51 years ago still apply today to our control line toys.

Keith

I read Yuriy's article (again) and found no mention about the vertical position of bellcrank. But we talked about it (and l.o. height) quite a bit the last time he was visiting me. Actually, the original Classic's with vertical engine had the l.o. guide lower than the wing c/l, only because vertical c.g. When he changed to horizontal engine, the leadouts went to the wing centerline. But bellcrank position was never moved. The good thing about Yuri's take-apart system is that the vertical position can be manipulated but reason for that would be mechanical, to acchieve symmetrical control impulses. L

Here is a guy who has a clue.

1. To install all surfaces and the engine "zero" is possible, if you have absolute straight plane for assembling (the table with very straight surface). With simple tools it is possible to fix all model surfaces straight according to this base surface. You must control the surface and be sure that it is straight. Curved and twisted base plane will give the mistakes, that will act to the model flight.

Take notice that all his airplanes have 3 degrees motor offset


2. Symmetric airfoil,how to make this? According to the construction of your model, step by step it is need to keep the dimensions of the airfoil. From the first step, the accurate making of the ribs templates, to the quality of covering, when the soft cover between ribs have symmetric curve on up and down surfaces of the wing.
Important to install flaps and the elevators to the axis of the wing (stabilizer). If it fixed upper or down, you receive not symmetric airfoil. This model flight will be not logic.

3. Minimum moment around the wing axis it means, that it must be very light nose and the tail. For this, better to start the model building from the stabilizer. If your built stabilizer is heavy, better do not use it for the model building, better to write off it to fighting looses, and to the experience accumulation. Using this experience, build the next, the next, until you will receive the waiting result. According to the weight of the stabilizer, and the engine weight, you select the nose length. Important to make this correct. Because if you will be mistaken, the center of gravity will be not on the place, you will be compelled to trim it by the weight, putting to the nose or to the tail. It is bad both, because it increase the called moment.
It is obviously, that better to select the light engine, than heavy. With heavy engine the nose must be shorter, also the total model weight will be higher. Both things are not good for the model.
Short nose model have not correct balance of the nose and tail area of the fuselage. Like weather vane, the model tries to turn the nose against the wind. Sometimes it is danger for the stability of the lines tension.
For minimum moment and weight of "Classic" was find the method of production in mould. The advantage of this method is the economy of the weight of the finishing surface layer.
Tradition way is to cover the balsa by paper with farther painting by some layers of paint, with intermediary finishing of every layer (nice but heavy finishing). Or cover by Oracover or another special covering films (not nice).
Painting the mould and receiving the good surface ready, give the advantage of the control of the finish surface weight. I do not find the possibility to have so good outside view with so minimum weight. It is the main advantage of the moulded models.Plus very good stability geometry, got from the mould.
One more word about the moments. It is the gyroscopic moment of the propeller. The best if the prop have no weight. It is impossible, that is why the prop must have the minimum weight. I had tried many kind of props, it was found that the wooden is the best as most light. From heavy plastic props the model twist the trajectory in the air, change the wing position according to the lines line, especial with more sharp turnings. Heavier prop, more RPM -  more action.
To understand the force, that acts to the model, it is easy of you will try to turn the axis of rotating bicycle wheel, if you keep this axis in your hands. You will be impressed.

4. Easy moving of the control system is possible to make, if you control all moving elements according to this aim. Every element. Better to use the friction pairs metal - plastic (Nylon), it is not need the greasing, and have minimum coefficient of friction. Also it is very long life and light weight.
Better to have limited shaking in the control elements, than hard control system moving. Our model is aerobatic, control system must be absolute perfect. To fly with hard control system is the same, as to drive the car with hard control wheel, all trees are your's. The same as hard control system increase the gravity action to the model, its possibility to "meet" the land many times higher.
How to control? When the model  is on the land, and you move the handle, you must not feel any friction. It reaches by every friction control system  element trimming during the assembly.
The weight of the control system is very important too. Inertia of very fast moving push rods makes the action of the control system more slow. It is not pleasure feeling, when the model is late for the handle moving. The same about the flaps and elevator weight. Minimum weight- minimum inertia. Faster model reaction.

5. You feel needs to create the new model of your construction.
Usually not very experienced designer gets as the example the drawing of famous or good model, and tries to modify it by changing of some dimensions.
For example , you want to have more stability and maneuverable model, than the prototype. You propose correct, that it is possible to do, if to increase the distance between the wing and the stabilizer. You correct this dimension and build the model.
Even if you will make all details according to the showed in the notes weight, probably you will not receive the waiting result. Because you did not think about the balance of the model. In wide understanding.
Every good flying model is good balanced. If you move the stabilizer farther from the wing, you change not only the aerodynamic moment of it, but move its mass too. So, you must understand, that you move the center of gravity back. Yes, the maneuverable will be higher with this stabilizer position, plus back center of gravity. But you loose the stability, the model is more sensitive in horizontal flight.
You loose the model total balance.
What you do when you understand this? You move the center of gravity forward, put the weight to the nose. But model do not want to fly better, it makes valve after the sharp turning. What happen? The balance stay lost. The moment of the model around the wing axis is higher, because the nose and the tail are made heavier. Plus the model is heavier to the weight of nose load.
For example, you is more experienced designer, and you understand, that you must save the position of the center of gravity. You move the stabilizer back, but increase the nose length, compensate the tail moment. It is clever and logic decision. However, you can not receive the waiting result again. Because you have the same higher moment around the wing axis, as before, only better situation, that there is no extra weight in the nose.
So, you start to understand at last, that if you change the stabilizer position, and want to save the model balance, it is need to save the center of gravity together with the moment around the wing axis. For this it is need to find the possibility to make the stabilizer lighter, according to distance, that you move it.
Is this all, as you think? No. We forget about the balance between the flaps and the elevator. Flaps moment and the elevator moment acts to various directions. If you increase the moment of the elevator, the moment of the flaps is the same now. So, you increase the effect of stabilizer many times more, than you had think. It acts to the possibility of the model stability after the sharp corners. To return the balance back is possible , if to make the flaps area bigger. Or to increase the flaps turning against to the elevator turning.
O.K., we have changed the flaps area. Or its turning. Possible, it will be need to increase the engine power, because the model needs now more energy for sharp turning, do not loose the speed.
You change the engine to more powerful. As rule, it is heavier. Again we are before the question of the position of the center of gravity and the moment of the model. Together, we have the question of the model total weight. But heavier model needs larger wing area… And so on, and so on.
I show this look like not difficult example of the model modification for showing, that not so easy to design the new model even from the prototype drawing. This 5th rule is important together with the showed before 4 rules of successful model.
I have showed only the characteristics, that is most visible. But there are many another things, that I did not show here. It have action to the model flight too, and you must know this. Its action one to another is so complex… If you design the model, and think, that may be you will be so successful , that without any knowledge and the experience you will draw now the best model…
The possibility of this is the same, as if you shoot to the sky with closed eyes think, that you will get the small bird, that flies some where high in this sky.
Literature, communication with experienced people, experiments with models, step by step you will move to the understanding of the model flight and the design.If you feel the designer talent.
If no, better to build the famous model that you like. In the best condition, according to the rules of success.

Success

Yuriy Yatsenko

English sentence structure and syntax is hard to read through but with a open mind some will figure it out.

It looks really nice! I wish I could build that well. I have a Yates Dragon I'd like to build but I don't think I could do it justice.

Like the tailwheel style...
Nice build!

Marcus

I used common sense, and it told me (although it might not be prudent to do for other reasons) that lengthening the tail would increase negative pitching moment due to pitch rate and decrease rate of change of downwash with angle of attack.  Common sense also told me that I can calculate the effect of lengthening the tail on CG and fix it by summing first moments of mass around the CG.  Anybody who paid attention in high school physics has that common sense.  Neither you nor "Yatsinko" invented it. 

You can use gravity to do that simulation.  Hang the plane by the leadouts.  This will tell you whether it's the bellcrank position or leadout guide position that determines at what angle the airplane hangs.  It will also tell you whether the leadout guide (or bellcrank, if that's how the experiment comes out) is in the right place relative to the vertical CG.  The part that hanging the plane by the leadouts doesn't tell you is the effect of drag on the lines.  When the leadouts (or bellcrank, if that's how the experiment comes out) are in the right place, the airplane will hang nose down.  You can get a quick estimate of how far behind the CG the leadout guide needs to be (I'm just assuming leadouts here, rather than bellcrank position) by plugging numbers into Bob Reeves's Line III calculator.

If that's all you understand oh well.

I was looking for a 3-blade backwards spinner.  Chris Cox sent me a note saying that Brodak makes a homeless spinner.  I told him I'd look for one on the freeway exit ramp.  Seems that Chris's spell checker objected to "holeless".

I can not ever seem to express my opinions with out flack. I do not give a damn if someone follows my findings. I throw them out for the sane people to evaluate for them self's. Then the magic bullet is always pulled Bill Netzaban's findings. That's great but its not for me. He also forgot centrifugal force and if you don't think its a factor for electrics move the battery into the highest or lowest part of the fuse and find out how much difference it really makes. We could always popcycle stick this to death with false results.

So if you are one of the doubters, keep shooting into the air blindfolded at those humming birds in hopes to maybe hit one.

I can not ever seem to express my opinions with out flack. I do not give a damn if someone follows my findings.

 C'mon Sparky, if you "do not give a damn" like you always say, then why do you get so wound anytime someone doesn't wholeheartedly agree with you?

 Plane looks awesome, just build it how YOU like. Bottom line, that's all that really matters.

C'mon Sparky, if you "do not give a damn" like you always say, then why do you get so wound anytime someone doesn't wholeheartedly agree with you?

 Plane looks awesome, just build it how YOU like. Bottom line, that's all that really matters.

Because they try to type down to me.

Steve,

 12366 is Sparky's AMA number. Many modelers add the N in front of their number. It just gives a full scale feeling and sometimes, like in this case, adds to the cool factor.

Robert said that the photo was copied and saved as a .PDF file, nothing else, thus the question. Meanwhile, I'll look forward to seeing how close both the vertical and lateral CG's comes out.  Oops, Spell Check wants to change "CG's" to "cogs". Damnit!   Steve

 

" So if you are one of the doubters, keep shooting into the air blindfolded at those humming birds in hopes to maybe hit one. "

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&v=lYKC-3Se6_M&hl=en-GB

  the ducks dont have much to worry about .