Standard Servo on ailerons?

Hello again everybody. I've finally found something that I don't really like about the Great Planes Ultimate (.40 size) that I'm building. The ailerons are controlled by a single standard servo. Is there a chance that the loading is too much for a Futaba 3004? I'm a little worried about stripping it. I'm looking for suggestions on a higher torque servo that won't bust my budget. The lower wing is already built, so dual servos would require a major rebuild (Yes, I do have perfect hindsight) . I intend to power the plane with a YS .45 with a Zinger 11-6 or 10-7

don't worry, be happy

I wouldn't expect any problems

Why would you suspect problems? Don't you realize that even many 60 sizs sport planes use a single aileron servo?

I remember when a single server with half the power of today's servos handled the ailerons of most everything. That's when you had to know what you're doing with control set up!

Unless your ailerons are 3" wide and you're planning madly overpower that puppy and then proceed to crank around at 100mph doing rolling loops, you don't have anything to worry about.

Paul McIntosh wrote: It is unfortunate that those who insist on two servos for one wing have even created this kind of controversy.

I'd go ahead and do the rebuild. It might not be as tough as you think. I don't think one 3004 is enough servo to safely handle the ailerons with the engine you specify.

Good advice from everybody, on both sides. The vote so far comes out 5 to 1 that one servo will do it, plus GP says that one is enough, so I guess I'm worried about nothing. It just seems like a lot of work for one servo to control four ailerons. Do you think GP will reimburse me if Dr1Driver turns out to be right? just kidding. I plan on keeping the throws very tame at first, anyway since this is too much plane for my experience at the time. This one is going to collect a lot of dust while I get some stick time on the trainer and a

300S.

snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

My GP Ultimate has a single Futaba ballraced servo. The engine is the OS72 FS. It doesn't need vast movement to roll or turn. You could always couple the rudder.

I just don't like torque rods. That's just personal

Neither do I. If anyone remembers, Dodge came out with the "Torque Rod" front suspension in the mid to late 60s. The main feature was a torque rod, bridged between the A-arms and chassis on each side, that TWISTED, replacing the usual spring unit. TWISTING is NOT something we want in our control linkages!!! Run a cable wire or rod-in-a-tube, pull-pull, or use direct linkages. I also prefer overkill on servos. They extra servo is cheap, not too heavy, and adds a tremendous safety advantage.

If you're worried about it, just put in a Hitec 605bb or similar servo. They have about 70oz. of torque. Much stronger than the standard futaba 3004 which has about 47oz.

Datsun/Nissan also used that type front spring. It has little to do with torque rods in model aircraft.

Torsion bar suspension used stored torsional strain energy as a spring. A torque rod transmits rotary motion from one end of the rod to the other, and is generally sized such that torsional strain energy is kept to zero.

After the discussion here, I intend to go with the plans. That is; one servo in the lower wing connected to the ailerons by torque rods, then

4-40 steel rods to c> The thing I like about the dual servos is the elimination of a lot of

require a

Not overpowered, and won't be any closer to 100MPH than I have to be, but are two 1 1/2" ailerons on each side the same as one 3"? 8--)

if the product of the speed and torque of a 1.5" servo is 1/2 the product of the speed and torque of a 3" servo then yes, though the two 1.5" servos will likely weigh more.