Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Results 1 to 14 of 14

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    c/v, AZ
    Posts
    346
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    weight limit for 1/2A

    What's a good weight for a 1/2A, powered by a cox golden bee?Built up wing. 5.5 oz ok?
    Last edited by jayseas; 12-02-2013 at 03:46 PM.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    4,085
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    That should be OK.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    c/v, AZ
    Posts
    346
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Thanks for the comment jim

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Corona, CA
    Posts
    172
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by jayseas View Post
    What's a good weight for a 1/2A, powered by a cox golden bee?Built up wing. 5.5 oz ok?

    Hi Jay, besides total weight, please consider wing loading as a very important factor

    concerning flight performance. The lighter the wing loading; the better will be the

    performance. Taking 5.5ozs as a base weight, 5.5 ozs in a 100sq" wing will not fly as

    well as 5.5ozs for a 200 sq" wing.

    Tony

  5. #5
    Joe Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Galesburg, KS
    Posts
    44
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    When I was a kid I built a lot of Sientific kits. The solid balsa airplanes all had 18" wing span and the built up wing airplanes were 22" span. They were reasonably fast and could tolerate resonable wind up to about 10 mph. I got for my 12th birthday a Berkley Aeronca C3 kit with 36" span. It flew good but it was slow and could not tolerate more than 3 MPH wind.

  6. #6
    GallopingGhostler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Clovis, NM
    Posts
    1,217
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    There were some half-A built up wing Scientifics with 22 inch span, but others were 18 inch. I built the Sizzlin' Liz P-51 and Grumman Hellcat, both with built up wings and built up fuselage with plastic turtle deck, both were 18 inch spans. The Hellcat kit was my 11th birthday present. The solid balsa wing half-A's were very durable compared with the plastic ready to fly's, which tended to shatter (or should I say implode) into a shower of particles upon hard impact with the earth.
    George Hostler
    Clovis MADS AMA Club, Vintage R/C Society (VRCS)
    And we know love by this, that He laid down His life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. 1 John 3:16

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    c/v, AZ
    Posts
    346
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Thomerson View Post
    That should be OK.
    The 5.5 oz is including the engine.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    c/v, AZ
    Posts
    346
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by paw080 View Post
    Hi Jay, besides total weight, please consider wing loading as a very important factor

    concerning flight performance. The lighter the wing loading; the better will be the

    performance. Taking 5.5ozs as a base weight, 5.5 ozs in a 100sq" wing will not fly as

    well as 5.5ozs for a 200 sq" wing.

    Tony
    Are you saying the more wing area is better?

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    c/v, AZ
    Posts
    346
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Fisher View Post
    When I was a kid I built a lot of Sientific kits. The solid balsa airplanes all had 18" wing span and the built up wing airplanes were 22" span. They were reasonably fast and could tolerate resonable wind up to about 10 mph. I got for my 12th birthday a Berkley Aeronca C3 kit with 36" span. It flew good but it was slow and could not tolerate more than 3 MPH wind.
    This is a scratch built, it is 13" long from the prop to the t/e of the elavator, and the wing is 23" L and is 5 1/2" wide down to 4 1/2" at the wing tip.

  10. #10
    Joe Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Galesburg, KS
    Posts
    44
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    That seems reasonable to me.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Corona, CA
    Posts
    172
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by jayseas View Post
    Are you saying the more wing area is better?
    That's what I'm saying. Lets be reasonable of course, you can exceed practicality

    with too much area for the engine power. Look at the TD .049 generation of 1/2A

    combat designs. a practical wing area for the TD was 190-220 sq"s, usually built

    to 5.5-6 ozs ready to fly weight. They flew fast enough to approach the limits of

    my ability to fly them. I flew 190 and 200 sq" designs that I propped for 72-73 mph

    sans streamer; I propped my sons' combat models to fly 74-75mph( I couldn't control

    them at that speed). Our 1/2A models weighed 4.9-5.5ozs, They had composite wings,

    built up wood superstructure with foam LEs. I even designed and built what was know as a "Floater"

    It flew spectacularly, it looked sorta like a "Sickle" design and had 270sq"s area and weighed

    5.4 ozs ready to fly. It gave away about 6mph to the normal 72 mph models but out turned any

    1/2A I've ever seen. It flew 6' diameter loops(measured by me and others) at 65-66mph.

    That is what low wing loading will buy for you. It also paid the price all "Floaters" pay; It

    died a glorious death when "bellcranked" by an opponent that hadn't realized his streamer

    was taken so quickly.

    Tony

    Tony
    Last edited by paw080; 12-06-2013 at 06:27 PM.

  12. #12
    GallopingGhostler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Clovis, NM
    Posts
    1,217
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by paw080 View Post
    That's what I'm saying. Lets be reasonable of course, you can exceed practicality with too much area for the engine power. Look at the TD .049 generation of 1/2A combat designs. a practical wing area for the TD was 190-220 sq"s, usually built to 5.5-6 ozs ready to fly weight. They flew fast enough to approach the limits of my ability to fly them. I flew 190 and 200 sq" designs that I propped for 72-73 mph sans streamer; I propped my sons' combat models to fly 74-75mph( I couldn't control them at that speed).

    Our 1/2A models weighed 4.9-5.5ozs, They had composite wings, built up wood superstructure with foam LEs. I even designed and built what was know as a "Floater" It flew spectacularly, it looked sorta like a "Sickle" design and had 270sq"s area and weighed 5.4 ozs ready to fly. It gave away about 6mph to the normal 72 mph models but out turned any 1/2A I've ever seen. It flew 6' diameter loops(measured by me and others) at 65-66mph. That is what low wing loading will buy for you. It also paid the price all "Floaters" pay; It died a glorious death when "bellcranked" by an opponent that hadn't realized his streamer was taken so quickly. Tony
    Interesting info, Tony, great stuff. My Ringmaster Jr. with OS .15FP-S is 200 sq. in. of area. What you just told me is that if the Ring Jr. was built light enough, a Tee Dee or Norvel could haul it no sweat.

    The OS engine is too heavy for it, have added ballast to the tail so CG falls were it should. It is a pig of plane because it is built from Sterling kit wood, which was heavy to begin with. The OS is a bit overpowering for it. I do 4 second laps on 58 feet lines. It doesn't stunt well at all due to weight.
    George Hostler
    Clovis MADS AMA Club, Vintage R/C Society (VRCS)
    And we know love by this, that He laid down His life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. 1 John 3:16

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Corona, CA
    Posts
    172
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Rinmaster Jr PAW .049.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	39.0 KB 
ID:	1945661
    Quote Originally Posted by GallopingGhostler View Post
    Interesting info, Tony, great stuff. My Ringmaster Jr. with OS .15FP-S is 200 sq. in. of area. What you just told me is that if the Ring Jr. was built light enough, a Tee Dee or Norvel could haul it no sweat.

    The OS engine is too heavy for it, have added ballast to the tail so CG falls were it should. It is a pig of plane because it is built from Sterling kit wood, which was heavy to begin with. The OS is a bit overpowering for it. I do 4 second laps on 58 feet lines. It doesn't stunt well at all due to weight.
    Hi George, I built a succession of Ring Jrs, I built a Ring Jr back in 1954(1955?) and powered it with a Cub .099. It flew

    very well back then, preforming horizontal, vertical and overhead eights. I did some maneuvers that were supposed to be

    square loops but really weren't. The Cub .099 had about the same power as a strong Cox reed valve .049.


    So I started a new series of Ring Jrs about 15 years ago building a Jr from a kit and powering it with an AM 1.0 cc

    diesel engine. that model did every maneuver in the pattern. I built a few longer span larger area Jrs, powered

    with PAW and Taifun .09 diesels. They flew just like the AM 1.0cc version. Then I optimized the Jr design for

    the PAW 080cc(.049cu") series. using a much shorter nose moment, same tail moment with reduced area fin

    and stab/elevator. These models weighed 6.8-7.2ozs with prop, ready to fly. This latest version flew the best,

    also flew a bit faster, It retained the Jr's 195sq" wing area, I flew the last versions on 44' x .008" stranded lines.

    The only modification that I would make to the design would bump the wing area up to 225 or 230 sq"s.

    I've got photos of the last Ring Jr; I'll try to attach them. Hmm, this pic post isn't exactly what I intended.

    If you wanna see more photos, send me an email.

    Oh, George, just checked, and I see that you've already seen photos of my last Ringmaster Jr. I'll see you later...


    Tony
    Last edited by paw080; 12-07-2013 at 04:51 PM. Reason: clarity

  14. #14
    GallopingGhostler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Clovis, NM
    Posts
    1,217
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by paw080 View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Rinmaster Jr PAW .049.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	39.0 KB 
ID:	1945661

    Hi George, I built a succession of Ring Jrs, I built a Ring Jr back in 1954(1955?) and powered it with a Cub .099. It flew very well back then, preforming horizontal, vertical and overhead eights. I did some maneuvers that were supposed to be square loops but really weren't. The Cub .099 had about the same power as a strong Cox reed valve .049.

    So I started a new series of Ring Jrs about 15 years ago building a Jr from a kit and powering it with an AM 1.0 cc diesel engine. that model did every maneuver in the pattern. I built a few longer span larger area Jrs, powered with PAW and Taifun .09 diesels. They flew just like the AM 1.0cc version. Then I optimized the Jr design for the PAW 080cc (.049cu") series. using a much shorter nose moment, same tail moment with reduced area fin and stab/elevator. These models weighed 6.8-7.2ozs with prop, ready to fly. This latest version flew the best, also flew a bit faster, It retained the Jr's 195sq" wing area, I flew the last versions on 44' x .008" stranded lines.

    The only modification that I would make to the design would bump the wing area up to 225 or 230 sq"s. I've got photos of the last Ring Jr; I'll try to attach them. Hmm, this pic post isn't exactly what I intended. If you wanna see more photos, send me an email. Oh, George, just checked, and I see that you've already seen photos of my last Ringmaster Jr. I'll see you later... Tony
    Tony, I just weighed my Ringmaster Jr., .15FP w/o muffler is 17.3 ounces, over twice what yours weighs. Yes, you have a nice Ring Jr. there.
    George Hostler
    Clovis MADS AMA Club, Vintage R/C Society (VRCS)
    And we know love by this, that He laid down His life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. 1 John 3:16


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:59 PM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.