Great - thanks for the info!

Originally Posted by Don Stackhouse

We have it flying (despite the weather this time of year) and it's looking VERY good. We've contacted some other folks in the Dayton and Columbus areas who have some of its European competitors, and we're looking forward to some comparison testing. Weight and other parameters are looking very competitive, and handling qualities are wonderful, excellent control response, and turning ability.

Is there going to be an e-power option for this one?


Thanks,
Mark

I expect yes. The starting point for it was a version of the new electric 1.5 meter, so a lot of the work from that would transfer.

That said, I would add the caution that although the 1.5 meter electric might have been the starting point for the 2-meter RES, don't fool yourself into thinking that you could convert one to the other. There are major differences in the details, affecting the entire design.

Hey Don,

Chrysalis 3M pleeeeeease?!?!?!

Waiting for the big move here!

Best Regards!

André

Don, will the new wing be backward compatible with an unbuilt Chrysalis 2M MkII kit? I may keep my recent purchase instead of selling it if there is an upgrade to be soon available for the wing.

Excellent kit, BTW, just a bit more than I wanted to take on this winter, so the kit will go into the stockpile of kits to build someday.

Jim C

Yes, the full-house wing fits the Chrysalis MkII fuselage.

Great news, thank you!

Word to the wise.
Don has said several times in this forum that the wing should be checked periodically for warps and washout. Says so on the instruction sheet too.
I had my 2M E-Chrysalis out for the first time this season last week. I kept adding left trim to counter a persistent right turn. I reset my control surfaces (I had replaced one for hanger rash) and flew again the next day. I still had the right turn tendency.
I checked my wing last weekend, and the wing needed "tuning". Both outer panels had a small amount of wash-in to take out, and the right inner panel needed wash-out added to get to spec. Afterward it flew straight, but I needed up-trim to hold level. I guess the tuned wing flew differently.
So, word to the wise, if it has been a while check and tune your wing for best performance.

The wing behaves a bit like new strings on a guitar. At first it takes frequent re-tuning, but the longer you keep them properly adjusted, the better they naturally hold the desired setup. A bit like a typical dog, or a two-year-old.

What size rubber bands do you recommend for holding the wing to the fuselage?
Thanks

Originally Posted by Don Stackhouse

Not a problem with hinges made from covering film, the glue is only sticky when at ironing-on temperatures. They also have better peel strength than regular tape. Unfortunately they don't work too well for ironing onto foam with bagged glass skins (tends to melt the foam), you need a different approach for that.

For increased peel strength, Sig Stix It helps. I understand even regular dope will help.

Originally Posted by Don Stackhouse

snip

Now, on really high-load situations (like giant scale, or pylon racers), you need to have real, mechanical hinges, solidly mounted tot he structure on both sides of the hinge gap. However, you can still use a film hinge in those situations as an aerodynamic seal. In cases like that, the crease in the film where the hinge flexing occurs must be in line with the axis pins on the primary hinges.

The Sky Pup, a well regarded full scale ultralight design that's been around for decades, uses fabric hinges. Builder's choice of either over and under strips or two strips sewn together down the middle. I've had good luck with both methods on models. As I recall, at nominal gross weight, the wing loading is about 53 ounces per square foot.

Originally Posted by fitzbill

What size rubber bands do you recommend for holding the wing to the fuselage?
Thanks

Big fat ones. # 64 will work, but a little tight. #68 works a bit better. I usually use at least four, two of them chordwise, and two more diagonally. Chordwise is better for aerodynamics, but not as safe because if the bands on one side break, the wing can come off. The diagonal ones do cause more disruption to the airflow (but not really enough to be a measurable problem), but a single diagonal might be enough to hold the wing on if you are not pulling a lot of G's. They also help retain the other bands.

Six rubber bands is not too much, but less chance of surviving a crash. Any more than six is overkill.

I want to check/set the washout on my Chrysalis 2M that I built in 2013, and for the life of me, I cannot find where I stored the plans. Can anyone give me brief instructions on how to do it?

Thanks,

Ray PB

The outer panels should be flat. The inboard panels should have 1/8" washout in them between the root and the poly break. Put a 1/8" shim under the trailing edge at the poly break and a 1/16" shim under the trailing edge at the middle of the inboard panel, hold it down flat on a flat board (i.e.: so the panel contacts at the spar and at the two shims and at the root trailing edge), then re-shrink the upper surface. Pick it up and re-shrink the bottom surface, put it back on the board along with the shims and see if it held the setting. If it didn't, repeat until it does.

Originally Posted by Don Stackhouse

The outer panels should be flat. The inboard panels should have 1/8" washout in them between the root and the poly break. Put a 1/8" shim under the trailing edge at the poly break and a 1/16" shim under the trailing edge at the middle of the inboard panel, hold it down flat on a flat board (i.e.: so the panel contacts at the spar and at the two shims and at the root trailing edge), then re-shrink the upper surface. Pick it up and re-shrink the bottom surface, put it back on the board along with the shims and see if it held the setting. If it didn't, repeat until it does.

Thanks, Don.

June 16: Redid the washout last evening and flew it this morning. It flew beautifully. - RayPB