Banshee with trike gear

[John Fitzgerald]

I would like to build my next Banshee with all the recommended mods, plus trike gear.  Would someone describe how/where to mount the gear blocks for wing mount landing gear?  Hard rock maple or plywood?  Would the trike gear adversly affect the flying to any great degree?  I always fly off grass / carpet and think it might work better on takeoffs and landings.

[Tim Wescott]

I want to know, too, at least the general issues with trike vs. taildragger gear.

I know it's harder on the nosewheel, which is why a lot of full-sized planes that are designed for rough fields are taildraggers.

I'd be awfully tempted to just relocate the landing gear hold-downs to swivel the main landing gear back instead of forward; I'd put the wheels distinctly, but not too terribly far, behind the CG (10 degrees?  1 inch?  I'd play with it).  And make your nose gear mounting stout.

[Russell Shaffer]

Good thought, Tim.  That would eliminate the danger of wing damage from a rough field event.  I think 5/32 wire would be a good idea for a swept back gear, though.

[Bob Reeves]

Trike gear is great, my main stunt ship has trike gear and any I build from now on will also have it. Mains should be ~15deg behind the CG and make sure it sits slightly nose down. If the nose gear comes off the ground before you have enough speed for good line tension the airplane will tend to turn in from line drag. The nose gear needs to be solidly mounted and strong especially if you still struggling with not so nice landings.

Go for it, trikes are great..

[Tim Wescott]

If the nose gear comes off the ground before you have enough speed for good line tension the airplane will tend to turn in from line drag.

How much can this effect be alleviated by holding down elevator as you come up to speed?  It seems (to my naive way of thinking -- I need to get trike gear on something and try it out) that this would be the bee's knees with trike gear.

[john e. holliday]

I beleive zero degree or maybe 1 to 2 degree positive trike gear.   Neutral elevator and let it  climb on it's own.   Negative degree or down elevator will cause the plane to jump into the air after attaining air speed.

[Hoss Cain]

I beleive zero degree or maybe 1 to 2 degree positive trike gear.   Neutral elevator and let it  climb on it's own.   Negative degree or down elevator will cause the plane to jump into the air after attaining air speed.

Mr. Holiday, IMO you are 101% CORRECT. Airplanes are airplanes regardless of the control method. Nose down on the takeoff roll will cause the wing to glue itself to the runway. (Lift vector becomes down-hold vector) Once enough speed is attained for the pilot to start lifting the nose, then the wing transitions from negative lift to positive lift and then there is a sudden jump into the air. This - for several reasons - can create a less than neat take-off. As one that has taught many newbies in the RC world, that is one of the biggest detriments to the newbie with little or no aeronautical experience.

In the multitude of RC Trainers, most of the L-Gear wires are soft. After a few bumps the model sets nose high. The newbie will then try to take-off, the nose-high machine will then jump into the air prior to being ready to fly and SNAP over into the ground. GROUND ALWAYS WINS!    I have no idea how many times I have grabbed a landing gear and bent it back to set their model straight. So, no nose down and very little up on a trike gear system, especially with a symmetrical airfoil along with flaps opposite to elevator.

The same applies to a CL Stunter. Very slight positive attitude is overcome since the flaps will be slightly up if pilot applies light down elevator. This prevents premature take-off and allows the model to fly off when such down elevator transitions to neutral or light up. Those flaps can assist to make neat take-offs, but the transition is sudden, therefore as You, John, state 1-2 degrees positive is the way to go.

Way back when I was an active CL Stunt person, I flew a Nobler converted to Trike gear. Good Old (late) George was judge at several. He had a hard time with anyone that made any change to his "Nobler". Some Fun! 

[Bob Reeves]

If you set it up so the nose is high, the nose wheel will come off the ground too early and it will chase you around the circle. Among other  differences, full size and RC airplanes do not have 65 feet of control wires attached to one wing. My Latency scored two 38 point takeoffs at Brodak's last year sitting slightly nose down, guess the airplane doesn't know it isn't set up properly.

My FJ-4B Carrier airplanes do sit slightly nose high but they are overpowered, have more than twice the tip weight of a stunt ship, need to get airborn withen 18 feet and the takeoff isn't scored.

[Steve Helmick]

Y'all can argue about the angle of dangle all you want. The nose gear needs to plant last on landing, that's for sure, or it will be bouncing like a kangaroo. Maybe take a look at the setup on the Pathfinder?


I would not put the main wheels too far aft of the CG, tho some have. The Mackey Gobbleswantz has the mains about 2 or 3 inches aft of the CG, and I can't imagine that would work real well, tho it obviously worked. When it won the NATS in '58, Bob Randall landed it power-on and taxied until the engine quit. Maybe that's the only way it would land smoothly?

A wing mounted main would want pretty decent grass, and it is not so easy to mount the mains on the fuselage on a profile, tho I'm sure it could be done with some thought and care. The Banshee has a very long nose, and adding the nose gear will make the CG more of a problem than it already is. Most folks cut the nose shorter, or move the wing forward. Building from scratch will make it easier, and I think a trike geared Banshee would be kinda cool looking.  Steve

[John Fitzgerald]

I am planning on doing many of the recommended mods, including moving the wing forward.  I thought wing mounted gear would look cool, but it may be too vulnerable to damage in grass.  I suppose I could mount the gear in the conventional position, but make it go straight down instead of forward.  I had planned to use aluminum main gear.  I will probably run a Neumann modified Tower .40 that is recommended to use a 12-6 prop.  After the Banshee is built I will have more planes than engines to put on them, but that's a good thing in my book.

[Bill Little]

I am planning on doing many of the recommended mods, including moving the wing forward.  I thought wing mounted gear would look cool, but it may be too vulnerable to damage in grass.  I suppose I could mount the gear in the conventional position, but make it go straight down instead of forward.  I had planned to use aluminum main gear.  I will probably run a Neumann modified Tower .40 that is recommended to use a 12-6 prop.  After the Banshee is built I will have more planes than engines to put on them, but that's a good thing in my book.

HI John,

My first thought was to use aluminum gear on the fuselage if a suitable area is available where the gear needs to go. (somewhere under the wing)

BIG Bear
RNMM/AMM

[Clancy Arnold]

John
From my experience do not use solid wood blocks, use plywood.  I built a CL Scale profile with wing mounted main gear.  On it's first contest take off the engine quit just as it lifted off.  One maple block split putting the gear strut through the top of the wing.  It dropped less than 2 feet.
Clancy

[wwwarbird]

 I don't know who belonged to it, but here's a modified trike gear Banshee that I spotted at the 2009 Sig contest...

[Larry Fernandez]

Trike gear is great, my main stunt ship has trike gear and any I build from now on will also have it. Mains should be ~15deg behind the CG and make sure it sits slightly nose down. If the nose gear comes off the ground before you have enough speed for good line tension the airplane will tend to turn in from line drag. The nose gear needs to be solidly mounted and strong especially if you still struggling with not so nice landings.

Go for it, trikes are great..

For what its worth...
I have been Flying a Macaluso Crusader for about five years now. I had played with the length of the nose gear the first twenty flights or so and found that the best set up was nose high. I'll post pictures tomorrow. When the plane is launched I hold a tad bit of down elevator and let her roll for almost a quarter circle, I'll then relax (slowly) to my neutral control position until I get to level flight. The longer the take off roll, the easier it is to make five foot level flight at the point of take off. Consistant 38-40 point take offs.
On landings, when the motor quits, I give her just a bit of down to establish a glide rate that stays put all the way down until about two foot off of the ground
I then give her a little up just to slow her down a bit, and as soon as the mains touch I crank in full down to keep her planted. Again, consistant 37-39 point landings( with a couple of 40's here and there.)

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

[Bob Reeves]

Good example of "do what works for you", like so many things in this hobby. What works for one doesn't necessarily mean it will work for everyone.

I know when I first started playing with trikes having the nose sitting high ended up being a bad thing. Either the nose gear would come off too early and I would have to step back to maintain control or if I held down elivator it would jump into the air as soon as I gave it any up. In either case I wasn't able to make a smooth takeoff.

Am sure Larry is a better stunt flyer than I am which might explain why he can and I couldn't.

[Steve Helmick]

What Bob said...maybe! When I started flying my SV-11, it would always leap into the air, and from my end of the lines, I couldn't tell that it was a neutral problem on the handle. Luckily, my gallery of criticizers told me that the handle wasn't adjusted right, and eventually I fixed it. And that's with a taildragger LG configuration. Another place to look is at the stab/elev thicknesses and hingeline sealing.  Steve

[Zuriel Armstrong]

Howdy John,

I borrowed this reply from a thread I started around 2002 on SSW.  I hope it helps some.  My plane worked flawlessly with this approach.

>I have read somewhere before on
>this forum how to locate
>the main gear for Tricycle
>landing gear. What is
>a good rule to use
>in determining the correct location.
> Also does it make
>a big difference the rake
>of the main gear.
>
>Zuriel


Zuriel,

I'll jump in here for the heck of it.

There are two "musts" for a trike gear setup. First, the main gear need to be located so that the wheels touch the ground aft of the center of gravity of the airplane. Second, the airplane needs to sit at a very slightly negative angle of attack when on the ground. Let's talk about each.

The wheels relative to the CG seems a no-brainer and although that is true philosophically, designwise it raises some questions. Specifically, you need to know where the CG is going to be in order to know where to put the main gear. It is probably safe to state that the CG won't "likely" be aft of 25% of the average chord of the wing. Ergo, you could install a fixed gear that touches the ground (wheel contact point...not the point the gear exits the wing) at around 30%.

Ideally, the wheel touchdown point would be adjustable. This could be as simple as making the gear flexible enough to bend fore and aft or as sophisticated as an adjustable attachment point that allow them to be moved fore and aft.

The ideal point will allow the ship to sit lightly on the nose wheel but not be willing to sit on the tail if you push the tail to the ground as will happen if the wheel touchdown point is too close to the CG. If the WHDP is too far aft it may become difficult to rotate the nose up for take-offs and landings on the main gear will result in a "clunker" arrival of the nose gear rather than a gradual lowering of the nose which looks smooth and controlled.

The nose gear must be adjusted so that the ship sits with a tiny bit of negative angle of attack at rest. This attitude will allow the ship to remain on the ground until the nose is purposely raised for take-off. If the ship sits at a positive angle of attack the take-off will occur as soon as the ship gets to flying speed. With a light wing-loading and lots of power this may be almost immediately rather than the desired smooth rolling take-off described in the rule book.

Minor considerations are: the angle of the gear leg (swept forward/swept aft/vertical) isn't particularly important as long as the gear is reasonably sturdy (use large enough wire!); the main gear should be far enough apart to prevent tri-cycling "rollovers" where the ship wants to roll up on the nose gear and one or the other of the main gear; the angle of the nose wheel must be set critically since it *will* control the yaw angle of the ship on the take-off roll--unlike a tail wheel which pretty much lifts off immediately and has little effect on the yaw angle of the ship on the ground. If the wheel is inset too much the ship will try to run into the circle and if outset too much it will exacerbate the tendency of the ship to tri-cycle onto the nose and left main gear. Try for a just noticeable tendency to turn left when rolling the ship forward.

Ted

[Larry Fernandez]

For what its worth...
I have been Flying a Macaluso Crusader for about five years now. I had played with the length of the nose gear the first twenty flights or so and found that the best set up was nose high. I'll post pictures tomorrow.

As promised

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

[Zuriel Armstrong]

Beautiful airplane.  I am curious if the relationship if the high wing/lower stab, make a difference in the set-up?

[Larry Fernandez]

Beautiful airplane.  I am curious if the relationship if the high wing/lower stab, make a difference in the set-up?

Good question. I dont have the answer to that other than there is anhedral built into the wing which may negate the high wing/lower stab relationship.
I really dont know.

The planes been wrecked a couple of times and she has seen her better days.

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team