Magic VF3 building thread
01-29-2009, 09:52 PM
#102
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
A piece of aluminum the size of a ball on the end of an ink pen- found its way into an unused port of the rx, shorting the pos and neg. That piece originated from one of two holes I drilled in angle bracket for the landing gear re-enforcement. I put this L bracket in because the field I was flying at was so rough, this worked well (held up in the crash too).
01-29-2009, 10:00 PM
#103
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
Pieces then go together. Each piece ranged from about 1/8 of an inch to several inches long, building larger sub-structure pieces. 1/3 of an ounce added from thick CA and some thin CA, and 1/4 ounce of foam safe CA. Average speed of re-assembly was 6 pieces per hour. I was never good a jigsaw puzzles. Average of one hour per evening. 3 weekends.
01-29-2009, 10:09 PM
#105
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
Trial fit of larger pieces on fuselage sides. Patience, endurance, dedication, thinking about getting it back in the air, getting back in the race, back into competition. Thinking about getting motivated, picking yourself up, get back into the groove. Squint your eyes, get on the simulator, work at it. Glue some more pieces. Don't let up. Spring will be here. Flying season will be here. Its in the blood.
01-30-2009, 11:15 AM
#110
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 2,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
ORIGINAL: Don Szczur
A piece of aluminum the size of a ball on the end of an ink pen- found its way into an unused port of the rx, shorting the pos and neg. That piece originated from one of two holes I drilled in angle bracket for the landing gear re-enforcement. I put this L bracket in because the field I was flying at was so rough, this worked well (held up in the crash too).
A piece of aluminum the size of a ball on the end of an ink pen- found its way into an unused port of the rx, shorting the pos and neg. That piece originated from one of two holes I drilled in angle bracket for the landing gear re-enforcement. I put this L bracket in because the field I was flying at was so rough, this worked well (held up in the crash too).
Still, a lesson, ____Cover your unused ports during installation.
I've managed to pass this failure mode for 49 years but I'm making changes right now !
The mere suggestion of this possibility is enough for me.
Possible accessory product as well __ a plastic plug to insert.
A "scissor device" if I may.[sm=eek.gif]
01-31-2009, 10:08 PM
#111
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
It was the first time I used aluminum inside a pattern plane (even if I used aluminum landing gear they were pre drilled before installing. Next step is finishing sanding the surfaces and filling with balsa-weight filler.
02-01-2009, 05:03 PM
#112
My Feedback: (56)
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
Don, your efforts should give others incentive not to trash a model simply because it's splintered. One of the benefits of building with wood. Reminds me of a Ukie Stunter I pile drove into the tarmac at Floyd Bennett Field , NY in the late 60's. Saved every piece and restored it.
The NTSB could use a few good modelers to help with reconstructing downed commercial aircraft. There's a US Airways jet liner from the Hudson River deadstick landing at a warehouse in Harrison, NJ right now.
The NTSB could use a few good modelers to help with reconstructing downed commercial aircraft. There's a US Airways jet liner from the Hudson River deadstick landing at a warehouse in Harrison, NJ right now.
02-01-2009, 07:31 PM
#113
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
You're not wrong!
I doubt I'd have the patience to rebuild that jigsaw puzzle... Then again we don't have winters down here like you guys do so I suppose if you have nothing else to do why not...
Great job Don.
Cheers
Jason.
I doubt I'd have the patience to rebuild that jigsaw puzzle... Then again we don't have winters down here like you guys do so I suppose if you have nothing else to do why not...
Great job Don.
Cheers
Jason.
02-22-2009, 12:11 AM
#114
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
Mounting a new landing gear plate took some thought. First, I cut the plate the same size as the original and sanded to fit. Then put a layer of CF cloth on the top side for extra strength. I drilled the right side landing gear, mounted it to the plate, then drilled through the aluminum angle pieces. Its amazing how little aluminum drillings there were. Food for thought. Then I drilled from the top (through the holes on the other side) and took the plate out, cleaned every bit of aluminum dust or drillings I could find, and then glued the plate in and screwed the gear legs in. This plate will not come out without ripping the sides of the fuselage off. Just need to finish it up. The mixture of finishing epoxy and a large amount of microballons created a paste to fill the cracks and dents. Then sanded with a block. Use your fingers to slide along the surface to see if there is more filling and sanding needed.
06-17-2009, 10:40 PM
#119
My Feedback: (45)
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
OK Don, gotta ask. Why the T - canalyzer. It does nothing on this plane. The V3 has no use for it. The T canalyzer only will hurt the performance on this plane. I have flown the new F pattern as well as the current F pattern and there is nothing to be gained with a canalyzer. Chip flew mine last week and even said it is as close to his passports as he has ever flown. The canalyzer only helps planes that have rudder deficiencies or vertical fins that are too small. Neither is a problem the V3 has.
Just curious as to the thought process,
Arch
Just curious as to the thought process,
Arch
06-18-2009, 07:50 AM
#120
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: boca raton,
FL
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
ORIGINAL: rcpattern
OK Don, gotta ask. Why the T - canalyzer. It does nothing on this plane. The V3 has no use for it. The T canalyzer only will hurt the performance on this plane. I have flown the new F pattern as well as the current F pattern and there is nothing to be gained with a canalyzer. Chip flew mine last week and even said it is as close to his passports as he has ever flown. The canalyzer only helps planes that have rudder deficiencies or vertical fins that are too small. Neither is a problem the V3 has.
Just curious as to the thought process,
Arch
OK Don, gotta ask. Why the T - canalyzer. It does nothing on this plane. The V3 has no use for it. The T canalyzer only will hurt the performance on this plane. I have flown the new F pattern as well as the current F pattern and there is nothing to be gained with a canalyzer. Chip flew mine last week and even said it is as close to his passports as he has ever flown. The canalyzer only helps planes that have rudder deficiencies or vertical fins that are too small. Neither is a problem the V3 has.
Just curious as to the thought process,
Arch
Arch,
Are you speaking from actual experience having tried it yourself and seen the differences between a plane with this device on it and not? Have you done these experiements, and messed with the size the vertical portion as well? To say it would do "nothing" on this plane is like saying the VF3 doesn't use a propeller or have a spiral slipstreem.
I have done this experiment on 4 planes. Each plane flew "better" with it installed for both the P09 and F09 patterns. Its not a trick - Christophe didjust fine without it on other planes- it may reduce or increasemix numbers until you trim the plane specifically to fly with it, but overall all 4planes became more solid,rolled better,kept heading better, changed the CGfeel of the plane, and gives that "yaw-carve" versus "yaw-skid" effect.
I'm just saying, I've done the experimenting and the effects of the T-cannalizer go way past adding positive pitching moment with rudder.
Thanks,
Jim
06-18-2009, 09:13 AM
#121
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Woodstock, GA
Posts: 2,707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
Jim, I've read Don's line by line pro/con of this Canalizer on this plane so far. if there was ever a design that could spark WW3 over the use of a Canlizer, this is the one LOL
Keep in mind this is an experiment, and Iappreciate the feedback. Don seems to like it so far. But reading the pros vs cons on what it does to THISairframe, it gets cloudy. Iknow some planes improve across the board. This is not that plane. Iknew it wasn't from day one. or had a strong suspiscion. Yes it does something, but it's not all positive. Ithink that's what Arch meant. Iknow what he's worried about, that people will see it and think "Oh NOIhave to have one on mine or it won't fly right!"Uhhh no. In fact, HECKno. Ithink it's neat that he's trying it out, and being objective about all of it. But he hasn't posted his results here, only pics.
Having read the results, the jury is still WAYout. The only thing that matters to me is whether or not DONlikes it. On his particular plane. he'd be the first to tell you this design is one of the best out there. But the other thing he didn;t mention is, I'm working on something new...have been for a long time, and Ineed more info, all Ican get. Good, bad, ugly, whatever. Don has helped me immensely in that regard.
But so has Archie. And recently even Chip to some extent. If Ihave learned ANYTHINGabout designing planes, it's that no 2 people like the same thing. Pattern above all else is very personal and particular when it comes to set up and feel. My challenge is making a plane that can be adjusted to cover the largest swath of that spectrum as possible. That's a razor's edge balance and it's not easy.
So, relax guys....it's experimental, and it's cool that he's trying it out. if he likes it, then great! If he doesn't, I'm sure he'll remove it.
-Mike
Keep in mind this is an experiment, and Iappreciate the feedback. Don seems to like it so far. But reading the pros vs cons on what it does to THISairframe, it gets cloudy. Iknow some planes improve across the board. This is not that plane. Iknew it wasn't from day one. or had a strong suspiscion. Yes it does something, but it's not all positive. Ithink that's what Arch meant. Iknow what he's worried about, that people will see it and think "Oh NOIhave to have one on mine or it won't fly right!"Uhhh no. In fact, HECKno. Ithink it's neat that he's trying it out, and being objective about all of it. But he hasn't posted his results here, only pics.
Having read the results, the jury is still WAYout. The only thing that matters to me is whether or not DONlikes it. On his particular plane. he'd be the first to tell you this design is one of the best out there. But the other thing he didn;t mention is, I'm working on something new...have been for a long time, and Ineed more info, all Ican get. Good, bad, ugly, whatever. Don has helped me immensely in that regard.
But so has Archie. And recently even Chip to some extent. If Ihave learned ANYTHINGabout designing planes, it's that no 2 people like the same thing. Pattern above all else is very personal and particular when it comes to set up and feel. My challenge is making a plane that can be adjusted to cover the largest swath of that spectrum as possible. That's a razor's edge balance and it's not easy.
So, relax guys....it's experimental, and it's cool that he's trying it out. if he likes it, then great! If he doesn't, I'm sure he'll remove it.
-Mike
06-18-2009, 10:05 AM
#123
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: boca raton,
FL
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
Mike,
It would be interesting to see Don's notes. Here is my take on the effects of the T:
1. Reduces rudder sensitivity around neutral
2. Adds yaw aurhority
3. Pushes/pulls/ all lock on a little better
4. Gives "carve" in yaw instead of "skid"
5. Small heading corrections easier to apply
6. Adds positivie pitching moment with rudder application - how much seems dependant on how tall it is
7. Doesn't affect roll mixing
8. Plane will deviate less from the intended line during rolls or point rolls
9. CG assessment - allows you to fly a nose-heavy plane as measured statically, but in flight it will "roll" and maintain 45 lines like a more neutral plane
10. Elevator - maybe some more pitch authority but not a drastic difference
11. Stall Turns- some can feel a difference, It is barely noticeable for me
12. Spins/Snaps - uneffected for the conditions I fly (snaps high rate aileron, spins, full rudder/elevator, tiny aileron).
Abbra -mid wing, Aggressor, mid/low wing, Osmose, mid/low wing, Passport, low wing. The basic effect was the same for each of these planes. For me, it just makes the FAI maneuvers easier and less work. I've also flown the Passport with YS 170, now with CDI, Electric (with and with our SFGs). T-can and no T-can, used the CA models T then made my own when I lost the original - even with small dimentional changes to the T nothing was changed as to the effect it provided the model.
It may be different for the VF3 though. You've had a lot of input on the plane for the past couple years for sure, and congrats also on developing a new bird too. Nothing to relax about here - airplane trimming and setup is one of the best parts of pattern to me.
Thanks,
Jim
It would be interesting to see Don's notes. Here is my take on the effects of the T:
1. Reduces rudder sensitivity around neutral
2. Adds yaw aurhority
3. Pushes/pulls/ all lock on a little better
4. Gives "carve" in yaw instead of "skid"
5. Small heading corrections easier to apply
6. Adds positivie pitching moment with rudder application - how much seems dependant on how tall it is
7. Doesn't affect roll mixing
8. Plane will deviate less from the intended line during rolls or point rolls
9. CG assessment - allows you to fly a nose-heavy plane as measured statically, but in flight it will "roll" and maintain 45 lines like a more neutral plane
10. Elevator - maybe some more pitch authority but not a drastic difference
11. Stall Turns- some can feel a difference, It is barely noticeable for me
12. Spins/Snaps - uneffected for the conditions I fly (snaps high rate aileron, spins, full rudder/elevator, tiny aileron).
Abbra -mid wing, Aggressor, mid/low wing, Osmose, mid/low wing, Passport, low wing. The basic effect was the same for each of these planes. For me, it just makes the FAI maneuvers easier and less work. I've also flown the Passport with YS 170, now with CDI, Electric (with and with our SFGs). T-can and no T-can, used the CA models T then made my own when I lost the original - even with small dimentional changes to the T nothing was changed as to the effect it provided the model.
It may be different for the VF3 though. You've had a lot of input on the plane for the past couple years for sure, and congrats also on developing a new bird too. Nothing to relax about here - airplane trimming and setup is one of the best parts of pattern to me.
Thanks,
Jim
06-19-2009, 10:16 PM
#124
RE: Magic VF3 building thread
Jim,
Here are my comments I'll build on your's
Absoultely 1. Reduces rudder sensitivity around neutral
Absolutely 2. Adds yaw aurhority
Absolutely 3. Pushes/pulls/ all lock on a little better
Absolutely 4. Gives "carve" in yaw instead of "skid"
Absolutely 5. Small heading corrections easier to apply
Yes. However, I noticed a better transition from point 3 to 4 of the 4 of 8 reversed as a result. 6. Adds positivie pitching moment with rudder application - how much seems dependant on how tall it is
It has affected my roll mixing. It acts like additional dihendral. It stands off about 2 1/2 inches, so probably 1 1/2 or 2 would reduce this 7. Doesn't affect roll mixing
Agree 8. Plane will deviate less from the intended line during rolls or point rolls
Agree, I will need to move my battery forward as a result. Plane holds inverted with very little down elevator now. 9. CG assessment - allows you to fly a nose-heavy plane as measured statically, but in flight it will "roll" and maintain 45 lines like a more neutral plane
More stability around neutral in pitch, and roll (very noticeable on a snap exit- it exits softer and more predictable. 10. Elevator - maybe some more pitch authority but not a drastic difference
Less likely to wiggle after stall turn. 11. Stall Turns- some can feel a difference, It is barely noticeable for me
Spin and Snap no adverse effects. 12. Spins/Snaps - uneffected for the conditions I fly (snaps high rate aileron, spins, full rudder/elevator, tiny aileron).
What I can't understand is why the full scale aerobatic planes have not tried this yet.
Here are my comments I'll build on your's
Absoultely 1. Reduces rudder sensitivity around neutral
Absolutely 2. Adds yaw aurhority
Absolutely 3. Pushes/pulls/ all lock on a little better
Absolutely 4. Gives "carve" in yaw instead of "skid"
Absolutely 5. Small heading corrections easier to apply
Yes. However, I noticed a better transition from point 3 to 4 of the 4 of 8 reversed as a result. 6. Adds positivie pitching moment with rudder application - how much seems dependant on how tall it is
It has affected my roll mixing. It acts like additional dihendral. It stands off about 2 1/2 inches, so probably 1 1/2 or 2 would reduce this 7. Doesn't affect roll mixing
Agree 8. Plane will deviate less from the intended line during rolls or point rolls
Agree, I will need to move my battery forward as a result. Plane holds inverted with very little down elevator now. 9. CG assessment - allows you to fly a nose-heavy plane as measured statically, but in flight it will "roll" and maintain 45 lines like a more neutral plane
More stability around neutral in pitch, and roll (very noticeable on a snap exit- it exits softer and more predictable. 10. Elevator - maybe some more pitch authority but not a drastic difference
Less likely to wiggle after stall turn. 11. Stall Turns- some can feel a difference, It is barely noticeable for me
Spin and Snap no adverse effects. 12. Spins/Snaps - uneffected for the conditions I fly (snaps high rate aileron, spins, full rudder/elevator, tiny aileron).
What I can't understand is why the full scale aerobatic planes have not tried this yet.
Thank you for your feed back.