HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Jun 14, 2009, 03:33 AM
Registered User
jojoen's Avatar
Norway
Joined Dec 2003
1,474 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by webbsolution
Thank you for the clarification.

the Winds at the WC were pretty harsh and the german team still flew the X. This makes me wonder what they consider too much wind...

I too think you could improve the legs with good tuning. I have made some changes to my 3.5 and I am getting a good return on them so far. I will fly a bunch tomorrow and see how it does.
What German team and what WC? All the senior Germans were flying different models. There was only one flying Xplorer. And this was the standard size.
I am pretty sure atleast Sebastian Feigl likes to fly the Experience Pro instead of the Xplorer in medium to high winds.

I am pretty sure the Xplorer 3800 that I have is too big for the high winds. And that the normal size would be a better choice.
jojoen is offline Find More Posts by jojoen
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Jun 14, 2009, 04:39 AM
Registered User
Tuomo's Avatar
Jyvaskyla, Finland
Joined Aug 2003
2,446 Posts
The F3J 3 model rule is interesting. Say your base model is 2x Perfect/Aspire. Should the third model be little smaller for the moments of high winds or an ultimate 4m floater for early morning/evening rounds... Or just fly 3 similar models, with maybe little different laminations?

How does Explorer fall into these categories? Is it a floater or the allround plane?
Tuomo is offline Find More Posts by Tuomo
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2009, 07:44 AM
Registered User
Joined Apr 2008
148 Posts
The National Thermal champs have just finished in Australia, at Jeriderie. One report I read, said that, ' a number of Xplorers blew up on the winch lines, most of which were full carbon versions'
Some people are now nick naming them 'xploders'
From what I have seen these are an exceptionally good aircraft, lets just hope that was a bad batch
Quote:
Originally Posted by jml724
Has this happened to anyone else with their X ? This is not the carbon version

The first launch of the day---conditions were calm. I was on our 25 year old club winch is adequate but not a powerhouse. I had just moved the tow hook back bacause the launches have been too flat and I was being cautious not wanting a pop off. Still too flat but better---into the bucket and up.

Left wing tip keeps going up and the rest of the plane starts to spiral down. I fought to get it level and kept it in a fast flat turn to the right. I was working hard to get in down without more damage and low and behold its going up. What are the odds of that happening??

I didnt want to touch the flaps as long as it was kinda sorta under control. I kept feeding in down and finally touched down pretty softly.

We located the wing tip but the joiner was not with it----we found the joiner with the joiner box still attached a few feet to the side of the winch line.

So what happened?? Looks like the joiner box in the center panel came loose and the wing tip pulled out through the end and bottom of the center panel

The rib at each end of the center panel is balsa so I am going to cut out the other side to run a bead of glue along the joiner box---I just hate making these kind of repairs on a plane that Ive only been flying a couple of months

But for those of you thinking of going bigger----the X will thermal with 2/3 of a wing

Jeff
bundyglida is offline Find More Posts by bundyglida
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2009, 01:28 PM
Win=span\massXpractice+lu ck
webbsolution's Avatar
Joined Jul 2007
3,091 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuomo
The F3J 3 model rule is interesting. Say your base model is 2x Perfect/Aspire. Should the third model be little smaller for the moments of high winds or an ultimate 4m floater for early morning/evening rounds... Or just fly 3 similar models, with maybe little different laminations?

How does Explorer fall into these categories? Is it a floater or the allround plane?

I would say its a floater that needs some attention in high winds to get it to punch through and range. In that one area other models appear to be easier to fly.

I went out Friday in moderate to high winds and compared my shadow to the X in the ability to penetrate and while I could get close to the same range and performance the pilot load on the X in higher wind was higher than the shadow. I donít have an Xpro yet so I canít compare.

More to your question, I like the concept of using the same model with different layups because this allows for a huge range of alternative part configurations. There is no provision against using Wing a) with Fuse B) and stabs from plane C) so in short if you use all the same airframe you can approximate more than 3 planes while this becomes difficult if you are mixing airframes.

This becomes extremely important if something were to happen to your planes in transit or perhaps you damage one plane in your throw out round. If you are well prepared you can have a huge assortment of alternative models setup from various parts of the main A,B and C models.

Of course if you are good and nothing happens to your planes in transit, you have no midairs and your towers don't break anything then having three different planes with unique flight qualities is also interesting.... its a gamble.

I just tend to plan for the worst and hope for the best. However considering the topic of pennetration I am torn as to which plane would be the best pack up choice.
webbsolution is offline Find More Posts by webbsolution
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2009, 02:39 PM
Registered User
Tuomo's Avatar
Jyvaskyla, Finland
Joined Aug 2003
2,446 Posts
I kind of agree with you. But if all 3 planes are the same, then you cannot have that ultimate floater... Neither you can have the plane for extreme winds.

For the reasons you listed, I will propably fly 3x Aspire in Poland F3J EC. For me Aspire is not really a floater, it is an allround plane. I know can fly Aspire efficiently in 8m/s and survive in 10m/s. I do not really want to know what it is like in 12m/s... When wind pics above 8m/s, I would in fact like to fly a smaller plane. Orca or even Crossfire, although the small size is bad for visibility. Smaller planes a re not only more robust, they are also more easy to lanuch and land - and even more so if it is turbulent.

Now, Explorer has the same 80dm2 wing as Aspire... Does anyone have the courage to choose 3x Explorer? Or take the Fiegl way of flying Experience Pro in strong winds?
Tuomo is offline Find More Posts by Tuomo
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2009, 02:49 PM
Win=span\massXpractice+lu ck
webbsolution's Avatar
Joined Jul 2007
3,091 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuomo
I kind of agree with you. But if all 3 planes are the same, then you cannot have that ultimate floater... Neither you can have the plane for extreme winds.

For the reasons you listed, I will propably fly 3x Aspire in Poland F3J EC. For me Aspire is not really a floeater, it is an allround plane. I know can fly Aspire efficiently in 8m/s and survive in 10m/s. I do not really want to know what it is like 12m/s... When wind pics above 8m/s, I would in fact like fly a smaller plane. Orca or even Crossfire, although the small size is bad for visibility. Smaller planes a re not only more robust, they are also more easy to lanuch and land - and even more so if it is turbulent.

Now, Exlorer has the same 80dm2 wing as Aspire... Does anyone have the courage to choose 3x Explorer? Or take the Fiegl way of flying Experience Pro in strong winds?

I was looking for an Aspire when I was in Turkey. I could not pry one out of anyones hands and at the time they were not really available in the US/CAN

I am considering a second airframe for high winds. I understand LJ is bringing the Aspires in now but im not sure just yet .... I would like to see how our team selects go before I make any decisions on another plane. I am also leaning heavily towards another NAN model. NAN was really generous to a lot of teams during the 2008 WC.
webbsolution is offline Find More Posts by webbsolution
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2009, 04:37 PM
Registered User
jojoen's Avatar
Norway
Joined Dec 2003
1,474 Posts
You can take lets say 2x normal Xplorer and one 3,8m. Then you should have models for most conditions F3J. I dont think the standard Xplorer have any problems in fairly high winds.
You all seem to forget that the Xplorer comes in 4 sizes.... And it is mostly interchangable parts.

This is why you also see the Perfect ET. Same model as the standard Perfec. Just bigger tips.
jojoen is offline Find More Posts by jojoen
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2009, 04:46 PM
F3J Nut
London UK
Joined Jul 2005
44 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuomo
Now, Explorer has the same 80dm2 wing as Aspire... Does anyone have the courage to choose 3x Explorer? Or take the Fiegl way of flying Experience Pro in strong winds?
I will fly 3 Xplorer's at the Euro's. 2 X 3500, 1 light one, 1 heavier for windy conditions and a X3800 for low wind/early/late slots.

I remember when the Shadow first arrived some said its only for low wind but I flew mine in all conditions just with different lay ups. Doesn't matter much what model you have you just hope your high enough to get back. There probably is not much difference in the sink rates of all the top models at the moment, a lot depends on the pilot. Also take into account that the a lot of pilots have not had their Xplorers that long and it can take a season to get the best from them.
Austin is offline Find More Posts by Austin
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2009, 05:34 PM
Austin Silent Flyer
rrdiaz30's Avatar
Austin Texas
Joined Mar 2003
384 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojoen
You all seem to forget that the Xplorer comes in 4 sizes.... And it is mostly interchangable parts.

JoJo,

There are 4 sizes? 3500, 3800, 4000...and another? Or a mixture of parts?

Hilsen...Rick
rrdiaz30 is offline Find More Posts by rrdiaz30
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2009, 05:48 PM
Registered User
jojoen's Avatar
Norway
Joined Dec 2003
1,474 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrdiaz30
JoJo,

There are 4 sizes? 3500, 3800, 4000...and another? Or a mixture of parts?

Hilsen...Rick
Mix of parts gives 3700
jojoen is offline Find More Posts by jojoen
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 15, 2009, 01:49 AM
Registered User
Tuomo's Avatar
Jyvaskyla, Finland
Joined Aug 2003
2,446 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austin
I remember when the Shadow first arrived some said its only for low wind but I flew mine in all conditions just with different lay ups. Doesn't matter much what model you have you just hope your high enough to get back. There probably is not much difference in the sink rates of all the top models at the moment, a lot depends on the pilot. Also take into account that the a lot of pilots have not had their Xplorers that long and it can take a season to get the best from them.
It depends... When flying in see breeze kind of wind, that is true. One just has to ballast right follow the thermals as long as possible.

Over here whe I mostly fly, typical wind is quite variable. At this time of year, say, 4m/s average with 9m/s tops. And this with strong thermal and and sink.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Austin
I will fly 3 Xplorer's at the Euro's. 2 X 3500, 1 light one, 1 heavier for windy conditions and a X3800 for low wind/early/late slots.
Must be a good combo.

Can you fly "Exploder" with assymtrical wing tips?
Tuomo is offline Find More Posts by Tuomo
Last edited by Tuomo; Jun 15, 2009 at 11:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2009, 10:09 PM
Registered User
USA, KS, Wichita
Joined Sep 2002
1,129 Posts
Guys,

I had a chance to go out today with both my 3.5 Xplorer and my Orca wth 3.63 tips on in fairly breezy conditions. We were flying in a steady 10 mph with gusts around 20 mph. We were flying off a short Hi-start basically for working on 2 minute drill and landings. Like a dummy, I left the ballast at home in my other flight box so my comparisons are soley based on flying both planes dry. The conditions had thermals cycling through fairly quickly and I quickly figured out the Orca was the better overall plane for these conditions sans the ballast. The Xplorer required much more down elevator and/or reflex in order to come back against the winds and really labored making it back if trying to push through the sink in front of the thermals. The Orca required no reflex and just a little down to scoot right on back up wind. The Orca seemed to handle the turbulence better and seemed to also climb better and was easier to keep in the thermal as it raced down wind. My brother was flying with me and he commented on several occasions about how much more comfortable the Orca looked in the gusty condtiions. I am pretty sure I will choose the Orca whenever the wind is up and keep the Xplorer handy for the calmer conditions. I hope to get out a couple of more times this week to fly both in similar conditions but next time I will not leave the ballast at home. I wish I had a way to accurately weigh the two planes but I know the Orca is at least slightly heavier than the Xplorer but not much.

See Ya,

Pat
pmccleave is offline Find More Posts by pmccleave
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2009, 11:14 PM
WINS - Winch In Nose Sailplane
jaizon's Avatar
USA, NH
Joined Mar 2008
3,109 Posts
I will be most interested in a ballasted comparison under the same conditions.
jaizon is offline Find More Posts by jaizon
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2009, 11:22 PM
RIP MC
fnnwizard's Avatar
United States, CA, Midway City
Joined Dec 2003
3,379 Posts
I would like to know the wing loading of each. Beside thinner airfoils and A/R, wing loading is what will make a difference in penetration. Given that most planforms and airfoils similiar, i would venture to guess wing loading is the difference maker.

If both are same loading, then it becomes a no brainer
fnnwizard is offline Find More Posts by fnnwizard
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2009, 11:38 PM
Registered User
USA, KS, Wichita
Joined Sep 2002
1,129 Posts
Tuan,

The following information is taken from each plane's general websites.

Xplorer: Area = 75.83 dm2, Weight = 1950 G
Orca: Area = 72.28 dm2, Weight = 1960 G

I would guess both of my planes are slightly heavier than the projected weights but I am guessing the differences would be similar. The Orca definately has a little heavier wing loading unballasted. It also has a faster airfoil, that responds very well to camber. Also, the Xplorer airfoil when set neutral is slightly cambered similar to the airfoil used on the Zenith. I will try to get actual weights of my two planes to see how they compare to the projected weights.

See Ya,

Pat
pmccleave is offline Find More Posts by pmccleave
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion RADINA 2 by NAN models Pinci Hand Launch 38 Feb 11, 2009 01:58 AM
Question Speed 1.5 /Nan Models. Alex Mini 1.5 setup question Broncomech Slope 20 Jul 23, 2008 10:47 PM
Discussion Nan Models Shadow ( sorry for the mistake ) Chipwillis Thermal 56 Apr 19, 2007 05:44 PM