Thread Tools
Jan 31, 2020, 07:55 AM
Registered User
Rollo340's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by gliderpd
thanks for the info .
I think I will opt for the CW29 UHM, I have a DLG in the standard version (Stark, 280 grams, RTF).
I am particularly interested in flight performance and I think a lighter DLG would be better than this Stark.

Dumitru
Good choice for sure

Rollo
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Jan 31, 2020, 11:24 AM
Registered User
ReidRoberts's Avatar
I like light DLGs.

I ordered the lightest CX-5 they would give me and it has held up well for over a year with lots of flight time and regular competitions. I even crashed it and the repair is just CA and some carbon tow in the nose.

Iíve been adjusting the CG on my CX-5 (post #48) and finally settled on 215 grams and a 69mm CG.

Keep in mind Iíve also ballasted it with 30 and 60 gram slugs and thrown it in high wind. It has held up wonderfully.

The top pilots who compete at the highest level in all kinds of weather donít seem to need very light models. But I just love the performance of my light CX-5.
Jan 31, 2020, 12:18 PM
Time for me to Fly...
Mr. Wiz's Avatar
I like light planes in very light conditions but not any other time....and I'm not a top competitor. I'm more on the good side of average at big contests. Why don't I like them really light? They aren't fast enough for me to cover all the sky I want and they don't come home from long downwind excursions as well. Today's planes are faster than they were a few years ago but I still prefer my planes in the 230-235 gram range for everything but dead air. That said, dead air floating is fun, especially when I'm just flying for fun.
Latest blog entry: The latest and greatest
Feb 02, 2020, 08:26 PM
Registered User
eitanro's Avatar
I agree with Wiz, light planes are awesome in dead air, but don't havy any advantage in any other weather (especially thay completely dead air is quite rear).
90% of the time I fly my standard planes (235-240 grams), 9% of the time I dly the heavy plane and only 1% of the time I use the light plane.
a standard plane covers almost any condition you might encounter (with ballast) and you don't risk a "unicorn" plane that has advantage in curtain constructions.

Eitan
Feb 08, 2020, 01:59 AM
Some.. call him Tim...
Ducati Mechanic's Avatar
Just finished my new standard with ballast kit. came out to 234g at 67.9mm with 1.5g of nose weight. Without weight itís 69mm. I donít build Particularly light, I definitely build for longevity. I upgraded to 19 strand wire, and I also have a Futaba 6ch rx,altimeter attachment,and dualsky 600mah pack.
Last edited by Ducati Mechanic; Feb 08, 2020 at 03:15 AM.
Feb 08, 2020, 10:02 AM
Wayne Wimbish
wdwimbish's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Wiz
I like light planes in very light conditions but not any other time....and I'm not a top competitor. I'm more on the good side of average at big contests. Why don't I like them really light? They aren't fast enough for me to cover all the sky I want and they don't come home from long downwind excursions as well. Today's planes are faster than they were a few years ago but I still prefer my planes in the 230-235 gram range for everything but dead air. That said, dead air floating is fun, especially when I'm just flying for fun.
This still makes me wonder why more guys don't pick a light plane and add a half ounce of ballast for normal conditions? That way one can take it out and fly at 220 when you really need to, and fly at 235 the rest of the time. Most of the light layups will take ballasting up to 300g which will cover all but the extreme situations. I would think that having the light air potential would be more useful for the average pilot than the potential to fly in gale force winds. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about world class pilots or the cream of the crop, just the rest of us everyday fliers. I like Reid's approach. Start light and ballast as needed.
Latest blog entry: Paying for Purchases by PayPal
Feb 08, 2020, 10:29 AM
Registered User
Rollo340's Avatar
Really nice build, Tim - happy maiden
Feb 08, 2020, 10:36 AM
Registered User
Rollo340's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdwimbish
This still makes me wonder why more guys don't pick a light plane and add a half ounce of ballast for normal conditions? That way one can take it out and fly at 220 when you really need to, and fly at 235 the rest of the time. Most of the light layups will take ballasting up to 300g which will cover all but the extreme situations. I would think that having the light air potential would be more useful for the average pilot than the potential to fly in gale force winds. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about world class pilots or the cream of the crop, just the rest of us everyday fliers. I like Reid's approach. Start light and ballast as needed.
I have the same approach here.
What I love about that CW29 UHM layup is, that itís almost as stiff as the D-Box CW40 version. It comes out between 205 and 220gr, depending on paintjob, servos, etc.
It also wotks pretty good with a little fwd CG, which I choose before ballasting up to 3-4 m/s. You can easily go full ballast with this version and fly in high winds. BUT....as the wing is pretty light it is also a little bit sensitive in turbulent air. Therefore, if you have a heavier layup, I would always choose that one before ballasting the light UHM version.
The UHM wing has 90-105gr, but my favourite in strong winds is a Textreme D-Box version with a 140gr wing. It dampens the turbulences/gusts a lot better and feels more like a tiny F3F plane.

But if I had only 1 plane, I definitely would go with the CW29 version.

Rollo
Feb 08, 2020, 11:20 AM
Registered User
Hey Ducati Mechanic;
I would recommend that you change the position of 1 of your antenna to a 90 degree position from the other.
Cary
Feb 08, 2020, 01:09 PM
Some.. call him Tim...
Ducati Mechanic's Avatar
Thanks Rollo! Off to have a great day!
Feb 08, 2020, 02:38 PM
Time for me to Fly...
Mr. Wiz's Avatar
I don’t like flying with ballast unless I need to. I’ve had super lite planes and they carried ballast nearly all the time but I had other planes that didn’t need it a lot of the time. Guess which plane sat around and nearly never got flown? That’s why I don’t like super lite planes, but that’s me, Wayne. Do what you like.
Latest blog entry: The latest and greatest
Feb 08, 2020, 05:15 PM
Registered User
Rollo340's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Wiz
I don’t like flying with ballast unless I need to. I’ve had super lite planes and they carried ballast nearly all the time but I had other planes that didn’t need it a lot of the time. Guess which plane sat around and nearly never got flown? That’s why I don’t like super lite planes, but that’s me, Wayne. Do what you like.
Then try the CG little fwd without ballast strategy ( with additional little elevator down trim accordingly). It works pretty good with the 5
Last edited by Rollo340; Feb 08, 2020 at 05:37 PM.
Feb 08, 2020, 05:35 PM
Some.. call him Tim...
Ducati Mechanic's Avatar
Just wow! Ended up pulling all the weight out and flying it at 232g 70mm CG in every condition up to 15 mph wind!! Then when it got a bit scary went with the 20g ballast at 69.5mm and the thing went after the 15 to 20 mph blowout like it was a jet!!! Very different from my old long fuselage v1! Even had a 15ft recover with the ballast in. Great day to maiden. Saw all conditions
Last edited by Ducati Mechanic; Feb 08, 2020 at 05:44 PM.
Feb 08, 2020, 05:42 PM
Registered User
Rollo340's Avatar
Beautiful bird - happy for your successful maiden
Feb 10, 2020, 08:37 AM
Registered User
eitanro's Avatar
Light layups are nice and fun to fly and you can have a constant 1 Oz ballast in it, but these models are always more fragile and soon enough you will find yourself adding 1 Oz on fixing stuff here and there, even though the 29 gsm UHM fiber is as strong as a 40 gsm layup, it is way more sensitive and brittle than a "regular" fiber.
As Rollo said, light wings in turbulent weather don't behave that well well because they are to "jumpy" and react to well to anything.

Eitan


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Product Concept X5 - the legacy Rollo340 Hand Launch 1606 Yesterday 08:38 AM
New Product SHENGKAI D97 (SYMA X5 Clone) (Reviewed) rquadusx Mini Multirotor Drones 5 Sep 19, 2015 10:11 PM