Comet Gull

I just flung my rebuilt Comet Gull into the air, having rebuilt it after it spent several years in pieces under my workbench. It now has a LiPo battery in there (and 1/2 oz of brass in the nose) instead of NiMH. Everything went nice, except the Peck Polymers "Domestic tissue" that I bought from the LHS was a huge disappointment -- it just wouldn't shrink. I've since found out that the domestic tissue that Easy Built carries is nicer -- but Esaki is still the best.

All-up weight is 5.5 oz -- not bad, for a plane that weighed around 8oz on NiMH batteries.

It definitely needs more dihedral -- I reduced it from the kit, and it tends to slide into turns. I can fly it, but you have to be on top of it with opposite rudder, or you get a "death spiral". Since one of the things I want to do is let my 12 year old kid fly it, I may need to fix that (I _hate_ ripping into wings).

(I did this on my Shershaw "Cadet", too -- and I need to rip into it's wing, too).

With a GWS IPS-B gearbox and motor, and a 9 x 4.7 prop, it climbs _really slow_, but it does fly. I need to measure current, to see if I can get away with a more aggressive prop. The death spiral helps absolutely not at all, nor does the fact that it's got a mile-long tail, which demands lots of elevator on turns (no surprise here).

I still need to put cabin windows on it. That should improve both the tendency toward the "death spiral" and reduce drag somewhat -- hopefully that'll fix things enough that it'll fly hands off. If not, the next step is to (sob!) hack out the wing center section and re-do the dihedral brace. I'd _really_ like something that flies more like an assisted free flight model than an RC plane that needs constant attention.

Lessons learned:

1: Domestic tissue is crap these days. But Esaki tissue is still good. 2: Ain't LiPos light? 3: Stop reducing dihedral on free-flight designs so much!!! 4: Brushed motors are still wimpy. 5: Pay attention to nose moment, if you can.
Reply to
Tim Wescott
Loading thread data ...

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:24:07 -0800, Tim Wescott wrote in :

That's a new one by me.

So is the Esaki tip, but I doubt I'll be building any 5.5 oz. aircraft.

Most of my airplanes have noses (1 delta wing by way of exception).

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

in:

Had I chopped the nose off less when I did the conversion, it wouldn't need the nose weight.

Or had I been more aggressive about leaving out some of the Comet wood in the back of the plane.

So you're too good for 5.5oz planes? Eh? What's the matter, 4oz is just too heavy for you?

Reply to
Tim Wescott

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 17:26:32 -0800, Tim Wescott wrote in :

Heh heh. I and my planes are on the other side of the Great Divide. And, lamentably, trending upward. :o(

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

-- snip --

-- snip --

I ran the calculation for a 1-square-foot, 5.5oz plane on a 4.7 inch pitch prop at 3600 RPM, and found that the prop's pitch speed was barely the stall speed of the plane!!! So clearly that prop was a problem.

I measured the static current with a 9x4.7 prop, and it came out to

1.8A. GWS gives dire warnings about putting more than 2A through the motor, so I took a 9x7 prop (2.4A without modification) and trimmed it down until I got a hair over 2A static (it's an 8x7 now). The plane flies _much better_ now -- I actually have enough power to loop!

Putting cabin windows on the plane really does give it more dihedral effect. I had learned about this in an aerodynamics book* for full-scale pilots, but didn't know if I should believe it or not -- now I do.

It still needs more dihedral to fly hands off, but it's better -- it's definitely better.

  • "Illustrated Guide to Aerodynamics", by Skip Smith. Good book.
    formatting link
Reply to
Tim Wescott

Cool. any pics? The last time I changed the dihedral of a wing I wound up with antihedral (sp?)

Reply to
MJKolodziej

Anhedral. go figure.

formatting link
No pictures -- it's pretty ugly. Some of lesson 1 is still clinging to the framework, and it's whiter and a lot more saggy than the Esaki. Maybe I'll snap a few pictures anyway, though.

Reply to
Tim Wescott

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.