Need airfoil advice
#51
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Edmonton, AB,
Here are the latest pics. It will weigh something between 4.5 and 4.75 lbs, so I'm pretty close to being on target.
The port wing has a positive incidence of +1 degree. (I rushed that part [:@]) Hopefully, that will trim out easily. Any thoughts?
The port wing has a positive incidence of +1 degree. (I rushed that part [:@]) Hopefully, that will trim out easily. Any thoughts?
#54

It is good election for the wing of an He-162 Salamander the airfoils S8052 and S8055.
The dimensions of the panels of the wings are.
13.2” root choord, 6.5” tip choord. Wing panel span 19.5”, total span 47.2”
S8052 at root and S8055 at tip. 8052 is 11.8% and 8055 is 12%.
Washout?
Manuel
The dimensions of the panels of the wings are.
13.2” root choord, 6.5” tip choord. Wing panel span 19.5”, total span 47.2”
S8052 at root and S8055 at tip. 8052 is 11.8% and 8055 is 12%.
Washout?
Manuel
#56
ORIGINAL: mberme
It is good election for the wing of an He-162 Salamander the airfoils S8052 and S8055.
The dimensions of the panels of the wings are.
13.2” root choord, 6.5” tip choord. Wing panel span 19.5”, total span 47.2”
S8052 at root and S8055 at tip. 8052 is 11.8% and 8055 is 12%.
Washout?
Manuel
It is good election for the wing of an He-162 Salamander the airfoils S8052 and S8055.
The dimensions of the panels of the wings are.
13.2” root choord, 6.5” tip choord. Wing panel span 19.5”, total span 47.2”
S8052 at root and S8055 at tip. 8052 is 11.8% and 8055 is 12%.
Washout?
Manuel
#58
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Edmonton, AB,
It flies!
It is quite windy, and I probably should have waited, but I tried it today. Overall, I'm pretty satisfied.
It is quite forgiving, but not over-powered. The engines were giving me just over 13000, turning MAS 8X4's. Once they are a little more broken in, I'll switch to 7X6's, and see if I can get a little more. Sounds great though!
I did not detect any tendency towards a sharp stall or tip stall.
It really needs rudder for a co-ordinated turn. In fact, once you are in a turn, it wants a little opposite aileron, and lots of rudder.
The alignment problem is definitely noticeable, but it does trim out.
It flies like a bomber: stable, and happy to be flying level or in a shallow bank. This is not an aircraft for maneuvers. But the ground-handling is excellent, and a long scale take off looks very nice.
As expected, the wing loading is quite light, so it got tossed around a lot close to the ground, and was damaged in a cross-wind landing. No structural damage -- just shell which should glue back easily. Also, the wing mounting blocks detached.
It is quite windy, and I probably should have waited, but I tried it today. Overall, I'm pretty satisfied.
It is quite forgiving, but not over-powered. The engines were giving me just over 13000, turning MAS 8X4's. Once they are a little more broken in, I'll switch to 7X6's, and see if I can get a little more. Sounds great though!
I did not detect any tendency towards a sharp stall or tip stall.

It really needs rudder for a co-ordinated turn. In fact, once you are in a turn, it wants a little opposite aileron, and lots of rudder.
The alignment problem is definitely noticeable, but it does trim out.
It flies like a bomber: stable, and happy to be flying level or in a shallow bank. This is not an aircraft for maneuvers. But the ground-handling is excellent, and a long scale take off looks very nice.
As expected, the wing loading is quite light, so it got tossed around a lot close to the ground, and was damaged in a cross-wind landing. No structural damage -- just shell which should glue back easily. Also, the wing mounting blocks detached.




