Topic: Zim's experimentals: she has a name - the Razor!

High Guys
     Well got 3 models ready, but wrong side of the pond as they say for first meet in the USA...Hey been playing with pacifier tanks as 1 model played up on No1 turns, borrowed one off Chas and it sorted it a treat Weird one that as other 2 models run fine off tanks yet the 3rd plays up, allthough motor is still squeaky   maybe it will settle...the other 2 have a fair pace on them though
Still have fun you lot catchyou at next meet!
                 Gilly

Full kit of parts cut for the fuse, fin and tailplane. Here's what's different this time around.

1. Fuse is a little fatter towards the rear. Actually held up pretty well in the mash up on the last one, but it was just too small to be a pleasant build.
2. No anhedral tails on this one! Tailplane is revised to a flat one, but I have resized so that it projects the same plan area i.e. smaller stabs than the anhedral.
3. Push for up this time - boringly conventional eh?
4. Nose is a little shorter so that I don't need the 15g on the tail.
5. Oh yeah, two ailerons, no wobbly wings!

I'm also not going to have bits which I have to build in i.e. the battery and the elevator servo.

So I guess you could say that I'm pretty much just going back to basics with something that is pretty conventional, but looks nice to me! My focus is straight, finished and flyable!

Zim

Well here's the vid of flight one...

Zwist Flight One on Vimeo

 

LOL nice vid 

i can't wait to get to work to watch this one!

LOL very good. Adam face as he carried it out to the launch summed up his optimisum ! "Hmmm i've been here before?" :

Make sure you have the sound on!

So the tail actually came off TWICE in 4 seconds.

Outstanding!!

No the tail only came off the first time. The second time it stayed on the fuse, except everything in FRONT of the tail was smashed to bits.

Z

No the tail only came off the first time. The second time it stayed on the fuse, except everything in FRONT of the tail was smashed to bits.

Z

Wooooooh! Pedantic

More more more more more ....I wanna see the 4 seconds flight so we can analyse it's demise

Analyse away!

Zwist Flight Two! on Vimeo

Zim

Brings it all back mate... 
Thanks for the entertainment!¬
George

Analyse away!

Zwist Flight Two! on Vimeo

Zim

Has the Air Accidents Investigation Branch seen the video yet?

Lol cracking video chaps!

(In my opinion) Your model crashed because it was tail heavy.
My reasons for believing this are. Had it been nose heavy it would have continued to balloon away from the launch with input being slow to react. The way it looked to me was pitch reaction was behind control input. After flying (sometimes crashing) unflyable racers with too reward cg this looked 100% identical. Had it been slop in the servos it would have also twisted the two wings in roll and more likely just fluttered. My second reason for the suspicion is the fact you told me it balanced at 60mm. I was floating around the waterpark on sunday trying to think how it could actually be flyable where you had put the cg and had I had my mobile at hand I would have told you to reconsider your cg. I know you have a model that fly on 60mm. I cannot get past 43mm (the 'bigger balls' / 'rearward cg game' is pretty wasted on me). Any more and it pitches to the belly on KE and isn't pleaseant to race. I flew one at 55/60mm along time ago and was lucky it survived after landing it on the bottom of a wallow and looked exactly the same as yours did on there.
Build another!

Well those bloody wings survived again! Thanks for the advice CK. I'll set the next one (non-wingeron  ) up much more forward for the maiden. Can't afford to have another one pile in as convincingly as that!

Z

I don't think you need any advice mate. I don't think you could have made a mechanically unflyable model. To much time / thought and effort went into it for it to fail due to mechanics. I know you'd have never have chucked anything that you had a feeling might fail which again makes me think it was cg. Get Barrie to have a glance over the video. He must have had some tail heavy racers in his time?

I won't repeat Barries thoughts on wingerons and pitcherons in public

zim out of interest what was the possible benifits you were hoping for out of the wingeron method, and the pivot point you had was it on the c of g and any piccies of how you did the machanical linkages.

i do remember years ago haveing a slope plane which was simuler to a phase six on the pitcheron method youve just tried and remember it working with no probs, ill hunt through my old pictures and see if i still have something, blowed if i can recall what it was called as it was second hand when i got it

cheers

Tbh Darren it looked like the pitcheron would be really easy to build. However, we're pretty sure that the pitcheron will never work due to the changing thrustline issues as you use the wing in pitch - not a problem with a glider! The wingeron got around that by using an elevator, but then you're into a pretty standard build. We estimate that with the wing joiners, tubes, and linkages and the two 5425 size servos, the extra weight in a wingeron was just shy of 100g or 3.5oz. Both mine and Adam's were pretty substantially overweight as a result, despite the builds being pretty standard i.e. light. We also thought it would make a nice way to test different wings as you can just slide them on and off and keep the whole rest of the model identical.

The main reason? Used to have a pitcheron glider called the Pixel until I sold it to Adam (doh!) and it made me want to make a Club 2000 pitcheron as a result, just because!

Zim

Zim doesn't think like a normal person.  He just sees green symbols falling down a black background.  He formulates ideas in ways we can't possibly understand............

Zim doesn't think like a normal person.  He just sees green symbols falling down a black background.  He formulates ideas in ways we can't possibly understand............

And I thought the whole thing was just a glitch in the matrix

Zim

I have reviewed the short video, it is differcult to tell if it is CG or pivot point too far behind the centre of pressure, I am tending towards the latter.I belive that if the pivot point is wrong the forces on the linkage would be intolerable!

Whilst I have had some horrible flights with reward CG's I dont remember sticking one in, seems like a good pilot can normally keep the thing in the air long enougth to make an emergency landing.

No bitcherons, no single ailerons, CG in a sensible position, no outboard servo's, sealed hinges.

Need I say more!

Baz

 

pivot point should be something like 22%

You only know that coz I told you  although 25% would do nicely as well.

Z

zim out of interest what was the possible benifits you were hoping for out of the wingeron method, and the pivot point you had was it on the c of g and any piccies of how you did the machanical linkages.

i do remember years ago haveing a slope plane which was simuler to a phase six on the pitcheron method youve just tried and remember it working with no probs, ill hunt through my old pictures and see if i still have something, blowed if i can recall what it was called as it was second hand when i got it

cheers

Hey Darren,,

  The linkages and wings Zim used were from My omen, There are some pics on the Video in the thread

The OMEN !

cheers adam, i just wanted to see how it differed from the glider that had the same set up, im sure i had a photo of the linkages taht were in the glider, the set up did seem to work well in the glider and adding a motor in front shouldnt have made much difference, not that he got ant air speed lol

cheers for that

With it not needing to pitch any more why don't you build it with just one twisting panel. Would keep the weight down of the heaveir servos needed and bit less setting up. They could both be still removeable.

Cheers CK. Whose of to fly some combat

From what I've heard of the times on the weekend, I reckon this one needs to be good...

Zim, who didn't do any building last week or on the weekend 

Coooor she's starting to come together...

Zim, who's liking this one a lot!

PS It still uses this...

Fuse outline is broadly similar - just 5mm thicker in depth at the rear so make the control run a little easier. Anhedral tail - yeah it was supercool. I wasn't happy with the linkage though, so I figured I'd make a regular one, get it done, and then figure out how I want to make an anhedral tailplane if I want to do it again. If this one flies nice with the tailplane where it is then I think I'll stick with a flat tailplane tbh mate. Easier! And I need that coz me curvy build is enough of a hassle anyway!

Z

Trick, Picture,,

  That is the anhederal tail one upside down!! before his dumb thumbs got hold of it

The Honey Wax arrives tomorrow...

Z

The Honey Wax arrives tomorrow...

Z
[/quote



Cool  Can I watch 

Fuse outline is broadly similar - just 5mm thicker in depth at the rear so make the control run a little easier. Anhedral tail - yeah it was supercool. I wasn't happy with the linkage though, so I figured I'd make a regular one, get it done, and then figure out how I want to make an anhedral tailplane if I want to do it again. If this one flies nice with the tailplane where it is then I think I'll stick with a flat tailplane tbh mate. Easier! And I need that coz me curvy build is enough of a hassle anyway!

Z

How about 2x 9g servo's, one on each half of the ele ala v tail glider?

CM

Yeah could happen in the future mate, but not on this one - tbh it's a damn sight easier than the way I did it last time, although it seemed to work fine in the end! This one is just as simple as with a flat tailplane and a single servo to drive it from a centre horn.

Z

Well the wing's out the bag - pretty happy with it for a first shot...

Zim

First go at vacuum bagging a wing... on Vimeo

Its come out great hasnt it mate .............3m wings next ...

Nice one Zim looks tidy mate, told you it wasn't as hard as its made out to be  now stop faffing about with the pylon stuff and bag yourself a DS plank 

well done, excellent first bagged wing

Mike_Y