[NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
John Pavlick
jpavlick at idseng.com
Fri Mar 21 20:39:17 AKDT 2008
Chris,
Fly it through the snap. Lots of elevator at first, then less as you progress. More rudder and less aileron too. It's over-rotating because the stall is deep (too much elevator). You want it just on the ragged edge so you can get out of the stalled condition quickly.
John Pavlick
http://www.idseng.com
----- Original Message -----
From: krishlan fitzsimmons
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 12:22 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
Ok,
Well, I did feel I was a little tail heavy after thinking, so I moved my batteries to the forward position and went back to 1/2 degree positive.. What a huge difference that made.. Line's are better than they have ever been. I've always fought this plane in the wind, even on horizontal straight flights.. Today, horizontal lines were hands off.. And it was pretty windy.. Up lines were much easier to fly. Not sure if it pulls to the canopy up or down as it was windy. But it held the track better all the way around. The wind was straight down the runway, and the plane held it's distance almost by itself. Very little heading corrections were needed. Before, I've always seemed to be on the rudder.. Even without wind. I actually left the field and said, dang, that's the best this plane has ever flown.. Even told the wife!!
Snaps, well that's still the strange thing. Inverted snaps seem very sluggish, like I break it with down ele, then throw in the aileron and rudder, and you can see the break, then it starts to barrel, then it speeds up and can over rotate a little ( I added more aileron throw, and took out some elevator and rudder, seemed to help a little. Regular snaps are lightning fast, but they stop when I let go of the sticks. They'd be great if they weren't so fast. I usually use one dual rate switch which is for low and high rate. Never needed anything different. I think I may need to try an inverted snap dual rate and a regular snap dual rate on different switches. That'll be a fun one to remember.. lol
Oh, it carries a little up trim in the ele's now. My knife up elevator mix of 15% on both sides is still there, but the roll coupling changed a little.
I kinda liked how the cg felt, I gave myself 5 percent more down ele so my stick felt the same inverted. Still I think I'd like to try it a little further forward, but I feel it would be a mistake. I didn't change motor thrust yet as I wanted to see the difference of the cg and incidence change first. I did feel I had too much positive in the wings and that I was a little tailheavy.. That's why I said the honest setup of the plane last time.
So now I am, 0 downthrust, 1/2 pos wings, 0 stab. But it needs a little up trim. I liked the way it flew, and presented today (especially in the wind). Just didn't care for the snaps.
More tomorrow night if I can get out after the easter egg hunt, or Sunday after the race..
Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Chris
shinden1 at cox.net wrote:
Chris sorry I have not got back to you
I see you have 3/4 deg pos in the wings ,,thats too much!
too much pos inc, will have the same feeling and response as too much tail weight the rudder will make the nose pitch down in both normal flying or knife ,,,and even vertical lines because of the down elevator needed to trim the model
go to 1/2 pos. on the wings 1/2 deg down thrust ,,
and then move the c/g around till the left knife has no mix or very little is needed ,,and the inverted elevator and rolls feel good
every thing else will fall in place
any time you need up trim with left and right rudder input your tail heavy ,,or you have too much pos. inc in the wing
Bryan
---- krishlan fitzsimmons wrote:
> Bryan,
> I was hopeful to hear back from you on this before I made a change. No worries though, I know you are busy, and you've been a great help with all of us..
> So if I go cg forward, I will need less positive in the wings as I wil need up trim in the ele's, correct? Or should I add 1/2 degree of down thrust? After seeing my uplines and my horizontal lines, I don't think I need it. But, what do I know? lol
> I think the cg forward could help my snaps and my downlines. I love the way it flys inverted and rolling right now, but I need to change.. I'll try the cg forward and less positive.
>
> C
>
> vicenterc at comcast.net wrote:
> Chris,
>
> Very good information. How much right thrust? I think you are correct, move the CG a little more forward. It could help the snaps also.
>
> --
> Vicente "Vince" Bortone
>
> -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: krishlan fitzsimmons
> > Ok Bryan,
> >
> > Here's how I went out today and man was I suprised, 0 degree down thrust, 0
> > stab, 3/4 positive in the wing.. Cg forward where Budd recommends. What a
> > difference.. I had a neutral elevator for the first time since I owned the plane
> > without adjusting things.. Uplines were good, downlines pulled to the canopy
> > still. Horizontal lines, the plane DID feel more locked into the line.. It's
> > never felt like that.. Mixing, well it still needed about 15% up mix in knifes,
> > down from 30% though. Inverted nearly hands off. 45 roll to inverted slowly
> > drops the nose. 45 downs are locked in. Snaps, well they suck for some reason. w
> > Not from this, but when I did cg, and other changes before, I changed throws cuz
> > the snaps sucked. It took alot more down ele, and aileron for inverted snaps..
> > And still, when I start the snap, it breaks, then slowly gets into the snap,
> > then speeds up too fast causing an overrotation. Regular snaps are now too fast
> > (easy to cure though with a different dual rate
> > setting).
> > I think my cg could go forward to help with the up ele needed in knife, and
> > also the pull to canopy on downlines maybe?? Or should I play with the wing
> > adjusters more?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > Nat Penton wrote:
> > Wayne
> > You missed the seminar - that was the rest room .
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Wayne Galligan
> > To: NSRCA Mailing List
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:21 AM
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
> >
> >
> > John Crapper was not the original inventor of the toilet. However Thomas
> > Crapper was one of the people that was responsible for it popularity. Not to
> > sure where John L Crapper came from but the original inventor was John
> > Harington. So maybe that's how the "John" and the "Crapper" have been come to
> > be known as.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Wayne Galligan
> > To: NSRCA Mailing List
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:11 AM
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
> >
> >
> > Water Closet (WC) is a toilet that disposes of the waste by using water to
> > flush it through a drainpipe to another location. Modern toilets incorporate an
> > 'S' bend; this 'trap' creates a water seal which remains filled the 'S' bend
> > also provides siphon action which helps accelerate the flushing process. Water
> > filling up the bowl creates a high pressure area which forces the water past the
> > S bend. At the S bend when water starts to move it creates a vacuum that pulls
> > the water and waste out of the toilet. When no more water is left then the air
> > stops the siphon or vacuum process. At that point the water that is going into
> > the bowl continues to fill up the bowl to equalize the bowl and the S bend. This
> > ends the cycle of one flush. Since there were no rooms designated for toilets
> > or crappers as they were called (named after John L Crapper, inventor of the
> > flush toilet) the term Water Closet was coined as homes that had the out houses
> > moved indoors were usually located in
> > closets in the home.
> >
> > Flush away............
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Karl G. Mueller
> > To: NSRCA Mailing List
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:45 AM
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
> >
> >
> > Vicente,
> >
> > "WC" actually is the short form of "Water Closet".
> > That's what the early Toilets were called.
> >
> > Karl G. Mueller
> > kgamueller at rogers.com
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: vicenterc at comcast.net
> > To: adriancwong at earthlink.net ; NSRCA Mailing List
> > Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 10:04 PM
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
> >
> >
> > WC = toilet. I wonder how many went and check.
> >
> > --
> > Vicente "Vince" Bortone
> >
> > -------------- Original message --------------
> > From: adriancwong at earthlink.net
> > BODY { FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY:
> > Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff }
> > body{font-family:
> > Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color: #ffffff;color:
> > black;} "WC", huh? I haven't heard that word since I've moved back from Hong
> > Kong in the early 90's.
> >
> > May be I should try the knife edge on a vertical down line, instead of doing it
> > horizontally?
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: vicenterc at comcast.net
> > Sent: Mar 17, 2008 7:00 PM
> > To: adriancwong at earthlink.net, NSRCA Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
> >
> > That is called Coriolis accerelation. That is why the water closets flush to
> > the right in the North hemisphere and to the left in the South hemisphere
> > (looking the water closet from above). If going down straight you are close to
> > the ecuator. If this do not happens as described the water closet needs to be
> > trimmed.
> >
> > --
> > Vicente "Vince" Bortone
> >
> > -------------- Original message --------------
> > From: adriancwong at earthlink.net
> > I think Bryan is hiding in his wind tunnel trying to duplicate the same
> > condition.
> >
> > I don't think it was my digits. It's probably between the earth's gravitational
> > pull and soething in the northern hemisphere. I bet the plane will do the exact
> > opposite if I fly it in Australia ... .-)
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Derek Koopowitz
> > Sent: Mar 17, 2008 3:36 PM
> > To: NSRCA Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
> >
> > I think he wishes it was his thumbs... :)
> >
> > The push to the belly was more than the pull to the canopy... the pull was
> > very slight.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 3:24 PM, krishlan fitzsimmons
> > wrote:
> > I was going to tell Adrian his thumbs cause this..
> > Just kidding of course Adrian..
> >
> > C
> >
> > Nat Penton wrote:
> >
> > Where is Bryan when you need him
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From:
> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> > Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 10:17 PM
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
> >
> >
> > > Bryan,
> > >
> > > What cause the plane to pull to the belly on one rudder, and to the canopy
> > > on the other rudder during knife edge.
> > >
> > > Thx,
> > >
> > > Adrian
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >>From: shinden1 at cox.net
> > >>Sent: Mar 16, 2008 7:17 PM
> > >>To: NSRCA Mailing List
> >
> > >>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
> > >>
> > >>Lance you need to find out exactly where the wing inc . is.
> > >>I think if you move your c/g back a little it will help take some of the
> > >>up trim out But you prob need more pos inc, in the wing so we need to know
> > >>where you are at right now to determine exactly where to go
> > >>Bryan
> >
> >
> > >>---- Lance Van Nostrand wrote:
> > >>> Bryan,
> > >>>
> > >>> The discussion list moves faster than I can try this stuff out. Too bad
> > >>> I
> > >>> have to work...
> > >>>
> > >>> I first only moved my CG forward significantly and have improved overall
> > >>> tracking. It was windy Saturday and wind penetration were good.
> > >>> Bryan's
> > >>> suggestion was correct on CG movement to make this improvement. However
> > >>> with the forward CG (and resultant uptrim) it pulls to the canopy
> > >>> slightly
> > >>> on downlines. At this point I noticed that during inverted flight,
> > >>> rudder
> > >>> input caused a pull to the belly (plane rose). This was weird. I then
> > >>> raised the incidence 2 turns and it fixed the inverted flight problem
> > >>> but it
> > >>> seemed to make the canopy pul! l worse . Interestingly, KE flight was not
> > >>> noticeably affected.
> > >>>
> > >>> The other affect is that inverted 45 downlines drop toward earth faster
> > >>> than
> > >>> upright 45s (which track nicely). Before this change, both 45s were
> > >>> fine.
> > >>>
> > >>> Is this the expectation?
> > >>>
> > >>> --Lance
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> > >>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> > >>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> > >>_______________________________________________
> > >>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> > >>NSRCA-disc! ussion@ l ists.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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
>
> From: krishlan fitzsimmons
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 23:24:07 +0000
>
> Ok Bryan,
>
> Here's how I went out today and man was I suprised, 0 degree down thrust, 0 stab, 3/4 positive in the wing.. Cg forward where Budd recommends. What a difference.. I had a neutral elevator for the first time since I owned the plane without adjusting things.. Uplines were good, downlines pulled to the canopy still. Horizontal lines, the plane DID feel more locked into the line.. It's never felt like that.. Mixing, well it still needed about 15% up mix in knifes, down from 30% though. Inverted nearly hands off. 45 roll to inverted slowly drops the nose. 45 downs are locked in. Snaps, well they suck for some reason. Not from this, but when I did cg, and other changes before, I changed throws cuz the snaps sucked. It took alot more down ele, and aileron for inverted snaps.. And still, when I start the snap, it breaks, then slowly gets into the snap, then speeds up too fast causing an overrotation. Regular snaps are now too fast (easy to cure though with a different dual rate
> setting).
> I think my cg could go forward to help with the up ele needed in knife, and also the pull to canopy on downlines maybe?? Or should I play with the wing adjusters more?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>
>
> Nat Penton wrote:
> Wayne
> You missed the seminar - that was the rest room .
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Wayne Galligan
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:21 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
>
>
> John Crapper was not the original inventor of the toilet. However Thomas Crapper was one of the people that was responsible for it popularity. Not to sure where John L Crapper came from but the original inventor was John Harington. So maybe that's how the "John" and the "Crapper" have been come to be known as.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Wayne Galligan
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:11 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
>
>
> Water Closet (WC) is a toilet that disposes of the waste by using water to flush it through a drainpipe to another location. Modern toilets incorporate an 'S' bend; this 'trap' creates a water seal which remains filled the 'S' bend also provides siphon action which helps accelerate the flushing process. Water filling up the bowl creates a high pressure area which forces the water past the S bend. At the S bend when water starts to move it creates a vacuum that pulls the water and waste out of the toilet. When no more water is left then the air stops the siphon or vacuum process. At that point the water that is going into the bowl continues to fill up the bowl to equalize the bowl and the S bend. This ends the cycle of one flush. Since there were no rooms designated for toilets or crappers as they were called (named after John L Crapper, inventor of the flush toilet) the term Water Closet was coined as homes that had the out houses moved indoors were usually located in
> closets in the home.
>
> Flush away............
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Karl G. Mueller
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
>
>
> Vicente,
>
> "WC" actually is the short form of "Water Closet".
> That's what the early Toilets were called.
>
> Karl G. Mueller
> kgamueller at rogers.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: vicenterc at comcast.net
> To: adriancwong at earthlink.net ; NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 10:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
>
>
> WC = toilet. I wonder how many went and check.
>
> --
> Vicente "Vince" Bortone
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: adriancwong at earthlink.net
> BODY { FONT-SIZE: 9pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff } body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color: #ffffff;color: black;} "WC", huh? I haven't heard that word since I've moved back from Hong Kong in the early 90's.
>
> May be I should try the knife edge on a vertical down line, instead of doing it horizontally?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vicenterc at comcast.net
> Sent: Mar 17, 2008 7:00 PM
> To: adriancwong at earthlink.net, NSRCA Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
>
> That is called Coriolis accerelation. That is why the water closets flush to the right in the North hemisphere and to the left in the South hemisphere (looking the water closet from above). If going down straight you are close to the ecuator. If this do not happens as described the water closet needs to be trimmed.
>
> --
> Vicente "Vince" Bortone
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: adriancwong at earthlink.net
> I think Bryan is hiding in his wind tunnel trying to duplicate the same condition.
>
> I don't think it was my digits. It's probably between the earth's gravitational pull and soething in the northern hemisphere. I bet the plane will do the exact opposite if I fly it in Australia ... .-)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Derek Koopowitz
> Sent: Mar 17, 2008 3:36 PM
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
>
> I think he wishes it was his thumbs... :)
>
> The push to the belly was more than the pull to the canopy... the pull was very slight.
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 3:24 PM, krishlan fitzsimmons wrote:
> I was going to tell Adrian his thumbs cause this..
> Just kidding of course Adrian..
>
> C
>
> Nat Penton wrote:
>
> Where is Bryan when you need him
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From:
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 10:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
>
>
> > Bryan,
> >
> > What cause the plane to pull to the belly on one rudder, and to the canopy
> > on the other rudder during knife edge.
> >
> > Thx,
> >
> > Adrian
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >>From: shinden1 at cox.net
> >>Sent: Mar 16, 2008 7:17 PM
> >>To: NSRCA Mailing List
>
> >>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] triangulation trimming
> >>
> >>Lance you need to find out exactly where the wing inc . is.
> >>I think if you move your c/g back a little it will help take some of the
> >>up trim out But you prob need more pos inc, in the wing so we need to know
> >>where you are at right now to determine exactly where to go
> >>Bryan
>
>
> >>---- Lance Van Nostrand wrote:
> >>> Bryan,
> >>>
> >>> The discussion list moves faster than I can try this stuff out. Too bad
> >>> I
> >>> have to work...
> >>>
> >>> I first only moved my CG forward significantly and have improved overall
> >>> tracking. It was windy Saturday and wind penetration were good.
> >>> Bryan's
> >>> suggestion was correct on CG movement to make this improvement. However
> >>> with the forward CG (and resultant uptrim) it pulls to the canopy
> >>> slightly
> >>> on downlines. At this point I noticed that during inverted flight,
> >>> rudder
> >>> input caused a pull to the belly (plane rose). This was weird. I then
> >>> raised the incidence 2 turns and it fixed the inverted flight problem
> >>> but it
> >>> seemed to make the canopy pul! l worse . Interestingly, KE flight was not
> >>> noticeably affected.
> >>>
> >>> The other affect is that inverted 45 downlines drop toward earth faster
> >>> than
> >>> upright 45s (which track nicely). Before this change, both 45s were
=== message truncated ===
Chris
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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/20080322/4b9b50e8/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list