RE: WH Giles G202 40%  
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 >> Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic >> WildHare R/C Support >> RE: WH Giles G202 40%
Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 2/16/2008 3:16:49 AM   
Scoubidou



Posts: 1547
Joined: 7/7/2003
From: Boisbriand, QC, CANADA
Status: online 		This thing will be a 3D monster under 27 lbs with DA100 on cans.

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


_____________________________

Seneca Engineering
http://www.seneca.ca/

(in reply to Scoubidou)
       Post #: 101

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/22/2008 4:56:43 PM   
Ialwayscrash



Posts: 73
Joined: 4/26/2004
From: Corpus Christi, TX, USA
Status: offline 		So are there only 4 people with this airframe.?Come on guys help those of us that are building one get it right and learn from your experiences.
Alan

(in reply to Scoubidou)
       Post #: 102

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/22/2008 5:18:51 PM   
Tired Old Man


 

Posts: 11367
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Central, CA, USA
Status: offline 		They're haven't been very many made. Tom really likes the way the Giles flys so he had the big Giles made mostly for him with extras for those that have the hair to be different and fly a better plane. Only 4 to 6 on the streets at the moment sounds like it could be about right. Mine is down due to an engine change over to a new import that I wanted to test out. That's turning out to have been a bad idea.

What do you need to know? It's as easy to get together as a 28% Edge, and like the Edge has no weak points or bad habits to be concerned about. The control deflections that Tom lists for low rates are near perfect for IMAC style flying. For high rate 3d flying I would not use more than 35 or 40 degrees of rudder. The plane responds extremely well to rudder input and therefore does not require super large rudder deflections to get things done.

Just keep the weight out of the nose so you don't have to add weight to the tail. I don't think there's a 100cc twin out there (except a BME-115) that's light enough to avoid adding ballast to the tail. The DA 85 is the engine for this plane. If you do decide to use a big twin install the rudder servo(s) in the tail with direct linkage. Also make a hatch in the back and put the flight battery there. That will avoid the need for added weight. Using the 85 you should come out at 24 pounds or so. Using a 100cc twin and you will come out in the mid to high 25 range. The current kits available can use a single aileron servo if desired. Mine is one of the first four and it was designed to have a dual aileron servo installation. The single servo installations will knock about 6 ounces off the final weight.

The balance location is everything to the way she lands. Nose heavy and she'll float all the way down the runway every time. If balanced on the center of the wing tube, to the forward edge of the wing tube she's an easy and soft plane to land. I have a 9% elevator to rudder mix set up on mine for knife edge and so far that's all the mixing I've felt a need to do.

She flys great!!

< Message edited by Pat Roy -- 3/22/2008 7:42:47 PM >

_____________________________

If you can''''t fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

(in reply to Ialwayscrash)
       Post #: 103

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/22/2008 5:40:52 PM   
Scoubidou



Posts: 1547
Joined: 7/7/2003
From: Boisbriand, QC, CANADA
Status: online 		Mine is untouched and still in the box. No time available to work on it Let me know if want to do a good deal

_____________________________

Seneca Engineering
http://www.seneca.ca/

(in reply to Tired Old Man)
       Post #: 104

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/22/2008 9:36:11 PM   
Ialwayscrash



Posts: 73
Joined: 4/26/2004
From: Corpus Christi, TX, USA
Status: offline 		Funny you should mention a BME 115 as that is what is going in mine. I am working on it slowly and have the elevators done and the RX and regs mounted and a few other things. There really isn't that much to do. I am having to redo my fire wall as I had origianlly wanted to put my BME 102(YEAH,I had been taking advantage of the fear of no parts or service) in it but bought the 115 also and that is where it is going. It is back from being modified and having a new igntion installed by a third party. I will say that I am impressed with the build quality of the Giles and everything seems very light weight. I guess if there is interest I can try and keep everyone posted on my progress.
Alan Clark

(in reply to Tired Old Man)
       Post #: 105

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/22/2008 10:35:02 PM   
rctom



Posts: 5148
Joined: 5/8/2002
From: Flower Mound (near Dallas), TX, USA
Status: online 		Actually there are about a dozen kits out there, most of the guys who bought them are slackers, some lame story about not wanting to fly in snow and stuff like that.

They'll start appearing, I'll have one at Toledo to show.

Pat is right, the DA-85 is the right engine unless you have a BME 110 or 115. Even an older 102/105 would be great. 5 years ago we were flying the BME-100 in a 29 pound Aeroworks Giles that was the same size and it was darned good. Now at 24 pounds it would be spectacular.

I actually have a 102, maybe I'll throw it on the front and see how it does.

TF

(in reply to Ialwayscrash)
       Post #: 106

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/23/2008 1:20:47 AM   
Tired Old Man


 

Posts: 11367
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Central, CA, USA
Status: offline 		Man, if you have a 115 you'll knock almost a full pound off the final weight of the plane with an 85!!! Sweet!! I have one too but it's in a Comp Arf Yak and it's too much work to pull it out.

As for flying in snow...don't thay have something called skis that make it pretty easy?

_____________________________

If you can''''t fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

(in reply to rctom)
       Post #: 107

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/23/2008 2:12:47 AM   
Scoubidou



Posts: 1547
Joined: 7/7/2003
From: Boisbriand, QC, CANADA
Status: online 		Did you say snow? We had so much of this "?&*?$/"$?% snow here 2 weeks ago, that i dought we are going to fly before june..

Attachments
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize


_____________________________

Seneca Engineering
http://www.seneca.ca/

(in reply to Tired Old Man)
       Post #: 108

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/23/2008 6:08:54 AM   
rctom



Posts: 5148
Joined: 5/8/2002
From: Flower Mound (near Dallas), TX, USA
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pat Roy

Man, if you have a 115 you'll knock almost a full pound off the final weight of the plane with an 85!!!


The DA-85 weighs 4.2 lbs, the BME 115 is about 4 pounds. IF both are equipped with canisters I think the DA-85 will net out lighter, if both have regular mufflers then weight doesn't really matter because either one would be too loud to fly anywhere.

TF

(in reply to Tired Old Man)
       Post #: 109

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/23/2008 7:44:02 AM   
Tired Old Man


 

Posts: 11367
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Central, CA, USA
Status: offline 		115=3.8 pounds.

I can take you to 5 fields within 45 minutes of my place where mufflers are just fine. At three of them you could run an open exhaust port.

_____________________________

If you can''''t fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

(in reply to rctom)
       Post #: 110

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/26/2008 2:50:46 AM   
Scoubidou



Posts: 1547
Joined: 7/7/2003
From: Boisbriand, QC, CANADA
Status: online 		Thanks guys. ( I had some pm to buy my Giles). After inspection, i decided to build it!

For 800$ with wing bags and CF tubes, you can't go wrong with that kit. This is my 3thd WH plane and i noticed a lot of improvement in the construction when we compare to first batch of WH 28%Edge. My Edge and 33% 260 were built like a tank but this Giles is definatley lighter.

I am painting the landing gear to match the wheel pants. More pics to come.

Pat, what current do you have with the ampmeter on the aileron servos when you have the matchbox set perfectly? I have 0.6amp at full deflection.
Daniel

_____________________________

Seneca Engineering
http://www.seneca.ca/

(in reply to Tired Old Man)
       Post #: 111

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/27/2008 6:37:00 AM   
Tired Old Man


 

Posts: 11367
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Central, CA, USA
Status: offline 		You're a little higher than mine. Mine bounce between .3 and .4 at max deflection. Do yours hold at .6 or bang that and drop down after hitting the max deflection?

You should see the v-2 Edge. Light is an understatement. I agree that the first version was a lot heavier but the dude still flew well. Not as good as the second, though.

_____________________________

If you can''''t fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

(in reply to Scoubidou)
       Post #: 112

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/28/2008 1:41:04 AM   
Scoubidou



Posts: 1547
Joined: 7/7/2003
From: Boisbriand, QC, CANADA
Status: online
quote:

You're a little higher than mine. Mine bounce between .3 and .4 at max deflection. Do yours hold at .6 or bang that and drop down after hitting the max deflection?

Ok i'll doublecheck it

Questions:
1) It seems the hinge in the top of the rudder has been cut? It normal Tom or should i try to replace it?

2) The instruction manual says the first production batch may be off set on the centerline (+) of the firewall. Are we still on the first batch?

Daniel

Attachments
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize


_____________________________

Seneca Engineering
http://www.seneca.ca/

(in reply to Tired Old Man)
       Post #: 113

RE: WH Giles G202 40% - 3/28/2008 2:19:45 AM   
Ialwayscrash



Posts: 73
Joined: 4/26/2004
From: Corpus Christi, TX, USA
Status: offline 		Tom,
Guess we wont be flying together. I am going to use the regular mufflers on mine. I don't think the other guy that flys at our field will mind! Sometimes it is good to be in the boondocks.
Alan Clark

(in reply to Scoubidou)