yepe

Just test flight my giles 46 with an old OS FS-90 4 stroke with 14x6 apc prop. The flight was nice, however it doesnt have vertical power. Any suggestion what engine to put. I was thinking of putting YS 1.10 or OS 91 fx. Any suggestions?

Cyberwolf

My Feedback: (4)

Whoa!!!!!! I read all this and that about landing gear troubles with the GP giles, !QUOT!Oh my!QUOT! don't tell my plane about it, cause if its there it dosent seem to know about it.Although I didn't use the stock gear and pants ,I don't like the plane sitting in the air higher than it needs to be to have adequate clearance for the prop .plus the stock gear looked sort of cheap.The plane is a sweetheart no prob taxiing, flys like a much bigger counterpart and loves windy days its rock solid .One dead stick that wasn't any probs either .I have a 91 YS FZ and the plane came out on the money balance wise with the rudder servo in the rear.As far as snapping out in a loop due to over throw on the elevator ????? don't mush the plane through a loop keep it under power and no snap and no I'm not saying full power , a person can wind up with a scud missile doing that sort of thing .I did notice the weak area in the fuse by the wing and added a another doubler , no weight gain and it cant hurt. All and all I'm very pleased with the way the plane built and flys .sorry to hear that a few are not.Happy Landings

CrashGaalaas

My Feedback: (8)

Been reading this forum for awhile. Just picked up my G-202 kit at LHS this morning. Hope I'll have it flying when the snow melts next spring.

Stripes

My Feedback: (19)

After my Giles was repaired I flew it quite a few times before the season ended here in New York. I had to retire it early in October because the fuel tank was loose and wobbling. The plans have you attach the tank to a removable tank holder which slides into place and is screwed to hold. My tank holder piece broke right across in front of the tank leaving it attached only by the screws in the back end. This piece failed due to the lightening holes put into it leaving it only 1/2 inch wide on each side. The 1/8 plywood is soft and failed due to lack of strength. Future builders of this kit should beef up the tank holder or replace it with stronger stock because it isn't up to the stresses of holding a full tank during extreme maneuvers.

Antennaman

My Feedback: (3)

well. i've been thinking about building one of these kits. i'm glad i've read this forum. it's nice to know what you're getting into when you buy a new plane. I had planned on buying an o.s 61 FX... i guess that idea's out of the picture for now. i also didn't really want to spend a lot on a 4 stroke. i'd be flying it off of grass. not the shortest stuff on the planet. oh well. any more suggestions? i've really enjoyed reading about this plane.
Rick M.

ActionVerb

Ive enjoyed the thread also. nice resourse. seriously considering getting the plane as my 1st kit. will take my time building with help from this awesome insight while I learn to fly my Fantasy. likely go with a TT.91. Like the Giles because it seems different. A lot of Extras and Edges at my field. Seems like it'd be a perfect 3rd plane. Couple questions though. .
-Can you tint the canopy?
-Is there different cowl you could use on it?
-how hard would it be to make a custom cowl? (just not too down with the nose of this plane)

Jimmy B

Just finished this kit using an OS91FS Pumped engine and returned from the flying field with a massive grin all over my face this evening.

All I can say is wow....what a great flying machine.

The engine is perfectly suited...I was using 10% nitro and a 14x8 APC prop.

No problem on a grass strip with the undercarriage as standard. The only change from the standard kit was the use of a fibreglass cowl.

Weight balance exactly as per the plans by putting a servo for the rudder at the back and the battery in the rear fuze accessible via a hatch.

....now I wonder what that 1/4 scale ARTF would be like with my Saito 180....

The MacDaddy

My Feedback: (10)

JigzB,

Glad to see you happy, I have a Saito 100 in mine, I was dissapointed at the perf., but I think I have a prop issue, I actually picked up the 14 x 8 apc, so maybe that will do it. I seemed to have little throttle response over 2/3. How about that elevator? I cant believe it is so sensitive for it's size. Pic to follow.

Mac

The MacDaddy

My Feedback: (10)

Better pic of the avitar.

Mac

The MacDaddy

My Feedback: (10)

Action,

See my pic, I used Pactra Canopy tint, you'll find it in the Car section of your LHS. I took 400 grit sandpaper and roughed up the silver area to make it look like aluminum. I used a litttle too much tint, and it came out really dark, I almost bought another canopy since I spent so much time on the instrument panel and pilot, but in the bright summer sun (finally) you can see in there. If you build it and have a grass field, shim the gear. I didnt and had to improvise, I took 3 small #2 shcs and put them into the hardwood LG towards the TE of the gear, gave me the fwd cant I was looking for, only prob now is the pants got destroyed. I am going to order some Sig SE pants, they have taken so much abuse at our field. My SE is my trusty plane when I just want to fly.

The stock cowl is a pain, it was my first cowl actually, I almost threw it away but couldn't bear to part w/ the dough on a Stan's, plus, remember planes crash.

Follow the control throws (in the addendum!), nuf said.

Mac

prgonzalez

I lost my Giles last week on final approach. I had mine with a OS.61FX using a 12x8 prop. Loosing the plane was a combination of my mistake (low altitude on final) plus the snap tendency of the airplane when pulling up the elevator too fast. I will receive my new kit this week and can't wait to start building.

After reading this thread since 2002, I find too little about the snappy tendency of this airplane. I did no more than 20 flights with mine since I was still trimming it.

Could you guys that love and have had this airplane for a while add more about the elevator setup and snappy tendencies?

Sincerely,
Pedro

The MacDaddy

My Feedback: (10)

Pedro,

First, sorry for the loss. If you have a computer radio like my Futaba 9C, put the elevator on the 3 pos switch, low for takeoff/landing, center for aerobatics (mid way between low and 3D) and the top for 3D only (i.e. the high rates in the book to start). Second, the plane needs to come in hot, that's just pratice, which I am still working on too. I have one of the field experts land for me until I get used to the plane. I think part of my problem is the fact that I have so many fun fly/3D (U Can Do, Sig SE, Fun51) that land so slow, esp. the UCD which almost lands w/o any ground speed, you might not feel comfortable w/ using all the runway!

Try your ele up high (4 mistakes?) so you can dial in the right rates to keep from snapping.

Not too rub salt in, but any pics of the crash? Really wondering where it broke/why? Was it totaled? There is discussion in the thread about some potential weak points, you might want to address it in your new build.

Mac

propshaft

Pedro,

The tendency to snap is not as bad when you keep the weight under control and use exponential rates on the elevator. I started with a TT 90 four stroke. The power was good, but it weighed too much. Since I changed to a TH .75 2 stroke (a weight difference of about 7 oz) the plane handles very well and smooth wheel or 3-point landings are easy to do. Landing under a little power when the air is turbulent also helps to reduce the danger of a stall. It has unlimited vertical with the TH .75. I use 50 % exponential (Futaba 9C radio) on the elevator and 30 % on the ailerons and rudder. I always fly on high rates. It can still snap-roll violently, but only does so on command.

Since I fly from rough grass I did not install the wheelpants and I use 3" light weight wheels. I built my Giles strictly according to the plans, apart from shimming the landing gear forward to prevent nose-overs while taxiing. The fuselage has not failed at the thin area behind the wing as some people have suggested could be a problem. I did not keep a record, but I must have flown the Giles hundreds of times by now (including a few hard landings that bent the landing gear) without any structural failures.

You may find that using a lower pitch prop (try 6 instead of 8) will improve your Giles' vertical performance and increase control on landing approach. You don't need high speed on the Giles, rather trade speed for higher torque.

I think it is an excellent design. Just take care to build it light and straight.

prgonzalez

For all Giles owners, here is the result of the autopsy. The giles found ground with the nose at a 45 degree angle between nose and left wing. The tail section is completely intact. The suspect weak point of the fuse behing the wing saddle resisted the impact. Damage in that point is minimal compared to the landing gear section. You can see the right wing is also intact. The nylon bolts resisted the impact. Due to space constraints, I will post additional photos in a second post.

prgonzalez

I used the stock PVC cowl with an fiberglass cloth reinforce. The fiberglass kept the cowl is a reasonable good shape considering the impact. We can just imagine the force of impact by observing how the hard tube of the pitts muffler was bent. The langind gear section ripped off completely. I would say the weakest point was the leading edge of the wing saddle. That point desintegrated completely.

I will start recovering all controls and engine this weekend.

Any questions ?

Pedro

prgonzalez

Finally. This was our Giles with my son. This photo was taken last year before its first flight.

The MacDaddy

My Feedback: (10)

Pedro,

I shed a tear! I looks like mine.....I hate when that happens. It's an easy plane to build anyway, so get moving! I have a question, did you thread the wing bolt block in the fuse or use blind nuts? I cant believe it ripped it out w/o breaking a bolt. Will you make any changes to the build? What enginer were you running? 61FX? It looks like some people have been running a TH75, my friend has the TH 46 and man is that engine strong! Well, gotta get to the field.......trying to get thoes pics out of my head.

Mac

prgonzalez

Hi Mac,

I was using a OS.61FX. I was using a 12x8 prop when it happend. I used blind nuts to hold the wing. The bolts holded very well. You can see from the pictures, the block that supports the wing is still attached to the wing with the two nylon bolts in it. On this new build, I will not make any mods. I will keep using blind nuts though. But I will change engine. I think I will use the TH 0.75. Although I am a big fan of O.S.

Pedro

winglift

My Feedback: (10)

You might look at the Saito 100, its almost 2 oz lighter than the TH .75 will swing a larger prop with power.[8D]

prgonzalez

My local hobby dealer recommends me to stay with O.S. if I want to go with 2-stroke engine. He suggests using the O.S.91FX which is 2oz lighter then the .61FX. It comes right at 19.3 oz., same weight (550 grams) of the saito 100. The difference, of course, is price and fuel economy.

Has anyone flown the Giles with a .91FX ?

Pedro

The MacDaddy

My Feedback: (10)

Pedro,

I have the Saito 100 in mine, Ive only flown it once and was disappointed w/ the power, lack of it I guess really. I changed the prop but for some odd reason no one was at the field yesterday, just me and 2 others one of which was still training..... so I didnt fly it. However, I flew my U Can Do 46, which I have a Saito 72 on, 13x4 prop and it was also a little lacking.... it flys nice w/ the 12.75 x 3.75 apc, but after I spent $40 on a TruTurn wide blade ult. spinner, I wanted the W prop.... reading some Saito info, alot of people are using 30% heli fuel, since I just started in heliz, I took some Cool Power 30% Nitro 22% syn oil, what a difference! unlimited up lines and 22 minute flights since I only need 3/4 on the upline and 1/4 for most everything else. also the engine actually run cooler, not sure I under stand that w/ all the nitro? I richend it up maybe 1/8 turn on the hs and ls needels, another plus is when you pop off full throttle, you get a free smoke system! Going from 18% to 22 % oil is about a 19% increase in oil content, guess that's why it runs cooler? A visitor from Cali stopped by and we spoke about the plane and he didnt believe the 72 would pull like I was describing, until he saw it! I kinda wish I had bought the 60 size UCD now.... w/ the Saito 100 or maybe a YS 1.10???


On the FX 91 vs S 100, the 100 is what $80 more? How long does it take to pay that w/ fuel savings? 1 flying season? Ive gone thru 6 gallons so far this year.... i actually had a 1 gallon day w/ the UCD, fuel up, take off, land, fuel up, take off!

Mac

BTW - Happy Father's Day to All!

Antennaman

My Feedback: (3)

Since this thread is what 2 years old? I'd like to keep it going. I purchased my giles about 2 months ago but just got it about a week ago due to shipping companies with their thumbs where they're not supposed to be.

I've greatly appreciated all the information i've gathered through reading this thread. So far i have the tail feathers built and almost done the wing. So far, I plan on buying the saito 91 or 100 and shimming the gear 1/8" sounds like a good idea to me.
Very neat plane. anyone else out there have any more flight reports?

CrashGaalaas

My Feedback: (8)

Just to let you know I'm with you on this thread. Started building my G-202 back in January. Have it covered and waiting on radio installation. Built it by the book and hope to be flying it soon. Put in a Saito 91. All up weight so far is 6.3 pounds.

The build was easy, hope to have a flight report soon.

prgonzalez

I received my new kit last week. I have not started yet because I have to clean up my working area in the garage.

In the meantime, I have been flying my other airplanes. I have two .46 semi-symetric airfoil airplanes. For the sake of learning more about dynamic balance. I increased the elevator throw in my GP Easy Sport. The final result was impresive to me. The GP-ES started to snap rolling when I janked up elevator. This airplane had never done that before, or with the recommended elevator throw. The leson learned here is the recommended high rates for the Giles are too much for the airplane. My be they are good for specific slow speed aerobatics. Because this snap roll characteristic was the cause of loosing my first Giles, this time I am going to reduce the high rate to the point that does not snap rolls. Maybe after being more familiar with the airplane, I might increase the elevator throws to GP recommended value.

I hope this information is useful for other GP Giles pilots.

Pedro

CrashGaalaas

My Feedback: (8)

There is a technote from Great Planes about the throws. Maybe your original kit had the old throw setting. The kit I bought last November had the new control throws pasted into the manual. Anyway, here is a link to the technote with the corrected control throws.
[link=http://www.greatplanes.com/techsupport/gpma0238tech.html]gpma0238tech[/link]

Hope it helps,
Larry