stunthanger.com
Speed,Combat,Scale,Racing => Carrier => Topic started by: JoeJust on November 15, 2019, 05:10:51 PM
-
Thought I might just start this thread by noting that for the last 5 months I have been trying to come up with the type of wings now winning in Europe. Here's a few pictures to titillate (maybe). Right now we are about a month or so away from testing 4 different wings on two different profile bodies. Keep in mind that Joe is a terrible builder/flyer/designer. With that said, this project has really helped me from going completely nuts, and this is he fist Carrier thread in months! OH, I forgot to mention. The wing is only covered on he top, not both sides!
-
The leading edge is foam that I cut myself (crude but workable) The wins are held in the body by a rectangular section of the center rib that slides into he body and is held in place with machine screws that clamp the wing into place. I decided to try two different bodies and use 2.4 in both of them. the fist four wings are not to any scale. The planes are powered by workable FP .40's that run well. Here's another picture showing the leading edge a bit better.
-
I await the finish of this. H^^
-
More Pics
-
Joe,
Here's what's wrong with the whole idea. First of all, it looks like it works. The picture shows the plane flying. Second, it looks like fun and you're enjoying it. That's got to be wrong, too. Finally, it needs to be a lot more complicated for it to be any good. But it's not. Finally, and not least, is that the plane looks really nice and scaley in your last picture. How it can be scaley and do all that other stuff is also wrong. You are upsetting the order of things.
Can't wait to see your next project.
Divot McSlow
"The wettest tailhook in the west"
PS--Flew your JJ Wildcat in our last contest. Didn't break any records, but sure had fun.
-
Forgive me if I missed it in the text -- the wing is covered on the top surface only?
-
Forgive me if I missed it in the text -- the wing is covered on the top surface only?
YEP!
-
Joe,
Here's what's wrong with the whole idea. First of all, it looks like it works. The picture shows the plane flying. Second, it looks like fun and you're enjoying it. That's got to be wrong, too. Finally, it needs to be a lot more complicated for it to be any good. But it's not. Finally, and not least, is that the plane looks really nice and scaley in your last picture. How it can be scaley and do all that other stuff is also wrong. You are upsetting the order of things.
Can't wait to see your next project.
Divot McSlow
"The wettest tailhook in the west"
PS--Flew your JJ Wildcat in our last contest. Didn't break any records, but sure had fun.
Dave, the three pictures are not of my planes. These are examples of Carrier planes now being flown in Europe. What I am trying to do is to create similar ships with detachable wings that may or may not be able to use under different weather situations.
That is the plan, and while I am not sure that I can do it, I find that the challenge has developed into one hell of a lot of fun! I also could not resist another "poke in the eye" of those that vehemently reject any change in Carrier operations since the 60's. I wont do it, but I was really stunned when I suggested that a raised carrier deck could more loosely resemble an actual Navy operation. Brick Bats, and other-wise obscene comments can't get to me now. Fighting Cancer, Arthritis, Heart conditions and a body that took way to many his to the head playing Professional Lacrosse in he 50's without a helmet plus legs and scolder's that also did way too much damage to an innocent football player give me more to think about than upsetting somebody's sacred cow.
IF I AINT FUN...….*&^%# On IT!
-
Joe,
The one time I flew carrier at the Nats, I seem to recall helping the guys pick up the deck and move it around to better position it for the wind direction. Or maybe we just talked about doing it? Memory says it was raised up maybe 6-12" off the ground? The two fields here no longer have a "portable" deck, but threaded lugs into the asphalt or concrete, so being up off the ground was new to me. Added to the pucker factor. RAMP STRIKE!
Keep working on your super light carrier idea....
The Divot
-
Hey Joe isn't that we are here for, to have fun. I helped Melvin Schuette build one deck that was given to the AMA, we used 3/4 X 4 for framing and 3/4 ply for the deck. We towed it to the Mid-America NATS. The British seem to like their deck as they don't have to mow the grass so short. Nobody in my area wants to try it even though it would take less wood. D>K
-
Doc, here ae two pictures of my "Deck". I only use it to take off from. Total cost of what you see was well under $80. The pails were free! I can set it up by myself in about 30 minutes. We also use in each October as a launching piece for he RM World thingy.
(DARN, I just let the thread drift away rom he original thought. Guess I will have to have a word or two with he sight moderator!
Joe
-
Joe,
I seem to recall that type of wing structure is known as a Jedesky or Jeldeski… something like that. I built a ghuck glider from a pull out plan that used it. east / quick build and surprising performance for such a simple structure.
-
yes it is a variation of the Jedelsky airfoil. Very popular in free flight and smaller RC . I have used it on FF , never thought about CL
-
By the way, this airfoil is good at slow speeds which is great for gliders etc. I think it will have a lot of drag at high speed and maybe way to much lift when going fast. For a sport plane especially a trainer it might be very good .
-
I find this whole topic a little weird. It's a bit like mixing oranges and apples. In the US it is weird, in the EU it is quite normal as far as the front runners in basic carrier deck (BCD) are concerned. The first through third HS times in the EU NATs was, 1st 41.5, the second place was 48.3, and and third place time was 42.9. That equates to HS's of 42 mph or so? Their LS times are in the of two to three minutes range? These EU BCD planes are scored differently than our AMA profile carrier planes are. So the performance figures are so different that you can't compare them. What works great for the EU NATS would never work great for the AMA carrier NATs and vice versa.
I find their planes to be quite interesting and innovating, they have worked long and hard to arrive at this level of flying after pretty much starting with planes much like our AMA carrier planes. Our AMA planes simply don't work in the framework of "their" BCD rules for carrier. So as Joe says, these airfoils (BCD) are really interesting and are proving to work quite well in the EU BCD events. I (me) wish our rules were the same just so we could try something new and very different from our AMA rules. It amounts to " what ever pulls your chian" I think.
-
Regarding the wing airfoil and covered on "the top only"...... Hey guys, remember back to your childhood and the Cox RTF PT-19. Yup, there's that airfoil (or something pretty close!)
-
...... It amounts to " what ever pulls your chian" I think.
More likely, "Whatever floats your boat".