Originally Posted by kin

The wing (econ version) are start the production , and the full composite is start to milling now . so you models will sent soon .

Yes for the delta, you really want to mold in some washout. 2-3 degrees would be a good starting point. As for the canard, I don't see the need for the undercambered section that you posted Kin,(other than for scale looks of course) I would think that a symmetrical section would do fine for flying. the lift generated from the canard in comparison to the wing and fuse would be minimal, there fore not justifying the need for the canard to be generating lift, but also more drag as well.

Thanks

dave

Measured from a JA-37 drawing, the incidence angle differential between the main and the canard (front wing) is approximately 4.0 degrees. Perhaps, Marcus can give you a better reading on this.

The MBS kit is still a kit in a box and destined for my grandson. I am a bit old with weak eyes.

Originally Posted by delperena

Measured from a JA-37 drawing, the incidence angle differential between the main and the canard (front wing) is approximately 4.0 degrees. Perhaps, Marcus can give you a better reading on this.

The MBS kit is still a kit in a box and destined for my grandson. I am a bit old with weak eyes.

This drawing looking fine .but it is a real full size . we need to do is a 1/9 or 1/10 . air density is higher .(much sensitive ) . so we need concern , so i think incidence angle , is not follow the drawing .and how this drawing from ??? I am not judge this drawing , i just want do thing safty .but the airfoil should have a deflect elevator a little up !

Kin,

I am very glad to note that you know what you are talking about. You are way above my level of aerodynamics awareness.

I have built and flown a few flying wings (delta). Typically, with a 2 degree washout/reflex, at least on launch.

Del

I found on my Eurofighter, that zero incidence on the wing and a positive incidence of a few degrees on the canard worked the best. this all but elliminated the need for reflex on the airfoil. that doesn't mean that there wasn't any reflex however. it went from 8mm of reflex (up elevator) to only needing 3mm total. my thinking was that the drag from the deflected canard would be less overall than the drag from all that up elevator from the mainplane. this turned out to be true.

having said that, if it were me designing a Viggen, I would possibly look at reflex on the first third of the span from the root. I would also add a few degrees of incidence to the canard. why?.........because I want my canard to stall before the mainplane. sure, the higher aspect of the canard will help here, but also adding some incidence will help too. I'de still keep the mainplane at zero incidence though...............inline with the thrust line. just my two cents of course.

Rich

Originally Posted by LuvEvolution7

I found on my Eurofighter, that zero incidence on the wing and a positive incidence of a few degrees on the canard worked the best. this all but elliminated the need for reflex on the airfoil. that doesn't mean that there wasn't any reflex however. it went from 8mm of reflex (up elevator) to only needing 3mm total. my thinking was that the drag from the deflected canard would be less overall than the drag from all that up elevator from the mainplane. this turned out to be true.

having said that, if it were me designing a Viggen, I would possibly look at reflex on the first third of the span from the root. I would also add a few degrees of incidence to the canard. why?.........because I want my canard to stall before the mainplane. sure, the higher aspect of the canard will help here, but also adding some incidence will help too. I'de still keep the mainplane at zero incidence though...............inline with the thrust line. just my two cents of course.

Rich

+1

Thanks

Dave

very helpful information ! TAHNKYOU ! And the second parcel arrival . it is the same plastic models but still good for me have two plastic models , no problem ,. but they are both AJ-37 , How should i do in this moment . the first AJ -37 already scan the data . but is it very big different between JA and AJ ??? In the posted floor plan is JA-37 ? or AJ ?if the different is not so big , i still can use the 3-D data to modification to the JA -37 we like , but i want to know where is the different ?

Hey kin, good to hear that it finally arrived!!

How are the system hawks coming along?

Hi Kin,
Can you please let us know what models will be available by Christmas.....hint F-20. My wife buys me 2 models a year and I want to get my orders in.

J

Originally Posted by ticketec

Hey kin, good to hear that it finally arrived!!

How are the system hawks coming along?

A long hoilday here China National day , start ot work nexy monday and back to factory busy in products line with the new system hawk , i will sent the test fly models soon .

Originally Posted by delperena

Measured from a JA-37 drawing, the incidence angle differential between the main and the canard (front wing) is approximately 4.0 degrees. Perhaps, Marcus can give you a better reading on this.

The MBS kit is still a kit in a box and destined for my grandson. I am a bit old with weak eyes.

That is a very accurate drawing of the JA37 (Figher jet)

I´ll check up angles on my models as soon as i am RTB.

I like the Viggen project too! I think you should make it as scale as possible regarding outlines and air inlets, speially the air inlets as they make the whole plane. Design it around a capable 90mm EDF system and keep the kit weight down to 1500grams or so. This way it would be suitable for a Kolibri turbine too (or even the P20) 1/12 scale sounds about right I think.

Better do it scale and make the design able to work with a cheater for more air to the EDF. The RC-lander Panther or EDO model J35 Draken are a great examples of this. It makes the plane look so much nicer.

I will buy a kif for one of my Kolibris :-)

Wrong



Right

Why this two box models name call AJ -37 , And we calling here is JA-37 . I thinking me have a misunderstand . or the name just different call in different country ? I should follow my plastic models or add the refrence from the posted drawing in the topic here you post it ??? So a little confuse ! but just for safty no wrong make it ! hope you can help to clear my problem !

Kin

Easy to fix. Finish the f-20 and hawk. Looking forward to flight reports.