New Products Flash Sale
Thread Tools
Old Oct 24, 2011, 01:40 PM
turboparker is online now
Find More Posts by turboparker
I'd rather be flying!
turboparker's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by maukabud View Post
Here's one that's close to my heart...because at one time I worked for a division of Lancair (Columbia) and was planning on building one for myself...full scale.

Lancair 360/Legacy 2000. It's a hot ship! Sexy and gorgeous IMO.
Bud,

Love the 360! Essentially - sex with wings attached. Never have had the chance to fly one (or even ride in one). But a guy can always dream...

Joel
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Oct 24, 2011, 01:51 PM
RNAF is offline
Find More Posts by RNAF
Registered User
RNAF's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pouncer View Post
Idly musing, I'd like to see a a 14 or 16" Fokker Dr I, in factory livery, without dihedral and a perilously aftwards CG.

Or a UM Harrier that can hover but there are serious engineering challenges involved; while the body of the Harrier is (was) very wide you could probably fid a shrouded 5070 prop in there and still call it a micro.
But how do you control it while in hover? If you fit 2 counter rotating motors inside you could control the roll axis with torque but what about pitch and yaw?
The real Harrier bleeds compressed air from the turbine and controls its attitude via nozzles in tail and wing tips but I don't see that happening on a small model.

What I really want is an ultra micro version of the E-Flite electrical retracts..
I think a lightweight Harrier could be done without those nozzles in tail and wing.
Bit too much engineering involved but what the heck
50mm EDF -> 34cm span, 56cm span (approx).

Here's a system that a German guy designed:
One EDF, four thrusters controlled by 2 servos. Left/ right each has 1.

"Action" starts from 2:30.

Harrier - RC-Impeller Antrieb (4 min 5 sec)
Old Oct 24, 2011, 01:59 PM
RealGambler is offline
Find More Posts by RealGambler
Way to many airplanes!
Quote:
Originally Posted by turboparker View Post
Bud,

Love the 360! Essentially - sex with wings attached. Never have had the chance to fly one (or even ride in one). But a guy can always dream...

Joel
Hey, hey, if you ever come up north, I'll let you fly my good old Electrifly Lancair! The only fiberglass/balsa airplane in my fleet (and basically the reason why it's still in top shape today, except the cowl). Have not flown it in the last two years, since I broke the propeller (little ooops moment) and never replaced it. Now, I'm getting the itch to go shopping for one before winter!
Old Oct 24, 2011, 02:23 PM
ScottGridley is offline
Find More Posts by ScottGridley
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by RealGambler View Post
Hey, hey, if you ever come up north, I'll let you fly my good old Electrifly Lancair! The only fiberglass/balsa airplane in my fleet (and basically the reason why it's still in top shape today, except the cowl). Have not flown it in the last two years, since I broke the propeller (little ooops moment) and never replaced it. Now, I'm getting the itch to go shopping for one before winter!
Considering what I thought he might offer, that was a tame post.

I'd love to see more WWII birds, LIKE A UM STUKA! I might save a few bucks for a brick to go into the Guillow's 16.5" conversion I've currently got pinned to the board...
Old Oct 24, 2011, 02:28 PM
Pouncer is online now
Find More Posts by Pouncer
Wanton construction
Pouncer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNAF View Post
I think a lightweight Harrier could be done without those nozzles in tail and wing.
Bit too much engineering involved but what the heck
50mm EDF -> 34cm span, 56cm span (approx).

Here's a system that a German guy designed:
One EDF, four thrusters controlled by 2 servos. Left/ right each has 1.

"Action" starts from 2:30.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PWtvbqbIUg
I've given it a bit more thought and I suppose it could theoretically be possible with existing components, basically by tilting a mCX 90 degrees forward.
Divide exhaust into four equal parts each leading to one of four nozzles, cyclic control then distributes thrust as needed.
Counter rotating shrouded props provide roll authority by torque.
The above gives control in forwar/backward and side to side translation, and roll.
We lack yaw so we need to 2 servos to operate the port and starboard nozzles in opposition.

The mCX doesn't have much spare power so even a proof of concept mock-up would be iffy, additionally it's 4 channels so no transition from hover to FF, and it lacks a couple of gyros..

But in theory..
Old Oct 24, 2011, 03:44 PM
anthony7820 is offline
Find More Posts by anthony7820
Team CJ Youngblood
anthony7820's Avatar
i would like them try and make this
Old Oct 24, 2011, 04:00 PM
RNAF is offline
Find More Posts by RNAF
Registered User
RNAF's Avatar
Pouncer, you do have yaw.
See left and right thrusters as tracks of a tank Left two forward, right two rearward = left yaw.
Pitch is done by a valve controlling airflow to rear and front thrusters.

Maybe a little off topic (this post) but the last ten years have proven that dreams come true
Old Oct 24, 2011, 04:00 PM
Ken Lilja is offline
Find More Posts by Ken Lilja
I'm slow but I'm expensive
Ken Lilja's Avatar

Piaggio Avanti


As Sophia Loren is to women, the Avanti is to planes.
http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace...anti-9599.aspx
http://www.luxist.com/photos/jamesli...uries/2660419/
http://www.nextcraft.com/p180.html
Ken
Old Oct 24, 2011, 04:13 PM
Pouncer is online now
Find More Posts by Pouncer
Wanton construction
Pouncer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNAF View Post
Pouncer, you do have yaw.
See left and right thrusters as tracks of a tank Left two forward, right two rearward = left yaw.
Pitch is done by a valve controlling airflow to rear and front thrusters.

Maybe a little off topic (this post) but the last ten years have proven that dreams come true
Yeah that's why I figured 2 servos were needed for the thrusters.
But I thought some more and if we have this level of control over the nozzles we can ditch the cyclic pitch completely and no need for valves:

Forward/backward translation by rotating the thruster backwards and forwards respectively.
Side to side by propeller torque.
Yaw by thrusters in opposition, like you described.

Horizon, are you taking notes ?
Old Oct 24, 2011, 04:19 PM
sablatnic is offline
Find More Posts by sablatnic
Registered User
Maybe Lockheed L-133.
Old Oct 24, 2011, 05:05 PM
corsair nut is offline
Find More Posts by corsair nut
fly like an EAGLE ;)
corsair nut's Avatar
X-4!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Old Oct 24, 2011, 05:52 PM
djhurlbut is offline
Find More Posts by djhurlbut
Registered User
I'll go primitive: Fokker DR-1. Maybe it's nothing outlandish, but it seems that most descriptions of them indicate they're pretty squirrely, and this might tame one in a UM size.
Old Oct 24, 2011, 06:30 PM
Grejen is offline
Find More Posts by Grejen
IAMCANADIAN
Grejen's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dukeofdata View Post
Arrows are flyable now. I have a 19" version (hey that's micro scale for a CF-105). It has a roll wobble issue that a gyro would probably clear easily.

I can't believe no one has yet suggested a V-173 or even better the XF5U Flying Pancake! I tried a V-173 but had problems with roll response, tucking, and matching the thrust well enough to control yaw.
Old Oct 24, 2011, 06:58 PM
maukabud is offline
Find More Posts by maukabud
HELP I AM BEING SET UP!!
maukabud's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grejen View Post
Arrows are flyable now. I have a 19" version (hey that's micro scale for a CF-105). It has a roll wobble issue that a gyro would probably clear easily.

I can't believe no one has yet suggested a V-173 or even better the XF5U Flying Pancake! I tried a V-173 but had problems with roll response, tucking, and matching the thrust well enough to control yaw.
probably because it's too unmentionably ugly?
Old Oct 24, 2011, 07:15 PM
pow-wow is offline
Find More Posts by pow-wow
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grejen View Post
Arrows are flyable now. I have a 19" version (hey that's micro scale for a CF-105). It has a roll wobble issue that a gyro would probably clear easily.

I can't believe no one has yet suggested a V-173 or even better the XF5U Flying Pancake! I tried a V-173 but had problems with roll response, tucking, and matching the thrust well enough to control yaw.
that wold be cool
btw I think it looks fine


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Poll What jet would you most like to see in an upcoming J-Power/Skyangel mini-jet release? herk1 Foamy EDFs 26 Oct 25, 2016 03:08 PM
Discussion What locations would you like someone else to film, because you can't get there? Flying-Monkey Aerial Photography 19 Jan 13, 2016 12:48 PM
Discussion Are 70mm's Dead? IF not what would you like to see? Dark Angel Foamy EDFs 16 Oct 28, 2015 06:06 PM
Discussion what would we like to see in the next version of the msr cmulder Micro Helis 0 Jul 31, 2011 11:53 AM