Rc Plane MADNESS

Planes in todays video- Flite test SUPER BEE with Emax 2600kv motors- Lidl's Glider rc conversion with Aerodrive SK3 2500kv- Durafly spitfire-Nitro Wasp with high performance K&B engine + tuned pipe.

[@rektrc1142]

One of those things was screaming. Haha great video. Subbed.

[@torquedude]

Fun R/C Projects cheers buddy, had a real blast. Stay tuned for more of these type videos👍

[@daviddavids2884]

thanks for posting. at 3:05, you may know that the prop is a bit Far from the model's c-m; resulting is Excess pitch-axis stability. the wingtip things are not a good idea. kindly do not tell me the model flies great. because, what can be observed during flight is Never the whole story. cheers googletranslate

[@torquedude]

David Davids yes I totally agree with the pitch axis stability and as you seen I need to replace the motor so I intend to move it back a little but the wingtips have been clipped 20mm each side after straightening the wing to improve roll rate and stabilisers added to make it track at high speed that do help massively. She’s a work in progress and any recommendations welcome. Cheers

[@daviddavids2884]

yaaay going fast. you may know that almost all of these sorts of models have wonky proportions, 'out of the box'. when converting such a model, a builder should Recognize All issues present; then, decide what to fix. the following are some of the ratios (see pdf-doc) that guide the Correct design of a conventional airframe, large or small.
1) prop diameter should be equal to about 25 percent of wingspan. 2) fuselage length should be equal to about 75 percent of wingspan. 3) the main wing chord should be equal to about 22 percent of fuselage length. 4) the span of the horizontal stabilizer Should be Equal to 30 percent of wingspan. 5) the ideal location of c-m (center of mass) is at 25 percent of fuselage length, and vertically aligns with 25 percent of main wing chord; with cg at 30 percent, at the surface of the main wing. the location of the c-m at twenty-five percent of fuselage length reflects the inherent 3/1 moment arm of a conventional fuselage. cheers googletranslate
www.princeton.edu/~stengel/MAE331Lecture5.pdf

[@torquedude]

Wow David, that is a fantastic piece of information that i will be keeping in mind in future builds. Being a child's toys at 6 quid a pop i recon the quality control has been over looked and I've had to spend quite some time correcting them before flight. Any models I've built capable of 100 + MPH have been built to perfection but the Lidl glider has been fun to build as its far from perfect out of the box as you have mentioned. The wing and elevator incidence is very badly out and causing massive drag requiring a lot more thrust for the high speed runs I'm trying to achieve from this airframe. If you enjoyed that high speed run stay tuned for my up and coming video of my Weston uk magnum R video. cheers

[@daviddavids2884]

misalignment of the wing and stab Should be corrected; not overcome with more thrust. it appears that the span of the stab of the 'lidl' is a bit over-long; ie, more that thirty percent of ws. when all other wonkyness has been resolved, try removing the wing-things. they are simply not a good idea; do you realize that they cause vortices and DRAG. if more longitudinal stability is desired, increase vert-stab area at the Tail. note that precise use of drag at the tail can also increase long-stability. cheers