May 31, 2012, 01:40 AM Registered User United Kingdom, England, Nottinghamshire Joined Dec 2003 586 Posts Ian, Sorry to read about continuing woes with this model.The original design comes from a very good stable and many have been successfuly built and flown over the years, so the isuue is "what's wrong with yours?" As George rightly points out this is a simple design and provided that you observe a few simple rules it should fly without any problems. Leaving the fin area aside for the moment assumuing that you have checked that there are no warps in the wing then it seems to me that the basic issue is the position of the CG. This should be checked very carefully to ensure that the CG on your model is at the position shown on the plan. As a double check I always calculate my own position of the CG as follows: 1) Calculate the wing area in square inches. 2) Divide the calculated wing area by the measured wingspan to give the average wing chord (in inches) 3) Calculate 75% of this average wing chord and measure this resulting distance forwards from the TE at the center of the wingspan to give the position of the CG. (Note; in the case of a simple rectangular wing like this one this is the same as measuring 25% backwards from the LE) If all is well this calulated position should more or less coincide with the position shown on the plan. This calculated position will enable you to fly a simple model like this safely and allow you to fine tune the model to your own liking without incuring any major truamas. I cannot emphasize too much how important it is to take your time when checking the position of the CG in the workshop before you venture out . I would also suggest that it is well worth checking the lateral balance of the assembled model to ensure that one wing is not heavier than the other. Last edited by Stan Rose; May 31, 2012 at 02:40 AM.
 Jun 06, 2012, 11:29 AM Registered User Joined Jun 2012 5 Posts Ballerina Centre Section Hi Ian, I'm new to this forum but have been watching your post with interest as I'm building a Ballerina myself. I've read about your problems with dutch roll and the effect that dihedral and fin area and rudder movement may have upon it. Looking at your photos of your wings I notice that the leading and trailing edges continue to slope down towards the centre, but my interpretation of the plan took the centre section to be flat. So although the main spar penetrates the centre section, the leading and trailing edges, plus the drag spar stop where the wing meets the centre section. The effect of this would be that your wing will sit slightly higher on the fusalge and need packing. Building the wings the way I saw them on the plan with 2.75 inches at each tip, the dihedral brace was a better fit to the spars than shown in your photos although it did seem still to be at a slightly steeper angle. So, I'm wondering if the wings are sitting too high this must have an effect on the handling. I also wonder what effect running the aerial under the port wing has on the symmetry of lift. All being said, mine still is not finished but I thought I'd share my observations with you. Hope you are not offended by my impudence Regards, Paul
 Aug 23, 2012, 05:38 PM Registered User United Kingdom, England, Warks Joined Aug 2012 1 Posts ballerina Hi Paul,just came across your thread on the Ballerina and wondered if you finished the model and how well it flew? I ask because im in the process of building the same one and starting to feel quite negative now i've read Ian's woes! I noticed on his he fitted a servo near the tail..my plan shows both in the centre section,where did you fit yours? Just joined RCG today and this is my first entry so if it doesn't make any sense i apologize. Regards karl
 Aug 24, 2012, 03:26 PM Registered User Farnborough, Hampshire, England. Joined Jan 2002 2,145 Posts Not offended in the least Paul.............. I do think you have a point about the c/s of the wing, and mine is clearly wrong!, however, the aerial lead is not a problem(I have that working on at least two other models)............... I have flown it reasonably well with an own design wing with ailerons...............so the rest of the airframe is ok. No doubt about it, the dihedral is not as great as shown on the plan, but I think that is not the issue. Let us know how your build is going. Ian
Apr 11, 2013, 10:40 AM
Registered User
Farnborough, Hampshire, England.
Joined Jan 2002
2,145 Posts

That motor bulkhead seems to collapse easily..........maybe a good thing?
I re-glued mine with Gorilla glue, this foams up nicely for jobs like this , but don't use too much.

With an 8.5x6 Aeronaut prop, and a 3 cell 800Mh Lipo, E.Max cf2822 outrunner, and with a weight of 14 oz, I gave it another chance to" redeem its self".

First hand launch, and it behaved very much like the previous flights, however this was calmed down on the second flight by rating down the elevator and rudder inputs.
There was plenty of power, with about 50% throttle holding altitude.............On pushing the left stick, she would pitch up alarmingly,( so I have shimmed the motor mount for down thrust),
But even so I had a good 8-10 mins. of nice flying ,with good some good slow and low fly bys.
No doubt a 9, or 10 inch slowfly prop may be even better.?
Now, all this was performed with an old and cheap white foam wing, not the wood built up wing from the kit .
I had this around, and thought I would give it a go, as I had nothing to lose. I even cut some shape to it. See photos.
The dihedral was nowhere near as steep as the plan/kit, which surprised me somewhat.

Ian

# Images

May 15, 2013, 03:12 PM
Registered User
Joined Jun 2012
5 Posts
Ballerina Photos

Here are some pictures of my Ballerina

# Images

 May 16, 2013, 07:10 AM So I'M meant to be in control? Ilkley, West Yorkshire, UK Joined Nov 2008 4,942 Posts Looks very nice indeed, and especially in those colours. I have had the Ballerina plan for quite some time now, and it has always been 'the model I will build after.....' Really should get a round tuit.......
May 16, 2013, 04:22 PM
Registered User
Farnborough, Hampshire, England.
Joined Jan 2002
2,145 Posts

I agree the rudder is very effective for its small(ish) size.
My version weighs just under 14oz with a 900mAh 3 cell battery.

I have added red Solafilm to the underside of the wing, and yes, I would agree the wing plan shape
is pleasing!! Sorry Vic!

I see your pics taken at Lasham............Ah memories, I used to live in Basingstoke in a previous life, and some summer Sundays I would drive over with my daughter (toddler) and enjoy watching the gliders..............In fact I had my first glider flight *side-by-side* in a Kirby Cadet(i think?) when I was a Scout, around the time this was filmed:http://www.britishpathe.com/video/gl...uery/airfields............
My model Club organised an evening at Lasham a few years back, that was aided by a Jodel via Aerotow......fantastic.

Ian

# Images

May 21, 2013, 02:25 PM
Registered User
Joined Jun 2012
5 Posts
Hi Ian,

K-13 'H', I have fond memories of, as I did my first solo in it about 15 years ago

Looks like you flew with Pete Masson, who later became a world gliding champion so you were well looked after.

You talk about the Air Scouts, their training base, as they called it; is now Lasham Vintage Glider Club, which has become a very vibrant organisation other the last couple of years. Parts of my Ballerina were born in the Lasham VGC hut during a very wet gliding comp, when it rained almost every day

You mention about how you fitted your new wings and how the controls were still over sensitive, well I now have a feeling that excessive control deflections may have been the root of your problems. Could it be that so much rudder input was applied, that the into turn wing was almost stalling? Could this have been the cause of your handling woes? In this case, reducing the dihedral would bring the handling back into a manageable form.

Whilst building the Ballerina, I could not help myself, so I bought the Lola kit about a month into my build. You may recall that I bemoaned the fact that no control deflections where supplied with the Ballerina kit, so I turned to the next best available thing, which was the Lola kit instructions which actually included suggested deflections.

These are to quote 'Elevator movement on initial flight was 5/16" up and down. Later reduced to 1/4" up and down. Rudder 5/8" left and right'.

I seemed to get slightly less than this with my setup, but managed to increase it using the travel adjust function on the DX6i.

So I wonder if I was lucky in my choice? Of course being a lifting tailplane, I wonder what the effects would be if the incidence was wrong also?

Other than that, I have no more ideas as to what your problems may have been.

In any case, I'm glad that you managed to arrive at a flyable model, even if the process of getting there was a bit of a frustration.

Hope you have many more happy flights with your Ballerina.

Kindest regards,

Paul Haliday

# Images

Last edited by PaulHaliday; May 21, 2013 at 02:38 PM.
May 21, 2013, 06:12 PM
Registered User
Mt Evelyn, Melbourne, OZ
Joined Dec 2008
1,048 Posts
Hi Paul,
Mine is a joy to fly.
Only issue is a slightly sudden stall (at very low speed).
The washout at the tips is 100% necessary!

# Images

May 25, 2013, 08:19 AM
Registered User
Farnborough, Hampshire, England.
Joined Jan 2002
2,145 Posts
I like the Lola Warren, I almost bought it instead of the Ballerina.

I would be interested in your build of the LOLA Paul.............

Funny that you think that I may have had the rudder movement too great..............I was thinking the very same.
The pics show the max. movement, and as you can see its almost 25mm...............I don't think
the elevator is a problem.
Next time out, I will take the balsa wing as a "what if".............

Thanks for the info about Lasham, If i recall, we were invited by the Air Scouts, as we were common or garden regular Scouts. It was a weekend trip with an overnight bunked up in a static
Avro YORK....................very exciting for a 15 year old.
Sadly the YORK (civilianised Lancaster)is long gone!!!.

Ian

# Images

 Nov 09, 2014, 01:26 AM Registered User United Kingdom, England, Nottinghamshire Joined Dec 2003 586 Posts I purchased this kit some three years ago, and having built the fuselage I have now decided that having had this element hanging on a hook in the workshop for three years it's about time the model was finished. So I have returned to this thread to remind myself of the various issues raised. Having read the thread again It occurs to me that it would be helpful if Roger T, having flown the model successfully, could supply us with the final CG position and the Rudder and Elevator throws together with the dihedral that he found worked best. Are you there Roger? Last edited by Stan Rose; Nov 09, 2014 at 03:39 AM.