Thread Tools
Oct 12, 2016, 02:51 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBCrazy
First post. The full specs are in the first post.
I didn't ask for specs, I asked for the manufactures list that is making spec wings.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Oct 13, 2016, 12:00 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirPoonga
I didn't ask for specs, I asked for the manufactures list that is making spec wings.
Stone Blue Airlines

http://www.stoneblueairlines.com/air...race-wing.html
Oct 13, 2016, 07:23 AM
Landing is mandatory
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBCrazy
Absolutely! You should have these on your site. The entire point was to make them super-easy to manufacture and cheap.

-Alex
Thanks again Alex.

Well, I'll need a couple volunteers to test FlyingFoam's spec cores. I want to try a NACA66-012 airfoil, which is the old standby from pylon racing. But that's only 1.08 max thick at root so if you want more room for gear I am not opposed to N66-014 which would be 1.26 max thick. But likely slower. None of these are reflexed airfoils for flying wing use so not at all sure if it's going to matter much. And it's easier/funner to build and fly than doing a bunch of math that may not match reality, so...

Looking for two flight testers who are willing to build/fly/crash and provide feedback before we commit to putting it up as a Standard Core. And it's Open Source so hacking/sharing any tweaks/build logs is really the intent here.

Email coby at flyingfoam //dot\\com if you want a free set of cores to help test. First two get em free. Just remember that if you want a kit then shop stoneblue or similar - we just cut the cores so tend to service more experienced hackers/builders. And US shipping only please. Thanks!

Your spec design Alex so if you want a set just let me know where to ship them.

R,
C
Oct 13, 2016, 08:45 AM
Registered User
Just sent you an email coby

Quote:
Originally Posted by cglusky
Thanks again Alex.

Well, I'll need a couple volunteers to test FlyingFoam's spec cores. I want to try a NACA66-012 airfoil, which is the old standby from pylon racing. But that's only 1.08 max thick at root so if you want more room for gear I am not opposed to N66-014 which would be 1.26 max thick. But likely slower. None of these are reflexed airfoils for flying wing use so not at all sure if it's going to matter much. And it's easier/funner to build and fly than doing a bunch of math that may not match reality, so...

Looking for two flight testers who are willing to build/fly/crash and provide feedback before we commit to putting it up as a Standard Core. And it's Open Source so hacking/sharing any tweaks/build logs is really the intent here.

Email coby at flyingfoam //dot\\com if you want a free set of cores to help test. First two get em free. Just remember that if you want a kit then shop stoneblue or similar - we just cut the cores so tend to service more experienced hackers/builders. And US shipping only please. Thanks!

Your spec design Alex so if you want a set just let me know where to ship them.

R,
C
Oct 14, 2016, 10:01 AM
Registered User
Ok, let's reword this.

IBCrazy said:
"If you have a plane that fits those requirements, I will add it to the FPVWRA Spec wing manufacturers list."

Right now Stone Blue Airlines may be the only one on that list. I am curious as to where this list is or will be if not public yet. I am looking for something to bookmark as other manufactures get added to the list. Is it going to be the first post of this thread? Some website somewhere?
Oct 17, 2016, 10:08 AM
Landing is mandatory
Here's the CG Calc results.

http://fwcg.3dzone.dk/?wing_span=36&...ow_mac_lines=0

I enlisted my dad to give me a hand yesterday and we cut a test set on my "day off".

N63-012 at root to N0014 at tip with dihedral set to bottom flat. I programmed it to cut live hinges to see if the foam control surfaces will work at speed. The elevons are a bit small for my taste at 20% chord but should be OK for speed. I do not have a high KV motor in the shop at this size so going to use a Hacker A20-22L with a 9x6 on 3S 2100. Won't be as fast but should be good enough to see how it flies in mid range. Hope to maiden later this week if I can find some time at night to finish up. Then will send tweaked version to @photohap for further eval.
Oct 17, 2016, 11:34 AM
Lee
Lee
PERFECT LANDING !!!
Lee's Avatar
If you are going to say the airfoil has to be symmetrical you need to specify the airfoil.

There can be more difference in the way two different symmetrical airfoils fly as between symmetrical and asymmetrical airfoils.

Did you want a 7% symmetrical airfoil or a 16% symmetrical airfoil?
How far back do you want the thickest part of the wing?
What modifications are allowed on the leading and trailing edges of the wing?
Can we use trips to delaminate the airflow to change stall characteristics?
What kind of fin size and shape are required?
What is the minimum and maximum weight that is allowed?
Do they have to be made out of foam?
Can the foam be fiberglassed to get a sharp trailing edge on the elevons?

If it is a one plane design to keep the playing field fair it has to be a one airfoil design.
Last edited by Lee; Oct 17, 2016 at 06:01 PM.
Oct 18, 2016, 01:01 AM
Retired USAF, A&P mechanic
Ronbo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
If you are going to say the airfoil has to be symmetrical you need to specify the airfoil.

There can be more difference in the way two different symmetrical airfoils fly as between symmetrical and asymmetrical airfoils.

Did you want a 7% symmetrical airfoil or a 16% symmetrical airfoil?
How far back do you want the thickest part of the wing?
What modifications are allowed on the leading and trailing edges of the wing?
Can we use trips to delaminate the airflow to change stall characteristics?
What kind of fin size and shape are required?
What is the minimum and maximum weight that is allowed?
Do they have to be made out of foam?
Can the foam be fiberglassed to get a sharp trailing edge on the elevons?

If it is a one plane design to keep the playing field fair it has to be a one airfoil design.
To add to these questions, I would suggest several motors in the same size, not limit to one manufacturer (which leads to supply problems) and probably 1 prop only. The current listed motor from HK is on backorder (just from international , its available as of now at both US warehouse), so that will hurt anyone not able to get the motor without other links to available motors. EF1 Formula 1 does this and its very competitive amongst 5-6 motors.
A single compatible, competitive prop would make teching easy plus keep it in the hands of the pilot for speed etc. EF1 has 1 prop choice as well to make it easy on tech and keeps performances closer.

How is tech going to be accomplished on a spec wing class? Unless there are approved kits for the class with the above mentioned rules considerations, it might be hard to judge. Spec racing isn't simple as it sounds. The intent is good, but unless everyone is running the same plane, gear etc its hard to tech. Racers will always try to improve if its not specifically not allowed in rules.
If it doesn't take off nationally (locally), might want to consider using the specs on page 1 and allow any wing airfoil with 5-6 approved motors and 1 prop and 3s of a certain max C rating to keep it competitive and easy to get into.

These are just my observations from my racing experience. For whats its worth...
Last edited by Ronbo; Oct 18, 2016 at 01:07 AM. Reason: motor availability
Oct 18, 2016, 11:11 AM
Landing is mandatory
FWIW, I agree with Lee. Let's just choose an airfoil and planform and go with it. Keeps people like me from trying to spend too much time tweaking a design that is really about getting in the air and having fun racing. It would also make it easier to cut by hand so people need not use outside services to get a good core. Alex has shown it flies just fine with a N0014. And he has already made and shared the templates.

I also agree with Rondo. Spec the motor size/kV, prop and battery AHr/# of cells/C rating so we can choose were to source while keeping craziness to min.

Edit: Forgot to mention I would also spec winglet area.
Last edited by cglusky; Oct 18, 2016 at 11:13 AM. Reason: Added winglet
Oct 21, 2016, 10:07 AM
-NEFPV-
Most likely specking on motors should be done on actual watt output. Its the only real way to test the actual power of a motor. Someone will have to thrust stand a bunch of different motors to find out which are in the same range...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo
To add to these questions, I would suggest several motors in the same size, not limit to one manufacturer (which leads to supply problems) and probably 1 prop only. The current listed motor from HK is on backorder (just from international , its available as of now at both US warehouse), so that will hurt anyone not able to get the motor without other links to available motors. EF1 Formula 1 does this and its very competitive amongst 5-6 motors.
A single compatible, competitive prop would make teching easy plus keep it in the hands of the pilot for speed etc. EF1 has 1 prop choice as well to make it easy on tech and keeps performances closer.

How is tech going to be accomplished on a spec wing class? Unless there are approved kits for the class with the above mentioned rules considerations, it might be hard to judge. Spec racing isn't simple as it sounds. The intent is good, but unless everyone is running the same plane, gear etc its hard to tech. Racers will always try to improve if its not specifically not allowed in rules.
If it doesn't take off nationally (locally), might want to consider using the specs on page 1 and allow any wing airfoil with 5-6 approved motors and 1 prop and 3s of a certain max C rating to keep it competitive and easy to get into.

These are just my observations from my racing experience. For whats its worth...
Oct 22, 2016, 10:10 PM
Registered User
I got a chance to maiden my FPVWRA wing today with suggested motor.

First I want to say for a wing that is symetrical, it handles slow speed quite nicely. Very impressive at high speed too.

Yaw waggle seems non existant. Glide is excellent.

I didn't get a chance to try my fpv gear out on it, had a wiring issue. But I did get to see the view from another pilots spec wing with same setup. The tracking looks really nice, no flutter at all.

I am running mine with a 30A ESC, 6x5 prop on 3S, never once did I overheat or puff a battery.

The wing is very comparable to crash test hobbies Vertigo minus the airfoil and difference in size.

My only complaint would be the laminate, it doesn't seem as sticky as crash test hobbies, and maybe it is thicker? I should have used super 77 before I ironed it on, but never had to with CTH's wings.

Overall an impressive wing.
Last edited by photohap; Oct 22, 2016 at 11:18 PM. Reason: typo
Oct 23, 2016, 03:40 PM
Retired USAF, A&P mechanic
Ronbo's Avatar
That would be a list of similar motors I was talking about. Allows access to a wide range of manufacturers, provided the listed 342w of power is accurate for each motor.
Perhaps a single prop choice of 6x4 like APC would keep it close in performance. Just a suggestion, not sure what the optimal prop would be.
Your first link from Amazon doesn't work for me.
BuddyRC
http://www.buddyrc.com/golden-a2212-...ess-motor.html
This motor is listed as 220w, so isn't a good fit even though its listed as 2200kv, so that wouldn't work.
Last edited by Ronbo; Oct 23, 2016 at 03:46 PM. Reason: Motor
Oct 24, 2016, 11:42 AM
Student Pilot
Quote:
Originally Posted by photohap
My only complaint would be the laminate, it doesn't seem as sticky as crash test hobbies, and maybe it is thicker? I should have used super 77 before I ironed it on, but never had to with CTH's wings.

I'm having a tough time with the laminate too, and I did spray it with Super 77 beforehand. It seems like the surface is very rough and the laminate only sticks to the high spots. Maybe my iron isn't hot enough or something. This is my first experience with EPP and laminate too, so despite watching about 6 different videos on laminating techniques, I guess there's a pretty steep learning curve. I've only done the top surface so far, and there's a lot more wrinkles than I'd like. Fortunately there seems to be plenty of laminate included in the SBA kit, so I'll just keep working and hope it's not too big of a mess when it's done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oct 26, 2016, 09:30 AM
BMRC - Boston Multi Rotor Club
BostonFPV's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by knight907
I'm having a tough time with the laminate too, and I did spray it with Super 77 beforehand. It seems like the surface is very rough and the laminate only sticks to the high spots. Maybe my iron isn't hot enough or something. This is my first experience with EPP and laminate too, so despite watching about 6 different videos on laminating techniques, I guess there's a pretty steep learning curve. I've only done the top surface so far, and there's a lot more wrinkles than I'd like. Fortunately there seems to be plenty of laminate included in the SBA kit, so I'll just keep working and hope it's not too big of a mess when it's done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What temp is your iron set too?


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools