<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3020" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I have tried all these methods of elevator
setup. Pushrod with Y at the end, pushrod to MK bellcrank, dual
servo's, pull/pull steel line and Kevlar, and DEPS(dual
pushrods.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>FWIW... All these setups work
good and are personal preference based on your building abilities and the type
of airframe your using. One thing I have found is its paramount to have
a fuse that does not flex or twist under load. If it does have any
movement I would think the dual servo's or DEPS may have an advantage
over the pull/pull. </FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>But I have been wrong
before.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>1. Pushrod with Y... worked good only
if it had a bearing at the front and tail to support pushrod.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. Pushrod to MK bellcrank... was very solid with
nary any blow back. But a little heavier then some setups. Pushrod needs
support in middle of rod with foam to prevent oscillation of the rod. Has
to many points of possible failure and requires more hardware, although I put
over 800 flights on one setup.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>3. Dual servo's... Very redundant and with
the right transmitter can be setup precisely. Slightly heavier then
pushrod setup with servo's and wire leads.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>4.Pull/pull... Very light and most adjustable
of the setups, Requires more time to set up properly and is a little less
ahhh... aesthetic with all the lines protruding from fuse. Wire
lines require good crimps and straight exit holes in line with servo and control
surface. Kevlar(my choice) requires Teflon or nylon exits to prevent
chafing of the line but does not have to be a perfect line to the control
surface when using this type of exit. I went gun shy on
pull/pull my setup(wire) broke on the down elevator on the 10th flight
causing a mishap. One other plane with Kevlar had hundreds of
flights before a radio failure retired it and it was still in good condition on
inspection after the crash. BTW I have found a spool of Kevlar
control line works good and will last for many setups and cost about 8
bucks.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>5. DEPs ... dual elevator rods (.07 c.fiber with
Teflon sleeves) has been in the last two planes I have built.
Requires a little time setting up in a straight line through exit to assure
smooth operation. Very light and positive control to elevator halves. When
exited below stab looks cleaner.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Wayne Galligan</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=bob@toprudder.com href="mailto:bob@toprudder.com">Bob Richards</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, January 10, 2007 7:38
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Pull-Pull</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Not all planes have push-pull elevators. I've had planes with all
pull-pull tail surfaces.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But, there are a few reasons why elevators would be setup with push-pull.
Seperate servos (much smaller ones) can easily be mounted in the tail. Having
seperate servos allows easy travel adjustment (travel matching) through the
radio programming, and also allows redundancy on this critical control.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The rudder requires more torque -- heavier servo -- and it might be a
design consideration (balance) to keep the weight of the heavier servo closer
to the CG.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Personally, I like pull-pull and would prefer it in my models.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>JMHO.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Bob R.</DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR><B><I>Jay Marshall <lightfoot@sc.rr.com></I></B>
wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Why
are rudder controls pull-pull and elevator controls push-pull?<BR><BR>Jay
Marshall<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>