Why aren't there more 70+inch span flying wings? - RC Groups
Thread Tools
Mar 30, 2005, 04:47 PM
Registered User

Why aren't there more 70+inch span flying wings?

Okay, Im not a slope genius when it comes to flying wings so I have to ask why there are not many 70+inch wings? Knowing what I do know about conventional designs (bigger span = better efficiency) It seems surprising to me that most of the flying wing designs on the slope are 60 inch wing spans or less.
Is it a convenience matter because many slopes require a bit of hiking? Or is it a more of a "higher degree of building skill required"? Give me your opinions!

Thanks in advance
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Mar 30, 2005, 04:54 PM
Tu ne cede malis
MtnGoat's Avatar
I've built 5 72" span wings with 2 still flying, and a 96" on the drawing board. Love 'em big. They fly better and you can see them way better too.

Problems that do get worse with size:

1) you *can* damage EPP if your plane weighs enough
2) must pay attention to good spars
3) servo size increases and must be anchored better than a foam pocket
4) surfaces get huge and must be carefully built to avoid flex and flutter
5) difficult to transport, must have a joiner system generally
6) wire and nylarod pushrods no longer suffice, I use solid CF rods with stainless ends attached with kevlar thread windings and soaked with CA
Mar 30, 2005, 05:06 PM
Crikey never leave beer behind
steve wenban's Avatar

big wing made of plastic

did you mean like this I built this awhile back flew very nicley but transporting it was a pain
Mar 30, 2005, 05:16 PM
Toy Flyer
glover's Avatar
Why not big wings? Because big wings roll like pigs... but they do loop really fast.
Mar 30, 2005, 07:05 PM
There is no spoon
Dax's Avatar
Originally Posted by steve wenban
did you mean like this I built this awhile back flew very nicley but transporting it was a pain

OMG it looks like he has a 5 pound rock taped to it for ballast
Mar 30, 2005, 07:44 PM
Registered User
Daemon's Avatar
Because big wings take up an enormous amount of space in your vehicle.
Because they fly fast, but look slow (they look like any other combat wing at a distance).
Because while looking like a combat wing, they're really not useful for combat. And god help everyone if someone does take it down in the middle of the furball and it spirals into a crowd of people.
Because they have no flaps/flaperons/spoilerons they land fast, heavy, and hard on their face tearing up the covering and breaking elevons.
Because they're slower than comparable span planks and crunchies, which
generally don't suffer from all of the above problems.

Mar 30, 2005, 08:14 PM
Member: GSPL
sloperut's Avatar
Go to this link: http://www.aerodesign.de/ then click on Modell, then nuflugel and see some larger flying wings.

Here are a couple of great links for flying wing info: http://www.b2streamlines.com/winglinks.html or http://www.b2streamlines.com/OTW.html

Seems to me as you get larger, you have to deal with some structural issues like torsional strength etc. that foam and tape cannot handle.

Just think how cool this would look tooling around at your favorite slope (from the aerodesign.de link)
Last edited by sloperut; Mar 30, 2005 at 08:19 PM.
Mar 30, 2005, 09:15 PM
Crikey never leave beer behind
steve wenban's Avatar
Originally Posted by Dax
OMG it looks like he has a 5 pound rock taped to it for ballast
No dude thats the esky where I keep the beer cold
Mar 30, 2005, 09:21 PM
Registered User
wow! that's awesome, may have to build myself one of those! ryan
Mar 30, 2005, 09:56 PM
around Colombia
ShredAir's Avatar
MtnGoat summed it up very well: they require more commitment building, and if slammed into the ground for a landing, they'll break. With all those short-comings, you may as well just get a crunchie (heaven forbid... : )

Dieter Mahlein, ShredAir
Mar 30, 2005, 10:10 PM
Registered User
Interesting............... Most of you assumed that EPP is the only building material available or suitable and then the defination of performance seems to be only based on combat, and crash survival.

maybe new building techniques will enable bigger designs.... I know the Big Bluto looks incredible and if it goes out and sets a new record in DS we'll be rethinking... maybe.. LOL

Keep posting this is all good stuff!!!
Mar 30, 2005, 11:09 PM
Tu ne cede malis
MtnGoat's Avatar
bigger flies better. that's all you need to know! my 5 lb behemoth pretty much stays up with the weasels in light lift (low loading) , and when the wind machine turns on and the lead comes out, a couple of lbs on there and watch out!
Mar 31, 2005, 12:18 AM
Piscine Promulgator
surfimp's Avatar
There's no inherent limit to the tailless market, only what "most people" are willing to pay for. Mainly that seems to be EPP and 48" or less, for many of the reasons raised by Ian and others, ergo most of the kits are designed to service that market.

Doesn't mean that this is ideal or anything, it's just what people want to buy. As for one-off/scratchbuilds, obviously there are all sorts of things out there, of which we only have a limited and imperfect grasp via RCGroups.

FWIW, here are couple "somethings" I'm working on...

"Aniso" 84", EPP

"FSW 01" 60" Balsa Sheeted Wing / Glass Fuse

Latest blog entry: Of Fish, France, FPV, and Fun!
Mar 31, 2005, 01:01 AM
Tearing the Skies a new one...
Sensiblenick's Avatar
One of the biggest reasons is simply ..... Foam Size.

To get larger than 50" span, I need to join foam blanks together to make a larger wing: and that's a royal pain in the arse.

A friend and I are working on a couple of planes at the moment, (well... 3, but the 3rd one's different) The first one looks disturbingly like the Queen Bee (we cut the blanks 8 months ago, and have done nothing since), and the second one could be likened to the M60.... just, erm... more of an M"100" (with crow braking if i can balance it out right.... and a drag-chute if I can't )

Neither of them are EPP: they're going to be Vacuum Bagged, and the Plank will be finished in Carbon with a carbon/kevlar body.

It's True: big wings don't roll, But they're fun to buzz the slope with, and people will ALWAYS ask "how can it fly if it doesn't have a tailplane?"

At the moment though, time is being devoted to a not-so-crunchy "hard-plane"
Mar 31, 2005, 01:51 AM
daedaluscan's Avatar
I built this last year but only have a couple of flights on it. It is kind of big and floaty, rolls realllly slooow. I was just going to build it with tape but peer pressure got me to veneer the wings, it does look nice. I am a bit scared of breaking it in half though as I undersized the wing rods quite badly. I think it is 2,18cm, it was the biggest I could get out of one sheet of roofmat.

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion why aren't there more scale helis? CzechSix Micro Helis 63 May 30, 2007 12:05 PM
Discussion Why isn't there more vids of forward flight? jive Coaxial Helicopters 14 May 25, 2006 12:41 AM
F5B-7, I tried it and like it, why aren't there more flyers? eye_rc_soar High Performance 59 Jun 07, 2005 03:40 PM
Alert Hey, why aren't there any molded-plane style EPP planes yet?! e-sailpilot86 Slope 29 Oct 12, 2002 01:18 AM
Why aren't there quieter IC engines? chlee Fuel Plane Talk 15 Nov 26, 2001 11:39 PM