World's largest radio controlled model aircraft

Loading thread data ...
That's not wholly correct, but a wreck is still a wreck and as they indicate the pilot was at fault.
Reply to
Rufus
Much better sound. Amazing how loud it is. Incredible job of flying too. The X-1 is a very nice touch.
WmB
Reply to
WmB
I'd like to know what tat X-1 is powered with; if it's a solid rocket or something else...it sure moved out.
Reply to
Rufus
Raamstein?..
I get the impression that Germans have a considerable amount of disposable income...just about all of these jet flicks I see are either from the Continent or the UK.
I also remember specifically being warned off building a swept wing jet as my first one because of the tendency for yaw induced snap rolls. We had an Hornet jock kill himself in a QF-86 some time ago in just that manner - used the wrong technique crossing a ridge line, slat deployed on the opposite wing and flipped him into the mountain...we had the wreckage spread out in the hangar for weeks. Was easily and repeatably duplicated at altitude...wild ride.
Reply to
Rufus
That crash site is really something to see:
formatting link
like a Piper Cub had augered in. :-) They're lucky it didn't hit someone's house.
Pat
Reply to
Pat Flannery
I was surprised they built the low vertical fin version; I would have thought you would have wanted all the stability you could get. I always wondered if the low vertical fin was a result of the turbulence problems encountered when refueling from a KC-135. That led to the tail falling off the one over Spain that dumped the H-bombs we had to recover.
Pat
Reply to
Pat Flannery
It would be interesting to know how they got the CG right on the X-1 to allow it to both glide and fly under rocket power. Because the engine loses mass as the propellant burns, the X-1 should have been nose-heavy after the rocket firing. Maybe the mounted it at the center of the fuselage and had it exhaust through a tube at the tail, or figured out someway to slide something in the nose backwards to balance things out.
Pat
Reply to
Pat Flannery
What was he doing flying a QF-86 around? Delivering it to a target range? Those self-deploying slats were always a problem; they used them on the BF-109 and Me-262 and the things were always deploying unexpectedly or one side would jam and the other would stick. IIRC, a lot of Me-262 pilots just wired them closed to avoid the trouble with them, and accepted the poor handling during low speed flight or at high angles of attack.
Pat
Reply to
Pat Flannery
Those RC jets - even the moderate sized single engine ones - are very different from the average giant scale RC plane. When they go in you sometimes get get the fireball. You don't see that with glow fuel powered planes. They're completely different animals and are flown only by the most expert RC pilots. Even so, when stuff goes wrong it often leaves a smoldering pile.
BobbyG
Reply to
Bobby Galvez
the luftwaffe training vid the history channel had in it's me 262 program shows a shwartzganger working on a front one with a small hammer and some pliers. pretty loe-tech adjustments. pretty funny.
Reply to
someone
Yeah, the mention that they have to make sure that they move freely. Pilots used to curse the things... they'd be in the middle of a dogfight, get their guns lined up on the enemy aircraft in the middle of a maneuver, and have the slats deploy, throwing off their aim. You would have thought that after the Bf-109 Messerschmitt would have gotten enough negative feedback not to use them on the Me-262, but instead the Me-262 had a even more extensive slat system than its predecessor, covering the whole leading edge of the wing. At least they avoided them on the Me-163B, using fixed slots instead, which may account for why Luftwaffe pilots said it was about the best-handling aircraft they ever flew.
Pat
Reply to
Pat Flannery
From what guys tell me, the only jet aircraft ever produced that actually has a correctly sized vertical tail is a Tornado...
That's why so many third-gen fighters have twin tails.
Reply to
Rufus
Depends on how heavy the motor actually is, but yeah, I suspect it has an exhaust tube. Other than that it would just require a trim change, I'd think.
Reply to
Rufus
Yeah...we used to be littered with QF-86s...until we shot them all up....er...down...
He was basically joy-riding. He managed to talk OPS into getting him on the schedule, and the result was what it was. I've always wondered why there isn't a cable mechanism on free-fall slats to make them deploy symmetrically. Me 109s had them, too.
It's a problem on the TA-4 as well - caught a training video on spin recovery for the TA-4 while I was at NAS Kingsville and they specifically mentioned that. The tendency of a swept wing to yaw-induced snap roll is only aggravated by an asymmetric slat deployment - the film mentioned that, too. If I recall, the snap always happens in opposition to the direction of yaw...
Reply to
Rufus
Correct.
AMA requires that anyone wanting to fly turbines gets a special waiver in order for the AMA insurance backing to remain in effect.
BobbyG
Reply to
Bobby Galvez
even the unpowered versions and the a model proto's had a good rep. always thought it looke like a 40's batmodile. to the messershmit, robin!
Reply to
someone

Site Timeline

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.