Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > Aerodynamics
Reload this Page >

Engine thrust angles

Notices
Aerodynamics Discuss the physics of flight revolving around the aerodynamics and design of aircraft.

Engine thrust angles

Old 01-23-2019, 04:55 AM
  #1  
TampaRC
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: DETROIT, MI
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Engine thrust angles

What type of aircraft require down thrust and or right thrust ? I am working on a low wing p-51 and am wonder if offsets are needed.
Old 01-23-2019, 05:08 AM
  #2  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 7,611
Received 41 Likes on 39 Posts
Default

No airplane really needs thrustline offset to fly however adding in offsets can reduce the pilot workload. I usually start with zero down thrust and 2 degrees of right thrust. These are my standard for an aerobatic model. They will get adjusted based on a few things. My question is on your P-51 is does the wing have a positive incidence. If so what will most likely result is that the airplane will pitch trim at a certain power level but add more power and it will climb. Some consider this desirable but I do not. If your model does this and you choose to want to eliminate or reduce the tendency then some down thrust will help. Right thrust will help during take off runs. Without it the model will want to veer off to the left and you will have to compensate with right rudder. Adding right thrust will reduce this to a degree but you will still need to be rudder proficient. This and other trimming techniques are just a matter of what expectations you have for the airplane.
Old 01-23-2019, 02:03 PM
  #3  
Appowner
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TampaRC View Post
What type of aircraft require down thrust and or right thrust ? I am working on a low wing p-51 and am wonder if offsets are needed.
There is no specific "type" that requires thrust angles to the engine. It's a combination of things including but not limited to wing, horizontal and vertical stab incidences. Speed envelope and wing loading. Engine torque and any number of other things. Even the airfoil of the wing can play into it. The full size Piper Cherokee has some noticeable down and right thrust to it. Some planes will offset the vert stab a few degrees which can be seen when looking down the center line.

I know the full size P-51 has some down thrust to it but not much. I don't believe it has any right thrust though. Some of the models I've seen of this plane have the down and some don't. Again, it's all in the rest of the stuff I mentioned.

If building a kit, I'll trust that the designer has built in any engine thrust he may want. If scratch building I tend to zero everything unless the plans say otherwise. If after flying it I feel a need to add engine thrust, I'll user washers behind the engine mount to "adjust" it. But for me, learning the different flying characteristics of each plane is part of the fun. If every plane flew and landed the same, I would soon get bored with the hobby.
Old 01-27-2019, 12:10 PM
  #4  
BMatthews
 
BMatthews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chilliwack, BC, CANADA
Posts: 12,355
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes on 8 Posts
Default

The need or not is related to the location of the thrust line to the wing, which is a major portion of the drag on any airplane. It is also related to the amount of pitch stability trimmed into the model by the selection of where the model is balanced and the resulting decalage angle between wing and stabilizer. The more "stable" the plane is the more it tries to climb from any excess speed or adding power. And thus the more desire for some downthrust to reduce that pitching up.

Which is why a lot of seriously aerobatic models that are trimmed for pretty much neutral stability can get away with a 0-0-0 thrust, wing and tail setup and why high wing trainers might have something more like -2, +4, +2 or -4, +2, 0 setups or something along that line.

Your P51 is a low wing so that helps avoid the need for excess downthrust provided you set the CG location and wing to stabilizer angles fairly flat so it has some but limited pitch stability. That being the case you could likely get by with something like 0, +1.5, 0 and it would fly well yet still have some positive self recovery from fast dives. And you would trim the CG location to arrive at where it flies level at mid throttle at that setup.
Old 09-02-2019, 10:34 AM
  #5  
RCAV8R13
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: White Salmon, WA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Right thrust is not used to compensate for engine torque. The torque of the engine is aligned with the roll axis. Right thrust imparts a moment to the yaw axis. The reason a single engine, single propeller aircraft turns left (when the prop spins CW as viewed from the cockpit) is because we have been building airplanes for over 100 years with half the vertical stabilizer missing. This is done to make the airplane easier to get into and out of and rotate for take off and landing. As a consequence, the airplane flies in a circle. As the air leaves the propeller it curls down the fuselage (spiral propwash). When the air gets to the tail, it beats against the left side of the vertical stabilizer. However, there's no corresponding lower vertical stabilizer for air to beat against the right side of. This results in the plane turning left. Since the problem is power related, using right thrust to compensate is the right thing to do. Angling the vertical stabilizer is not. It's a dynamic problem and requires a dynamic solution. Modern pattern planes have counter rotating propellers and require no right thrust. In spite of the fact that they still have just one motor spinning in one direction producing lots of torque.
Old 10-12-2019, 04:50 AM
  #6  
049flyer
My Feedback: (18)
 
049flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Tyler, TX
Posts: 1,073
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Down thrust can can really improve the flight handling of high wing flat bottom trainer type aircraft. I added what I thought was too much to a Top Flite Schoolmaster which was a small trainer type as I just described. The plane was the best flying of it’s type I had ever flown. It flew inverted as well as upright which is very unusual for that style of plane, furthermore, power changes did not affect pitch trim to a large degree as is normal for trainer type aircraft. It was a refreshingly neutral flying airplane, capable of good speed, sport aerobatics and yet still retained all of the easy slow flying and slow landing traits common to trainers.

Old 10-14-2019, 01:59 PM
  #7  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 7,611
Received 41 Likes on 39 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 049flyer View Post
Down thrust can can really improve the flight handling of high wing flat bottom trainer type aircraft. I added what I thought was too much to a Top Flite Schoolmaster which was a small trainer type as I just described. The plane was the best flying of its type I had ever flown. It flew inverted as well as upright which is very unusual for that style of plane, furthermore, power changes did not affect pitch trim to a large degree as is normal for trainer type aircraft. It was a refreshingly neutral flying airplane, capable of good speed, sport aerobatics and yet still retained all of the easy slow flying and slow landing traits common to trainers.

absolutely correct. I find that not many guys learn how to completely trim their airplanes. Far too many get caught up on what full scale does. It's easy to look up specs for a full scale P-51 and draw the conclusion that the model should have the same. Very few guys look to see what the model does and come up with a plan to correct poor flight charictaristics. IMO it's a pretty lame excuse claim that you want to flying charictaristics of the full scale airplane as you fight your model around the sky. Especially when the same guy has never flown the full scale counterpart.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.