1:4.4 polikarpov I16 with saito fg84
#27
Thread Starter
Maiden today. It tracked realy good and vas easy on take off and in the air. Had to trim alot down on elevator so i think it is a bit tail heavy. But I loosed one of the wheels and had to land with the retract inn. Shout down th engine when i was in for landing but when i was 1 meter over the grass it flipped around and cartwheeled along the strip. Not to mouch dammage. the fuse rippet up in the joint under the belly and it got a crack on the side. but that kan easily be fixed with epoxy and glassfiber.
#29
Thread Starter
ready for new missions. checking that everyting is ok and measure the temp with the covling. after some minutes on half trottle the hottest sylinder was 90degres C. so it should be no problem in the air.
https://youtu.be/6Tbp5HhDm-g
https://youtu.be/6Tbp5HhDm-g
#31
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: BlenheimMarlborough, NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks great Tyor. Shame about the undercarriage causing a rough landing. At our club we have a saying,"if it has **** or retracts, it'll give you trouble!!"
I see you have a lack of snow this time of year. We have some snow, and a lot of frost. Very cold on the fingers early in the morning at the field!!
I see you have a lack of snow this time of year. We have some snow, and a lot of frost. Very cold on the fingers early in the morning at the field!!
#32
Thread Starter
Had 2 fligts today. And it went bad both landings. I think it is to heavy for the size of the wing som it cant slow down enough for landing. I dont think I will fix it this time, becouse I will not take any chance with this engine. It is to expensive.
here are some video from today. on the last landing i Had about 65 km/h and stil it just flippet when i try to add a little elevator for landing.
https://youtu.be/gC8jvnMnGE8
here are some video from today. on the last landing i Had about 65 km/h and stil it just flippet when i try to add a little elevator for landing.
https://youtu.be/gC8jvnMnGE8
#33
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: BlenheimMarlborough, NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ouch! Shame, it seems to climb out well and looks good in the air. Don't blame you for wanting to look after the engine, it is a really nice sounding engine.
I am assembling a Greatplanes Waco 72" biplane to fit the second NGH GF 38. Will be a big engine for it, but it is made to fit DLE 30cc 2-stroke, so my engine will probably put out about the same power.
I am assembling a Greatplanes Waco 72" biplane to fit the second NGH GF 38. Will be a big engine for it, but it is made to fit DLE 30cc 2-stroke, so my engine will probably put out about the same power.
#36
My Feedback: (81)
Sorry about your Donkey. I understand, but I wouldn't give up. I found on my I-16, you need to carry a lot of speed on landing...it is no floater. Also, after reading Delmar Benjamin's book on the Gee Bee R2 replica, he talks of balancing his full scale at 18% M.A.C. He found the airplane to be more stable and controllable at that point. He talks of stability issues with the shourt-coupled fuse, and that you need to bring teh CG forward. It was enlightening.
I built a half scale R2 and balanced it at 20%...flew like a dream. On my 115 inch I-16, I have it balanced at 22%....flies good there.
I totally busted up my I-16 on the second flight, and spend 6 years deciding whether I burn it or fix it. In the end, I fixed it. I am glad I did. I have been flying it for 3 years now. It is a cool plane, and will garner a lot of attention at the field, but is not for the faint hearted. Under power, it flies like any other plane. But if you lose power, with that short coupled, flat front end, you need to point it straight down and land ASAP. My last flight off my I-16 had an engine out and I landed OK, but bounced and broke a gear and it flipped over and broke off the tip of the vertical stab/rudder. Minor, but I will fix again.
A friend In Illinois has a big I-16, and he has also repaired his several times.
I only tell you all of this so that you know it is not just you or the plane. It is a plane that requires constant attention, but, to me, that's what makes it fun and interesting.
Good Luck.
JQ
I built a half scale R2 and balanced it at 20%...flew like a dream. On my 115 inch I-16, I have it balanced at 22%....flies good there.
I totally busted up my I-16 on the second flight, and spend 6 years deciding whether I burn it or fix it. In the end, I fixed it. I am glad I did. I have been flying it for 3 years now. It is a cool plane, and will garner a lot of attention at the field, but is not for the faint hearted. Under power, it flies like any other plane. But if you lose power, with that short coupled, flat front end, you need to point it straight down and land ASAP. My last flight off my I-16 had an engine out and I landed OK, but bounced and broke a gear and it flipped over and broke off the tip of the vertical stab/rudder. Minor, but I will fix again.
A friend In Illinois has a big I-16, and he has also repaired his several times.
I only tell you all of this so that you know it is not just you or the plane. It is a plane that requires constant attention, but, to me, that's what makes it fun and interesting.
Good Luck.
JQ
#40
Hi, i have just watched the video and it seems that plane has not been trimed for level flight before landing. it seems to me that during flight your finger pushes up elevator stick all the time in order to fly straight and each time you release the elevator stick a little plane goes down so its a little difficult to built a steady rate of descend while landing. i also see that it doesnt like much wing angle during landing or else it will tip stall, i guess i saw it two times happening during landing. Probably its a fast - heavy plane with no or a minor wash out on the wing tip. Generally those Russian wings with their narrow tip surface are a little tricky to handle while slowing down for landing. I didnt see any FLAPS...is that right...;
i would advise you NOT to put your CG to 20% , your plane is really fast during landing, putting more weight to the nose will make its landings more faster. i dont think its tail heavy since your CG is already at 25% as you say.
i would advise you NOT to put your CG to 20% , your plane is really fast during landing, putting more weight to the nose will make its landings more faster. i dont think its tail heavy since your CG is already at 25% as you say.
#41
Thread Starter
Hi There is not flaps on the plane. Wasn`t flaps on the fullsize so i didn`t build flaps on the model.
Calculatet where MAC (main aerodynamic cord) is on the wing. measured 22% of the wing cord at MAc. and the cg will be 3-4cm in front of where i has it now. so the plane is tail heavy I think.
Calculatet where MAC (main aerodynamic cord) is on the wing. measured 22% of the wing cord at MAc. and the cg will be 3-4cm in front of where i has it now. so the plane is tail heavy I think.
#42
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Holbrook, New York NY
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tyor
Keep with it, mine at true 1/4 scale is magnificent in the air, just a little speedy on landing. IF I dont get it just right it likes to bounce a bit, just like the full size.
Best to you, Sal
Keep with it, mine at true 1/4 scale is magnificent in the air, just a little speedy on landing. IF I dont get it just right it likes to bounce a bit, just like the full size.
Best to you, Sal
#44
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Holbrook, New York NY
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tyor
close to 25 percent and I use lots of exponential on the elevator. In the air the I-16 is magnificent, landing approach is rock solid, however, as it settles in for landing, the
elevator becomes very sensitive. Although some of the I-16 versions did not have flaps, they did use flaperons.
Best to you, Sal
close to 25 percent and I use lots of exponential on the elevator. In the air the I-16 is magnificent, landing approach is rock solid, however, as it settles in for landing, the
elevator becomes very sensitive. Although some of the I-16 versions did not have flaps, they did use flaperons.
Best to you, Sal
#46
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tyor,
My condolences on the crash. Very disheartening I am sure.
I found this thread as I was going to build an I-16. Second guessing myself now that I see the trouble you and most have with landing.
My question was to be what would you suggest a wingspan for this plane using a.046 2-stroke?
My condolences on the crash. Very disheartening I am sure.
I found this thread as I was going to build an I-16. Second guessing myself now that I see the trouble you and most have with landing.
My question was to be what would you suggest a wingspan for this plane using a.046 2-stroke?
#47
Thread Starter
Hi difficult to say but 130-140cm should be ok I think.
I have fixed the plane and it is flying again. but stil trouble with the landing. now i have moved cg to 22% of the wing cord. and it is easier to land now. Her are a video from a warbirdmeeting her in Norway. My polikarpov I16 with saito fg84 at 32:40-35:55 and 1:20:10-1:25:40
I am going to change the oleolegs, they are to week and is the reason for the noseover on landing. On the second landing I used the ailerons a little down for flaps and that helped.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=4992&v=hi938WNAXTw
I have fixed the plane and it is flying again. but stil trouble with the landing. now i have moved cg to 22% of the wing cord. and it is easier to land now. Her are a video from a warbirdmeeting her in Norway. My polikarpov I16 with saito fg84 at 32:40-35:55 and 1:20:10-1:25:40
I am going to change the oleolegs, they are to week and is the reason for the noseover on landing. On the second landing I used the ailerons a little down for flaps and that helped.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=4992&v=hi938WNAXTw
#48
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I watched. Good to see it in the sky. You fared much better then many others that day.
I would think that if you can have both ailerons lower together (like flaps) you'd have an slower landing speed. Do you think if you had an extra centimeter devoted to the ailerons that you'd have more control landing? (I read through this whole post and then dutifully checked the web on terminology. I'm new to winged craft.)
As for my I-16 plans. I talked to one RC pilot who thought about 92 centimeters. I'm not going to give up on this but I may have to buy an eight channel to add flaps.
I found TDM Models who sells plans for the I-16 but he uses electric. His recommended motors AXI 2212/20 or Mega 16/15/6 brushless at a wingspan of 78.7cm. Hoping to get a conversion and go from there as I'd use his plans having them sized as needed.
(I found some information on motors vs glo. I think your estimate is closer.)
I would think that if you can have both ailerons lower together (like flaps) you'd have an slower landing speed. Do you think if you had an extra centimeter devoted to the ailerons that you'd have more control landing? (I read through this whole post and then dutifully checked the web on terminology. I'm new to winged craft.)
As for my I-16 plans. I talked to one RC pilot who thought about 92 centimeters. I'm not going to give up on this but I may have to buy an eight channel to add flaps.
I found TDM Models who sells plans for the I-16 but he uses electric. His recommended motors AXI 2212/20 or Mega 16/15/6 brushless at a wingspan of 78.7cm. Hoping to get a conversion and go from there as I'd use his plans having them sized as needed.
(I found some information on motors vs glo. I think your estimate is closer.)
Last edited by Oopsla; 09-12-2015 at 09:17 AM.
#49
Thread Starter
I think the one with 78cm wingspan should fit a 0.20-0.25 size glow engine. But the nose is short so if you can scale that drawing up to 120cm I think you can use that .46 engine.