just finished building glider - now what?

[DerShark3]

Hi guys,

Just finished buiding my first unpowered RE trainer glider.
Lanier Hawk 75" (http://www.lanierrc.com/lrcprivate/rcairplanes/hawk.htm)
But I don't think it will fly well.
What do you think..........
WingSpan 75"
10" Constant chord, flat bottom wing. 12.5% thickness.
AUW 64oz. !!!
Wing loading 12.3oz. per sq ft.
Incidence/decalage = 1 degree.
Everything is very straight and aligned and balance is set at 33.4% from LE. ( manufacturer recomends 30 to 32.5%)
It's got lots of polyhedaral and elevator and rudder throws are set up per manufacturers specs.

As a newbie here is my problem......
It feels so damn heavy when I hold it in a hand launch test glide position, that I'm sure it will just drop right to the ground when I heave it.
It seems like I would have to get up plenty of speed before it will glide.
I doubt I can hand launch it for glide test at enough speed to generate enough lift.
What do you think???
Am I worrying too much???
Should I launch for a glide test with a hi-start up to about 50 feet altitude instead of a hand launch?

Thanks for any help.

[Ollie]

As you have found from some of the advertising copy from this manufacturer, its information may or may not be dependable. For this reason, you should seek out some experienced glider fliers, especially if you are risk averse. I think it would be worth a trip of 50 to 100 miles to get expert help. A thorough preflight check by an experienced glider flier is in order.

A strong adult can easily throw the plane fast enough, wings level enough and nose slightly down so that the model is flying out of the hand. However, a beginner may not be able to do it with skill, get the hands on the controls soon enough and give the correct commands to safely trim out the model. The histart is just as risky.

On the other hand, if you do go it alone and crash the model, it will be a good opportunity to junk the dog and start over with a quality model that is recommended by people with experience.

[DerShark3]

what about a glide test that starts from an elevated position?
Like say from the top of a 20 foot ladder.
That might give enough flight time to get it trimmed?

Do you think ( given the specs ) that a CG of 33.4% is a good place to start glide testing? ( 30 to 32.5% is suggested by manufacturer )

[Ollie]

Start with the CG no farther back than 32.5% and be prepared to remove nose weight in 1/4 ounce or smaller increments between test flights. I think trying to launch from a ladder is a really unsafe idea for you and the plane.

You can't wiggle around the good advice you are given. Why do you try?

The wing loading of this model is about twice the wing loading a beginners model should have. That means that the model will fly roughly 41% faster than a beginners model should. It also means that it will have to disipate about four times as much energy as a beginners model would in a crash. That means that the model will suffer much greater damage in a crash than a proper beginners model would. Those are only a few of the many reasons you need the hands on help of an experienced glider flier. Get It!

[DerShark3]

yes Ollie - I get it.
thanks for your advice.

I'm thinking that I will put a fan powered pusher pod and use it for aerial photography.
Above the wing at about the CG.
All I would need is enough power for it to climg to 400 feet in about 2 minutes and then maintain altitude for about 4 or 5 minutes more, while taking pictures.
Do you think that this is a good idea, considering it will fail badly as a thermal ship?
Photography and power setup will add about 17 more ounces.

By the way.........
What 2M trainer gliders for beginners have 6.15 oz per sq ft wing loading.
I can't find any!

[DerShark3]

hey Ollie.......

check out this video!

water touchdown (http://home.cogeco.ca/~gmarshalld/FISHING.wmv)

[steve wenban]

I can definitely recommend the Global Cirrus Ihave taught a number of people to fly using this ship it handles beautifully
and its a ARF so you dont have to worry about building weight into it the are great for slope thermal or straight out thermal
off the line Ilike them so much I own 2 they are RES but I only use the spoilers on 1 of them .
Cheers Steve

[Ollie]

See:
http://www.isthmusmodels.com/mtntoy/gentle.html
http://www.nesail.com/detail.php?productID=1445
These are two models that will bounce back from a beginners mistakes.

As for electric power the, Hawk is already way too heavy and adding a motor, ESC and battery with enough power to get it to climb will be prohibitively expensive for the performance. Don't waste any more money on the Hawk.

An AXI 2814 outrunner motor and 30 ampere ESC will cost you about $155. A 1700 Mah NiMh 8 cell battery pack will cost you another $65. Any thing much less will give poor prformance. That's not counting a 10-6 folding prop and a charger for the battery. Figure about $300 to $350 for adequate electric power. Now the total flying weight is up to about 5 pounds and the stalling speed will put it well out of the beginners catagory.

If you are not going to seek experienced help or risk crashing the Hawk by going it alone then hang the thing up somewhere as a reminder that:
The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten.

[Sparky Paul]

I have 2M gliders I've converted to electric power that weigh 25 ounces LESS than that Hawk.
My home-built Gentle Lady flies at 30 oz.!
I'd suggest returning it to Lanier and ask for your money back!

[BMatthews]

And let's not forget that even if you DID add all that electric motor and battery pack to this model you would be upping the weight by a good 16 more ounces and up the wingloading by whatever amount. Not to mention the weight of the camera and it's related systems

As Ollie said, you're just tossing good money after bad.

The only thing I can see doing with this pig that will let you get some of your money's worth back out of it would be to hack off the nose and add a plywood firewall for a 25 sized engine and fly it as a glow model trainer. If the belly is strong enough (tow hook base plate?) you could add a sheet aluminium landing gear otherwise just hand launch it and belly land.

[DerShark3]

Let it be known that Lanier has no qualms about screwing you over.
Please spread the word.
They won't respond to any of my emails.
How many other companies will screw one over like this???

[BMatthews]

I'm afraid you're stuck with this as one of life's little lessons. They sold you the kit with no pretenses about what it was. It was up to you to have done your homework to find out that it's not a popular model and why. They can honestly say that it flies. It's not a matter of how WELL it flies. That part is YOUR problem.

I know it's painful but put it aside for now and perhaps do the engine conversion later. Now go find a GOOD glider.

[DerShark3]

no pretenses?????????
it was billed as an ideal trainer glider.
supossedly had everything that is constantly preached the newbie should look for....... the polyhedral wings. the flat bottom wings........simpls Rudder and elevator design.... slow speed etc.
There were pretenses.
It's a company with no scruples at all.
they lie outright about the weight.
the product is all warped up.

I've had it with getting screwed over every which way by vendors in this business,.

screw it - Im getting out.

see ya.

[Ollie]

So, another potential member of our little fraternity is lost because his dreams were dashed with a poor quality ARF by an unscrupulous mass marketeer. A major contributing factor was that he never connected with a soaring club. He never connected with any of the many small suppliers of quality products that can't afford to advertise much because they put their resources into their products and customer support.

[surfimp]

Actually that plane would probably be fine on the slope, though I'm sure this is not the original poster's intention. But perhaps all is not lost, and he can get some stick time in while he researches a proper thermal glider? Just trying to help.

Steve

[fprintf]

Well, I am not sure what happened here. Taken from Lanier's website (without permission):

"Great for first-time fliers and sailplane pilots. ABS/foam construction and a flat-bottom airfoil make our big, 75" span Hawk a great choice in a trainer glider. The Hawk puts first-timers on a fast track to flying with extensive prebuilding and absolutely no finishing chores. A 2.5 lb. weight 750 sq. in. of wing area give the Hawk lightning-like lift, whether equipped with a power pod or launched from a high start. Comes 90% prebuilt and 100% prefinished."

2 1/2 pounds with 750 sq. inches... that is 40 ounces, comes out to 7.7 oz/sq.ft - so this thing should fly about as well as many of the other foam thermal trainers.

I'd say either this was built poorly (too much glue, incorrect radio/battery gear) *or* DerShark should return it because it did not come out nearly as advertised.

[ICTHRMLS]

I have found the worst way to complain is using e-mail..... better to start with a phone call (expensive?...... can be) or two and begin actual dialog.

Since this is an ARF, you might weigh the plane without the radio gear for ammunition in these discussions. If it weighs more than specified upon arrival they really can't argue with a return.

[DerShark3]

RADIO GEAR

1100Mah Rx battery = 5 oz. (used as balance weight in nose as far forward as possible).
2 x HS81 = 1.4 oz. including wires ( behind battery )
Rx JR 770S = .9 oz including foam ( behind servos )
Golden rods and hardware, 33 inch length = 1 oz.
switch harness and charge jack etc. = 1 oz.
everything cramed as far forward as possible to help balance.
Too much glue?? it is an ARF! maybe, say 1.0 oz.

TOTAL = 10.3 oz.

AUW 65.6oz - 10.3 oz = 55.3 oz.

There is 10.7 oz. of lead weights in the nose to balance midway in the recommended CG range!
It would be way more with a smaller Rx battery.

55.3 - 10.7 = 44.6 oz.

SUMMARY

Not including the radio gear and linkages,switch etc., and allowing for using too much glue, the unbalanced AUW = 44.6 ounces!!
Sounds pretty good eh? Looks like Lanier only exaggerated by 10%.
OK now - lets get real..............

1) Weight reduction from removing bottom 2/5 of fuse from front to back + drilling holes everywhere = 7.8 oz.

2) You can't fly the plane without balancing it = 10.7 oz.

3) You can't fly the plane without radio gear and linkages = 9.3 oz.

Total = 27.8 oz.

Total AUW ( flying weight without extensive weight reduction work ) = 44.6 + 27.8 = 72.4 oz. !!!

Lanier LIED on their web site and said "flying wieght" was 40 oz. ( way more than a slight exaggeration ) A difference of 32.4 oz.
This is the difference between a glider that glides and a brick that doesn't.
Why does Lanier want to do this dirty deed to anybody?
It's not a glider at all.
It's just a high wing trainer with long wings.
See - Lanier "Slo Comet" = 6 lbs.
Lanier Slo Comet (http://www.lanierrc.com/lrcprivate/rcairplanes/slocom.htm)
Designed to have an engine up front - this is why so much balance weight is needed when unpowered.
They photographed the Slo Comet without an engine and said " it's a sailplane!"
Has Lanier any scruples at all?????

Looks like they need new management down in Georgia.

Oh - did I mention that everything was badly warped, from the fuse to the wing spars?!
Did I mention the abs fuse skin had so many warps and defects it looks like the mold was in a fire.
Did I mention I paid 28USD for shipping and then they didn't put enough postage on the package and it got shipped ground - took 31 days. They said air shipping guaranteed on the web site.
Did I mention 1 wing was 1" longer than the other?
Did I mention the spar joiners were warped too? and a different design than what was in the plans?
Did I mention the elevator hits the rudder when going up only 1/8 inch?
Did I mention the shipping damage due to poor packaging?
Did I mention the staples that went through the light ply and missed the target on the other side?
Did I mention the glue joints that fell apart in my hands when I had to disassemble the whole thing during weight reduction work?
Did I mention absolutely no washout in the wings at all?
Did I mention 1 wing cap was crooked?
Did I mention the solid steel hinge pin for the rudder weighed an ounce?
Did I mention the fuse bottom plate was not square?
Did I mention I get no response from Lanier when I complain?

What a ******* nightmare.

If this is how Lanier intends to introduce beginners to RC planes I think they have lost thier marbles.
I myself only have a couple left after this mess.

[Ollie]

Look on the bright side, It would have cost you a lot more to learn the same lesson if you had bought a Yugo.

First get reliable information that agrees from several independent sources or, at least, someone that you can surely trust, then make the purchase. Not,"Ready, fire, aim."

Always put assured quality before price. If you can't afford reasonable quality then don't buy until you can. Let the buyer beware.

One of the great virtues of building something yourself is that you control the quality and little or nothing is hidden from you. Instant gratification doesn't and, shouldn't apply to this hobby/sport. Maybe that is one of the reasons it is in slow decline.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[DerShark3]

From a 60's classic tune..........
We won't get fooled again!!!!!!!
lol.
I now know that an RC manufacturer can lie outright to extreme and get away with it.
I don't believe that happens in too many other areas except the RC hobbie because it is so esoteric.
I'm learning and I don't like what I see.

What about the European manufacturers? Do they lie to such extreme too?

[BMatthews]

It truly is a shame that you got stung this way. Everything I've seen from Lanier other than some of their very latest offerings were junk. At least I saw this at shows or at friend's that were sorry they bothered. Lanier was one of the very first ARF suppliers and producers. The Hawk dates back to their "dark days" of overweight junk. The new offerings appear to come from the same factories that produce the lion's share of other ARF offerings and as such show a much needed improvement.

I know it's 20-20 hindsight but when you opened it and saw how bad it was for the basic quality issues you probably should have demanded your money back then. Or did you and THAT'S when they started ignoring you? You should have had the right to return it for a refund. You'd be out shipping but at least the $damage would be limited.

It's a great hobby if you can put this behind you and move on. Lots of good flying to be done with the right model. On the bright side you've got enough knowledge from all those inspections and modifications to do a good job at building a kit.

[DerShark3]

Thanks for all your help guys.

[DerShark3]

According to this nasa foil program.......

it will float at approx. 22 mph.
Sounds good to me!!!

I have this program available if you want it.
I can post a link for download if your interested.

[DerShark3]

Get the NASA foilsim program HERE (http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/javplts/foilsim5/applet/FoilSim.zip)

Only 113 kb!

The downloaded file is in .ZIP format. Store the file "FoilSim.zip" on your hard drive when prompted by your browser.
Go to the directory where you have stored "FoilSim.zip" and open the program "WinZip".
"Extract" all the files. If you skip this step, you will only see a grey box when you attempt to run FoilSim.
Click on either FoilSim.html or Foil.html to launch your browser and load the FoilSim driver program. Foil.html is intended for experienced users and only displays the program; FoilSim.html includes instructions on program operation.

Put a shortcut on your desktop for easy acess.

[BMatthews]

That IS a great bit of program isn't it. I lean on that one quite heavily for determining the lift coefficient for a design as well as determineing the angle of attack. You can do the math but this makes it so much more interactive.

But what this tells us is that Ollie is 100% right about the speed. Most trainer and light air thermalling gliders have a minimum speed closer to 12 to 14 mph. 22 mph is a speed that many models cruise at when covering lots of ground to look for thermals.

But hey, find and instructor and have at it. At this point it would appear that you have nothing to loose. And you'll at least get some stick time for all your efforts. DO take our advice and search out a glider club or even a casual group that flies gliders. They'll have the winch or high start to help you out and the skills to ensure you take your model home in one piece.

[DerShark3]

Im lined up to join a glider group near me this spring.
They have a winch.
I think this "pig" may turn out to be ok for training after all.
big sink rate means more landing practice!
12.5 oz wing loading is not all that bad! not good but not terrible.

Im thinking maybe popup spoilers would be a good idea for slower landings.

[BMatthews]

Popup spoilers don't reduce the speed. In fact they RAISE the speed needed for the model to stay in the air while adding more drag. I think you're thinking of flaps which do lower the flying speed by increasing the effective camber of the airfoil.

At this point I woudn't bother adding any mods at all to the Hawk. Use it as your trainer and then move on. You'll be better off with an aerodynamically cleaner model that both slows down AND goes faster with less energy loss. Much of the magic of glider flying is the efficiency of the model and how frugal it is about converting the potential energy (height) to kinetic energy (speed) and the ground it can cover to search for lift while doing this conversion. It's sort of like once you drive a Porsche you don't really want to go back to the VW microbus... :D

[xtc]

DERSHARK if you live in burlington ,i fly about twenty minutes from you in paris ontario ,i have flown gliders [r/c & fullsize] for 21 yrs,i would be glad to help out if you need trimming etc

xtc

[DerShark3]

Yes - Paris is real close to me.
That would be great.
I'll let you know when I'm set to test glide and trim.
Some decent weather would be good too.
Talk to you soon.
Thanks.

[DerShark3]

After all the trouble I been through with this POS product from Lanier , I wrote to them to complain about the product.

A guy named Wayne from tech support wrote me back an email after about 6 weeks - he said " have a nice day".
That's all he said.

Here is the full email.......
email from Lanier Tech Support (http://home.cogeco.ca/~gmarshallf/Re_%20hawk%2075_%20sailplane.htm)

OK everybody - Please do not patronize these people.
Lanier is possibly the worst excuse for a rc plane maker that could possibly be.

That response from Lanier really says it all.

They have no qualms screwing you over and then tell you to have a nice day.

Please stay away from Lanier RC. I guarantee you'll be sorry.

I am 49 years old.
I have never done business with any company that have pissed me off as much as Lanier RC.
I am so sorry I ever even considered their crappy products and nasty sarcastic tech support who couldn't care less about your satisfaction.
Un *******believable.
I might just take a drive down there and launch the thing through their front window.

[jlk]

DerShark,

I am sure the glider you received was of poor quality especially by todays standards. The glider is the old style of Lanier construction, I flew some of these planes in the 70's. You point out all the problems with the glider, if you saw all of these problems when you opened and examined the kit, why did you build it?

I read your emails to Lanier, you have to lighten up, you left no room for any conversation from Lanier, you only called them liars and showed how you were already flamming them in this forum. What did they have to gain by reponding to you? Have a nice day was all you left for them to say.

Jordan

[DerShark3]

You make some good points there.

But the fact is that I don't ever expect to get any favourable response from them ever.

I just want to advise others about the nature of the company and let Lanier know how poor their products and service are.

I think I have suceeded in doing that.

That one email reply from them took 6 weeks from when I first contacted them.

The POS was only 90 cdn bucks.

Hardly worth even shipping it back even if they would refund me.
If you walk three miles to the store for a loaf of bread and when u get home you see it's mouldy - your not gonna walk all the way back for your 85 cent refund are you?
You wouldn't believe what I went thru just toi get this crap shipped to me.

So I took it up as a challenge and did extensive weight reduction work to try and make it fly.
It may just barley fly sort of.
Lots of landing practice anyways. hehe.

[R. Carver]

Originally posted by DerShark3
You make some good points there.

But the fact is that I don't ever expect to get any favourable response from them ever.


I'd say you did great to get the response you did, considering the e-mail you fired off! Wow, man, that was pretty harsh....A bit like starting a face to face conversation with a punch in the nose :)

Look on the bright side- at least you have a POS plane you can practice on the winch with :D

[DerShark3]

the first punch was the screwing they gave me.

so I guess what goes around - comes around.

Anyways - the point of all this is to warn you guys who don't know any better about Lanier.

[R. Carver]

Originally posted by DerShark3
the first punch was the screwing they gave me.


Ya shoulda ducked :D

And you're not saying anything most of us don't already know. I remember a while back on another forum a thread was started about the "worst planes you've ever had". Lanier was mentioned more than a few times.

[splash99]

You should have a look at the Multiplex Easystar for a practice plane. If you already have the RC gear, its 60$ .
It's an unbelievable plane to learn to fly.
see
partI
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=144078&perpage=15&pagenumber=1
part II
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=208883&perpage=15&pagenumber=1
part III
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=208883&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

[xtc]

Originally posted by DerShark3
the first punch was the screwing they gave me.

so I guess what goes around - comes around.

Anyways - the point of all this is to warn you guys who don't know any better about Lanier.

i would have to say that of all the yrs that i have flown gliders,i have never believed the spec`s that most advertise

im not saying that you were at fault by buying the glider but its just a ''heads up ;; on your next purchase,its also quite common for fellow pilots to underestimate there AUW,heck i remember about a yr back reading weights from this forum about the hobbies lobby skimmer lol heck the weights that theses guys were reporting could not be reached for the airframe alone,never mind with the radio gear!

having said that,,stick with a model that has a good rap ,there are many many gliders for the new soaring pilot that are fantastic,in fact i have 3 in my hangar that i would be more than willing to sell for less than the material to build them

i truely feel sorry that you had a bad experience ,seems it was just bad luck that you happened to run into lanier but i also agree with the others ,chill out! dont let it bother you no more!,forget it!

your next post should read ;;where to find good gliders in canada?;

:) xtc

[Ollie]

The Scooter is an outstanding design. It is produced by an outstanding Canadian supplier. It costs about $125 but that is money very well spent, not wasted. It will require a lot of building effort on your part but if you do a craftsman like job of it and do not depart from the plans and instructions you will have a wonderfully efficient and easy to fly model. If you get help from an experienced glider flier to set up, adjust and test fly it, I grarantee you will not be dissapointed. This is one road map to success and satisfaction if you choose to take it. It will take a realistic expenditure and a realistic effort on your part to build it. That's a lot better than falling for advertising hype. You probably never heard of Spirit of Yesteryear because they put their resources into a quality product rather than expensive advertising. See:
http://www.soy.on.ca/scooter.html

R/C sailplanes are an small and shrinking part of the R/C model market as a whole. It is mostly a low priority afterthought to the big suppliers. The quality and integrity is to be found in the small garage shop manufacturers who are craftsmen and sailplane fliers first and foremost. The way to connect with these many good guys is to join a soaring club first and benefit from the experience of your fellow club members. That way you can see results first hand rather than relying on your imagination and advertising hype.

[rloose]

DerShark-

I still have a Lanier Hawk New-In-Box except for the wing. When I received it, I thought the fuse looked klunky and heavy. I tried out the wing on a motorized fuse that I already had set up. The wing folded during a not so harsh workout and took out a very nice brushless motor, ESC, radio, battery, and one of the servos. So the Hawk ended up costing me an extra $300 or so.

So watch out while winching it up! Take it easy as they say.

You are more than welcome to the fuse and tail if you want them. Don't know if it is worth the postage. I might consider paying YOU to take it off my hands. See what Lanier thinks about that! :p

Rich