News:



  • November 28, 2020, 12:08:45 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Can small fly beautiful?  (Read 1440 times)

Offline Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
Can small fly beautiful?
« on: January 21, 2020, 07:56:13 AM »
As our most used circle here in Switzerland is limited to 59 ft (18m) lines I wonder whether a smaller (and lighter) than usual airplane could be designed to fly competitive. Trying to make use of what I've learned since flying electrics I have now come to related concept and I would really appreciate your comments on it before starting the building of "Modestia"
Peter

Peter Germann


Advertise Here

Offline Motorman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 5954
  • Millville NJ PDQ Flying Clown Country
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2020, 09:11:13 AM »
That's about Twister/Banshee size. If it has a good airfoil and longer tail moment it will fly good.


Motorman 8)
Remove victim to fresh air

Offline john e. holliday

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 21274
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2020, 11:11:57 AM »
I have several .25 size planes that I don't fly enough.  One is a Brazilian design that my flying partner seen fly and he stated it looked better than my bigger(40 size) planes.  Yes it is on 52 X .015 cable lines.   Grass needs to be really short for them.   Closest paved circle for me is Wichita KS or the alternative is Buder Park in St louis. D>K
John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530  Have fun as I have and I am still breaking a record.

Online Brent Williams

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 864
  • Making America Fly Stunt Again!
    • Fancher Handles - Presented by Brent Williams
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2020, 11:57:56 AM »
Looks like an easy plane to build.  The numbers look like it would make for a good plane. 

I think the AXI 2820/4S-2600 might be a bit over weight for that size of plane, though.   A 2814/2200 should be more than plenty.

50.2" span, 493sq.in. 15.75 tail, 10 25 nose,  5.1:1 aspect wing,
3.9 aspect tail, 135sq.in. 27% tail %
« Last Edit: January 21, 2020, 06:28:16 PM by Brent Williams »
Laser-cut, "Ted Fancher Precision-Pro" Hard Point Handle Kits are available again.  PM for info.
https://stunthanger.com/smf/brent-williams'-fancher-handles-and-cl-parts/ted-fancher's-precision-pro-handle-kit-by-brent-williams-information/

Offline Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2020, 02:56:43 AM »
Yes. it might be a bit generously powered. But then I could perhaps  fly it on full length lines on my "home" circle Untersiggenthal...
It is supposed to come out at 43 oz  (1223 Gr.) resulting in a load of 12.6 oz/sq.ft (38.4 Gr / qdm). CG to be bench set to 17% MAC

Peter Germann

Offline phil c

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2171
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2020, 07:52:51 PM »
This cute little plane , a Rugged Stunt Trainer, will easily do the whole pattern.  For beginners and some of us older folks, it can also survive a straight in crash in moderate turf.  Several in fact.

25 sized, such as FP or LA 25 with standard venturis and an 8/4 to 9/5 prop.

Landing gear is optional for over grass.


Perhaps the biggest problem with smaller planes is that the judges are now trained only with large planes, well over 2.5sq.m.  If the judges actually score the flight, and not just their biases, smaller planes can do well.

The smaller planes can turn sharper corners and make the sharp turns look much better, if the judges will notice.  With proper trimming they can be set up to fly much like a much larger plane.
phil Cartier

Online Mark Mc

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 548
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2020, 08:39:29 PM »
Perhaps the biggest problem with smaller planes is that the judges are now trained only with large planes, well over 2.5sq.m.  If the judges actually score the flight, and not just their biases, smaller planes can do well.

Phil,

With the statement that the judges are trained with larger planes, I assume this is with respect to visual cues.  What type of visual cues can be built in to smaller planes to make them score better/easier?  Specific fuselage/tail group shapes?  Better color schemes/designs to queue the judges' eyes?  Couldn't simple cosmetic approaches make it easier to score, since the wing/tail areas and moments are the important things on flight characteristics?

Mark

Online Mark Mc

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 548
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2020, 08:40:41 PM »
.

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5113
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2020, 02:05:32 PM »
Peter I’ve always felt the smaller (.35 IC size) always built lighter and flew better than the larger airplanes.  The bigger ones just seemed more impressive.  I’ve designed very many great flying airplanes but have to honestly say I have a kit- built Jetco Dolphin that can fly as well as anything I’ve touched.  Power is really the only net gain in larger,  newer airplanes.  Your design should do well as long as battery weight isn’t a problem.

Dave
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 11267
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2020, 03:37:11 PM »
As our most used circle here in Switzerland is limited to 59 ft (18m) lines I wonder whether a smaller (and lighter) than usual airplane could be designed to fly competitive. Trying to make use of what I've learned since flying electrics I have now come to related concept and I would really appreciate your comments on it before starting the building of "Modestia"
Peter

   I see no real reason you cannot design something that flies pretty well inside those limitations. A Nobler/Fox 35 probably works best on 55-56 foot lines.

   Your proposed design looks OK, but I would be inclined to just scale down a Nobler slightly (everything but the stabilizer/elevator, which I would leave full-size) and then 20FP or something similar, a Saito 30, or equivalent electric. A tapered wing would fly more smoothly - because along with the small circle are probably a lot of nearby obstructions (trees, etc) and that will handle turbulence a lot better than a straight wing.

   I would also spend a lot of time making it look really good, to take advantage of the fact that compared to current airplanes, it could look like a little jewel or perfect toy.

      I am not quite there with Dave on the topic of the smaller airplanes flying better - they are less likely to overwhelm you in the wind with control load and pull, probably. But, a lot of smaller airplanes are also classic/OTS and despite what anyone thinks, we have learned a few things since 35-sized planes were the standard. 

     I actually have a reduced-size Infinity design, but I haven't built it. I don't think it would be small enough for that short a lines, but I hadn't considered that a goal.

    Brett

Offline phil c

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2171
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2020, 06:18:48 PM »
Phil,

With the statement that the judges are trained with larger planes, I assume this is with respect to visual cues.  What type of visual cues can be built in to smaller planes to make them score better/easier?  Specific fuselage/tail group shapes?  Better color schemes/designs to queue the judges' eyes?  Couldn't simple cosmetic approaches make it easier to score, since the wing/tail areas and moments are the important things on flight characteristics?

Mark

I think the issue is not so much color schemes as differences such as the size of the plane compared to the maneuver, the length of the lines, certainly a full fuselage will be perceived more favorably than a profile.  But it's more a matter of what people are used to seeing.
phil Cartier

Offline Dave Hull

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1142
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2020, 10:35:48 PM »
Consider that there are actually reasons the judges see something different when people are flying (much) smaller planes. Our club's circles are paved a little bit out beyond the safety circle. Say another 8-10 feet. The judges stand outside those lines, and often, just off the pavement. When you fly a (much) smaller plane, the judges don't move in. I noticed that they stay in the same spot. So now the maneuvers look more compressed. Compound that with the bottoms still being in the same location, when ideally, those would move down, too. Their sight picture is now different. And when I fly a 1/2A right after someone flies a Gonzo-Piper, in a succession of .46 and .60 ships, well.....

I would put considerable taper into both the wing and tail. Anything to reduce the roll upsets of the smaller plane.

Hopefully, I will find time this summer to get back to work on my mid-sized ship. It's a bit smaller than Peter's current plan.

Dave


Offline Dave_Trible

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5113
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #12 on: January 25, 2020, 09:28:44 AM »
I will have some agreement with Dave (above).  The straight wing itself isn't a huge matter but if it were me I'd taper the flaps some-say the tip chord about 2/3rds that of the root flap chord.  It should be a little more stable in the wind but to me more important the whole wing will be less likely to stall at the same time in a demanding maneuver or on landing approach when the ship really slows down.  You'd prefer the center to stall a little sooner to maintain roll stability and more gradually stall rather than all at once.  It appears you plan to use a common airfoil down the length of the span which will aggravate that a little more although yield good lift.  Someone mentioned extending the stab back- to me it looks OK where it is.  If you are concerned about battery/motor weight shorten the nose some instead of extending the lever any more.  In fact I'd keep the nose as short as is practical to keep the weight concentration as close the the CG as you can.  It's easier to START and STOP in rotation that way.

Dave
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4068
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #13 on: January 26, 2020, 08:14:08 AM »
Just liberated this , If your going for the ' plank wing ' I think the T Bolt treatments gunna beea improvement .
In rough air / wind theres less yaw & bounce with the egged tips . Little plank wing Cassutt Goodyears in N Z Winds yawed and rolled decidedly . Very definately educationally .



That said , theres a pile of ' 1/2 A A.M.A. .049 stunt ships . a bit of hunting will find some .

Seems ' half size '( of a .35 / 40 FSR / ST 46 ship ), about 11 to 15 ounce was about the game . but theyre actually a quater the wing area . If you look at say the ' Mirage ' 30 inch span Vs 60 .
Think they manadged 55 foot of .012 wire . Give or take .

The other way 'd be a . 15 size 30 " snotbox . Say a Aeroflite Hurricane / P-051 / Spitfire . 1.5 cc to 2.5 cc sucker . Which if you double the size / quadruple the area . you can throw in a 51 or .60 . or V.c.V. ??? ???

The good U S 1/2 A .049 ships were fairly sophisticated . To siple a aproach might get to simple a result .  :(

SO , youre going to need to check the ' power loading ' and ' weight loading ' , as in if theres a heavy electric engine & batteries - thats going to dictate the wing area for a 15 Oz Sq Ft set up .
Thus a light motor battery will be a advantage - along with clean aerodynamics . whatever that means .

You could have a hoot trying your battery / motor combo on a discard FAI Combat wing . With a monowheel .
Useing a foam combat wing leading edge for a starting point'd get you a metre / 40 inch span .

That horrible plastic stuff and minialist airframe TEOSWAKI ish , might get you a clean low drag L/W thing with a bit of area . Which I think youll find you need .
Unless you go for a TeeDee / Norvil 049 / 061 / 1cc grunter equivilant electric set up and similar airframe to the U S .049 comp models .

Well, you did ask.  VD~ just my ten cents worth . The tiny ( 2 foot span ? ) foam scale R C electric comercial things , ive always thought would convert well to a ' kids ' control line knockabout .
Youd think with a bigger wing ( Cox Chipmunk wing ? ) theyed have to start being aerobatic . Obviously if you halved the battery set up & went for three minute flights , youd get a better loading .
Might be the better ' first step ' for full comp. performace. And give you a few figures to calc a ' real ' motor battery set up . Tho Id think low drag would reduce battery consumption -
so the notorious ' Dominoes ' suggests the plastic foam simplistic approach if performance is the priority .  :P H^^

Offline Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4068
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #14 on: January 26, 2020, 08:20:08 AM »
& o.k. Compostellas ' plank ' 4 stroke had impressive performance . So dont let me put you off . That half size'd be similar to your sketch .

I think many U S 1/2 A had 1/16 fuze sides , 1/64 ply , 1/32 ribs , 1/8 sht. flaps tailplane & elevator . but 15 Oz for 30 span is a definate .
Ive been looking at a 40 span Pattern Master or 48 inch span L J / B J . For the 25 FP / FSR , thinking 60 foot in calm air . Which is comparable airframe to your proposed set up . Now ive re read your notes .  :-X

Offline Igor Burger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 2051
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #15 on: January 28, 2020, 07:01:06 AM »
12 years ago I reworked my LA25 powered Middle to electrics and now our kids use them to fly on smaller soccer fields:








Online Brent Williams

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 864
  • Making America Fly Stunt Again!
    • Fancher Handles - Presented by Brent Williams
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #16 on: January 28, 2020, 08:43:08 PM »
12 years ago I reworked my LA25 powered Middle to electrics and now our kids use them to fly on smaller soccer fields:



Here is a PDF file of the plans for Igor's cool little "Middle Pro" design.   
Igor kindly shared his original drawing as a corel draw .cdr file and I converted it to a PDF.  I have it as a .svg and .dxf file as well if anyone wants it. 
(Edit: DXF file added to follow up post.)

For the .jpg example view in this post, I rearranged Igor's drawing a bit and added the dimensions in mm/inches for ease of study.

« Last Edit: January 29, 2020, 07:58:50 PM by Brent Williams »
Laser-cut, "Ted Fancher Precision-Pro" Hard Point Handle Kits are available again.  PM for info.
https://stunthanger.com/smf/brent-williams'-fancher-handles-and-cl-parts/ted-fancher's-precision-pro-handle-kit-by-brent-williams-information/

Offline Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #17 on: January 29, 2020, 02:56:45 AM »
Very interesting, indeed. "Middle" seems to be a good approach. Thank you for publishing it.
Peter Germann

Online Steve Berry

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #18 on: January 29, 2020, 07:11:11 AM »
I have it as a .svg and .dxf file as well if anyone wants it.

I would very much like it as a .dxf, please.

Steve

Offline Wolfgang Nieuwkamp

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #19 on: January 29, 2020, 11:35:33 AM »
dxf drawing would be nice!

Regards,

Wolfgang

Online Brent Williams

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 864
  • Making America Fly Stunt Again!
    • Fancher Handles - Presented by Brent Williams
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #20 on: January 29, 2020, 07:48:56 PM »
Here is the .DXF file of Igor's Middle Pro.  It is twice converted, so I can't guarantee perfection.  cdr into inkscape .svg into dxf.

edit: I took the first dxf drawing down and edited a few things.  The root chord on the wing is 220mm, so if you resize it to that dimension you should be accurate.


The photos are from one of the SVK F2b forums.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2020, 08:52:24 PM by Brent Williams »
Laser-cut, "Ted Fancher Precision-Pro" Hard Point Handle Kits are available again.  PM for info.
https://stunthanger.com/smf/brent-williams'-fancher-handles-and-cl-parts/ted-fancher's-precision-pro-handle-kit-by-brent-williams-information/

Online Brent Williams

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 864
  • Making America Fly Stunt Again!
    • Fancher Handles - Presented by Brent Williams
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #21 on: January 29, 2020, 07:53:59 PM »
Here are some of the build photos of the Middle that Igor posted on one of the euro sites.
Laser-cut, "Ted Fancher Precision-Pro" Hard Point Handle Kits are available again.  PM for info.
https://stunthanger.com/smf/brent-williams'-fancher-handles-and-cl-parts/ted-fancher's-precision-pro-handle-kit-by-brent-williams-information/

Offline Igor Burger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 2051
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #22 on: January 30, 2020, 01:45:39 AM »
Just to make it clear, that blue/white model had classic controls and on back screws 45 degrees mounted LA 25.

That other had saito 30 and logarithmic unit on flaps. The rest is the same. I did them to compare logarithmic controlls on small models, just like I did on MAX and MAXII (they were also identical except the controls).

Later I replaced saito and converted model to electric.

http://www.netax.sk/hexoft/stunt/the_middle.htm






Online Steve Berry

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #23 on: January 30, 2020, 06:51:22 AM »
Very nice model. Thanks for posting.

Steve

Offline Jason Greer

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 486
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #24 on: January 31, 2020, 07:04:33 AM »
What a neat model.  Thanks for sharing.  I may have to build one.
El Dorado, AR
AMA 518858

Offline Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #25 on: June 13, 2020, 07:32:15 AM »
After a series of tests here now the updated operating data and results of Modestia:

Weight:  1‘370 Gr. / 48.3 oz
Load: 41.7 Gr. / sqdm
Motor: Dualsky ECO 2814C 1120 KV
Avg. in-flight (F2B) power: 368 W
Peak in-flight power: 466 W
ESC / Mode:  Castle Edge lite 50A / constant RPM governed
Max. power-out: 68%
Propeller / RPM: APC thin electric pusher 10 x 5.8 / 10’401 RPM
Lines: Kurenkov 18 m x 0.38 mm / 5.0 sec
Motor runtime: 5‘20“
Batterie / Recharge: Fullymax 2600 4S 40C / 1‘960 mAh

C.G: 16% MAC
Elevator-flaps deflection ratio: 1:1
Leadout position: 25 mm (1 in) rear of C.G.
Rudder: 10° out (Rabe function inactive)
Outer tip heavier: 15 Gr (0.52 oz)

Level- inverted flight: requires constant action to maintain altitude
Turn rate: sufficiently quick and very sensitive
Lift in 4th corner of hourglass: close to stall
Corner exit: not solid
Overhead line pull: Sufficent
Tracking: Not very good

Summary
If light (below 1'300 gr) and precisely built, Modestia is suitable for F2B basic training. The airplane needs however constant attention and lacks in flight the stability of "big machine". Modestia is less suitable for advanced pilots.
The reasons which lead to the deficits are not known to me in all details. Following the example of well-known "designers", I will now modify the dimensions of Modestia in such a way that they correspond to a proven concept. This with the goal to create a smaller version of my "My Way" with Modestia II.
Peter Germann

Online Peter Nevai

  • 2018 Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 923
    • C3EL
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #26 on: June 14, 2020, 09:29:41 PM »
Can smaller planes fly beautifully? Now this is a loaded question if ever there was one. It begs to answer a question with a question.

Are you intending it for competition? And that is the crux of it really. Because depending on the answer the I will use the age old cliche Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. (I'm just chock full of em aren't I)? In this case the beholders are the judges. If the judges consider anything 550 sq inches or below to be not beautiful then no matter how well it flies or looks you will get dinged, because the airplane presents and appears to move through out the space differently than the 700 sq inch model before and after. Of course judges becoming older and older with eyesight degrading with the inexorable march into decrepitude  ;D A bigger airplane is easier to see from across the field. Considering that through out the 60's and early to mid 70's everyone was flying 35 sized models an occasional 40 or 45 and that was when the plane was on the overweight side. Did the top pilots of that era fly worse that today's top pilots? Did the airplanes perform the pattern poorly in comparison? I think not, especially if you ever saw Gene Schaffer, Bob Hunt, Les McDonald and those guys fly the pattern with models of a size that people are saying these days would be too small. In fact I would not be wrong to say that the big model considered today to be the tops could probably not perform with as quick clean precision many of the square elements that some of those 35 sized models in the hands of the top pilots of the day could pull off.  I would like to see any top pilot today take their 700 sq or bigger super stunt ship and fly completely dead stick indefinitely doing lazy 8's until they felt like stopping. Gene Shaffer routinely did that with his 35 sized Stunt Machine. And if a smaller well designed and built model can fly with out power while doing maneuvers, I would pretty much say it could be flown beautifully.
Words Spoken by the first human to set foot on Mars... "Now What?"

Offline Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #27 on: July 15, 2020, 07:25:05 AM »
From experience made while test flying  "Modestia", as well as following suggetions made by friends and last encouraged by Peter Nevai's comment from June 15, I thought I should to give the "smaller" idea a second chance.
Meanwhile some 40 drawings are ready to go and, looking fwd. to comments, have been published here:

https://www.mycloud.ch/s/S00EB1857033DF42F516295541545D3334176810A49

Its all in metric and german but making use of DeepL might help.

kind rgds,

August 3rd 2020:
I've modified Modestia to try out some of the changes planned for Modestia 2. As the airplane now performs clearly better, chances are that M 2 will work as expected. A number of drawings have been changed accordingly (Rev. 1) and are ready for download from the same above link.

Peter


 
« Last Edit: August 04, 2020, 08:11:41 AM by Peter Germann »
Peter Germann

Online Steve Berry

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 153
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #28 on: July 16, 2020, 07:25:03 AM »
Peter, well done & nice plans. Certainly a lot to digest. Now, I just need to translate it from German to English.

Online Brent Williams

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 864
  • Making America Fly Stunt Again!
    • Fancher Handles - Presented by Brent Williams
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #29 on: July 16, 2020, 12:35:38 PM »
Nice looking design.  Though I don't know if Modestia 2 still qualifies as "small" with a 1430mm/56.3" wingspan and 1136mm/44.75" length.

Good, modern, medium sized plane, however!   The 2600/4s sized batteries and a 2820 sized motor make for an economical and competent airplane.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2020, 05:57:26 PM by Brent Williams »
Laser-cut, "Ted Fancher Precision-Pro" Hard Point Handle Kits are available again.  PM for info.
https://stunthanger.com/smf/brent-williams'-fancher-handles-and-cl-parts/ted-fancher's-precision-pro-handle-kit-by-brent-williams-information/

Offline Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2020, 01:35:59 PM »
Peter, well done & nice plans. Certainly a lot to digest. Now, I just need to translate it from German to English.

Divide Millimeters by 25.4 to get inches, grams by 28.35 for ounces and feed german text into this:
https://www.deepl.com/en/translator
Units will be correct and text comes really close.

rgds, Peter
Peter Germann

Offline Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #31 on: August 04, 2020, 08:16:26 AM »
I've modified Modestia to try out some of the changes planned for Modestia 2. As the airplane now performs clearly better, chances are that M 2 will work as expected. A number of drawings have been changed accordingly (Rev. 1) and are ready for download from the same above link.

Peter
Peter Germann

Online Brent Williams

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 864
  • Making America Fly Stunt Again!
    • Fancher Handles - Presented by Brent Williams
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #32 on: August 04, 2020, 03:09:10 PM »
What performance improvements did you observe in your modified Modestia?

What did you change?
« Last Edit: August 05, 2020, 01:26:23 AM by Brent Williams »
Laser-cut, "Ted Fancher Precision-Pro" Hard Point Handle Kits are available again.  PM for info.
https://stunthanger.com/smf/brent-williams'-fancher-handles-and-cl-parts/ted-fancher's-precision-pro-handle-kit-by-brent-williams-information/

Offline Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #33 on: August 05, 2020, 07:40:47 AM »
Here is what I’ve done to improve Modestia:

Lack of stability around pitch axis: 
•   elevators cut back from rectangular shape to taper and reduced area.
•   changed flaps/elevators ratio from 0.8:1 to  1:1

Approaching stall in 4th corner of hr. glass:
•   added area by increasing wingspan (+ 7 in)
•   cut full span flaps from rectangular to taper

Severe prop noise in corners:
•   internal nose structure reinforced.
•   replaced 12 x 6 light drone prop by APC 11 x 8 EP
•   reducing RPM from 9’200 to 8’500

Changes have been carried fwd. to Modestia 2 docs.

Peter
« Last Edit: August 07, 2020, 05:28:40 AM by Peter Germann »
Peter Germann

Offline phil c

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2171
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #34 on: August 14, 2020, 01:13:11 PM »
Phil,

With the statement that the judges are trained with larger planes, I assume this is with respect to visual cues.  What type of visual cues can be built in to smaller planes to make them score better/easier?  Specific fuselage/tail group shapes?  Better color schemes/designs to queue the judges' eyes?  Couldn't simple cosmetic approaches make it easier to score, since the wing/tail areas and moments are the important things on flight characteristics?

Mark
[/quote
Smaller planes get around the corner a bit quicker- lower span loading and the smaller and can present a tighter turn 'cause it takes up less of the circumference.  The main problem is getting it to look " look" smooth.  Sometimes tight ,quick corners look jumpy evev when they are not.  A fair number of judges have a hard time with somthing they don,t see every day.
phil Cartier

Offline Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 372
Re: Can small fly beautiful?
« Reply #35 on: August 15, 2020, 07:46:54 AM »
Updated documents describing the" Modestia 2" project in detail are now available for download here:

https://www.mycloud.ch/s/S00D13CF7AA6E4822DFEDFD37A7B629A66AE8F3BBE2

kind regards, Peter
Peter Germann


Advertise Here
Tags: