To conclude re-design of Xigris C1, the following details at different CG has been compared.

1. CG @ 20% MAC
2. CG @ 25% MAC
3. CG @ 20% MAC and NO wing Incidence
4. CG @ 25% MAC and NO wing Incidence

NP on CMAC = 0.4956

1.1 CG @ 20% MAC

Tail Volume (TVC) =0,700
Static Margin = 29,7%
Wing Aero Incidence = 0,9deg
Lift coeff at Current V =0,13
Fuselage Deck Angle = 0,68deg
Horiz Stab Incidence =0,01deg
Short Period Pitch Damping =0,83

2.1 CG @ 25% MAC

Tail Volume (TVC) =0,700
Static Margin = 25,0%
Wing Aero Incidence = 0,9deg
Lift coeff at Current V =0,12
Fuselage Deck Angle = 0,66deg
Horiz Stab Incidence =0,1deg
Short Period Pitch Damping =0,89


3.1 CG @ 20% and wing @ ZERO deg
No other differance than Fuselage Deck Angle @ 1,57 deg nose up.
4.1CG @ 25% and wing @ ZERO deg
No other differance than Fuselage Deck Angle @ 1,55 deg nose up.


As one can see, @ 20% MAC the Static Margin increased to close to 30%. This requires a larger deflection (13). At CG @25% this figure is (11).

What to do now?
1. Re-use the wing
2. Build new stab to TVC 0,7
3. Locate CG @ 25% with possibility to reduce this 1-3% (Shuffle batteries etc)
4. Set downthrust to -0,5deg.

WAIT FOR SPRING!!!!!

In meen time watch for Santa!


Regards