RCU Forums - View Single Post - Which is lighter CA or Titebond?
View Single Post
Old 08-28-2012 | 07:18 PM
  #43  
JohnBuckner's Avatar
JohnBuckner
My Feedback: (1)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 10,441
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
From: Kingman, AZ
Default RE: Which is lighter CA or Titebond?

ORIGINAL: BillinIndiana

. What I am going to do is build another set of wings when I feel comfortable flying the trainer as the plan says to build it. Then I'll probably reduce it by about half the angle the plan calls for.

That plan is if fine if you just stick with the stock dihedral at first. Now if you want to talk dihedral on a conventional trainer to make it more aerobatic for down the line forget just flattening the wing, lets talk anhedral. Using about the same anhedral as it formerly used dihedral will impart a very neutral roll response much like a pattern airplane and its that 'stays where you put it' feeling that is so prized by the pattern pilot.

Also the airplane will be more stabile than it would be if you had just flattened the wing. Just remember I definately do not recommend this for any one new as the achilles heels is the difficulty in maintaining orientation with the unusual configiguration. This is just one example of the time honored propensity of the modelers tendency to 'kit bash'.

Just don,t do it now!
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	He97319.jpg
Views:	43
Size:	40.5 KB
ID:	1796237   Click image for larger version

Name:	Bw72951.jpg
Views:	40
Size:	35.3 KB
ID:	1796238   Click image for larger version

Name:	In26062.jpg
Views:	49
Size:	52.8 KB
ID:	1796239