TF FW190 GIANT ARF
#4430
Weight & Balance
For Saito FG84 users: how did your plane come out with this engine?
I have done some preliminary weight and balance with a Vanessa rig and after measuring CG twice ( upside down and normal with gear retracted of course ) I am tal heavy by a bit more than 1/2 inch back!. CG as per the manual is 139mm from LE.
Battery packs are not yet installed, which I was going to put at the front, but after these tests even with the batteries I am not on the suggested CoG.
I would have thought that with this powerplant If anything I would be nose heavy but not tail heavy!.
Have done lots of work on this model, fiberglassed, scaled and weathered to the limits and many more things. I even opened cowl adding inspection hatches on both sides to access the engine which added mor weight due to the copper hinges I made.
weight is 12.5kg so far.
I have done some preliminary weight and balance with a Vanessa rig and after measuring CG twice ( upside down and normal with gear retracted of course ) I am tal heavy by a bit more than 1/2 inch back!. CG as per the manual is 139mm from LE.
Battery packs are not yet installed, which I was going to put at the front, but after these tests even with the batteries I am not on the suggested CoG.
I would have thought that with this powerplant If anything I would be nose heavy but not tail heavy!.
Have done lots of work on this model, fiberglassed, scaled and weathered to the limits and many more things. I even opened cowl adding inspection hatches on both sides to access the engine which added mor weight due to the copper hinges I made.
weight is 12.5kg so far.
#4433
#4435
#4436
Regarding the Center of Gravity on this plane, from a post a long time ago in this thread #1849,
"Also, since I am using the Saito FG57T the CG was further forward than need be. It balanced on the factory indicated spot.
But I did the calculations myself directly on the wing and found the factory spot to be a little more than 1.5" ahead of where I calculated it should be.
Yes the plane flew well in that configuration, but I have since removed both ballast plates on the firewall and the plane has gotten even better in the flying and ground handling department.
I think that with the load of ballast off the nose the tailwheel is now better planted when the tail drops, giving me better control on the ground."
So, yes. I moved my balance point aft by 1.5" as compared to the instructions.
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/rc-w...l#post11552405
As previously mentioned, I switched to an FG60R3 and the plane is still flying just as it did with the FG57. This thing is a blast to barnstorm with.
"Also, since I am using the Saito FG57T the CG was further forward than need be. It balanced on the factory indicated spot.
But I did the calculations myself directly on the wing and found the factory spot to be a little more than 1.5" ahead of where I calculated it should be.
Yes the plane flew well in that configuration, but I have since removed both ballast plates on the firewall and the plane has gotten even better in the flying and ground handling department.
I think that with the load of ballast off the nose the tailwheel is now better planted when the tail drops, giving me better control on the ground."
So, yes. I moved my balance point aft by 1.5" as compared to the instructions.
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/rc-w...l#post11552405
As previously mentioned, I switched to an FG60R3 and the plane is still flying just as it did with the FG57. This thing is a blast to barnstorm with.
#4437
My Feedback: (34)
Loco3D, Regarding the CG with the FG-84 Triple. I built one with the stock finish as an ARF and I had to mount my RX battery packs just behind the wing. I had taken the firewall plates off. So it was considerably nose heavy. I proceeded to crash the airplane on the first flight having reversed the Ailerons so I never got the chance to see how she flew. I am building a brand new one now with an FG-57 Twin, looking so forward to flying this airplane! Leo
#4438
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Melbourne, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,505
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Loco3D, Regarding the CG with the FG-84 Triple. I built one with the stock finish as an ARF and I had to mount my RX battery packs just behind the wing. I had taken the firewall plates off. So it was considerably nose heavy. I proceeded to crash the airplane on the first flight having reversed the Ailerons so I never got the chance to see how she flew. I am building a brand new one now with an FG-57 Twin, looking so forward to flying this airplane! Leo
BJ
#4442
#4444
... locally we grind out the pins on Robart trunions and use 1/4 inch hardened steel pins as replacements (and a mig welder). I've used drill bit shafts (very tough) and others get high grade steel rod from places like McMaster/Carr, etc...
One of the guys found a guy that'll mig weld the new pins in for $20 (you can find welders anywhere)
One of the guys found a guy that'll mig weld the new pins in for $20 (you can find welders anywhere)
So, now Im following the adwise of trying a drillbit. I could, after all, just remove the bolt, and put in the drillbit. I just glued it in place using epoxy. hehe. After all, the epoxy's job is to just stopping it from sliding up and down in an otherwise quite tight hole. I hope for the best.
#4445
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Southern Minnesota USA
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
hi kwik, i used both the 8.8 allen bolt and the drill bit. the drill bit eventually shattered and snapped off from a hard landing. the allen bolt has held out for me but i have been very carefull about my landings. sooner or later i'm sure the allen bolt will bend but i think it is better than having the retract fold like when the drill bit snapped. so far the allen bolt is winning in my robarts. i have just ordered the laser cut adapters for the sierra retracts from skyshark rc they should be here tomorrow and i will be done with the robarts once and for all.the epoxy may be the way to go with the drill bit. maybe mine got too brittle when i welded them in?
#4446
My Feedback: (124)
Balance
Sorry if this has already been covered but I could not find it in the forum. How have you all balanced the 190? The instructions show inverted with the gear extended but because the way gear extend slightly forward when they are down it makes sense to me to balance it inverted with the gear retracted.
Thanks,
Tony
Thanks,
Tony
#4447
I did just as you intend.
Gear up and inverted. With the fg57t and the fg60r3, I have it balanced aft of the factory spec with the steel plates removed from the firewall box. Flies great, and does dynamite tail slides.
Gear up and inverted. With the fg57t and the fg60r3, I have it balanced aft of the factory spec with the steel plates removed from the firewall box. Flies great, and does dynamite tail slides.
#4449
The TF 190 at a flyin this weekend. With a TF Zero in the background;
The drillbit shaft works very well as gear-pin. It is strong enough even just glued in place with epoxy.
Of course, this time I got problems with the not-repaired leg. I think its bendt too.
So the first flight ended with a belly landing. Second flight was with gear out.
The drillbit shaft works very well as gear-pin. It is strong enough even just glued in place with epoxy.
Of course, this time I got problems with the not-repaired leg. I think its bendt too.
So the first flight ended with a belly landing. Second flight was with gear out.
#4450
My Feedback: (10)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Displaced Canadian in Central Texas TX
Posts: 2,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The TF 190 at a flyin this weekend. With a TF Zero in the background;
The drillbit shaft works very well as gear-pin. It is strong enough even just glued in place with epoxy.
Of course, this time I got problems with the not-repaired leg. I think its bendt too.
So the first flight ended with a belly landing. Second flight was with gear out.
The drillbit shaft works very well as gear-pin. It is strong enough even just glued in place with epoxy.
Of course, this time I got problems with the not-repaired leg. I think its bendt too.
So the first flight ended with a belly landing. Second flight was with gear out.