ORIGINAL: njmheli
Hi Paul.
Many thanks for your comments.........she should be ready for her maiden in a couple of weeks,will post some photos of her being completed and I hope flying.I am just finishing off the last gear door,awaiting the ''N'' numbers from Charles at CFC Graphics for the wings,then the all important C of G.........!!!!! ( have ordered a GP C of G balancer.........hope that will be good for it !!! )
As said in my post above,the FA 200 R3 should have more power that the 170,I hoping that the 17 x 8 prop will work very well........
We have a small club ( only 10 of us ),and we are very lucky to fly off a disused airfield ( 1 1/4 mile long strip ).........so shouldn't be a problem with take off length I hope !!!
I read your posts on the weight problem..........I have 3 x 5 cell Nimh battery packs,packed right up against the firewall,they fit in a treat in the structure on the inside of the fuzz,two of these supply the powersafe spektrum Rx,the other pack suppling volts to the ''down and locked'' electrics ( decided to use a stand alone battery set up for the U/C ) and tail wheel servo.......making good use of all that battery weight.
I hoping that I won't need too much additional nose weight...........if any??? ( not too much room left to put any in !!! )
Having read all the Staggerwing treads.............and obviously your flying experience..........how does she fly and any do's or dont's that you can tell me about.From the U tube vids,looks like she flies well and landing looks to be quite fast,any trends to drop a wing on slowing.......?Does she have the usual Bi-plane drag problems ( I havn't flown bipe's before ).
Your answers will be greatly appreciated.........
Many thanks
Nick (UK)
Nick,
Sorry for the delayed reply. I agree with you that the new 2.00 radial will be a better fit both in terms of power and weight. 17x8 sounds about right for the prop but you may want to experiment to find the optimum. I have no experience with that engine yet. The plane flies very well and I haven't noticed any bad habits. It "feels" a little heavy in terms of wing loading so I've never let it get very slow for landing. It's got plenty of drag - like most biplanes do - and slows down pretty quickly when you back off on the throttle, so the flaps aren't absolutely necessary, but I do use them. I've not seen it drop a wing at stall speed, it just mushes along and wants to drop the nose. I prefer to keep a little speed and fly it all the way to touchdown and let it roll out on the mains. Looking forward to hearing about your maiden. Do a thorough ground test of that engine before you go up! Good luck.
Paul