cartercg

Hi, just had flight number 1000 on my Valiant today. It's flying great and is in excellent condition. The CARF build is excellent. No issues or problems at all. Electric is certainly very easy on the airframe and servos.

Regards
Clint

wagen017

that is great to hear Clint!

Can you comment a bit with your experience on the "0 mix" setup the plane should have? Is this for you really the case?

Volkert

cartercg

Hi Volkert,

I did put wing adjusters on my Valiant (after some discusison with Bryan Herbest) and increased the incidence slightly from the factory default. This also got rid of a small amount of aileron trim as the factory set incidences were not absoutely identical. The Cg is on the centre of the wing tube. I have 2% down elev mix to low throttle. No rudder to elev mix. But I do have rudder to aileron mix. My Valiant rolls in the opposite direction to applied rudder. It hence needs more dihedral on the main wing. I replaced the main wing tube (the factory supplied one is heavy and more suitable as a self defence weapon) with a Graphtech one. The Graptech tube was slightly smaller so I build it up with cyno in various places to provide a little more dihedral on the wing. That did reduce the rudder aileron coupling a little, but I still needed mix. I was in contact with Bryan and tried different things, such as moving the CG right forward. Nothing solved the coupling. What I think I can put it down to is that the Valiant is a glow/electric plane. Bryan's applications are glow. In a glow setup the cylinder, tune pipe and fuel tank all sit below the wing line. In electric the battery and motor sit on the wing line. On KE the glow version will hence have more weight towards the landing gear, which counters the opposite aileron roll? That's my guess anyway.

I can confirm that with the right CG, wing incidence and elev trim that I can get hands free up and down lines (down lines do require 2% down elev mix) and can do KE loops with zero rudder to elev mix. If for electric it had more dihedral on the wing I expect that it would be a zero mix plane, or very close to it.

Regards
Clint

Stuart Chale

I agree the dihedral is off. I don't know for sure but doubt it is an electric vs glow thing. I also increased the wing incidence a little. Except for the down line mix and rudder aileron mix there is very little other coupling. The vertical and knfe edges in this design are affected fairly obviously by CG changes. I ended up with a CG to give me the best vertical (with a slight increase in wing incidence) and the knife edge flight is real close. The only odd trait I found is the lack for need of much expo on aileron and elevator. I believe the counter balances are causing this. On the other hand the rudder is extremely sensitive and I have my expo dialed way up on it. First flights were interesting with 40% expo on ail and elevator.
Stuart

Freddy

My Feedback: (3)

Here are pictures of my new Valiant after it's maiden flight a few days ago. I had the CG just aft of the center of the wing tube yet it needed 10 clicks of up to maintain straight and level flight. Therefore needed more down than usual on inverted. I had only one flight and am breaking in a new YS170DZ with an 18.1x10W APC. Not much time yet on it but a few more checks were done:
Hardly any aileron trim needed
Pulls straight up without any deviation, no pitch or yaw
Down line will need slight down trim with idle as advertised in the manual
Knife edges seemed good both ways without any significant pitch or roll though need more time to evaluate
Should I move the CG even more aft? That is what my experience tells me though it is contrary to the manual and where Hebert says the CG should be. My next try will be with a slightly more aft CG and go from there.
Gorgeous bird and it looks like it will fly very well overall.

cartercg

Hi Freddy,

I ran my CG on the centre of the wing tube, but increased the main wing incidence slightly. The elevator was then flush with the stab. This plane likes to have a forward CG, and you will need to push a fair bit when inverted.

I'd suggest you PM Bryan Herbest (you'll find one of his earlier posts) and ask him for his latest recommendation on setup with this plane. I know he has made some refinements on CG and incidence. Try his latest settings and let us know how it works out.

Clint

Freddy

My Feedback: (3)

Had a few more flight attempts but my new YS is acting up, all deadsticks after a few minutes. I did move the CG aft by moving the battery aft of the wing tube on the vertical tank support, lightened spinner backplate, and 1 oz weight in the tail, so CG is probably just aft of the wing tube aft edge. Needed less down in inverted and all the tracking including up and KE still great. Maybe this will affect my spins/snaps? Too soon to tell. I PM's Bryan Hebert but no feedback yet.

RC_Pattern_Flyer

My Feedback: (1)

Freddy, what altitude do you fly at?

Chuck

mjfrederick

One thing Hebert will tell you is you don't move the CG just to make elevator "feel" right for inverted flight. That's what God invented exponential for. Moving the CG too far aft on an Hebert design can cause some very bad spin and snap characteristics, and the rolls won't be near as pretty. He's actually in the process of re-trimming the prototype (since he was kind enough to lend me the airplane he was originally going to fly this year), so his mind is definitely on this plane at this time, and he will probably chime in here. I know he added tail weight to his this past weekend, but most of his radio gear is right at or in front of the wing tube with the exception of the elevator servos.

Freddy

My Feedback: (3)

Bryan Hebert did PM me and assured me to move the CG back fwd which I did and I will see what that does. He also mentioned using positive expo on down elevator. Never done that before and I will see if that suits me.

Dave Harmon

Freddie.....Having less expo on down than up will definately change the inverted elevator feel.....I did this on my V and lowered the workload considerably.
I've never needed positive expo on down elevator but each airplane is a bit different and should be trimmed.

Freddy

My Feedback: (3)

OK you all I moved the CG back to the center of the wing tube and it is much better overall now. I have zero expo on down elevator. Great flying bird. Still dialing it in but I can see that it flies good already. Point and shoot, great knife edges, that anhedral seems to help like the Curare in the old days. It also looks better than most ships out there. I fly near sea level (60 ft) in the Seattle area.

cartercg

That's great Freddy, I tried a whole lot of different CG positions and ended up with the CG on the centre of the wing tube.

Clint

jkruger

Building a Valiant. First time experience with a nose ring. Using a YS 175 engine, Hyde soft mount and Central Hobbies nose ring. Do I use the carbon fiber nose ring that came with the plane also or is that just for electrics?
thanks

wagen017

Great to hear she is flying well. I've been to the east coast 3 times now, hope to come to Seattle next time again. Want to see that Valiant fly!!

Volkert

MTK

There is no reason the carbon ring needs to be replaced. Aluminum doesn't buy you anything in my opinion.

I make my own rings from 1/32" ply and glass and that works great too.

kevinlam

My valiant needs a very large amount of down mix to keep the downline from pulling. Is there anything wrong with my set up?

drac1

My Feedback: (4)

I'm flying two Valiants with the 175cdi. C.G. on both is at the rear of the wing tube. I don't use a rudder to elevator mix and they track perfect on knife edge.
I use rudder to aileron mixes and quite a bit of throttle to elevator down line mix.
I also have to push more than i have been used to when inverted. The positive expo on down elevator will be interesting to try.
This is the best snapping model i have flown. The model exits the 45 degree up line with 1 snap perfectly on line.
Bryan has previously emailed me new settings to try, but i have been time poor lately and haven't been able to make the changes yet.

GiMsAcE

Hi all what is the best prop combo using a Pletty Evo with the Valiant and what batteries are you guys using?.My Valiant is 250 grams over weight and need to start cutting down on weight!.

wagen017

I was using the RASA MAG5, 20.2x16 prop. You can find them at the website of Lorenz F3A.

Volkert

cmoulder

Kevin, do you have the means to accurately measure your wing and stab incidences?

These numbers and the CG (and prop thrust line) will provide a good starting point for examining the cause.

For instance, if you have a wing incidence of 0.8 degree with the CG too far back and a bit of downthrust in the motor to compensate, when trimmed to fly straight-and-level at cruising speed the model will definitely pull a lot on a downline when the throttle is cut.

ltc

My Feedback: (3)

Sorry for digging up a 5 year old thread ...

I was lucky enough to get a new in box Valiant (designers scheme) which i would like to build as an electric

Has anyine built this plane with a (front nose ring mounted) Hacker Q80 F3A motor?
Ot should I buy a backmounted outrunner instead?

Thank you very much

wagen017

I mounted a home made nose ring and used a Plettenberg Advance. You can also add for piece of mind/security a back support to such engine. This works fine!

ltc

My Feedback: (3)

Thank you for the reply. I would definitely add a Q80 backmount.
I will likely need to double check the diameter of the Q80, but I think it should fit.
My first choice was a Plettenberg Xtra 30-10, but I sent mine back to Plettenberg and they informed me that they no longer have parts in stock to repair and maintain these motors any longer. I think the Xtra 30-10 is the one shown in the electric manual for backmounting.

Freddy

My Feedback: (3)

I still have my Valiant. Beautiful airplane! The Hebert designs just look cool and look right. Nothing like those boxy things these days. Nice to hear that some are still being put together. Happy flying.