 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Air Models / November 2008Seagull Ultimate Bipe C of G
I am putting the finishing touches on my Ultimate Bipe and was wondering about the CG. The manual says its between 10 and 13 CM back from the leading edge of the top wing, This places it pretty far back from the leading edge. Has anyone built one of these and can verify that the CG distance is correct? >I am putting the finishing touches on my Ultimate Bipe and was > wondering about the CG. The manual says its between 10 and 13 CM back > from the leading edge of the top wing, This places it pretty far back > from the leading edge. Has anyone built one of these and can verify > that the CG distance is correct? Where is the 25% point on the lower wing, and what percentage of wing area is the lower wing vs. the upper wing? Then you have to take the incidence of the upper wing compared to the lower wing into account, also. Biplanes are complex. Go with the manual, and adjust it after that if you don't like how it flies. All that said, if someone weighs in with actual experience, that would be interesting.  SignatureJim in NC >>I am putting the finishing touches on my Ultimate Bipe and was >> wondering about the CG. The manual says its between 10 and 13 CM back >> from the leading edge of the top wing, This places it pretty far back >> from the leading edge. Has anyone built one of these and can verify >> that the CG distance is correct? >Where is the 25% point on the lower wing, and what percentage of wing area >is the lower wing vs. the upper wing? Then you have to take the incidence >of the upper wing compared to the lower wing into account, also. >Biplanes are complex. Go with the manual, and adjust it after that if you >don't like how it flies. >All that said, if someone weighs in with actual experience, that would be >interesting. Nice pun ("weighs"). :-O The best article I've read is by Jerry Neuberger. I don't know the original source, but there is a legible copy of it in this newsletter. http://galleryofaviation.com/articles/eagle/pdf/eagle0204.pdf It used to be on the AMA website. Draw the pictures and do the calculations. They may help prevent you from having to learn from mistakes. ;o) Marty SignatureBig-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.* See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups. FWIW, I tried Jerry Neuberger's method on a park flyer I'm building (30" constant chord wing) and came up with a CG location within 1/16" of that which the manual called for. >>>I am putting the finishing touches on my Ultimate Bipe and was >>> wondering about the CG. The manual says its between 10 and 13 CM back [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Marty >All that said, if someone weighs in with actual experience, that would be >interesting. ------------ This must be a generational thing. This "actual experience" thing is what I'm referring to. What if the person with the "actual experience" did it wrong and totalled his/her model? Is that as good as someone that has been designing, building and flying different kinds of biplanes all of his/her long life, but may not have actually used the particular model that you have? Do yourself a favor, OP. Lose this insult now. You are alienating many who could accurately help you. I'm offended. Figure it out yourself like I had to do. Ed Cregger > >All that said, if someone weighs in with actual experience, that would > >be [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Ed Cregger That was not the OPs comment. It was Jim's comment about his own advice. The insult was not there. As in everyting the insust is in how YOU take it not how they meant it. Having one of your bad days? I feel your pain. Take a deep breath, chill. You are not up to your usual good spirits. :) mk >> >All that said, if someone weighs in with actual experience, that would >> >be [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > :) > mk ---------- Doh! You are correct. Not feeling great. Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways. Ed Cregger |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.