[NSRCA-discussion] C'ARF Integral - Mixing secret?

[Andre Bouchard]

I will to stand-up for often maligned Integral...

 

I have two Integrals with over 1000 flights between the two, so I have a
pretty well refined the trim issues(!).  I have no wing adjusters and while
I do see some slight differences between the two in terms of wing incidence
and wing incidence relative to each wing, I am amazed at the ability of CARF
to produce such nearly identical models in a mss production mode (mine were
purchased about two years apart) - maybe I got lucky.  I think wing
adjusters are useful in any airplane, and I am sure I could tweak my trim
some more if I had them, but I guess the point is I have not yet thought the
benefit was worth the effort.  

 

The key to the trim on this airplane (any airplane IMO) is as Brian Hebert
said: CG position.  CG position will make more of a difference on this
airplane than any design I have flown.  I have found 160mm-165mm to be good
overall; negligible R to E and R to A mixes to the point it is better not to
mess with mixes.  More forward CG than 160 and it flies noticeably nose
heavy and rolls are labored.  Beyond 175mm it becomes like pushing a rope.
No question, more rearward CG makes it easier to roll, but has other
consequences like the mixes mentioned.  At 160ish CG you may need more
down-thrust as you will be carrying up-trim somewhere (wing or elevator) and
a bit of throttle to elevator mix at idle. 

 

Weights.I guess I am lucky here also. Both are 10.75# RTF using Hacker
C50Comp; Hacker ESC; TP5000; 2x9650; 2x9551; 1x9157; 930mAh Rx pack; Jaccio
regulator; Budd mount; APC 20.5x14; TT; MK hardware and all the other stuff
that goes into these things.  One has a PPG wing tube, but that did not save
much weight after having to fatten it up with tape to match the stock
sockets.

 

I hope this info helps.

 

Regards,

 

Andre Bouchard    

 

  _____  

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of CHV69 at aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 8:19 PM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] C'ARF Integral - Mixing secret?

 

In a message dated 7/6/2010 8:59:10 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
rcmaster199 at aol.com writes:

Guys,

 

This is an ARFie and as arfies go, wing incidence differential causes what
is described here-in. Check that please and report back

Matt,

We had a conversation about my Integral at Pocono.

 

Difference in Wing incidence and Low wing without enough dihedral.

There are not any wing adjusters on the stock integral.

 

I know mine is different from one wing to the other by a 1/2 a degree.

If I were to try to get 3 degrees positive as I have read here on the list I
am not sure the holes would be covered where the stock pins go through the
fuse.

 

I like my Vivat Much better then my Integral.

 

Carl

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.439 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2986 - Release Date: 07/06/10
18:36:00


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20100707/368eabd9/attachment.html>