Quote from: Ken Culbertson on August 14, 2026, 10:21:18 AMIn light of Mark's posts, would further forward under the high point of the stab have the same effect?  All I have been able to read and a few AI searches tells me that they would. 

The exhaust hood idea certainly has coolness built in. I like it. Done right, adding heat in the cooling train they can produce thrust. The P51 radiator is a perfect example. In the cooling system we hope for reduced installation drag. Bottom line is if it makes you happy then absolutely do it.

Gotta be careful about what you're receiving from AI. Ask for specifics like sources. The term is relative. It's basically Bernoulli in application. The fatter the cross section' the lower the static pressure will be. We want to dump our cooling system into the lowest static pressure we can in order to realize the maximum mass flow. The way to think about it is to picture slicing the airplane into sections. The slice where the wing interfaces has much more area the the slice back at the tail. That means the static pressure at the section around the wing will have the lowest static pressure. AI is correct, moving the slice forward will reduce the pressure. However the  difference is slight. Especially when compared with the slice up by the wing.

I don't believe thinking about the lower pressure side as sucking the air out is quite the best way. It's more better to think of how fluids move. They move as the result of pressure differential. The greater the pressure difference, the faster it moves. The other part of the equation is the restriction in between. That is probably the more often overlooked part. I see lots of examples of large intakes coupled with small passages along the flow path dumping into what would be adequate exhaust. This happens very often around the battery which takes up a large piece of the cross section. It's also one of the biggest troubles we have with batteries. The motors have some self cooling ability provided they are given cool air.

Quote from: Dave_Trible on Yesterday at 04:13:15 PMYatsenko Sharks..


Dave

None of the first 3 are Sharks. First one is from Shuhrat Ishbutaev, 2 next from Pavll Kravchenko.

I started building one a couple of weeks ago. I have several kits for sale,  and nobody even nibbled on the Accentor, so i decided to build it. I haven't seen one anywhere that has been built and flown. I'm changing a few minor things during the build: adding adjustable leadouts, changing the wingtips to be thicker, remote glow plug since the OS 40 FP is mounted inverted, suspended bellcrank, 4-40 hardware and ball link controls, weight box in the outboard wingtip, and a uniflow fuel tank.
The thicker wingtips allow the adjustable leadouts to move easier, and the remote glow plug allows the engine to be started right side up,instead of holding the plane inverted by another person.
I've decided that the pilot figure is Iron Man,that was the topper of a single serving child's fruit drink, that I detailed a little bit, to highlight the head's features.
Hopefully,  I can get a picture to stick to my post.

Quote from: Kevin K on Yesterday at 03:01:14 PMSo, are these cool or what??

When all pilots will fly the same model it will really show the level of piloting skills.

Jerry

Quote from: Howard Rush on Yesterday at 07:29:43 PMUnder evaluation by Jive Combat Team Investigative Services as we speak.

That might be one of the best backdrops to fly stunt against! That view is something else

6S 18650.  First picture is battery holder.  Second picture is latch toggle.

Under evaluation by Jive Combat Team Investigative Services as we speak.

Hello All:


Back with a report. I put in a couple hours with diagnostics & attempts at running.

1) No leaks in tank or lines. Verified with serious bulb pressure tests in a quiet room.
2) With a full tank and ship at the level, I pulled the fuel line at the needle and could only get flow if I lowered it a half inch below needle.
3)The tank holds 1-3/4 ounce when full. It is plumbed with 1/8" pipes. No trouble getting it to fill completely.
4) When I installed the tank, it was a loose fit in the compartment. Loose enough so that I could pad it all around.
5) I did find that the needle was partially blocked, so cleared that out to great effect.

So, I attached an external 1-oz. uniflow tank with rubber bands. After many attempts to get the needle right for starting, I managed to get a run of less than a minute that left much fuel in the tank. I forgot to check if the exterior tank passed the flow test at the needle. I might try substituting a non-uniflow tank next if it doesn't.

I got a little burnt out, so that's where I left it. Will try again.

Dave Mo...

Yatsenko Sharks..


Dave

.