Midwest Magician vs Original flight report  
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 >> Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more >> Control Lines >> Midwest Magician vs Original flight report Page: [1]

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Midwest Magician vs Original flight report - 2/13/2008 1:39:11 AM   
cutaway


 

Posts: 328
Joined: 6/25/2007
From: Lake Worth, FL, USA
Status: offline 		Flew the original I built from the Brodak plans a couple of days ago.

My general impression was that the Midwest version (longer wingspan, slightly wider stab/elevator, longer nose) flies a bit better than the original. My Midwest kit 30 years ago had a fuselage made out of iron wood, so that helped balance out the effects of the longer nose and the C/G winds up within a comfortable range without adding any weight to the tail. The new Original balances about 1/2" behind the "hot" position on the Brodak plans without any weight in the tail and is still very stable. I used a Sig 3" nylon bellcrank with the pushrod on the inner hole and an ordinary large nylon R/C type control horn. With the pushrod on one hole in from the outermost hole it wound up with about 30 degrees of throw in each direction. On full deflection maneuvers, this was enough to stall it and make it wobble around corners. Next time out I'll move the pushrod to the outer hole on the horn.

The Brodak plan C/G range is VERY conservative. If anyone builds one of these and the C/G winds up just in front of the spar, don't bother adding weight in the tail - it will fly fine. With the C/G where I had it, the plane won't need a lot of deflection to turn well. Definitely go with the inner bellcrank holes and outer control horn holes.
       Post #: 1

RE: Midwest Magician vs Original flight report - 2/15/2008 6:55:17 PM   
Black Arrow


 

Posts: 41
Joined: 5/8/2006
From: , MI, USA
Status: offline 		Have you ever built a Magician with flaps? Back in the 60's guys in my area were convinced that was the hot set up. Some would move the horizontal stab rearward about 1/2 " or so to compensate for the increased maneuvreability the flaps gave. I built one with flaps but never flew it. I've never flown any CL plane with flaps.

< Message edited by Black Arrow -- 2/15/2008 6:57:09 PM >

(in reply to cutaway)
       Post #: 2

RE: Midwest Magician vs Original flight report - 2/15/2008 10:40:22 PM   
cutaway


 

Posts: 328
Joined: 6/25/2007
From: Lake Worth, FL, USA
Status: offline 		I never built one with flaps. One of the guys in my club claims to have had one built that way. If I was going to do one with flaps, I'd want to beef up the T/E some to handle the added loads - maybe 2-1/2" at the root tapering down to the stock 1-1/2" towards the tips. I'd also use harder wood. Lengthening the tail moment sounds like a reasonable thing to do.

(in reply to Black Arrow)
       Post #: 3

RE: Midwest Magician vs Original flight report - 2/16/2008 7:15:11 PM   
gcb



Posts: 2422
Joined: 10/24/2002
From: Port Ewen, NY, USA
Status: offline 		There was a discussion on one of the boards within the last year about with or without flaps and people who have built both seem to say that it flies just as well without them.

George

(in reply to cutaway)
       Post #: 4

RE: Midwest Magician vs Original flight report - 2/20/2008 5:54:07 AM   
Black Arrow


 

Posts: 41
Joined: 5/8/2006
From: , MI, USA
Status: offline 		Well if it doesn't fly a whole lot better with flaps then the thing to do is keep it simple and save the little bit of extra weight. I still have an unstarted Magician kit that I bought back around 1967 or '68.

(in reply to gcb)
       Post #: 5

RE: Midwest Magician vs Original flight report - 2/20/2008 2:40:49 PM   
gcb



Posts: 2422
Joined: 10/24/2002
From: Port Ewen, NY, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Arrow

Well if it doesn't fly a whole lot better with flaps then the thing to do is keep it simple and save the little bit of extra weight. I still have an unstarted Magician kit that I bought back around 1967 or '68.


In addition to saving a little weight you usually save a LOT of extra trim adjustment.

Look carefully at the plans and make sure you trace any parts that are not shown so you can replicate it if you want to build another.

George

(in reply to Black Arrow)
       Post #: 6

Page:   [1]
All Forums >> Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more >> Control Lines >> Midwest Magician vs Original flight report
Page: [1]





Jump to:


Google 



Search | Marketplace | Event Calendar | Local Clubs | Magazine | Product Ratings | New Products | Discussion Forums

Photo Gallery | Member Video Posts | RCU Video Gallery | Instructor Search | Field|Track|Marina Search

Advertisers | Hobby Vendor Resources | Rate Manufacturers | Sign In/Sign Up

SITE MAP!   : :   FORUM RULES

© 2001 - 2007 24-7 RC, LLC, all rights reserved.

Charities we support that also need your help
Yorkie Rescue | Humane Society | ASPCA | Crohn's-Colitis America

Kaango.com Classifieds

1.016RCU1