retransit

My Feedback: (18)

Here are your pictures, Jim. By the way, you have some nice examples of model aircraft in your gallery.

Bob

retransit

My Feedback: (18)

Jim, I noticed that you did the rod and ring on the landing gear cross bracing. [i][b]Good man![b]


Bob

Jb Stearman

My Feedback: (8)

Ray,

Thank you sir.I will have a go at it first thing Tuesday morning.

Jim

Jb Stearman

My Feedback: (8)

That is the Fleet that I used for my model.Your photo is much better than the one I had to go by.

Jim

retransit

My Feedback: (18)

That's from the collection at Pennsacola.

Bob

Jb Stearman

My Feedback: (8)

Bob,

Thank you for pulling up the pictures and the kind words about the gallery photos. Scale model airplanes should LOOK scale.
I'm looking forward to getting this Fleet back in the air where it belongs.

Jim

Kinner

Hopefully, mine will get a needed overhaul/repair this winter. Some changes will be to make the top wing one piece (ala retrasent) and, if I feel real froggy, I'll make the bottom wing a one piece. Should make alignments easier and field assembly quicker. I'd like to go rod rigging rather than steel cable but the thought of a kink weakening one sort of shys me away.

The Enya VT will find a reprise as powerplant and may go back to a single pickup or two seperate tanks. Depending on the room within. On board glow will be entertained.

The 1/3rd scale is back on the table with the Nstruts being assembled. Good friend is breaking the engine in for me (OS 300).

Ray W.

HOT COALS

Glad to see the FLEETS are on the thread again.  And to  see more  coming.  Sad to say CONCEPTS does not make the kits any more.  MY  2 Fleets fly very well and 1 is on the work bench now.  1 flies with a asp 5 cylinder &  2 flies  a zen  38 . All 1/4 scale.  STILTS  covering & paint.  Both built in the  90s  and still flying . Glad to see some photo's    FLEET &  STINSON FLYER   FLEET BROTHERHOOD # 20  HANK.

Jb Stearman

My Feedback: (8)

tTook some pictures of the N2Y-1 today. Probably the first time in years that it has seen daylight.

Jb Stearman

My Feedback: (8)

Ray,

Thanks much for your help showing me how to download photos.

And to Bob also for posting my pics.

Jim

Kinner

Sure. Thant is a nice color scheme.

When I rebuild mine, it will be as light as possible. I'll forgo the rib tape and stichings to help compensate for the SolarTex silver I'll use on the wings and horz stab. Fues will be Koveral and dope. It was a floater when powered down and would like to keep that trait.

Ray W.

retransit

My Feedback: (18)

Ray, I believe that aircraft would fly just fine at thirty pounds.

Wing Cube loading would only be 9.27.

Bob

Kinner

Should be a winner with all those cubes.

I just finished my Cub that I used silver SolarTex on.  Stuff is nice, just a few new tricks needed but it is noticabley heavier than other fabric coverings. 

Any IMAAs coming up at your club?   'Twas nice down there.   Oldest daughter now lives in Jacksonville.  Found some nice compgrounds there too.

Ray W

retransit

My Feedback: (18)

Nothing going on, Ray. It's the summer "HOT" season.

I passed through your state on the way up to, and returning from, two weeks in NYC. You guys have the cheapest gas on the East coast @ $3.08 per gallon as of the third week in June.

Bob

Kinner

that price changes drastically when you get to the Coast of SC.  $3.35 this morning. 

Got the Warbird Invasion in August if you have a mind to travel.  Your Fleet would be the only Fleet there probably.  Quite the show.

Ray W.

Mein Duff

Hey Guys, I am recovering my 1/4 scale Fleet wings ( I didn't build it)..I am thinking of removing the cross braces as noted with red arrow on the pics.
I could see where on the original full size these might do some good but think they are just adding weight to a model without any needed structural strength.
This is the first time I have seen this on a model .
I will also be drilling lots of holes in the wing spars as I think they are way too heavy for the job ...two box beams on a non areobatic is just over kill IMO.
What do you guys think?

Kinner

I could agree on the built up box beam. Sure added alot of time to the build and the weight penalty to boot. I would only take material away fromt the spars outboard of the N struts. Just my $.02.

The cross bracing probably won't be missed if they were just butt glued on the ends. On my 1/3 scaler, they are functional and were into drilled holes so there was more glue surface.

retransit

My Feedback: (18)

With the limited weight savings I would leave as is. Like I stated before, this aircraft design flies just fine at heavier weights. I have flown two versions of the Fleet, one at 23 lbs. and the latest at 25 lbs. 6.5 oz. Now I will admit that I'm no aerobatic skilled pilot and for what it's worth, this aircraft isn't an aerobatic type aircraft. It is meant to be flown scale-like and in addition, it has NO bad flying habits.

I would say build it or refurbish it, but leave the design elements alone because what you propose will do nothing to improve the flight characteristics of the flight envelope in which this aircraft operates.

In other words, "don't fix what ain't broke".

Now if one has a desire to drill some lightening holes or remove diagonal bracing, do me a favor. Weigh the wing panels with a postage scale before and after the mods. I'd be curious to know how much weight is saved.

Bob

retransit

My Feedback: (18)

One other thing; this aircraft does not have a sprung landing gear. As such, when landing, the imposed loads of striking the ground are being transferred to the structure. Now I'm not an engineer, but I would guess the wing spars would be subject to the same sudden stop of a descent that the gear is subject to upon landing.

I've had two 1/4" wing rear spar tongues fail in my previous Fleet. I substituted 1/4" aluminum tongues in their place on the latest build. Some of that increase in weight of the second aircraft can be attributed to those tongues as well as my mod to the existing design of the tongue receivers in the fuselage. I figured it would be embarrassing to see my wings drop to the runway during a hard landing.

Bob

Jaybird

That's why on full scale aircraft the wires going from the bottom of the fuselage to the top wing are called "flying wires" as they oppose the wing lifting loads in flight and the wires going from the top of the cabanes at the center section to the lower wing are called "landing wires" as they oppose the loads caused by gravity and the impact of landing. I just learned that the cross wires between the cabane struts are called "roll wires" as they oppose the loads trying to twist the wings around the fuselage when the wings are rolled.

Probably old information for everyone but it might help explain why structures are the way they are. If the flying wires are non-functional on the model then the designer might have added internal structure to help carry the loads.

I have a 1/6 scale Concept Fleet that was built to the plans and had VERY flimsy wings when I bought it. The N struts were only mounted at one point at the top and bottom and free floating at the other point. It had never been flown when I bought it. I added mounting points for each strut end point and functional flying wires that clip on near the struts for quick field assembly. Very rigid but still light weight. A great little flyer but can't handle a lot of wind.

It had rigid landing gear as well and over time the upper cross braces broke free from their soldered joints. Just recently I cut the cross braces at the top and made a hook on the end and added pull coil springs back to the original connection point. They work great and make ground handling and landings a lot easier.

Jaybird

retransit

My Feedback: (18)

The flying and landing wires on the Concept Fleet are optional. As a matter of fact, the first Fleet I owned did not have any and was flown for twenty years without them.

I installed the wires on my first Fleet during an extensive rebuild and that's probably why the lower wing didn't separate in flight when the rear spar tongue fractured.

Bob

Kinner

District V Rally in October in Dunnelon, Fla. I might go.

Jaybird

Here is what I did on the landing gear of my 1/6 scale Concept Fleet. Makes ground handling a lot better and keeps the cross bracing from tearing out.

Jaybird

Jb Stearman

My Feedback: (8)

retransit

Bob, question; what numbers have you found to be the best to use for the optimum CG location on the 1/4 scale fleet? The plans show it from the center of the top wing aft mounting bolt to an inch or so forward. Earlier posts have shown 6 3/8 " to 7 3/8" from the LE, and from 1" to 1 1/2" in front of the top wing rear attachment bolt.The distance from the LE to the bolt center is right at 6".To me, this seems like a pretty large range. Is this 1/4 airplane THAT forgiving?Normally I balance my aircraft with the nose just a tad below the horizon and adjust from there if needed.This has worked well for me on both mono and biplanes.

Thanks again,

Jim[8D]

retransit

My Feedback: (18)

Jim, quarter scale plans show the CG range to be between 6-1/4" to 7-1/4" back from the leading edge of the top wing. Of course this is dependent on you placing the upper wing position according to plans. My CG came out equidistant between the fore and aft limit without the use of lead by placing servos and batteries correctly.

Below is a drawing to illustrate how to determine the CG on a biplane with wing stagger if you do not have plans to go by.

I hope my answer is of help.

Bob