Check out this RC airplane here: bit.ly/4c8vZXZ LEARN MORE ABOUT THE ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS HERE: join.modelaircraft.org/rc-saylors/ Does CG really even matter at all? In this video we do some extreme center of gravity (CG) testing with the E-Flite Commander. Let us know your thoughts about CG in the comments. Disclosure: This description box contains affiliate links. E-Flite Commander: bit.ly/4c8vZXZ 4s Battery: bit.ly/3xQ0TSN Transmitter: bit.ly/3yXw4wO Charger: bit.ly/3wQJzvc Budget Charger: bit.ly/3xqGTEZ Hot glue: amzn.to/3D7ypqP LEARN MORE ABOUT THE ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS HERE: join.modelaircraft.org/rc-saylors/ The products in this video are rated for ages 14+. Amazon RCs: amzn.to/44pklnb FMS: www.fmsmodel.com/bG7_qnRWGKXIak AMain: bit.ly/3FIc1V7 Hobby Zone (Arrows): bit.ly/3Sp3HRR Tower Hobbies: bit.ly/3FB56gq Banggood: ban.ggood.vip/14gJx Redcat: www.redcatracing.com/?ref=FXq96heFYK8m Aviation Apparel: bit.ly/48yTc3Z Fair RC: bit.ly/3QkFJ7r Horizon Hobby: bit.ly/4c8vZXZ Support TheRcSaylors Patreon & Stickers | www.patreon.com/TheRcSaylors Merch | www.thercsaylorsyt.com/shirts Mail | 1140 Carter Ave, P.O. Box 361, Ashland, Kentucky 41101 Social Media TheRcSaylors Shorts | bit.ly/3rN37xp Facebook | facebook.com/thercsaylors Instagram | instagram.com/thercsaylors Twitter | twitter.com/thercsaylors Vlog and Live Channel | th-cam.com/users/TheSaylorsYTchannel SPECIAL THANKS TO OUR PATREON FAMILY!! Jim Mulder, john salt, Jose Valentin, Michael Keller, Richard Higginson, Robert Sanges, Russ Cooper, ruudy, Ryan Alexander, Terry Kellogg, Anthony May, Big Mountain Custom RC, Chris Hamlett, David Chenzoff, dmilbrandt, Doug Dahlheimer, Gary Zion, Haar Bear, Jason day, Jeff Buys, Jeffrey Davis, and Jesper Larsen #rc #rcplane #rcairplane
I was taught to always check the CG with the wing up. Low wing, test CG upside down. (Plane will be more stable and give better test). High wing, test with wing up (right side up). Center wing, try both ways.
I had a fun experience watching half of your video. Still waiting to hear back from HH as to why my plane came out of the box all warped and twisted. In the meantime, I think you hit the nail on the head.
I've been flying my Commander for two years, and I have a problem with it nosing over on even low, manicured grass runway. I always thought the wheels were the problem. I was going to move the battery back to get more weight on the tail, and I was going to experiment on my next outing. Your video confirms my assumption that a spot-on CG doesn't really affect flight characteristics on some models. I hope moving the battery an inch towards the tail solves my (very frustrating) problem. Thanks for the vid, Nate. And thank you Abby for suggesting it.
Same problem with me, hold full up on initial taxi -take off. Biggie wheels remove pants, move undercarriage 5mm forward and angle forward with shim under the rear of undercarriage. Cured my problem
@@patrickhoyle8357 I've got about as much throw as I can get out of the elevator and always give full up on take-off. I removed the wheel pants when they got crunched (I wish they were plastic and not EPO). My next step is to try bigger wheels, but I'm going to try getting a little more tail weight first. I love the Commander! What a great flyer!
@bobroska38 would not recommend adding weight, especially to rear , messing with flying characteristics , move landing gear forwards is the answer. Look at trainers, they all have forward undercarriage- not under the wing. Does yours nose on landing? Keep power on , don't glide it in
I was taught to check CG on low-wing planes with the plane inverted for a more reliable check. Different planes can be more sensitive than others. One of my planes had the battery pull loose from the Velcro on lift-off, causing a shift to tail-heavy on the CG. Fortunately, it just stalled into a bush with pretty much no damage. I had another plane that the Velcro holding the battery let go coming out of a loop, and the battery completely departed the plane. Despite losing the battery weight from the nose (and all motor power and receiver power), the plane glided in and touched down without a scratch. Gotta love the Flite Test Simple Scout.
Nice! I've noticed that different aircraft respond differently to CG placement. For instance, my Pulse doesn't care much about CG (within reason) yet my Osprey is extremely sensitive to CG, which makes sense. It has a 110 degree variation of the direction of thrust, like the real one. I haven't had the guts to fly it horizontally yet, as it is so hard to fly in vertical mode. Just like the real ones!
One thing to consider is that the battery is located almost exactly were the CG is supposed to be so moving the battery should not have a big effect on the CG.
The CG is CRUCIAL! This was an interesting video for sure. I suspect the airframe design and given the extremely light wing loading and shear size of the wing made this possible. I am a balsa and ply guy. Ive been flying for 20 some years and have lost models due to a battery shift or improper CG check. These foamies and all the new gyro and safe functions are actually making less skilled RC aviator's IMO. I think when you build a model from sticks all the way to covering you understand the airframe much better ans where the bird should balance. With that being said i love all the new tech in our hobby. Its definitely different than when i was learning. Im not here to troll i get enough of that myself on IG. I love your channel keep up the good work. Id love to see you run this test on a balsa airframe especially a nitro model or even a scake electric like the OMP Decathlon. Im currently loving that model and if i switch from a 4s 2200mAh battery to a 4s 3300 mAh battery my CG requires me to move the battery quite a bit to fly safely. And that plan has a flat bottom high wing airfoil.
when you came up with the commander a few years ago,i immediately bought it,indeed a lovely plane,flew hundreds flights,never crashed,until a few weeks ago...it suddenly threw itself to the ground,damages looked the same as yours looks now...but when i came to the crash site,the receiver was blinking,so it looked like the connection was gone !!...it was at that time that the earth was hit by a cme,there were reports of hobby radio guys had no connection aswell....my plane was not to far away,i always keep it in good sight,....so we also have to keep an eye on what is happening with the sun !! You can;t buy the commander here in the netherlands,the parts took a while to get ...but he is almost ready to fly again !!..with the rc-saylor stickers attached !! God bless from the Netherlands !!
It all depends on the width of the wing chord. Planes with a wide wing chord are more forgiving to CG adjustments. Planes with a narrow wing chord like an A10 are much more sensitive to CG. You also need to check the CG inverted on the A10. If the plane has a gyro it hides a wrong CG because it is correcting for it. Every plane will be different. Getting the CG perfect is what you should always do. The plane flies much better. If not you're not going to experience the true performance of the plane.
Moral of the story is if your going to fly RC aircraft its best to buy some Lead weights that come with 3M tape an find the CG an balance the aircraft properly! Do not expect any brand aircraft to be balanced straight out the box always find the CG an check it! Nate just showed some aircraft will still fly with the CG off but for best results get the CG perfect before flight!!!
Appreciate the exploration of the CG topic! If a given model shows little sensitivity to changes in CG (such as moving battery around), you can be assured that the CG is far enough forward in the safe zone that it doesn't matter (you might perceive this as not being sensitive to CG). But as you move the CG farther back, it will become more and more sensitive to even quite small changes, and also increasingly more unstable. It's not really a question of good design or bad design (although if the manufacturer's CG suggestion is incorrect or the particular model has a problem making it tail heavy, it might "feel" like a bad design!), its more of an issue of finding the optimum CG for the design and it's a fundamental concept of a winged airplane. Take your A10 and start adding lead or steel to the nose and you'll see it become more docile; take your Commander and start adding lead or steel to the tail and you'll find the CG point where it becomes quite unstable like the A10!
What a FUN and impromptu video, also very informative for me!! I LOVE the E-Flight Commander, it's been thru SOOOO much...I'm going to name him SCAR, cuz he has many!! Thanks Saylors for honestly sharing your thoughts!! 💟👍😎
Condolences to Adam sorry for you loss 🙏🏼 I'm so glad you guys made this video because I have learned that cg is very important on some planes yet others it really doesn't make a difference....I had an old biplane that loved being nose heavy I would put the cg spot on and it flew like crap lol excellent "tutorial" on "cg" some planes /jets it just doesn't matter and some it does ALOT lol
Getting Cg spot on is something that is extremely important...having many planes i always am checking and making sure my CG is correct before i fly...have had dozens of crashes due to wrong Cg and batteries shifting during flights..Securing battery is Extremely Important.
True Cg is not as critical with some planes..this is one of them..not sure if you use stabilizer,but i can say that tiny battery moved a couple of inches forward or back barely changed its Cg anyways.
I believe the electronic stabilization systems(gyro, accelerometer compensation) is masking poorly balanced planes. Having the cg too far back can a plane very hard almost impossible to fly, but with modern stabilization it kind of dials out bad flight characteristics.
Yes if plane has gyro on its cg can be off considerably vs no gyro...i myself fly without gyros so with some of my small fast jets i hand launch its a must to get Cg as spot on as possible...
@@roadstar499 Most of these ready to fly planes, especially smaller planes have a 3 axis gyro and maybe even a 3 axis accelerometer built into the controller/receiver. I know EFlight calls theirs AS3X and the have it on all of their micro planes. I think most of the other makes have something simular to AS3X, which is basically a 3-axis gyro.
Check your CofG by holding your wing tips with a finger on each wing. If you have flat wind tips thenits the peak of the contour on the underside of the wing
The wings are so wide on this model it’s very forgiving as far as CG. Obviously this is a great airplane. Some model have narrow wings and need you to pay more attention to CG and more speed to get lift. Obviously small warbirds are more sensitive.⚓️ It was a fun video great experiment. 👍
My commander is a paradox, it's my fav plane but I fly it the least - because I don't want to ruin it . Unavaible in UK and I don't want to not have one. Wish full thinking but hoping it will be the next SWS. Fantastic plane
I completely understand that mindset and often treat my planes similarly! I happen to have a backup of my Commander (don’t mean to rub that in) so it’s another reason I love flying it! 👍💯😎⚓️
Ummm, you do know when checking CG on a low wing plane you need to check it with the plane inverted. High wing planes can be checked right side up. If giving advice, give it right.
Interesting points about the CG. I would think the muscle memory would be a bit of a handicap because your fingers would expect it to behave a certain way. As for the haters, people are always gonna bag on things. If you don't like something, you don't like it. Saying otherwise would be a disservice.
I am sorry for your friend's loss and my prayers go out to him and his family. It used to be, and I hate to say it, but.........back in the day with front engine fuel powered models you would balance them with the tank empty. Once you added the fuel the CG would change, and the model would be nose heavy. Being that the model was under power that would compensate for the forward CG, or at least that was the theory. The thought process was once the tank was almost empty or empty you were flying/landing with a correct CG. Now all that jazz aside, some models are not that finicky with the CG and some are. Do not listen to the trolls as some people have nothing good to say about anything that does not align with their world.
Hi Nate! Wow, that's the same Commander you brought to the 2022 AMA Fun Fly. I loaned you a pair of pliers to fix servo linkage. Try that CG thing with a 3200 3s. The heavier battery makes a bigger difference. I feel your Motion RC pain. I bought one from them. On the fifth flight the elevator servo failed. It went straight in, totally destroyed, including my battery. Motion RC said sorry, but we do not warranty our products that have been flown. Horizon has helped me out with product issues even if the warranty was expired.
I’ve done several foam board builds and I can tell you from bad experience lol CG is very important, The bigger the wing the more you can get away with but there’s a limit to every plane…
I found it an interesting video to watch. I must admit that I was surprised that changing the battery position that much didn't translate to more dramatically changed flights then what we saw. I'm thinking that this particular model you flew and your experienced piloting skills somewhat masked what we'd see in a different model flown by a less experienced pilot.
I appreciate the kind words, but I really wasn’t compensating for poor flight characteristics at all. Probably more credit goes to the airplane than anything. However, MOST of my airplanes are flown pretty casually when it comes to CG. It’s never been such a sensitive topic until that Motion RC A-10 appeared on our channel. I’m glad we made this video 😁💯 Thanks for watching! 👍😎💯
CoG is important. Except for the Carbon Cub. Velcro fail and a SMART 6s7000mah slid off the tray aft. The entire battery was behind the tray. And? Umm, it felt a little out of trim but meh, whatever. 😅 Second flight today on a new Flex Mamba 60e and a 6s6000mah went off the tray to the back. That was pretty exciting. Had to keep the throttle up at 75% until the wheels were back on the ground to keep the tail from falling out. Cannot recommend flying it like that😅. I love the Comander. Come on Horizon! Give us a 2 meter Carbon Z Comander with good nav lights. $600 any day for that one!
So basically what you have proven with this designed aircraft is that the cg is forgiving due to the design..... (other designs are not as forviging as this one)...There are two things to think about cg, ac.., and the (ac) is aircrafts center of areodynamic's , mostly the ac should be an inch or so infront of the cg...or just infront of the cg, that is how most aircraft are designed....🙃
Nate another great guys and by the way was designed by to model airplane guys I have three of these the old style and the new the old style had the three cell the new style is the four cell..... Keep up the good work and always stay honest like you do love ya guys. the guy across the river from you❤❤❤❤
I had the old 4s a10 and it was an absolute turd. It was a 25/75 bird. Flew good 25% of the time. I traded it to a guy at my field and he wadded it up on the maiden lol
This plane is obviously nice to fly, judging by what you say about it. And what I'll say about it that the shape reminds me of the Supermarine Spitfire, which is, from it's history of course, one of the nicest planes for humans to sit in and fly. And that general shape was "borrowed" by full size race plane designers over many decades.
Actually the recommended CG for the Commander is 85 mm back from the leading edge, which is actually about a half inch further back than the marks in the styrofoam ! (very misleading don't know why they would do that)
Just yesterday I added 12 ounces of weights to the front of my Flightline Bearcat to get the CG that the instructions suggest and that was the bare minimum location. This was even with a 4s 4000mah 50c battery pushed all the way to the front. I'm pretty new to the hobby and my first plane did not require that kind of work to achieve the suggested CG. Is what I had to do with the Bearcat uncommon? I also assume there is eventually a point where adding weight becomes more detrimental than the CG gains.
What I’ve recently learned about Flightline (Motion RC) is that more work than usual is required to achieve normal flight. There are a few other exceptional brands that do not require extensive work to achieve fun and safe flight, like the plane demonstrated in this video. For some reason, the Motion RC community is extremely defensive when it comes to this topic. I’m still trying to figure that aspect out because this vibe is very new to me in the RC Plane community which is usually very welcoming! I would suggest that you also look into some other brands, as spending $20 more might give you a 5X better experience! 👍💯😎⚓️ Happy Flying!
@@TheRcSaylors thank you, in my case I am a WW2 warbird fanatic and I specifically sought a Bearcat for my collection. I would have definitely preferred it was made by EFlite but I've come to accept I'll have to shop different brands to get the specific planes I want.
I see three major problems with this that completely invalidate this test firstly the size of the wing in proportion to the body on the tail as well those surfaces are huge this is a very stable airplane with a flying tail a flying tail is a wing and is lifting itself up it has so much surface area and compared to a typical RC plane that this is the worst aircraft you could have possibly used to demonstrate CG changes and how they affect flight also you've used what looks to be a fairly light battery in proportion to the size and lift of the aircraft most aircraft have higher Wing loading than this particular model which is well known to have very low Wing loading from an engineering perspective that should be unacceptable for this test you need a battery that has enough weight to actually affect the center of gravity when you move it if you're not getting an effect then the battery is not heavy enough to make any significant change partly like I said because of the big flying tail and very large winged area compared to its very lightweight try this test again using a regular airplane any other one will do try it on a fighter plane for example in addition your sieging the plane in the wrong spot anyway manufacturers fail on this one you need to flip the plane over and center of gravity should be done inverted inverted on any fighter plane believe it or not your plane is aerobatic and absolutely counts as a plane that should be CD inverted it's one of the reasons your CG tests aren't showing much also if you really want to have it so precisely your fingertips are hardly very good use an actual CG machine brother so we can see the real results don't forget the lubricate take the tips and put a drop of Lube on each one where the little fitting goes that is the tip that the plane sits on cuz those are pivot Points and you want them to Pivot as smoothly and easily as possible also either use a much heavier battery like I said or switch to a fighter plane that's lighter and smaller wings or heavier with smaller Wings would be even better the higher the wing loading the more effect CG changes will have on the aircraft because the closer it is to stall in a regular flight the particular aircraft you're using is a very well known design sir and has been used for a long time and is of a very particular design for a very particular reason it's the most stable damn plane that's ever been made for a fighter plane type design it was made for racing
The commander is such a forgiving plane with its wide wings it's going to fly good nomatter what. Unfortunately your channel is watched by people that don't know how too fly anything. As far as motion goes , they don't want any negative feedback by anybody reviewing any of there products. Witch is sad. They make great jets but you have to watch videos on what to buy. My experience with motion rc is they always come out with a version 2 or 3. They hardly get it right the first time. They still have some great jets though, you have to watch the videos. But that's kinda sad. They all should be good for a premium price. Thanks guys. You dont have to defend yourself.
Boeing isn't the only company to use computer-controlled flight surfaces to counteract off CG or designs. The stealth bomber and stealth fighter are both inherently almost impossible to fly by humans as I understand it. They both have computer control systems(gyros/accelerometers) to make them fly more docile.
The biggest problem I have with the AMA is the fine print, You Must ask permission from the owner of that field, to fly at that field, try asking city gov if you could fly at their park??? I bet the official answer is No!!! So that is why I like to fly at empty fields... They call the little r/c ones Park Flyer's for a reason!!........
If I had to do what AMA has set out to do for $90 a year, I wouldn’t even get out of my chair and try. I think what people expect out of them is a lot for the cost of admission. Having said that, I have my own opinions of what they could EASILY be doing better, but it’s fallen on deaf ears. At the end of the day, we’re better off because of AMA, like it or not. No one else goes to bat for us foam flyers! ❤️💯⚓️
@@TheRcSaylors Yes I agree with you guys, but remember you are flying from a sactioned field, with owners permission, I do not have anything like that here, so I have to make do with what I have..., Sorry....
@@TheRcSaylors Try this on any Viper or the Eflight A-10. Thats a true apples to apples comparison. That’ll educate your curiosity. Not sure what you’re trying to de-bunk here. In the same voice that you seem to be generalizing the Motion fan base, you’re going above and beyond for clickbait.
Must admit I've always loved that plane unfortunately Its far too large for the space I have available may try one of the umx planes at some point problem is Im radiomaster multi protocol guy I switched from spektrum when I realized the ease of use and amazing quality of the radiomaster products.. Anyway you mentioned having some planes at home you haven't built yet but how about helicopters anything sitting around in need of a review? Lol
Oh and I DEFINITELY want to say nate do NOT let anyone get to you man!!!! You and abby ARE FREAKING AWESOME and 2 of the most honest reviewers on YT!!!! Don't change a thing you're doing! ✌🏼
Some good flying with different balance test. Sounds like coperate sponsored hate group. Ignore them thar haters. You guys do honest content which viewers need to make reasonable buying choices. So don't worry be happy, subscribers love the Saylor's. And who doesn't love hearing Abby laughing & giggling in the background cheering on & harangueing her man Nate. Have a great weekend Saylor's oh my Saylor's. ⚓️⚓️👍💚🧡💛👍⚓️⚓️.
I just asked Abby. Apparently if we link the Commander, Google (who owns TH-cam) flags our channel for spam because Horizons website thinks the Commander and other products is a fraudulent website site because of all of the website issues they had 9 or so months ago the ago. They still have issues. So we had to link this plane! 🤩💯🤯⚓️
That very well may be true! I’ve never tried testing CG like this on anything ever before this video! Might be worth messing around with, but very carefully 👍💯😎⚓️
Maybe possible wing cord may be what makes CG placement more or less critical. The A10 has a short cord and the Commander has a long wing cord. It look’s like on the commander where you place your CG determines flying style,ie, if you want a 3D’ish style put CG aft, if you want scale style put CG forward.
I appreciate your guys’ candidness. Thanks for your channel. Much appreciated! God bless you. FYI…the link provided takes you to the Decathalon. Not whatever this plane is. What plane is this? mPd Commander. I did just watch the video….duh.
Sorry but I’m not sure I understand what’s your point? Do you say that CG doesn’t matter? Is this video trying to prove something about Freewing airplanes? Every airplane may react differently for “incorrect” CG IMO, try this test on EFlite/FMS EDFs and I guess it’ll be different. This test does not prove anything IMO :)
Just an interesting finding that we thought we would share! Sometimes there isn’t a definitive “point” to things. Actually, I find that is the case with most things in life. 💯❤️😎⚓️
Try this on any Viper or the Eflight A-10. Thats a true apples to apples comparison. Or better yet, ask the HH product specialist. Not sure what you’re trying to de-bunk here. You had a bad experience with 1 jet. Arguable one of the worst. Any experienced RC would have learned that by spending 5 mins in a RC form. In the same voice that you seem to be generalizing the Motion fan base, you’re going above and beyond for clickbait.
C'mon Nate. You know from your full scale training that the test of rearward CG limit would be recovery from engine out nose up low speed (wing) stall without power to recover. I hope your CFI doesn't hear about this video! You never tested the plane jn this situation! Suggest you take down this video before someone has an engine out and loses their plane, or re-edit it witn a warning. The center of lift is 1/3 back on the wing. With CG behind that point, an engine out nose up low speed wing stall with no elevator authority is unrecoverable. You know that from your private ground school. The point of CG limit is ability to recover control of the aircraft from any flight orientation and land safely with no engine power.
Check out this RC airplane here: bit.ly/4c8vZXZ
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS HERE: join.modelaircraft.org/rc-saylors/
Does CG really even matter at all? In this video we do some extreme center of gravity (CG) testing with the E-Flite Commander. Let us know your thoughts about CG in the comments.
Disclosure: This description box contains affiliate links.
E-Flite Commander: bit.ly/4c8vZXZ
4s Battery: bit.ly/3xQ0TSN
Transmitter: bit.ly/3yXw4wO
Charger: bit.ly/3wQJzvc
Budget Charger: bit.ly/3xqGTEZ
Hot glue: amzn.to/3D7ypqP
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE ACADEMY OF MODEL AERONAUTICS HERE: join.modelaircraft.org/rc-saylors/
The products in this video are rated for ages 14+.
Amazon RCs: amzn.to/44pklnb
FMS: www.fmsmodel.com/bG7_qnRWGKXIak
AMain: bit.ly/3FIc1V7
Hobby Zone (Arrows): bit.ly/3Sp3HRR
Tower Hobbies: bit.ly/3FB56gq
Banggood: ban.ggood.vip/14gJx
Redcat: www.redcatracing.com/?ref=FXq96heFYK8m
Aviation Apparel: bit.ly/48yTc3Z
Fair RC: bit.ly/3QkFJ7r
Horizon Hobby: bit.ly/4c8vZXZ
Support TheRcSaylors
Patreon & Stickers | www.patreon.com/TheRcSaylors
Merch | www.thercsaylorsyt.com/shirts
Mail | 1140 Carter Ave, P.O. Box 361, Ashland, Kentucky 41101
Social Media
TheRcSaylors Shorts | bit.ly/3rN37xp
Facebook | facebook.com/thercsaylors
Instagram | instagram.com/thercsaylors
Twitter | twitter.com/thercsaylors
Vlog and Live Channel | th-cam.com/users/TheSaylorsYTchannel
SPECIAL THANKS TO OUR PATREON FAMILY!!
Jim Mulder, john salt, Jose Valentin, Michael Keller, Richard Higginson, Robert Sanges, Russ Cooper, ruudy, Ryan Alexander, Terry Kellogg, Anthony May, Big Mountain Custom RC, Chris Hamlett, David Chenzoff, dmilbrandt, Doug Dahlheimer, Gary Zion, Haar Bear, Jason day, Jeff Buys, Jeffrey Davis, and Jesper Larsen
#rc #rcplane #rcairplane
I would love to have one of those airplanes but I can't afford one
I was taught to always check the CG with the wing up. Low wing, test CG upside down. (Plane will be more stable and give better test). High wing, test with wing up (right side up). Center wing, try both ways.
Excellent camera lady.
🙏❤️💯⚓️ Thank you!
I had a fun experience watching half of your video.
Still waiting to hear back from HH as to why my plane came out of the box all warped and twisted.
In the meantime, I think you hit the nail on the head.
Looks and flies like a Flite Test Sportster - one of my favorite planes and a quick build
I should try that one! Adding it to my short list now. Thanks! 🙏💯👍😎⚓️
I've been flying my Commander for two years, and I have a problem with it nosing over on even low, manicured grass runway. I always thought the wheels were the problem. I was going to move the battery back to get more weight on the tail, and I was going to experiment on my next outing. Your video confirms my assumption that a spot-on CG doesn't really affect flight characteristics on some models. I hope moving the battery an inch towards the tail solves my (very frustrating) problem. Thanks for the vid, Nate. And thank you Abby for suggesting it.
Same problem with me, hold full up on initial taxi -take off. Biggie wheels remove pants, move undercarriage 5mm forward and angle forward with shim under the rear of undercarriage. Cured my problem
@@patrickhoyle8357 I've got about as much throw as I can get out of the elevator and always give full up on take-off. I removed the wheel pants when they got crunched (I wish they were plastic and not EPO). My next step is to try bigger wheels, but I'm going to try getting a little more tail weight first. I love the Commander! What a great flyer!
@bobroska38 would not recommend adding weight, especially to rear , messing with flying characteristics , move landing gear forwards is the answer. Look at trainers, they all have forward undercarriage- not under the wing. Does yours nose on landing? Keep power on , don't glide it in
Love the Commander! It and the T28 1.2 are two of my favorite warm up planes! Fantastic!
Has to be definitely because the wing is so wide. It's a very stable plane. Great video.
I was taught to check CG on low-wing planes with the plane inverted for a more reliable check.
Different planes can be more sensitive than others. One of my planes had the battery pull loose from the Velcro on lift-off, causing a shift to tail-heavy on the CG. Fortunately, it just stalled into a bush with pretty much no damage. I had another plane that the Velcro holding the battery let go coming out of a loop, and the battery completely departed the plane. Despite losing the battery weight from the nose (and all motor power and receiver power), the plane glided in and touched down without a scratch. Gotta love the Flite Test Simple Scout.
the no cut recommendation from Abby was a good idea. good video as always boss.
Good Job Nate. Always learning something from you guys! Appreciate your good work.
Nice! I've noticed that different aircraft respond differently to CG placement. For instance, my Pulse doesn't care much about CG (within reason) yet my Osprey is extremely sensitive to CG, which makes sense. It has a 110 degree variation of the direction of thrust, like the real one. I haven't had the guts to fly it horizontally yet, as it is so hard to fly in vertical mode. Just like the real ones!
Thanks for what you do. We appreciate it.
Was a fun video, she certainly had some battle scars, I have had a battery slide and hit a servo, it didn’t end well. Bless you both 🙏🏻
One thing to consider is that the battery is located almost exactly were the CG is supposed to be so moving the battery should not have a big effect on the CG.
I want to see a test with a 3d plane.
The CG is CRUCIAL! This was an interesting video for sure. I suspect the airframe design and given the extremely light wing loading and shear size of the wing made this possible. I am a balsa and ply guy. Ive been flying for 20 some years and have lost models due to a battery shift or improper CG check. These foamies and all the new gyro and safe functions are actually making less skilled RC aviator's IMO. I think when you build a model from sticks all the way to covering you understand the airframe much better ans where the bird should balance. With that being said i love all the new tech in our hobby. Its definitely different than when i was learning. Im not here to troll i get enough of that myself on IG. I love your channel keep up the good work. Id love to see you run this test on a balsa airframe especially a nitro model or even a scake electric like the OMP Decathlon. Im currently loving that model and if i switch from a 4s 2200mAh battery to a 4s 3300 mAh battery my CG requires me to move the battery quite a bit to fly safely. And that plan has a flat bottom high wing airfoil.
when you came up with the commander a few years ago,i immediately bought it,indeed a lovely plane,flew hundreds flights,never crashed,until a few weeks ago...it suddenly threw itself to the ground,damages looked the same as yours looks now...but when i came to the crash site,the receiver was blinking,so it looked like the connection was gone !!...it was at that time that the earth was hit by a cme,there were reports of hobby radio guys had no connection aswell....my plane was not to far away,i always keep it in good sight,....so we also have to keep an eye on what is happening with the sun !! You can;t buy the commander here in the netherlands,the parts took a while to get ...but he is almost ready to fly again !!..with the rc-saylor stickers attached !! God bless from the Netherlands !!
Hey Nate &Abby! Love that plane, thick wing and body, too sweet! Great flight!
It all depends on the width of the wing chord. Planes with a wide wing chord are more forgiving to CG adjustments. Planes with a narrow wing chord like an A10 are much more sensitive to CG. You also need to check the CG inverted on the A10. If the plane has a gyro it hides a wrong CG because it is correcting for it. Every plane will be different. Getting the CG perfect is what you should always do. The plane flies much better. If not you're not going to experience the true performance of the plane.
Moral of the story is if your going to fly RC aircraft its best to buy some Lead weights that come with 3M tape an find the CG an balance the aircraft properly! Do not expect any brand aircraft to be balanced straight out the box always find the CG an check it! Nate just showed some aircraft will still fly with the CG off but for best results get the CG perfect before flight!!!
Appreciate the exploration of the CG topic! If a given model shows little sensitivity to changes in CG (such as moving battery around), you can be assured that the CG is far enough forward in the safe zone that it doesn't matter (you might perceive this as not being sensitive to CG). But as you move the CG farther back, it will become more and more sensitive to even quite small changes, and also increasingly more unstable. It's not really a question of good design or bad design (although if the manufacturer's CG suggestion is incorrect or the particular model has a problem making it tail heavy, it might "feel" like a bad design!), its more of an issue of finding the optimum CG for the design and it's a fundamental concept of a winged airplane. Take your A10 and start adding lead or steel to the nose and you'll see it become more docile; take your Commander and start adding lead or steel to the tail and you'll find the CG point where it becomes quite unstable like the A10!
What a FUN and impromptu video, also very informative for me!! I LOVE the E-Flight Commander, it's been thru SOOOO much...I'm going to name him SCAR, cuz he has many!! Thanks Saylors for honestly sharing your thoughts!! 💟👍😎
Condolences to Adam sorry for you loss 🙏🏼 I'm so glad you guys made this video because I have learned that cg is very important on some planes yet others it really doesn't make a difference....I had an old biplane that loved being nose heavy I would put the cg spot on and it flew like crap lol excellent "tutorial" on "cg" some planes /jets it just doesn't matter and some it does ALOT lol
Getting Cg spot on is something that is extremely important...having many planes i always am checking and making sure my CG is correct before i fly...have had dozens of crashes due to wrong Cg and batteries shifting during flights..Securing battery is Extremely Important.
I’ll agree 100% with everything you’ve said here. However, how do we explain what we experienced regarding CG in this video? 🤔⚓️
True Cg is not as critical with some planes..this is one of them..not sure if you use stabilizer,but i can say that tiny battery moved a couple of inches forward or back barely changed its Cg anyways.
I believe the electronic stabilization systems(gyro, accelerometer compensation) is masking poorly balanced planes. Having the cg too far back can a plane very hard almost impossible to fly, but with modern stabilization it kind of dials out bad flight characteristics.
Yes if plane has gyro on its cg can be off considerably vs no gyro...i myself fly without gyros so with some of my small fast jets i hand launch its a must to get Cg as spot on as possible...
@@roadstar499 Most of these ready to fly planes, especially smaller planes have a 3 axis gyro and maybe even a 3 axis accelerometer built into the controller/receiver. I know EFlight calls theirs AS3X and the have it on all of their micro planes. I think most of the other makes have something simular to AS3X, which is basically a 3-axis gyro.
Check your CofG by holding your wing tips with a finger on each wing. If you have flat wind tips thenits the peak of the contour on the underside of the wing
The wings are so wide on this model it’s very forgiving as far as CG. Obviously this is a great airplane. Some model have narrow wings and need you to pay more attention to CG and more speed to get lift. Obviously small warbirds are more sensitive.⚓️ It was a fun video great experiment. 👍
My commander is a paradox, it's my fav plane but I fly it the least - because I don't want to ruin it . Unavaible in UK and I don't want to not have one. Wish full thinking but hoping it will be the next SWS. Fantastic plane
I completely understand that mindset and often treat my planes similarly! I happen to have a backup of my Commander (don’t mean to rub that in) so it’s another reason I love flying it! 👍💯😎⚓️
Ummm, you do know when checking CG on a low wing plane you need to check it with the plane inverted. High wing planes can be checked right side up. If giving advice, give it right.
This just seems unnecessarily mean… ❤️⚓️
Has to be a solid plane to mess with CG like that and all is good! 👍🏻
I have one and cg at the two circles on the top on the wings inverted. It’s fine
Nice plane. My condolences on your family member.
Interesting points about the CG. I would think the muscle memory would be a bit of a handicap because your fingers would expect it to behave a certain way. As for the haters, people are always gonna bag on things. If you don't like something, you don't like it. Saying otherwise would be a disservice.
I am sorry for your friend's loss and my prayers go out to him and his family. It used to be, and I hate to say it, but.........back in the day with front engine fuel powered models you would balance them with the tank empty. Once you added the fuel the CG would change, and the model would be nose heavy. Being that the model was under power that would compensate for the forward CG, or at least that was the theory. The thought process was once the tank was almost empty or empty you were flying/landing with a correct CG. Now all that jazz aside, some models are not that finicky with the CG and some are. Do not listen to the trolls as some people have nothing good to say about anything that does not align with their world.
🙏
Hi Nate! Wow, that's the same Commander you brought to the 2022 AMA Fun Fly. I loaned you a pair of pliers to fix servo linkage. Try that CG thing with a 3200 3s. The heavier battery makes a bigger difference. I feel your Motion RC pain. I bought one from them. On the fifth flight the elevator servo failed. It went straight in, totally destroyed, including my battery. Motion RC said sorry, but we do not warranty our products that have been flown. Horizon has helped me out with product issues even if the warranty was expired.
I’ve done several foam board builds and I can tell you from bad experience lol CG is very important, The bigger the wing the more you can get away with but there’s a limit to every plane…
I found it an interesting video to watch.
I must admit that I was surprised that changing the battery position that much didn't translate to more dramatically changed flights then what we saw. I'm thinking that this particular model you flew and your experienced piloting skills somewhat masked what we'd see in a different model flown by a less experienced pilot.
I appreciate the kind words, but I really wasn’t compensating for poor flight characteristics at all. Probably more credit goes to the airplane than anything. However, MOST of my airplanes are flown pretty casually when it comes to CG. It’s never been such a sensitive topic until that Motion RC A-10 appeared on our channel. I’m glad we made this video 😁💯 Thanks for watching! 👍😎💯
@@TheRcSaylors Now I've got to go back and watch that Motion RC A10 video again to see what all the fuss is about. 😊
CoG is important. Except for the Carbon Cub. Velcro fail and a SMART 6s7000mah slid off the tray aft. The entire battery was behind the tray. And? Umm, it felt a little out of trim but meh, whatever. 😅 Second flight today on a new Flex Mamba 60e and a 6s6000mah went off the tray to the back. That was pretty exciting. Had to keep the throttle up at 75% until the wheels were back on the ground to keep the tail from falling out. Cannot recommend flying it like that😅. I love the Comander. Come on Horizon! Give us a 2 meter Carbon Z Comander with good nav lights. $600 any day for that one!
So basically what you have proven with this designed aircraft is that the cg is forgiving due to the design..... (other designs are not as forviging as this one)...There are two things to think about cg, ac.., and the (ac) is aircrafts center of areodynamic's , mostly the ac should be an inch or so infront of the cg...or just infront of the cg, that is how most aircraft are designed....🙃
From my mates experience certain planes, jet ones the battery placement is crucial for cg
Nate another great guys and by the way was designed by to model airplane guys I have three of these the old style and the new the old style had the three cell the new style is the four cell..... Keep up the good work and always stay honest like you do love ya guys. the guy across the river from you❤❤❤❤
I had the old 4s a10 and it was an absolute turd. It was a 25/75 bird. Flew good 25% of the time. I traded it to a guy at my field and he wadded it up on the maiden lol
can you make a video on the ov10 bronco please
I’d love to fly a Bronco! 👍😎💯⚓️
You should have flown it with the battery unstrapped and flopping around loose!
Yeah I’d never really recommend anyone doing that 😅😬💯⚓️
This plane is obviously nice to fly, judging by what you say about it. And what I'll say about it that the shape reminds me of the Supermarine Spitfire, which is, from it's history of course, one of the nicest planes for humans to sit in and fly. And that general shape was "borrowed" by full size race plane designers over many decades.
You can tell how the CG is when inverted for sure...if you need elevator push to stay level...
Seems like the width of the wing is larger than most plane wings.
Abbey coming up with awesome 👏 ideas on the fly 😊😊😊love TheRCSaylors happy flying all ⚓️⚓️⚓️⚓️
Lots of wing area so no problem!
Actually the recommended CG for the Commander is 85 mm back from the leading edge, which is actually about a half inch further back than the marks in the styrofoam ! (very misleading don't know why they would do that)
Just yesterday I added 12 ounces of weights to the front of my Flightline Bearcat to get the CG that the instructions suggest and that was the bare minimum location. This was even with a 4s 4000mah 50c battery pushed all the way to the front. I'm pretty new to the hobby and my first plane did not require that kind of work to achieve the suggested CG. Is what I had to do with the Bearcat uncommon? I also assume there is eventually a point where adding weight becomes more detrimental than the CG gains.
What I’ve recently learned about Flightline (Motion RC) is that more work than usual is required to achieve normal flight. There are a few other exceptional brands that do not require extensive work to achieve fun and safe flight, like the plane demonstrated in this video. For some reason, the Motion RC community is extremely defensive when it comes to this topic. I’m still trying to figure that aspect out because this vibe is very new to me in the RC Plane community which is usually very welcoming! I would suggest that you also look into some other brands, as spending $20 more might give you a 5X better experience! 👍💯😎⚓️ Happy Flying!
@@TheRcSaylors thank you, in my case I am a WW2 warbird fanatic and I specifically sought a Bearcat for my collection. I would have definitely preferred it was made by EFlite but I've come to accept I'll have to shop different brands to get the specific planes I want.
Awesome video,wow guys alot of weirdos,in the messages ,rc family and freaking weird people message, thanks guys have blessed weekend.
I see three major problems with this that completely invalidate this test firstly the size of the wing in proportion to the body on the tail as well those surfaces are huge this is a very stable airplane with a flying tail a flying tail is a wing and is lifting itself up it has so much surface area and compared to a typical RC plane that this is the worst aircraft you could have possibly used to demonstrate CG changes and how they affect flight also you've used what looks to be a fairly light battery in proportion to the size and lift of the aircraft most aircraft have higher Wing loading than this particular model which is well known to have very low Wing loading from an engineering perspective that should be unacceptable for this test you need a battery that has enough weight to actually affect the center of gravity when you move it if you're not getting an effect then the battery is not heavy enough to make any significant change partly like I said because of the big flying tail and very large winged area compared to its very lightweight try this test again using a regular airplane any other one will do try it on a fighter plane for example in addition your sieging the plane in the wrong spot anyway manufacturers fail on this one you need to flip the plane over and center of gravity should be done inverted inverted on any fighter plane believe it or not your plane is aerobatic and absolutely counts as a plane that should be CD inverted it's one of the reasons your CG tests aren't showing much also if you really want to have it so precisely your fingertips are hardly very good use an actual CG machine brother so we can see the real results don't forget the lubricate take the tips and put a drop of Lube on each one where the little fitting goes that is the tip that the plane sits on cuz those are pivot Points and you want them to Pivot as smoothly and easily as possible also either use a much heavier battery like I said or switch to a fighter plane that's lighter and smaller wings or heavier with smaller Wings would be even better the higher the wing loading the more effect CG changes will have on the aircraft because the closer it is to stall in a regular flight the particular aircraft you're using is a very well known design sir and has been used for a long time and is of a very particular design for a very particular reason it's the most stable damn plane that's ever been made for a fighter plane type design it was made for racing
I think the width of the wings give you a lot more room to play with the CG?
Blessings!
It’s very possible! That’s a good point 👍💯😎⚓️
A nose heavy plane flies bad, a tail heavy one flies once.
Solid advice! 👍💯 In this case, it seems to always fly! Could just be a superb plane? I honestly didn’t expect these results 🤩🤯⚓️
@@TheRcSaylors I think the wing chord of that plane might have something to do with it.
The commander is such a forgiving plane with its wide wings it's going to fly good nomatter what. Unfortunately your channel is watched by people that don't know how too fly anything. As far as motion goes , they don't want any negative feedback by anybody reviewing any of there products. Witch is sad. They make great jets but you have to watch videos on what to buy. My experience with motion rc is they always come out with a version 2 or 3. They hardly get it right the first time. They still have some great jets though, you have to watch the videos. But that's kinda sad. They all should be good for a premium price. Thanks guys. You dont have to defend yourself.
I do believe you told me a while back that you didn't pay that much attention to C.G. lol
And now you can see why! 😅💯👍⚓️
@@TheRcSaylors Do that same test with all of them.
Love ur guy’s videos 🫡❤💯⚓️
Thanks! 🙏💯😎⚓️
@@TheRcSaylors thanks for liking my comment ❤️⚓️💯
Tell that to Boing! They used computer controlled fligjt contril surfaces programs to counteract off CG!
Very interesting! 👍💯⚓️
Boeing isn't the only company to use computer-controlled flight surfaces to counteract off CG or designs. The stealth bomber and stealth fighter are both inherently almost impossible to fly by humans as I understand it. They both have computer control systems(gyros/accelerometers) to make them fly more docile.
Ok... 🤔 but what if you take the battery out ?
yeh...pros don'...leave batt installed...chk c.g. ..simple no??🇪🇦🇦🇹🇩🇪🇺🇦🇸🇮🇸🇰🇬🇧🇮🇱🇮🇩🇨🇦🇨🇵
Or put a hot wired 1 cell battery that fits in the plane
Or put a hot wired 1 cell battery that fits in the plane
👍👍😎😎
The biggest problem I have with the AMA is the fine print, You Must ask permission from the owner of that field, to fly at that field, try asking city gov if you could fly at their park??? I bet the official answer is No!!! So that is why I like to fly at empty fields... They call the little r/c ones Park Flyer's for a reason!!........
Is AMA the problem or our mess of a government? 🤔⚓️
@@TheRcSaylors Very interesting Question!!!.... I am Not Sure.... Exactly... but I would venture to guess half -n- half, maybe?????
If I had to do what AMA has set out to do for $90 a year, I wouldn’t even get out of my chair and try. I think what people expect out of them is a lot for the cost of admission. Having said that, I have my own opinions of what they could EASILY be doing better, but it’s fallen on deaf ears. At the end of the day, we’re better off because of AMA, like it or not. No one else goes to bat for us foam flyers! ❤️💯⚓️
@@TheRcSaylors Yes I agree with you guys, but remember you are flying from a sactioned field, with owners permission,
I do not have anything like that here, so I have to make do with what I have..., Sorry....
Fact! CG matters.
Wonder why I was able to move the battery around so much on this particular plane? Genuinely curious 💯⚓️
@@TheRcSaylors Try this on any Viper or the Eflight A-10. Thats a true apples to apples comparison. That’ll educate your curiosity. Not sure what you’re trying to de-bunk here. In the same voice that you seem to be generalizing the Motion fan base, you’re going above and beyond for clickbait.
Must admit I've always loved that plane unfortunately Its far too large for the space I have available may try one of the umx planes at some point problem is Im radiomaster multi protocol guy I switched from spektrum when I realized the ease of use and amazing quality of the radiomaster products.. Anyway you mentioned having some planes at home you haven't built yet but how about helicopters anything sitting around in need of a review? Lol
Adam?? Modelav8r?
Im shocked by how many folks are always angry in this comment section...
I tend to think if a person is that angry in our comments section they are probably a LOT angrier in real life 😢❤️💯⚓️
Oh and I DEFINITELY want to say nate do NOT let anyone get to you man!!!! You and abby ARE FREAKING AWESOME and 2 of the most honest reviewers on YT!!!! Don't change a thing you're doing! ✌🏼
Condolences,.
Yea Trolls, Back under Bridge's,
More Boats, an Helicopters.
. Get a Sitter an Take wife to Olive Garden.
Me an mine went last nite
Some good flying with different balance test. Sounds like coperate sponsored hate group. Ignore them thar haters. You guys do honest content which viewers need to make reasonable buying choices. So don't worry be happy, subscribers love the Saylor's. And who doesn't love hearing Abby laughing & giggling in the background cheering on & harangueing her man Nate. Have a great weekend Saylor's oh my Saylor's. ⚓️⚓️👍💚🧡💛👍⚓️⚓️.
Wrong link in the description
Thank you! Abby usually makes the links for me. No clue how she confused it with the Decathlon! 😅🙏💯⚓️
I just asked Abby. Apparently if we link the Commander, Google (who owns TH-cam) flags our channel for spam because Horizons website thinks the Commander and other products is a fraudulent website site because of all of the website issues they had 9 or so months ago the ago. They still have issues. So we had to link this plane! 🤩💯🤯⚓️
@@TheRcSaylors copy that.
Is that har,a helmat,or brains on the piolet?
?
I think it louks lirke har
I think it louks lirke har
seems to me like the jets are more picky with C.G. or as I call them crotch rockets
That very well may be true! I’ve never tried testing CG like this on anything ever before this video! Might be worth messing around with, but very carefully 👍💯😎⚓️
Like 👍
🖤🙏
Maybe possible wing cord may be what makes CG placement more or less critical. The A10 has a short cord and the Commander has a long wing cord. It look’s like on the commander where you place your CG determines flying style,ie, if you want a 3D’ish style put CG aft, if you want scale style put CG forward.
I appreciate your guys’ candidness. Thanks for your channel. Much appreciated! God bless you. FYI…the link provided takes you to the Decathalon. Not whatever this plane is. What plane is this? mPd Commander. I did just watch the video….duh.
Sorry but I’m not sure I understand what’s your point? Do you say that CG doesn’t matter? Is this video trying to prove something about Freewing airplanes?
Every airplane may react differently for “incorrect” CG IMO, try this test on EFlite/FMS EDFs and I guess it’ll be different. This test does not prove anything IMO :)
Just an interesting finding that we thought we would share! Sometimes there isn’t a definitive “point” to things. Actually, I find that is the case with most things in life. 💯❤️😎⚓️
Try this on any Viper or the Eflight A-10. Thats a true apples to apples comparison. Or better yet, ask the HH product specialist. Not sure what you’re trying to de-bunk here. You had a bad experience with 1 jet. Arguable one of the worst. Any experienced RC would have learned that by spending 5 mins in a RC form. In the same voice that you seem to be generalizing the Motion fan base, you’re going above and beyond for clickbait.
C'mon Nate. You know from your full scale training that the test of rearward CG limit would be recovery from engine out nose up low speed (wing) stall without power to recover. I hope your CFI doesn't hear about this video!
You never tested the plane jn this situation! Suggest you take down this video before someone has an engine out and loses their plane, or re-edit it witn a warning.
The center of lift is 1/3 back on the wing. With CG behind that point, an engine out nose up low speed wing stall with no elevator authority is unrecoverable. You know that from your private ground school. The point of CG limit is ability to recover control of the aircraft from any flight orientation and land safely with no engine power.
Tks Ken, TRoll Union Called, U need to stay under Bridge, unless U get someone to cover
Lots of wing area so no problem!