MTK

Chris,

Do you have any info on next delivery of fuselages?

Thanks,

MattK

Chris Moon

My Feedback: (8)

Hi Matt,

Email from ZN I got yesterday said estimated new ship date of 2/15 for the Xigris kits and fuses.

ExFokkerFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

First flight of the Xigris C2... actually 4 flights on the first outing. Absolutely amazing! All up with the Rhino 4900s and the Neu motor was 10 lbs even... plane flew straight off the board... no trim or mix required! Could not believe how well it flew and how locked in it felt. On the second flight, after the trim flight, I flew the complete P-11 sequence and i couldn't believe how smooth and easy it felt. I hadn't flown the sequence in a while, but I could not believe how 'right' it felt. ZN line really has done their homework on this one... cannot believe how well it flew! On the third flight I flew the F-11 sequence, for the first time ever! The rolling loop segments were so much easier than I had ever thought they could be... this will put me in the winners circle for sure!

____________________________________________

Okay, it's a little late for a April Fools joke... but that's what makes it funny... even if only to me. Isn't that how first flight reports are supposed to go?

I did fly the C2 for the first time today. I have to say I see the potential in the plane... after the first couple of flights it did feel very solid and smooth. The t-can and the thick trailing edge rudder provide an interesting combination that will take some time to trim properly. The knife edge requires a bare minimum of rudder... so little that you wonder if you even really need to apply any whatsoever. My first attempts resulted in abrupt climbs... I started at 80% and ended up with 40% with 30% expo and still need some adjustment.

The stab incidence seemed off... and required a lot of up trim. Cranking the stab down reduced the up trim... more trimming with the wing now is likely needed. With all the new elements this plane has it will take a bit of time to get it just right. Whatever today's first adjustments, time will be needed to figure out the best course of action. It's different... not bad, just different.

With that said... I played with a few manuevers from P-11 and it felt pretty good, even at this early stage. The knife isn't quite trimmed out yet, but even so, the figure M was ridiculously easy (no April Fools joke...). I can see the potential of the plane, it's just going to take some time.

For the flights today I had both Rhino 4900s and Zippy 5000s. With the Rhino 4900s my weight is 10 lbs. 15 oz. The Zippys brought the weight down to 10 lbs. 12 oz.

Neu F3A
Castle 80 HV ICE
Futaba BLS 153 on elev./ail.
Futabe 9156 on rudder
Jaccio 6V reg and switch.

Tom M

Derek.Koopowitz

Looking good Tom!

Chris Moon

My Feedback: (8)

Looks great Tom!

You left out:

"it is so good I feel like I am cheating when I fly"
"this is the perfect F3A design"

LOL - very funny

mups53

My Feedback: (41)

Trouble maker!!!!!

J Lachowski

My Feedback: (46)

Like butta!!!!!!!!!!!!

ExFokkerFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Yeah, I also forgot

"Flies like it's on rails!"

"No mix!"

"Not a click of trim!"

klhoard

My Feedback: (10)

.
.
Sounds like an ARF review in one of the glossy R/C magazines. . .
.
.

ExFokkerFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Or your average pattern plane review right here on RCU... [8D]

I won't get a chance to fly it again until maybe Monday, but I will be making a few changes. It looks like it might be nose heavy, quite a bit actually, at the 220 mm from the TE point. Carried a lot of up elev. and it pitched to the canopy both directions pretty good. With three incidences to check it's possible that there is something else going on, but I made a new battery tray and will move the batts back an inch or so and see if that helps things. Would be nice to have accurate starting points on incidences, cg locations, down thrusts, etc. Hopefully that will be available soon.

Either way, I'll post what I end up with if anybody is interested.

Tom M

najary

Hi Tom,

My suggestion for you is: don't be in rush with the location of the C.G.

I discovered the 220 mm from the root TE is exactly 25% of the MAC, according to Bryan Hebert this is a very good C.G. location to start with.
http://hebertcompetitiondesigns.com/triangulation.aspx#

I think that you have to increase the wing incidence.

Because you don't know were the center line is, you should measure the angle between the motor trust line and the wing incident.
According to J.P. Zardini it should be 2.25 degrees (Down trust 2 degrees + 0.25 degrees wing incident), See my Building Thread, post 13
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_9305653/tm.htm

Best regards,

Isaac Najary

can773

My Feedback: (1)

I have posted this before, and have taken a lot of measurements on my models. There are two marks for the wing on the left side of the fuse (they are there, but you gotta look, I have them on both C1 kits, and my new C2 kit), with those set at 0.5+, the motor will be around -0.5 negative. At that point the stab CL should be sitting at zero.

I have not flown my C2 yet, but my C1 is setup like this, CG is 280mm from the TE which works out to about 33% of MAC, with this setup there is pretty much no mixing except a little down at idle, and some small roll coupling, but the new planes have more dihedral to help correct this.

I would say if the CG is at 25% then my experience is it should be a little further back. If you are pulling to canopy in upline, and both KE moving it back a bit should help all that.

Rune

Okey
I found some marks on my C2 on mine they was as Chad say on the left side on the fuse .
But for those who dont find them I did some other messurments f.
First if you looks closely its a this stripe in front off the holes for the wingbolts in the front and its a smal kross at the back end.
well here is my results.

Wing + 0.2
cockpit floor  - 3.8
rudder line + 5,4

I have used a digital device so I think its pretty close but if you chose to use this angels its at your own risk .

so I think I sett the wing like it is after the referance mark put the stab at 0 and the engine after the nose ( I have added ca 1mm more right) after some info I got from O.Fremming that it was needed a bit more.

can773

My Feedback: (1)

Typical ZN designs have the fin angle at 6 degrees to stab line.

MTK

Hey gang,

Does any one of you out there have a crunched fuselage for the Xigris that you are not planning to build?? PM me please...I'd like to buy it from you or work out a deal

MattK

cchariandy

Anyone building a glow version? I just trial fit the firewall and there's a 3/4 inch gap behind it to the end of the cut-out. Is that the case for others and what would be the best way to seal up the gap?

Also, how are others fitting the fuel tank and rudder tray and still accessing the rear wing bolt?

And one last one...I'm looking for good options for rudder horns so that I can get the clevis for the pull-pull on the hinge line? I don't like offsets on the servo control arm.

Colin.

NJRCFLYER2

My Feedback: (42)

I'm building one for recip power. I would just use the plywood cutout they provided as a template to make a slightly larger crossgrain balsa-CF laminate replacement.

Thinn

I'm building a glow version and encountered the same challenge regarding the wing bolts...
I placed the elevator servo (pull-pull to MK Belcrank) under the rear wing bolt, and the rudder servo way up in the fuse.

Also, I used the ply firewall as guide only, ad made a new one from 4mm end-grain balsa and carbon (30g). I'm using R&G laminating epoxy throughout, and mix in thixotrop-"powder" to make it thicker. I placed the engine at an angle to avoid manifold-through-belly incidents!

The tank (K&S) is placed over the wing tube with a CF-nomex sandwich holding the cap in place. Please note that the assembly is far from finished on the photos.

I hope this is going to work, this being my first ever pattern build.

Thinn

...*** happened to the image sizes...??

Rune

Chad , my rudder line is finished bewled and its possible some glue or something is making the messurment is not exacly correct!
But the messurment between the wing and cocpit "floor" should be good enough for referance.

Thinn...looking nice airborn May ????
Soon starting painting mine still some sanding to make the fuse ready for the acrylic paint

Mach1GB

Interesting comments Chad. I have an electric C2 with about 25 flights on it. Still to be painted but weighs 4650g with 1230g batteries - I did nothing special to achieve this weight just an excellent kit from JP as usual.

I have explored the settings (wing incidence and CG) on the C2 but at the moment I have motor at -0.5 deg, wing at +0.25 deg and tail at 0 deg (need to check the caniliser incidence). CG is 210mm from the TE. My model pulls to the canopy in both KEs and pulls out on a vertical down. Moving the CG rearward from here and it starts to become less stable and start to see some yaw on pull out (I believe this to be a symptom of a tail heavy model). It needs some down ele to hold inverted and 45 deg downs (more than my Osmose) but doesn't drop sharply in slow or point rolls. Snaps look good and spins well (very slow). I would expect a small mix to sort the v down but what would you suggest to sort the KE without mixing? Could the caniliser incidence sort this?

Any comments welcome.

Regards,

Matt

ExFokkerFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Finally got a chance to take the plane out today. I was away on a trip for work and a mini vacation right after that... so this is the first time I had a chance to try some changes.

I moved the CG back about 10 mm at first, and that was a little better. I cranked in some pos incidence in the wing and that was a little better. Each little change reduced the pitching to the canopy a little bit... but it stayed in. I got to the point where up and down lines were pretty straight... and KE with right rudder just had a little bit of pull to the canopy. Plane was flying well, tracked nice... and the rolling half loops for the Figure M was really really, REALLY easy and nice. Spins were good, slow, or fast, whatever you like... but nice. Snaps sucked... takes forever to get into it and then it just winds up... looks like a monkey f.... well, you get the picture.

Then... reaching the bottom of the Figure M with rolling half loop... the canalizer separates from the plane. It flutters into the weeds and is lost forever... Five of us looked for about a half hour, no luck in the thigh high weeds. Might get a chance to look tomorrow morning.

The canalizer comes in two pieces... you must figure out how to attach the two and figure out how to put it on the canopy. Obviously, after 10 flights, I figured wrong.

I did put in one flight without the canalizer though... that was interesting. The pitching to the canopy was almost gone... there was more of a pull in the canopy in the downline, but not bad at all... Rudder effectiveness was WAY LESS effective. The airplane usually would slide easy as could be through the Figure M... not now though... it's just like a "normal" airplane, perhaps a bit worse. Probably will get better with more throw, I'll have to play with that in the future.

Disappointed, upset, regret, angry... yep, all those fit. The plane now has significantly less wing area, less rudder effectiveness, and two holes on the top of the canopy I have to cover. The CG is still too far forward, and I'm running out of ways to bring it back without buying a new spinner. I can go to the Jeti 75 and get 1.5 ounces out of the nose... I can also go to the Rasa Folding prop and get almost the same... that might do it... I could order and build another canalizer... but I'm really not certain that I'm going to be able to build a more secure replacement. I'll have to think about that one.

The good news is that my wife hated the canalizer... so now she likes the plane much better.

Tom M

VerneK

Tom,
If it makes you feel any better, you at least have a SHOT at finding yours. Chads are lost in Portugal..... Sorry, Chad, just had to say it.

Verne


"Then... reaching the bottom of the Figure M with rolling half loop... the canalizer separates from the plane. It flutters into the weeds and is lost forever... Five of us looked for about a half hour, no luck luck in the thigh high weeds. Might get a chance to look tomorrow morning."

Read more: http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_93...#ixzz0mGlmdDGi

can773

My Feedback: (1)

Haha, lol, yep both of them are over there someplace....just watched them drift away. Oh well...my next ones will use a much more intelligent mount than those lol. I didn't account for the "portugal turbulence" when I came up with the mounting pylon!

ExFokkerFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Very true Verne... not sure I could make it very sturdy with the old, damaged to an unknown degree, canalizer... but if I find it, we'll see.

T