[NSRCA-discussion] Another trimming question
R. LIPRIE
RLIPRIE at centurytel.net
Wed Oct 25 19:02:41 AKDT 2006
Mr. Nat,
I could of swore that swept wing helps fight and smooth out the
turbulence.
Oh well
guess I was wrong: Matt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nat Penton" <natpenton at centurytel.net>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Another trimming question
> Ed
> The way you describe the problem with turbulence, CG change will not be
> of
> any benefit. The parameter that counts most is taper. Going from a .6 tip
> to
> a .38 tip moves the panel center of lift in only 10%, but where it counts
> bigtime is in reducing area near the extremities. You will also like the
> lower moments of inertia - the feel.
>
> Sweep will cause problems in turbulence, but I don't recall any of
> Hansen's
> designs having much sweep. I prefer to limit the sweep to 3degrees. Sweep
> is
> measured by the line thru the ACs of the airfoils, the 25% chordline.
> Nat
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ed Miller" <edbon85 at charter.net>
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 4:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Another trimming question
>
>
>>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" <d.pappas at kodeos.com>
>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> 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" <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com>
>>> To: <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> 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" <pentagon.systems at bigpond.com>
>>> >>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> >>To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> >>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
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.1/466 - Release Date: 10/7/2006
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.1/466 - Release Date: 10/7/2006
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list