No fixed tips/ tip shape?

[Terry Terrenoire]

Ok! Let's open another can of worms.

Pros and cons on flat plate wing tips vs. nicely rounded ones!
I prefer the looks of the rounded tips, and find them easier to cover
with Monokote, but they give just one more point where a difference from
one wing to the other could creep in and cause some minor flight
annomolies.

Terry T.


On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 20:08:02 -0500 "Mike Hester" <kerlock at comcast.net>
writes:
I tend to agree.

Sometimes I think we all spend far too much time fussing over small stuff
when what we really should be worried about is how much fuel we burn, ya
know?

Find something that works for you, then practice with it and get it
working right for YOU. There is no "right" or "wrong" way do do a lot of
the stuff we go nuts over. That's usually the stuff that gets me cranked
up.

Wanna know what the best set up in the world is? It's whatever YOU can
get working and make it look GOOD. It doesn't matter if it's cardboard, a
gas engine, an electric motor, or whether or not your surfaces have tips.
If it works, it's gold. If it doesn't, it's junk. Someone else's gold is
my migraine. 

And on that note, I have some sanding to do =)

-Mike
----- Original Message ----- 
From: David Lockhart 
To: discussion at nsrca.org 
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 10:32 PM
Subject: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: No fixed tips?


This past year I put about 500 flights on a pair of Vivats which have
fixed tips.  The 3 years prior, I put about 1600 flights on a pair of
EMCs which had the control surfaces go all the way to the tips.  Same
servos, same linkages, very similar surface areas and control throws. 
Both used 2C engines and similar softmounts.  I found the average aileron
servo needed to be replaced (pots and gears) after about 250 flights on
both planes.  I suspect the biggest difference between the servo life I
see and Troy sees is attributable to 2C vs 4C.  FWIW - we are both using
the same aileron servos and laser throw meters.

The theory about tip vortices putting extra wear on an aileron servo
makes sense - but I tend to think it may be more/less of a problem on
different designs.  I tend to think other factors may contribute less,
equally, or more depending on the particular plane - softmount used,
engine used, weight of control surface, control throw geometry,
orientation of the servo pot, etc.

Regards,

Dave Lockhart
DaveL322 at comcast.net
----- Original Message ----- 
From: vicenterc at comcast.net 
To: discussion at nsrca.org ; discussion at nsrca.org 
Cc: Rcmaster199 at aol.com 
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 3:58 PM
Subject: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: No fixed tips?


I agree with Matt.  I have done it in both ways and never had problems.

Vince Bortone
-------------- Original message -------------- 

I have done it both ways and notice virtually identical performance as
long as the aileron areas (as a percentage and planform) are unchanged.
What I have found stops the snap accurately and repeatably is a light
wing. Have not required servo pots in either type after 100's of flights.
Don't know why some are losing servos after a few flights, but do know
what works for me.

Commercial jets flying at 600 mph and models flying at 100mph, don't have
much in common.

MattK
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050202/399e8756/attachment.html