Help Identify this plane older biwing
#1
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (3)
Help Identify this plane older biwing
Hi I bought this plane as is , I think the motor is a 26cc
weed wacker conversion but my problem is that I don't see
any where for cabanes or wires?? I know I have seen this set up
somewhere . I think it flew without them.. Cant anyone verify this?
The standoffs from the fuselage are the only wing support other then the rods
operating the servos from the bottom wing to the top wing . Has anyone ever owned this kit.
Thanks
David
weed wacker conversion but my problem is that I don't see
any where for cabanes or wires?? I know I have seen this set up
somewhere . I think it flew without them.. Cant anyone verify this?
The standoffs from the fuselage are the only wing support other then the rods
operating the servos from the bottom wing to the top wing . Has anyone ever owned this kit.
Thanks
David
#5
My Feedback: (5)
RE: Help Identify this plane older biwing
If it's an AceRC kit (sorry, I can't really tell) some flew them without struts while others added them for piece of mind and not turning it into a monoplane. If you don't want to put struts on then wires would be the next best thing......in my opinion.
#6
RE: Help Identify this plane older biwing
ORIGINAL: flyinwalenda
If it's an AceRC kit (sorry, I can't really tell) some flew them without struts while others added them for piece of mind and not turning it into a monoplane. If you don't want to put struts on then wires would be the next best thing......in my opinion.
If it's an AceRC kit (sorry, I can't really tell) some flew them without struts while others added them for piece of mind and not turning it into a monoplane. If you don't want to put struts on then wires would be the next best thing......in my opinion.
I would think that it needs the N-struts.
#7
Senior Member
RE: Help Identify this plane older biwing
If it originally flew without the interplane struts, then I would see no need to add them now. "The standoffs from the fuselage" are the cabane struts.
According to a story I once heard about the Fokker Dr1, the original plane was produced without interplane struts, but the pilots were so afraid to fly the plane that the manufacturer added the struts on later versions. I may have this story confused with the D7, but I do know that many of the Fokker planes did not have flying wires and depended upon a cantilever wing for structural support.
According to a story I once heard about the Fokker Dr1, the original plane was produced without interplane struts, but the pilots were so afraid to fly the plane that the manufacturer added the struts on later versions. I may have this story confused with the D7, but I do know that many of the Fokker planes did not have flying wires and depended upon a cantilever wing for structural support.
#9
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Cedar City ,
UT
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Help Identify this plane older biwing
On most R/C biplanes including the one you picture, the wings are of cantilever design, and the inter-plane struts are just cosmetic, if your model had functional flying and landing wires then the inter-plane struts would be a necessity. A full size example would be the WWI Fokker Dr1 Triplane, it had cantilever wings, and struts added (but no flying wires)just to please the higher command.
#11
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Help Identify this plane older biwing
ORIGINAL: tweedy
On most R/C biplanes including the one you picture, the wings are of cantilever design, and the inter-plane struts are just cosmetic, if your model had functional flying and landing wires then the inter-plane struts would be a necessity. A full size example would be the WWI Fokker Dr1 Triplane, it had cantilever wings, and struts added (but no flying wires)just to please the higher command.
On most R/C biplanes including the one you picture, the wings are of cantilever design, and the inter-plane struts are just cosmetic, if your model had functional flying and landing wires then the inter-plane struts would be a necessity. A full size example would be the WWI Fokker Dr1 Triplane, it had cantilever wings, and struts added (but no flying wires)just to please the higher command.
I personally would add them to this model, just to take the load off of the cabanes. Looks like a fun model. Would be cool to have ailerons on the top wing.
Also, interplanes struts can be used to get the wings incidence set perfectly at the outer sections of the wings. You could just fabricate some plates, out of plywood. Somewhat like the Ultiate bipe. Will give a little more side area.
#12
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (3)
RE: Help Identify this plane older biwing
Ok Guys,
I went to the field yesterday and low and behold he comes a guy with a similar biwing plane.
no n struts and he fly it hard and fast just with the cabanes struts holding on the wing no wires either ..
I talked with him about my plane and he said wing
load is 1/2 then normal cause of 2 wings. He said it will fly fine without them if the incidence is correct.
I think the solder joints are fine. Imho solder joints don't break down with age.
I am going to fly her in about a month. I just maidened my Cap 232 and still trying to dial her in ..
Thanks everyone for the support and I let you know how it flys soon
Thanks
David
I went to the field yesterday and low and behold he comes a guy with a similar biwing plane.
no n struts and he fly it hard and fast just with the cabanes struts holding on the wing no wires either ..
I talked with him about my plane and he said wing
load is 1/2 then normal cause of 2 wings. He said it will fly fine without them if the incidence is correct.
I think the solder joints are fine. Imho solder joints don't break down with age.
I am going to fly her in about a month. I just maidened my Cap 232 and still trying to dial her in ..
Thanks everyone for the support and I let you know how it flys soon
Thanks
David