Xplorer/NAN models - Page 65 - RC Groups
Thread Tools
Feb 16, 2009, 10:18 PM
MSgt, USAF Ret.
Jim Frahm's Avatar
Originally Posted by fnnwizard
Mike, when you time for me, you are more than welcome to slap me upside my head if you think I'm doing something wrong! I am still trainable! .

Thanks again all!

And I thought the flying was going to be fun; watching Mike slap Tuan upside the head will be the real show. Of couse if it works then we all need to list Mike as our timer.

See you guys on Friday,
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Feb 16, 2009, 11:59 PM
Fly R/C writer
Hey Tuan,

I leave the slapping to others. In my case, I give advice and then it is up to the pilot to use it or decline in favor of his own judgement. Sometimes, I've been damn glad they didn't take my advice! Other times, it works out good.

CG, no worries, mate. I loaf along at minimum sink at times just because I can. When I get the plane up high enough to be confident of making my task times, I will loaf along like that. This keeps the plane from going away from me at any decent speed and I can relax to gather my concentration for the landing. We have all seen photos of the big guys like DP, JW, DH, MS and others sitting, laying, or just laughing along on a contest flight, and they are doing the same thing. Refreshing their minds and getting prepared to concentrate on the landing. When I first watched LJ fly competition, this guy was nothing but a total cut-up, joking and laughing his brains out constantly. Until it came time to fly and then he got deadly serious. As soon as the plane touched down, he was back to being a cut-up. Just keeping the pressure from disturbing his concentration. So, I relax by loafing along at minimum sink...or goofing off.

Feb 17, 2009, 12:06 AM
Hot Dawg Glider Pilot
schrederman's Avatar
Dang, Mike... we were looking forward to that...

See you all at SWC

Feb 17, 2009, 12:46 AM
Throw it like you hate it
RCPC's Avatar
on my drive home today, the traffic was thick so i got some "thinking time" in on this idea of flying faster yielding a better climb-out rate.

i came to the same conclusion as Silvester. We all know that the center of a thermal has the greatest strength but to stay in the center requires an aggressive bank angle. flying at a large bank angle requires a larger coefficient of lift to be generated by the wing since the lift vector is always perpendicular to the wing but the weight of the glider is always towards the earth. to generate more lift, you need to fly faster.

this is the only reasoning i came up with to reconcile the claim that flying faster yields a faster climb-out in a thermal.

this technique will be thermal-dependent since the radial gradient of lift of the thermal must have a profile such that tight turns are preferential over lazier turns.

Jack was right in the sense that flying slower will yield a lower sink rate. this was my first response to Tuan's claim. always fly at the airspeed that yields minimum sink rate. the airspeed for minimum sink rate is right before a stall which is also reaffirmed by Silvester's plots. if the air was completely flat in its buoyancy, i would always choose the airspeed that yields minimum sink rate, but since the air is not equally buoyant everywhere one must find the lift and stay in it, this needs to be done by making a turn, i.e. banking. therefore, the tighter the bank the more focused one can stay in the maximum lift, but the faster one will need to fly to maintain that bank angle while minimizing sink rate.

a couple years ago i realized that i needed to educate myself in the science of flight. of all the books i read, Martin Simon's Model Aircraft Aerodynamics was the most complete, and since it focused mostly on non-powered flight, it is very germane to our aircraft of choice. i would advise anyone with a bit of curiosity of flight to get it. i need a second one because the spine in mine is already disintegrating due to constant reference. it is not as grueling like other fluid dynamic-oriented flight texts, so it is much more digestible...and if you made it this far through my post, i think that speaks volumes to your curiosity, so go click away at amazon
Feb 17, 2009, 01:01 AM
Registered User
@ Tuan

My Shadow-E weighs 2450g.
Great link!!!

You should be very carefull with polars. Most of them show results of a 2D wing i.e. an infinite wing. This is great for making comparison between profiles, but the trick is, that all our wings are NOT infinite

Now you have to take into account also parasitic drag (induced drag, drag of surfaces that are not producing lift...).

On full scale planes L/D of 30 was achieved something like 60 years ago, now they are close to 70. At model planes the best ones only now get to 30 .

Why is that?

Mr. Reynolds is the one to ask.

OK, now I have to wake my doughter and I have to get to work. If you will be interested in theory, let me know. I do not want to hijack this thread.

Feb 17, 2009, 06:48 AM
Originally Posted by webbsolution
I think I can take this down a notch even further

but I limited my extreme range options (too twitchy for flying at 1.25+ miles) and the plane flew much slower.
I hope u have satellite info then or found a damn good bug in google earth ;-) su u can follow ur plane around the globe.
Put a gps unit in it, U'll be surprised how far a km is, let alone a mile+

from someone that has his foot on the ground.
Feb 17, 2009, 07:34 PM
Registered User

xplorer wiring loom

can anyone supply me the measurements needed for wiring loom?
wing root to flap servo.
wing root to tip joint.
tip joint to aileron servo.
and wing root to reciever position.
still waiting on my xplorer full carbon light to arrive, will make loom in meantime.
Feb 17, 2009, 09:44 PM
Win=span\massXpractice+lu ck
webbsolution's Avatar
Originally Posted by glderguy
Oh, I have one question, if Im flying my plane at 1.25+ mi, Im not so sure I could quite tell what the plane was actually doing/responding to control inputs, what kinda eyes do you have anyway man??? 1.25+ mi downwind, 1500 feet up.......duuuuude, I gotta go find that bong!!!!!

Carlos Cataneda..."A Seperate Reality"

I am only 38 and I attribute my excellent vision to 10 years of archery and good investments in sunglasses.

1.25 miles and 1500 feet is really not that far. At last years F3J in the rockies I could clearly see Cody's plane bobbing up and down last year while it was at the extreme range of his vision and I was all the way down at the end of the tow line. Angle likely had more to do with that.
Feb 18, 2009, 12:46 AM
Registered User
ClayH's Avatar
I find it hard to believe that anyone can tell the behavior of a 3.5 meter F3J craft at 1.25 miles and 1500 feet. A mean, as a test , imagine if the plane was at 3000 feet straight up how small it would be, now double that, then tack on another 600 feet to that height. That's how far away 1.25 miles is. I think it is more likely that we fly closer than think we do and realistically 3/4 mile is pretty far away. 60 mph for 45 seconds gets you pretty far from where you are standing in a hurry?

Then again if I'm wrong, I'll have to get binocular laser eye surgery if I ever take up F3J seriously!
Feb 18, 2009, 01:45 AM
Registered User
How far we can see depends also from atmospheric conditions.

Sometimes it is hard to see a plane only maybe 1/4 mile away, on the other hand if moisture level is low and on a windy day it is no problem to see a plane from more than 3/4 mile away. As Web suggested it is also matter of angles.

I guess all of you crashed a plane at least once and think how far you had to walk to find it. I know I have to walk usually much more than I think at first (not that I crash that many planes ).
Feb 18, 2009, 01:51 AM
Detail Freak
target's Avatar
I'm really looking forward to getting mine put together soon. It will be hard to build someone else's planes with that red beauty waiting for me!
I have 3 F3F/B planes ahead of her; a Tanga and 2 Calibers.

Feb 18, 2009, 11:22 AM
agony sweetns the victory
atjurhs's Avatar
Originally Posted by webbsolution
I am only 38 and I attribute my excellent vision to 10 years of archery and good investments in sunglasses.


Just a word of warning, I shot olympic style archery for more than 10 years, and almost always wear sunglasses, and at 38 had perfect vision. Now at 44, the eyeballs ain't working as well. Time takes it's toll on all of us, but hey you've still got 6 good years of vision ahead of you
Feb 19, 2009, 12:14 AM
Win=span\massXpractice+lu ck
webbsolution's Avatar
Originally Posted by atjurhs

Just a word of warning, I shot olympic style archery for more than 10 years, and almost always wear sunglasses, and at 38 had perfect vision. Now at 44, the eyeballs ain't working as well. Time takes it's toll on all of us, but hey you've still got 6 good years of vision ahead of you

As I was writing my comment I knew someone was going to tell me this...

I am hoping that my eyes hold out because I know that 18 years of motorcycling has pretty much damaged my hearing
def and blind would be a bad state !

myabe within 6 years they will have laser eye surgery available at wallmart ...
Feb 19, 2009, 01:25 PM
WINS - Winch In Nose Sailplane
jaizon's Avatar
My new Xplorer. Ready to fly. As soon as the snow is gone. AUW is exactly 71 oz. 3421 elev, 368 rudder, 368 flaps, 168 ail.

The little pushrod covers on the upper wing are from some old Graupner covers trimmed a whole lot to fit. This is for those who wanted to know from a previous post. I did sand them down to just clear the clevis.

These are some preliminary numbers for throws. I'd appreciate some feedback if anyone thinks these are incorrect or you have a better suggestion.

elevator +/- 10 mm
rudder +/- 15 mm
Launch Flaps down 12mm/ail down 6mm
Speed +2 mm (full t.e. up)
Thermal 2 mm down full t.e.
cruise normal wing section
Land flaps down 55/ail up 10 mm/elevator down 7 mm

No idea yet on where the c.g. sits, but I'll check later tonight.

Now something I don't ever do. And that is give props to Bob who I have never met and don't know other than from my purchase of this plane. I had a problem that needed to be resolved. What is was is not important. Bob, upon hearing about it stepped up big time, without any prompting from me. Above and beyond, trust me. This level of outstanding service is worth at least a mention in this thread. This is a company and man I would not hesitate to do business with again. Tuck that away in the back of your mind if you're thinking about a new plane. Enough said.

Feb 19, 2009, 06:26 PM
Detail Freak
target's Avatar
I thought that most guys launch with the flaps and ailerons even??


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion RADINA 2 by NAN models Pinci Hand Launch 38 Feb 11, 2009 01:58 AM
Question Speed 1.5 /Nan Models. Alex Mini 1.5 setup question Broncomech Slope 20 Jul 23, 2008 10:47 PM
Discussion Nan Models Shadow ( sorry for the mistake ) Chipwillis Thermal 56 Apr 19, 2007 05:44 PM