[NSRCA-discussion] Another trimming question

vicenterc at comcast.net vicenterc at comcast.net
Wed Oct 25 13:47:48 AKDT 2006


Probably you mean "fairly backward".

Vicente "Vince" Bortone

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Ed Miller" <edbon85 at charter.net> 

> I fly my EMC2 with a fairly forward CG and it too becomes a bit of a handful 
> in heavy wind. Turbulence seems to be constantly rocking the wings. Being 
> under the 1lb per 100square rule ( 1100 squares at 10lbs 7 ounces ) I 
> believe has something to do with it also. I'm going to push the CG a bit 
> more forward to see if there is any improvement. 
> Ed M. 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dean Pappas" 
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 2:49 PM 
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Another trimming question 
> 
> 
> > Hello Peter, 
> > Fred and Anthony are onto the basic issue. You will almost certainly have 
> > to trade off the "rolling workload" versus damping in turbulence, using CG 
> > position. Many flyers trim themselves into borderline tail-heaviness in 
> > order to lessen the workload in rolls, but the piper will be paid. I 
> > always liked them nose-heavy, myself. I figure predictability is more 
> > important. 
> > 
> > I don't know the Impact, personally ... does it generally handle 
> > turbulence well? Some designs don't. 
> > 
> > good luck, 
> > Dean Pappas 
> > 
> > -----Original Message----- 
> > From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org on behalf of Fred Huber 
> > Sent: Wed 10/25/2006 2:24 PM 
> > To: NSRCA Mailing List 
> > Cc: 
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Another trimming question 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Moving CG forward and adding + wing incidence should help upright wind 
> > penetration... but inverted would then need more elevator correction to 
> > prevent the nose from dropping, and the plane might have pitch with rudder 
> > and other effects. 
> > 
> > Typicly I approach trimming from a nose-heavy start. and I do notice the 
> > plane being affected more by turbulence as the plane becomes better 
> > trimmed 
> > and the CG approaches the point where little or no elevator is needed for 
> > inverted flight. 
> > 
> > I suggest more expo for softer stick centers, allowing correcting for the 
> > wind effects with less "jumping" of the model. If the plane flys the way 
> > you want when there's no wind... Leave the CG, incidences and the rest of 
> > the setup alone. 
> > 
> > If just adding expo and a little airspeed does the trick.... its the best 
> > solution, as it has the least chance of negative side effects. 
> > 
> > FHH 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Anthony Romano" 
> > To: 
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 9:30 AM 
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Another trimming question 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Interesting thinking a little more positive would allow a further 
> > > forward 
> > > CG 
> > > which may give you a little more stability. Document it so you can move 
> > > back and give it a try. As I have heard said "trimming is a verb." 
> > > 
> > > Anthony 
> > > 
> > >>From: "Peter Pennisi" 
> > >>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List 
> > >>To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" 
> > >>Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Another trimming question 
> > >>Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 08:37:54 +1000 
> > >> 
> > >>Hi Guys, 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>I am looking for opinions. 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>I am currently flying the COMP-ARF IMPACT with DZ160 which I am very 
> > >>pleased 
> > >>with. 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>Model is flying with no trim and negligible mix. There is no rudder to 
> > >>elevator mix for knife edge flight and 5% mix at large rudder throws for 
> > >>rollers etc. 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>Model climbs as straight as an arrow so I am happy with my thrust 
> > >>settings 
> > >>and the model pulls ever so slightly to canopy on long down lines which 
> > >>is 
> > >>mixed with throttle. 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>The incidence settings are 0 degrees on tail-plane and approximately 
> > >>1/6th 
> > >>of a degree positive on the wing. The CG is about right and I don't want 
> > >>to 
> > >>go any further forward as it creates too much work when rolling in 45 
> > >>degree 
> > >>up lines. 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>I know most of you will say that the model is fairly well trimmed. The 
> > >>model 
> > >>is pure pleasure to fly in the calm and really locks on well however 
> > >>when 
> > >>the wind comes up it is a different animal to fly. The model gets 
> > >>knocked 
> > >>around and I find it very difficult to lock in a line. I am only talking 
> > >>about moderate wind here. My other model (Alliance) seems to handle the 
> > >>windy conditions better. I don't want to go any heavier in the nose 
> > >>otherwise rolls become too much work. I would actually like to bring my 
> > >>CG 
> > >>further back but it will make the model even more difficult to fly in 
> > >>the 
> > >>wind. CG is currently 5 mm behind rear of wing tube. Model weight is 
> > >>4.72 
> > >>KG 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>Question: Will changing wing incidence have any effect on model behavior 
> > >>in 
> > >>windy weather without affecting the rest of my settings / trimming. I 
> > >>only 
> > >>have 1/6th of degree positive and I know a lot of people run anywhere 
> > >>between 0.25 to 0.5 degree on their models. 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>Thanks 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >>Peter 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >><< winmail.dat >> 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >>_______________________________________________ 
> > >>NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
> > >>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
> > >>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 
> > > 
> > > _________________________________________________________________ 
> > > Stay in touch with old friends and meet new ones with Windows Live 
> > > Spaces 
> > > 
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://spaces. 
> live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________ 
> > > NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
> > > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
> > > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > No virus found in this incoming message. 
> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> > > Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.11/497 - Release Date: 
> > > 10/25/2006 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________ 
> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
> > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> 
> 
> > _______________________________________________ 
> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
> > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 
> _______________________________________________ 
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20061025/039f7560/attachment.html 


More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list