HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Feb 16, 2010, 05:26 AM
What could possibly go wrong?
nickchud's Avatar
Market Harborough
Joined Apr 2006
3,628 Posts
Great pictures, Akram!

My Starship has now had a successful take-two maiden flight, the datails are here.

Both motors went in the same direction this time and I'm truly delighted with it. She looks beautiful in the sunshine. Video to follow, hopefully. I think she's going to be a pussycat when I've put a bit more weight in the nose. I don't mind launching a canard with the CoG backwards slightly. At least it means she goes upwards with good pitch authority. Just as long as I remember not to let her get anywhere near a stall until she's 2 mistakes high. And don't try to land too slowly. In other words, keep the nose down and she'll be fine.

With regard to that knee-trembling maiden flight moment, let me recommend the use of a bungee launcher. It's consistent and it gives you time to get your thumbs in place and have a look at the glide before throttling up. The key is to use a nice long, gentle bungee. In the past I've tried luggage cords with disastrous results.

Like Charles, I enjoy flying alone and taking in the outdoor life, especially at stressful times. Once I get the hang of a new plane, then I'm pleased to share it.

Nick the happy owner of another fun canard plane.

Go on.... build one, it's not so hard.
nickchud is online now Find More Posts by nickchud
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Feb 16, 2010, 07:15 AM
Onward through the fog.
Cybernaught's Avatar
Bohol Philippines
Joined Aug 2008
1,566 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickchud View Post
Great pictures, Akram!

My Starship has now had a successful take-two maiden flight, the datails are here.

Both motors went in the same direction this time and I'm truly delighted with it. She looks beautiful in the sunshine. Video to follow, hopefully. I think she's going to be a pussycat when I've put a bit more weight in the nose. I don't mind launching a canard with the CoG backwards slightly. At least it means she goes upwards with good pitch authority. Just as long as I remember not to let her get anywhere near a stall until she's 2 mistakes high. And don't try to land too slowly. In other words, keep the nose down and she'll be fine.

With regard to that knee-trembling maiden flight moment, let me recommend the use of a bungee launcher. It's consistent and it gives you time to get your thumbs in place and have a look at the glide before throttling up. The key is to use a nice long, gentle bungee. In the past I've tried luggage cords with disastrous results.

Like Charles, I enjoy flying alone and taking in the outdoor life, especially at stressful times. Once I get the hang of a new plane, then I'm pleased to share it.

Nick the happy owner of another fun canard plane.

Go on.... build one, it's not so hard.
Congrats on the successful flight...
I read your account on the URL you posted and that is an impressive machine.

How do you have the controls set up? I'm curious. Elevons with elevator mixed in or ailerons and canard separate?

Steve.
Cybernaught is offline Find More Posts by Cybernaught
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 08:54 AM
What could possibly go wrong?
nickchud's Avatar
Market Harborough
Joined Apr 2006
3,628 Posts
Thanks Steve. You know the thrill when things go right.

I've got ailerons and canard separate. 60% of the canard surface is fixed, the remaining 40% is the elevator control. Trims with just a bit of down camber. The ailerons have a tiny bit of reflex and a lot of differential. All very simple. After a few more flights, I'll taper the canard wings so that they're a cm or so narrower at the tip. Then it should work with the CoG further back. But, for the time being I'm concerned to make sure that I get enough authority for pitch control.

So far, so good.

Nick
nickchud is online now Find More Posts by nickchud
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 11:30 AM
Registered User
Joined Jun 2005
2,440 Posts
Nickchud
Quote:
I'll taper the canard wings so that they're a cm or so narrower at the tip. Then it should work with the CoG further back. But, for the time being I'm concerned to make sure that I get enough authority for pitch control.
I believe you said it needed nose weight because the canard wing did not stall first? Your fix will be to reduce area up front for higher loading and not have to add ballast forward? That is how I trimmed the Evader chuck glider. It put the CG where it needed to be as I saw it.
Charles
canard addict is offline Find More Posts by canard addict
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 11:54 AM
Registered User
Joined Jun 2005
2,440 Posts
Evader

New landing gear wires were made. Fuselage sheeting was added and the battery was placed on an over sized plate to allow CG changes if needed. All that is left is to add film to the fuselage and add some wood to the LG wires.
Charles
canard addict is offline Find More Posts by canard addict
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 12:38 PM
What could possibly go wrong?
nickchud's Avatar
Market Harborough
Joined Apr 2006
3,628 Posts
What a lovely job you've done on that plane Charles! Beautiful! I take my hat off to you.

Quote:
I believe you said it needed nose weight because the canard wing did not stall first? Your fix will be to reduce area up front for higher loading and not have to add ballast forward?
Yes, at the moment, I think the canard does not stall first. 2 solutions: first, more weight at the nose, or second, smaller canard. I'm going to do the first one first 'cos it's reversible and also because I want to avoid the situation where I can't get any lift at the front when I need it.

Perhaps I'm wrong, I know that with conventional planes you should do the maiden flight with the CoG error if any, on the forward side. My theory is, that with canards, I don't want the CoG to be on the forward side 'cos I'd rather have too much pitch control than too little. So, keep the AoA away from any chance of anything stalling, until you've got some height. Then slow down, point the nose up and see what stalls first. Get it right and you get that satisfying cyclical stall, where the plane continues in a straight line, stalling, then nodding down and recovering repeatedly. Get it wrong and the plane still flies alright as long as you keep the nose down. With my Starship this morning, I don't seem to have got wild squirreling as I have with conventional models. The landing was a bit faster than I wanted, but that's better than a take-off where the main wing lifts and the canard doesn't.

What do you think? Anyone?

Nick
nickchud is online now Find More Posts by nickchud
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 03:45 PM
Onward through the fog.
Cybernaught's Avatar
Bohol Philippines
Joined Aug 2008
1,566 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickchud View Post
What a lovely job you've done on that plane Charles! Beautiful! I take my hat off to you.


Yes, at the moment, I think the canard does not stall first. 2 solutions: first, more weight at the nose, or second, smaller canard. I'm going to do the first one first 'cos it's reversible and also because I want to avoid the situation where I can't get any lift at the front when I need it.

Perhaps I'm wrong, I know that with conventional planes you should do the maiden flight with the CoG error if any, on the forward side. My theory is, that with canards, I don't want the CoG to be on the forward side 'cos I'd rather have too much pitch control than too little. So, keep the AoA away from any chance of anything stalling, until you've got some height. Then slow down, point the nose up and see what stalls first. Get it right and you get that satisfying cyclical stall, where the plane continues in a straight line, stalling, then nodding down and recovering repeatedly. Get it wrong and the plane still flies alright as long as you keep the nose down. With my Starship this morning, I don't seem to have got wild squirreling as I have with conventional models. The landing was a bit faster than I wanted, but that's better than a take-off where the main wing lifts and the canard doesn't.

What do you think? Anyone?

Nick
No Comment...
You guys are the experts with these crazy backwards flying machines. I'm a noob who's here to watch and learn....

Good luck and continued successsssus wid d Evader and Starship. Meanwhile, I wait with baited breath for the next exciting episode.

Steve
Cybernaught is offline Find More Posts by Cybernaught
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 03:54 PM
Onward through the fog.
Cybernaught's Avatar
Bohol Philippines
Joined Aug 2008
1,566 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickchud View Post
Thanks Steve. You know the thrill when things go right.

I've got ailerons and canard separate. 60% of the canard surface is fixed, the remaining 40% is the elevator control. Trims with just a bit of down camber. The ailerons have a tiny bit of reflex and a lot of differential. All very simple. After a few more flights, I'll taper the canard wings so that they're a cm or so narrower at the tip. Then it should work with the CoG further back. But, for the time being I'm concerned to make sure that I get enough authority for pitch control.

So far, so good.

Nick
How much incidence are you using?

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickchud View Post
...You know the thrill when things go right....
When that happens I call it "Therapy"!

Steve.
Cybernaught is offline Find More Posts by Cybernaught
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 05:07 PM
Registered User
Joined Jun 2005
2,440 Posts
Nickchud
Quote:
Yes, at the moment, I think the canard does not stall first. 2 solutions: first, more weight at the nose, or second, smaller canard. I'm going to do the first one first 'cos it's reversible and also because I want to avoid the situation where I can't get any lift at the front when I need it.

Perhaps I'm wrong, I know that with conventional planes you should do the maiden flight with the CoG error if any, on the forward side. My theory is, that with canards, I don't want the CoG to be on the forward side 'cos I'd rather have too much pitch control than too little. So, keep the AoA away from any chance of anything stalling, until you've got some height. Then slow down, point the nose up and see what stalls first. Get it right and you get that satisfying cyclical stall, where the plane continues in a straight line, stalling, then nodding down and recovering repeatedly. Get it wrong and the plane still flies alright as long as you keep the nose down. With my Starship this morning, I don't seem to have got wild squirreling as I have with conventional models. The landing was a bit faster than I wanted, but that's better than a take-off where the main wing lifts and the canard doesn't.
Sounds like logical thinking to me, Nick. You have built three Starships and other canards which puts you in a special class. I enjoy the positive landing approach which a canard offers with the front in control instead of the rear.

Steve, It would be good to see what you are doing with the fixed stab with elevators.
Charles
canard addict is offline Find More Posts by canard addict
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 08:04 PM
Onward through the fog.
Cybernaught's Avatar
Bohol Philippines
Joined Aug 2008
1,566 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by canard addict View Post
Steve, It would be good to see what you are doing with the fixed stab with elevators.
Charles
Got a bit of flight time in, on Whisper, this morning but the battery was very hot. I have put a small air scoop on the nose and a vent hole behind the battery. The air can also travel through the rear fusilage and pass over the ESC.

Here's another vid from this morning's flying:
Whisper ses10.mp4 (1 min 52 sec)


I will put some visual info into an edit to show what I have with the fixed canard/elelvator system in a later edit.

Steve.
Cybernaught is offline Find More Posts by Cybernaught
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 08:24 PM
Registered User
John235's Avatar
Sydney, Australia
Joined Mar 2006
1,315 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickchud View Post
Yes, at the moment, I think the canard does not stall first. 2 solutions: first, more weight at the nose, or second, smaller canard. I'm going to do the first one first 'cos it's reversible and also because I want to avoid the situation where I can't get any lift at the front when I need it.
Nick, your approach seems totally reasonable. The only comment I will make is that you should be able to know when your CoG is correct based on the pitch stabilty of the model. I know you have experience with tail-less / flying wing models, so you would know the typical process of finding the correct CoG location. If a slightly forward CoG solves the stall problem and you still have good elevator authority, then lets call it a solution. As you wrote, it makes sense to try the simple things first. If the CoG adjustment does not work to your satisfaction, maybe you can look at ways to improve the performance of the main wing. That seems more desirable than reducing the lift capability of the canard, since you mentioned the model is already a bit faster on the final than you would like. Please let us know how it goes. Your depron Starship is an impressive looking model. I am hopeful that we will get to see a video of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickchud View Post
With my Starship this morning, I don't seem to have got wild squirreling as I have with conventional models. The landing was a bit faster than I wanted, but that's better than a take-off where the main wing lifts and the canard doesn't.
I am not sure what you mean by squirreling..
John235 is offline Find More Posts by John235
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 08:31 PM
Registered User
John235's Avatar
Sydney, Australia
Joined Mar 2006
1,315 Posts
Charles, I recall you wrote the battery loction on the Evader is right over the calculated CoG location. Visually it looks a bit far forward. How does the CoG location on the Evader compare to the CoG location on the Egret?
John235 is offline Find More Posts by John235
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 08:48 PM
Registered User
Joined Jun 2005
2,440 Posts
Evader Ready foy Range Check

The main fuselage received film covering and the wheel fairings were made. The motor was tested again and seems very powerful for it's size. The battery position was marked with a 3S 2100 lipo which was one ounce lighter than the one which was used so the model balances a bit nose down which is good insurance. The weather forecast is favorable right now for the coming weekend but if it is windy I won't care because it is nice to enjoy the model on the ground for a while without taking any risk. My thinking is that the Egret which is lurking inside the Evader will prevail in spite of the rear wing. If the wind is down tomorrow, it will get a range check and maybe a taxi with me down the street.
Charles
canard addict is offline Find More Posts by canard addict
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 09:45 PM
Flutter-Bys are fun
Conehead's Avatar
United States, MI, Honor
Joined Dec 2005
5,029 Posts
Now that is stunning Charles.

I have looked and looked and I don't see any openings to let air in to cool the esc and motor. I must have missed that part.

Now that looks so neat, good luck with the maiden voyage.
I am sure it will be neat to see it in the air.
Conehead
Orrin Eldred
Conehead is offline Find More Posts by Conehead
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: TRAMPS Air Show, 28-June 2014
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 16, 2010, 09:47 PM
Registered User
Joined Jun 2005
2,440 Posts
John 235
Quote:
Charles, I recall you wrote the battery loction on the Evader is right over the calculated CoG location. Visually it looks a bit far forward. How does the CoG location on the Evader compare to the CoG location on the Egret?
Today 09:24 PM

John, The main wings on both models are identical. The Canard wings were built from the same plans but the Evader tips were cut down to reduce the span from 22 to 18". The Egret has a 22" distance between leading edges and the Evader is at 17.5". The CG on the Egret is at 3-5/8" forward from the main wing's LE and it is 2" for the Evader. The CG was determined from the chuck glider because it was really all I had to go by. At first the glider had the CG too far forward to suit me. To move it back, the area of the canard wing was reduced until the CG was just far enough in front of the LG to put enough weight on the nose gear. The glider seemed to have a balanced load. If the Evader is nose heavy, There will be a problem with main LG position. You certainly did turn on my thinking here because I expected the Egret's CG location to be further forward.
Charles
canard addict is offline Find More Posts by canard addict
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools