Originally Posted by Vantasstic

No fair on having a back-yard pond to fly from. While I'm not real fond of overflying houses, having a pond like that and a great flying water plane would be awful tempting.

Face it, Vantasstic - you're just jealous, as I am! Looks like a good Polaris breeding ground - all the neighbors will want one!

Originally Posted by Vantasstic

While I'm not real fond of overflying houses, having a pond like that and a great flying water plane would be awful tempting.

I also would like to have such a pond in front of my house ....

Although I also would not overfly houses and people... Always something can fail mechanically and I don't want to personally hurt someone not expecting a crashing Polaris in his backyard..... Actually wild flying here is now allowed outside the city. But it's still a bit sensitive because of safety and environmental consideration. And actually I hope that in my country all wild flyers do it as careful as possible. Any incident will draw (wrong) attention, and possibly stimulate to tighten the rules. Something we don't want of course...

But for sure nice flying!

Originally Posted by mavlo77

I also would like to have such a pond in front of my house ....

Although I also would not overfly houses and people... Always something can fail mechanically and I don't want to personally hurt someone not expecting a crashing Polaris in his backyard..... Actually wild flying here is now allowed outside the city. But it's still a bit sensitive because of safety and environmental consideration. And actually I hope that in my country all wild flyers do it as careful as possible. Any incident will draw (wrong) attention, and possibly stimulate to tighten the rules. Something we don't want of course...

But for sure nice flying!

Dumb question of the day - What is the definition of "Wild Flying"

Sorry Kim, maybe a too direct translation which results in incorrect English....

What I mean is flying from surfaces other than a dedicated and authorized RC club field. It is allowed but you need to have permission from the landowner, then you need to be outside the city, not interfere with local air traffic, and not fly near or from national parks. But there so many exceptions that it is easy to violate the rules. So if someone complains you have a problem.... And here it's so crowded that there is nearly no space which is not near an airport, not near houses and not near national park or bird grasslands or whatever... And disturbing a bird is more or less a crime here.

I can clearly remember a lawsuit against 2 pilots of a small aircraft (a real one) last year. They flew over a small national park @ 1500 ft...... On the ground a forester noticed that wild animals were disturbed. That was enough to punish them, so they get a criminal record. And you have to know that here the national park areas are small and scattered like a checkerboard.... Just to demonstrate how sensitive it can get, without intentionally harm anything or anybody...

But normally it isn't a problem as long as nobody complains and you don't fly in front of the threshold of a runway.... And as long as RC flyers keep using their mind and don't create dangerous situations... Otherwise we get the same situation as in Belgium: RC flying outside an authorized RC field is simply forbidden by law!

Originally Posted by Vantasstic

I think I recall some talk on single aileron planes used for pylon racing.

We used only one aileron on the right wing. The drag from the aileron would help pitch the nose of the plane up as we rolled to knife edge for a turn.

That would probably not be a desireable flight effect for a polaris unless you were going to pylon race it.

McD

Originally Posted by kadil

Aileron geometry is an interesting subject, I read an article online indicating models need only one aileron surface, as the aileron acts in both directions and the weight saving warranted this method.

There are several proofs of concept for having just one aileron. A quite famous one is the Trans Atlantic Model (TAM) (see page 3 of this pdf).

I guess for the Polaris the weight saved by having just one aileron is not worth the disadvantages in aerobatics that come with it.

Good news. My hanging throttle issue and shifting aileron trim seems to be solved with the new receiver... I did 4 batteries in blazing sun, it was quite hot...

But no problems! I think I hit the temperature cut off once, but OK I accept it, as it was close to the temperature cut off of the pilot aswell ...

One uncertaintly left: during the range check I could only walk 20 paces away and reception was lost! I am using Spektrum Dx6i with the AR6100 receiver. I think the AR6110 I replaced just reached 30 paces during range check... Maybe the AR6110 has a bit more sensitivy in all directions?

Anyway, I brought my Polaris at very high altitude but never lost connection.

What do you think? Is it acceptable to keep flying, or should I buy a new AR6110?

There is 2 half round 5 mm CF on the complete leading edge. Maybe it obstructs the signal too much?

Been at this for 35 years. Have flown most everything. The Polaris offers the broadest speed range and take off capabilities. Flew off water for the first time ever a few weeks ago...so unique. Here are some pics of my ship.

Originally Posted by gapagod

Been at this for 35 years. Have flown most everything. The Polaris offers the broadest speed range and take off capabilities. Flew off water for the first time ever a few weeks ago...so unique. Here are some pics of my ship.

Nice looking ship! Very clean.

Scott

www.ModelAero.com

Originally Posted by kadil

since you like the photo's here is an ear bud tube and a lolly pop stick (and a servo arm), cleverly disguised as model parts

Hey Kim, what is an ear bud tube??????? Looks like an cheap/light/easy fix.

-Gary

Originally Posted by gapagod

Been at this for 35 years. Have flown most everything. The Polaris offers the broadest speed range and take off capabilities. Flew off water for the first time ever a few weeks ago...so unique. Here are some pics of my ship.

Very, very slick.

-Gary

Originally Posted by gmphoto

Hey Kim, what is an ear bud tube??????? Looks like an cheap/light/easy fix.

-Gary

Cotton tip is the correct terminology. I have always called them ear buds. The shaft on these ones looks like a fine nylon tube. The ends come off cleanly with a little force.

Originally Posted by gapagod

Been at this for 35 years. Have flown most everything. The Polaris offers the broadest speed range and take off capabilities. Flew off water for the first time ever a few weeks ago...so unique. Here are some pics of my ship.

Glad to hear it! Sharp looking model, too.

Steve

Thanks for the kind words. She was a pleasure to build. It helps that the design is gorgeous from the beginning.

I used vinyl from the local Fastsigns place to give her some color. They wouldn't give me any scraps, so I did a little dumpster diving after hours...bast@@ds wanted $10 for a little scrap!

Reflecting back on the build, the one main change I made was in how the main spar was installed in the wing. Here is what worked for me.

I used the new white Gorilla glue. Wax paper on the table, glue in the spar, wax paper on top. Then a laminate board on top with a few books. As the glue cures, it expands and fills the voids between the spar and the wing foam. Any excess spreads thinly between the wax paper and the wing. After curing, remove the board and wax paper. No sanding required, adds much strength with minimal weight.

Leaks found in my polaris.

I think I found the source of my problem with water inside the hull....

I pressurized the hull, poured some soap water... And found several bubble-generators... . The nacelle is not a big problem as it will normally not be covered with water. But the wing is frequently covered with water. So I think some capilary action will do the rest....

Do some more testing tomorrow (on the bottom).