Treehopper Twin  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Twin & Multi Engine RC Aircraft >> Treehopper Twin
Page: [1]

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Treehopper Twin - 11/1/2007 12:09:53 AM   
teufelhund



Posts: 282
Joined: 9/16/2003
From: Bladenboro, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Hi All,
It's been a while in taking shape but it is recognizable as a twin now. The nacelles gave me the most frustration. I couldn't figure out how to get the strength I wanted to attach to the wing. I finally figured it out though. Here are some pics. I have two brand new OS max .91 2 strokes powering this one.

Attachments
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize 		Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize 		Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize 		Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize


_____________________________

Conform and be dull...
       Post #: 1

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/1/2007 1:28:18 AM   
Flyboy Dave



Posts: 13306
Joined: 3/20/2002
From: San Bernardino County, CA, USA
Status: online 		....that should have plenty of steam.

FBD.

_____________________________

An engineer says.... "That won''t work".
A mechanic says..."Oh yeah, watch this".
"Old Age, and Treachery will overcome youth and skill".
Revver Bro #4.

(in reply to teufelhund)
       Post #: 2

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/1/2007 5:29:23 AM   
NikolayTT


 

Posts: 572
Joined: 9/29/2002
From: Tampere, FINLAND
Status: offline 		Nice looking but distance between engines is too big compared to the wing span. It seems easy to
enlarge the wings on both sides. Check for example Catalina picture for the ratio of wing-span
versus distance betwen engines. That will save your plane in case if one engine stops; Catalina
was designed to fly even on one engine. I believe you should almost double the wing span of
course the parts you add should go narrow to the tip; maybe it is good to scale some real
plane wing shape (seen from above).

Attachments
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize

(in reply to Flyboy Dave)
       Post #: 3

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/1/2007 5:34:17 AM   
NikolayTT


 

Posts: 572
Joined: 9/29/2002
From: Tampere, FINLAND
Status: offline 		One thing more: - in hard landing some of your engine exhaust most likely will hit the ground and
the damage on plane&engine will be severe, isn't it; I would keep the engines with vertical head,
that has several other benefits too.

(in reply to NikolayTT)
       Post #: 4

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/1/2007 6:19:21 AM   
teufelhund



Posts: 282
Joined: 9/16/2003
From: Bladenboro, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Hi NikolayTT,
I thought about adding some length to the wing as well, but I thought that because the wing has such a broad chord I should be alright. I still don't understand what you mean about the hard landing damaging the engines unless you mean that I need to lengthen the distance between the main gear wheels. It has been my experience also that the engines should run perfectly fine on their sides when adjusted properly. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the plane and please add more if you think of anything. Thanks for looking! Ben

_____________________________

Conform and be dull...

(in reply to NikolayTT)
       Post #: 5

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/1/2007 6:25:59 AM   
teufelhund



Posts: 282
Joined: 9/16/2003
From: Bladenboro, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Hi Dave,
Thanks for looking. I was wanting plenty of power for this one as I plan to have it perform on floats as well. It may get a third engine also. It was originally designed as a trainer for a 25cc to 26cc gasoline engine. Ben

_____________________________

Conform and be dull...

(in reply to Flyboy Dave)
       Post #: 6

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/1/2007 6:37:04 AM   
NikolayTT


 

Posts: 572
Joined: 9/29/2002
From: Tampere, FINLAND
Status: offline 		Hi Ben,

I have twin of OS.91FX and that is quite heavy. Looking at your landing gear - it looks almost half of the strenght I have
unless you use some special metals there. Then with this wing surface you have, you will most likely come to about of
100g/dm.sq wing loading or more and then the stall speed will be maybe near 100 km/h, thus your main landing gear
will be "tested" because you haver to either land with high-speed (you seems you have no flaps) or almost stall the
plane very near to ground. I have about 210 cm wing span and wing loading is about 80g/dm.sq and still the landing
is not what I want especially if the engines are killed prior landing. Not to mention that there might be a cross wind
and then the story will get further more nasty and one of the wing tips will head to the ground - there is the engine
muffler which will hit first the ground and that is very bad if you land on asfalt especially; anyway I broke my engine
even on a grass ... and I will not place mufler near ground, maybe on contrary; I will place the engine in the way
that the muffler is on the top; yes it is a bit ugly while it is a safe solution.

In fact if you enlarge the wings, there you cam place the ailerons and your current ailerons you could control as
flaps and that would be pretty nice solution I would vote for.

Regards,
Nikolay

< Message edited by NikolayTT -- 11/1/2007 6:45:36 AM >

(in reply to teufelhund)
       Post #: 7

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/1/2007 6:57:08 AM   
teufelhund



Posts: 282
Joined: 9/16/2003
From: Bladenboro, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Ok NikolayTT, I see what you are saying now about the landing gear and the wing span. I do have flaps on it(look closely and you can see them). The main landing gear was designed for a giant scale Sukoi (25-26lbs) so it should hold up. The Robart nose strut should also be adequate. It is rated for 15- 22lbs aircraft. My landings aren't that hard(most of the time) .I still have quite a few more things to work out before she gets maidened though. I may go ahead and lenghten the wings a bit. I done the math before for the wing loading(22oz per square foot) with a 25cc gasoline engine(2.5lbs) and everything needed to fly so everything has changed now. I think now it would probably be closer to a 30oz psf loading on the wing. Thanks for your input again. Ben

_____________________________

Conform and be dull...

(in reply to NikolayTT)
       Post #: 8

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/12/2007 7:30:18 PM   
TRoc


 

Posts: 76
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Fairbanks, AK, USA
Status: offline 		I like the mods to your Treehopper, Ben! Looks good, especially the twin rudders (besides the twin engines). Were it me (and this may not be wise) I'd see how it flys with the current wing; if it (survives and) needs more wing after that, build outboard wing panels and figure out how to attach them to the current wing (after removing the tips).

Twins are fun and I think it's good to have at least one in the stable (I have a Sportster 40 twin). When I fly my twin, a lot of time is spent wondering if both engines are running !

I enjoyed seeing your creativeness with the Treehopper!

Tom

< Message edited by TRoc -- 11/12/2007 11:32:21 PM >

(in reply to teufelhund)
       Post #: 9

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/13/2007 1:50:05 AM   
teufelhund



Posts: 282
Joined: 9/16/2003
From: Bladenboro, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Hey Tom,
Thanks for the compliments! I'm going to try the current wing and see. I still have to make up a balsa nose cone for the Treehopper also. Finished all covering now except the nacelles and ailerons/flaps. I was wondering about the wing loading on this one to. It may become a sesquiplane! Thanks for your input again! Glad to hear you got everything straightened out with your motor. Ben

_____________________________

Conform and be dull...

(in reply to TRoc)
       Post #: 10

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/13/2007 2:47:34 AM   
TRoc


 

Posts: 76
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Fairbanks, AK, USA
Status: offline 		Hi Ben,

This is just a guess, but I'm thinking the wing loading with two FX 91's will be about the same as the wing loading with one Zenoah G26; Two FX91's weigh about 25 oz each with muffler = 50 oz. A G26 weighs about 60 oz. which leaves about 10 oz. left for the weight of the two nacelles. While I wouldn't consider my G26 powered Treehopper to be a floater (maybe my CG is too far forward), it does well and has a gentle stall (actually I run out of elevator getting it to stall so maybe it's the CG thing again). I may be overlooking something, but I don't think the wingloading on your twin will be that much different from that of a "regular" Treehopper.

I'll be interested to hear how your twin flys.

Maybe after a season or two, you may want to try another engine on the nose! <grin>

Tom

(in reply to teufelhund)
       Post #: 11

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/13/2007 2:59:58 PM   
teufelhund



Posts: 282
Joined: 9/16/2003
From: Bladenboro, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Tom,

I had thought about a third engine also! I'll just have to see about the wing loading when I get it finished and ready for maiden. I know that you had said that maybe the CG was off before in the other thread, did u ever try changing it? If so then what were the results or did you just change it back to what it was originally? Thanks for the info! Ben

_____________________________

Conform and be dull...

(in reply to TRoc)
       Post #: 12

RE: Treehopper Twin - 11/13/2007 4:50:12 PM   
TRoc


 

Posts: 76
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Fairbanks, AK, USA
Status: offline 		Ben,

I think I was focusing more on getting the engine to run well so didn't get around to experimenting with the CG; The plane actually flew fine where I had the CG from the start and I didn't change it. Plane is stable, tracks well although as I mentioned, it feels just slightly heavy to me on the elevator but not bad. It does take a lot of down elevator for inverted flight but perhaps a lot of that is due to the flat bottomed airfoil. Also (from the other thread), some time back I added down thrust because it would clearly climb when I added power from straight and level.

Regarding the third engine. Probably enough on your plate now with two engines; the third one can be for dessert later.

< Message edited by TRoc -- 11/13/2007 6:13:43 PM >

(in reply to teufelhund)
       Post #: 13

RE: Treehopper Twin - 5/14/2008 4:04:08 AM   
teufelhund



Posts: 282
Joined: 9/16/2003
From: Bladenboro, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Hi guys!

For all of you waiting to hear if this twin flys or not, IT DOES FLY! It flys very well and tracks straight and true. I finished it up yesterday and began breaking in the engines in. All up weight came out to 18lbs 9 oz(dry). Today I took her out to the field a