86" Flying Quaker CG  
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 >> Vintage & Antique RC >> 86" Flying Quaker CG
Page: [1]

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
86" Flying Quaker CG - 4/29/2008 9:21:08 AM   
siddus74



Posts: 131
Joined: 6/29/2004
From: Nottingham, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		Picked up this old beaut last night, needs some TLC and structual enhancements. I do have the wings they are in good nick. gave strong money for it but you cant put a price on nostalgia . . .

Does any body now what the CG position should be and the elevator and rudder movements?

Its about 86" span BTW.

Cheers

Attachments
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize



_____________________________

siddus74
       Post #: 1

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 4/29/2008 1:12:55 PM   
Telemaster Sales UK


 

Posts: 52
Joined: 4/20/2008
From: ShrewsburyShropshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		I'd start at about 30%-33% back from the leading edge for the CG. Elevator need not be very much and rudder can be as much as you can get you can always switch in the rates in flight. Movement also depends on engine power: the more powerful the engine, the less movement is needed.

If you want chapter and verse on this model, try contacting Ben Buckle on 01793 764017.

Dave Davis.

(in reply to siddus74)
       Post #: 2

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 4/29/2008 2:07:53 PM   
evan-RCU



Posts: 2540
Joined: 2/4/2002
From: Charlotte, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Anywhere between the front spar to 3/4" behind the front spar for CG, it's not very critical on the Quaker. Elevator 1/2" on low rate and 3/4" on high rate and rudder 1 to 1 1/2" low rate with full travel high rate.

Nice looking plane.

_____________________________

Revver #125, Pico Owners Club #3
R/C Anonymous. My name is Evan and I have not flown for 14 hours.

(in reply to Telemaster Sales UK)
       Post #: 3

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 4/29/2008 2:23:31 PM   
siddus74



Posts: 131
Joined: 6/29/2004
From: Nottingham, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		Many thanks for the details, hopefully should have her up and running within a couple of days. Any body recommend a power plant? I want to turn a big wooded prop - I have an OS52 but that can only turn a 12x6, I have also have an OS61 but it is a 2 cyl but can swing a 13x6 wooden which I also have. I figure that I am going to need the weight in the front of it anyway, why not carry an engine? With the big prop it will be on tickover anyway . . .


_____________________________

siddus74

(in reply to evan-RCU)
       Post #: 4

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 4/29/2008 2:40:59 PM   
evan-RCU



Posts: 2540
Joined: 2/4/2002
From: Charlotte, NC, USA
Status: offline 		Use the 52 and find a 14X4... more than enough power for her.

_____________________________

Revver #125, Pico Owners Club #3
R/C Anonymous. My name is Evan and I have not flown for 14 hours.

(in reply to siddus74)
       Post #: 5

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 4/29/2008 4:58:30 PM   
siddus74



Posts: 131
Joined: 6/29/2004
From: Nottingham, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		Evan,

I like the idea of the 52 f/s with the 14x4, but will the OS52 turn a this prop, the manual suggest's a 12x5.6 tops . . . have you tried this configuration? And if so was it successful?

Thanks again.


_____________________________

siddus74

(in reply to evan-RCU)
       Post #: 6

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 4/29/2008 6:07:07 PM   
evan-RCU



Posts: 2540
Joined: 2/4/2002
From: Charlotte, NC, USA
Status: offline 		I have a few 105" Quaker 2000's, redesigns that I've done and sold maybe 100 sets of plans for. Most use Saito .56 or the OS and use 12x6 to 15x6 props. I have always used the Saito .56 and either a 15x6 or 14x6 wood or a 14x6 nylon (especially on the float equiped Quaker). The r's are low and it pulls great on the 105".

I think the 14x4 would be excellent.

Attachments
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize


_____________________________

Revver #125, Pico Owners Club #3
R/C Anonymous. My name is Evan and I have not flown for 14 hours.

(in reply to siddus74)
       Post #: 7

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 4/30/2008 5:58:40 AM   
Telemaster Sales UK


 

Posts: 52
Joined: 4/20/2008
From: ShrewsburyShropshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		Morning Siddus

I fly a Radio Queen on an OS52 and have flown it on a 40 fourstroke in the past. The original flew on a 19 diesel! This aircraft is about the same size as your Quaker but probably more heavily built. It flies fline on a 13x6 prop, so a 14x4 would probably be ideal on yours.

I echo the remarks about how smart your model looks.

Happy Landings

DD

(in reply to siddus74)
       Post #: 8

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 5/2/2008 8:03:10 PM   
siddus74



Posts: 131
Joined: 6/29/2004
From: Nottingham, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		The restoration of my 85" Quaker is complete - a couple of pieces of replacement ply for the undercarriage plate (as the old one was fuel soaked) a new servo tray and tank installation, a good clean and few other bits an pieces now shes back into flying condition.

The .61 fx made it very nosee heavy and I am not a fan of putting lead on the tail so I opted for an os46 la, even then I had to make a battery mount about 4 inches behind the trailing edge but at least not lead. An AUW of 5lb 10 onces I am hopeing that the .46 plain bearing engine with an 11x6 will be enough. I zipped her up and down the garden whilst starting to run the engine in and it seems spritely.

We will see . . .

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



_____________________________

siddus74

(in reply to Telemaster Sales UK)
       Post #: 9

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 5/3/2008 6:43:41 AM   
Telemaster Sales UK


 

Posts: 52
Joined: 4/20/2008
From: ShrewsburyShropshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		I'm sure the 46 will be fine. I've seen Radio Queens fly on 40 fourstrokes and they're much heavier aircraft than your Quaker.

Happy Landings

DD

(in reply to siddus74)
       Post #: 10

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 5/3/2008 5:54:21 PM   
siddus74



Posts: 131
Joined: 6/29/2004
From: Nottingham, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		Guys I flew the Quaker today, that OS46LAn with a 12 x6 Zinger was MORE than adequate, under half throttle most of the time . . . every body loved it and they all had a go . . . another vintage airframe saved.



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



_____________________________

siddus74

(in reply to Telemaster Sales UK)
       Post #: 11

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 5/3/2008 6:15:03 PM   
Telemaster Sales UK


 

Posts: 52
Joined: 4/20/2008
From: ShrewsburyShropshire, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		Well done Siddus!

Any problems with those forward set undercarriage legs on take-off?

DD

(in reply to siddus74)
       Post #: 12

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 5/3/2008 6:54:16 PM   
siddus74



Posts: 131
Joined: 6/29/2004
From: Nottingham, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		not really, how ever I found that the take off was allot smoother if I tried to leave the rudder alone and just let it weathervane untill it was off the deck - superb flyer, fits in nicely to vintage set of planes I already own . . .



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



_____________________________

siddus74

(in reply to Telemaster Sales UK)
       Post #: 13

RE: 86" Flying Quaker CG - 5/7/2008 10:22:14 AM   
old git


 

Posts: 677
Joined: 3/10/2004
From: BelvedereKent, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: online 		I have a couple of Midwest Quaker kit waiting to be built, I cannot understand why I haven't "got 'er done" yet, something holding me back?

quote:

ORIGINAL: siddus74
not really, how ever I found that the take off was allot smoother if I tried to leave the rudder alone and just let it weathervane u