Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
05-01-2012, 10:23 PM
#26
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Miami,
FL
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
Sorry it's quite confusing to write that in simple word but thanks for asking. Here's my explanation. First your guess is correct because he used TLAR and it did work. Second pertains not on your comment but for those who used TLAR in CG location on their build aircraft prior to maiden. For me this method require a lot of skills to become successful. Actually not just skills even how expert the pilot is anything could happen. However cg calculation in the example is not easily accessible due to the nature of the wings and TLAR is the most common used in estimate and it's the closest one available. In some aspect it is critical depending on the skills of the test pilot and the cost that may bring considering all safety procedure has been implemented on the test site. The problem is the non linear structure of the wings which require method to determine cg location prior to maiden in order to become successful as possible on the first flight. This pertains to the subject matter of having complex shape wing. A method that will generate function to represent wing chord for determining MAC. In other words without this, other method needs to be consider like graphical analysis, taking small increment of chord, etc. to be used in approximation rather than using integration since curve tracing is complicated although the wings can divided in portions. On our example look like the leading edge has linear portion while a semi ellipse is on the trailing edge. In addition to become more accurate such as calculating wing area for wing loading of such design may solve easily by integration IMO (because computer is available now a days). Aerodynamics is the law that governs our aircraft, airspeed is the reason why airplane stays safe in the sky. However there are hidden parts in aerodynamics which cannot be expressed in math. Those things require wind tunnel to determine. I've been in electrical and it's invisible form of energy but from small scale power plant to large scale, ohm's law is always there. From small energy cell to utilization there's always simple calculation available if we could only know it's accurate and easy.
05-06-2012, 09:07 PM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Issaquah,
WA
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
Ok, call me stupid. What are you guys using TLAR in representation of?
Calculating a multipanel wing MAC/NP is very simple so...
Are you guys trying to figure out the induced angle of attack due to the sweep angle? I assume this is what you guys have been discussing as on a delta, one section of wing even though it is at the same angle of attack as say the forward portion will provide significantly less lift due to a delta wings induced angle of attack issue. Though I note no one has brought up the rule of thumb for swept back angle of attack inducement so guess I am lost. What is new.
TLAR = ???
Guess I must be dense today as for the life of me I can't figure out what it represents.
Calculating a multipanel wing MAC/NP is very simple so...
Are you guys trying to figure out the induced angle of attack due to the sweep angle? I assume this is what you guys have been discussing as on a delta, one section of wing even though it is at the same angle of attack as say the forward portion will provide significantly less lift due to a delta wings induced angle of attack issue. Though I note no one has brought up the rule of thumb for swept back angle of attack inducement so guess I am lost. What is new.
TLAR = ???
Guess I must be dense today as for the life of me I can't figure out what it represents.
05-07-2012, 06:49 AM
#31
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 2,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
ORIGINAL: BFoote
Ok, call me stupid. What are you guys using TLAR in representation of?
TLAR = ???
Guess I must be dense today as for the life of me I can't figure out what it represents.
Ok, call me stupid. What are you guys using TLAR in representation of?
TLAR = ???
Guess I must be dense today as for the life of me I can't figure out what it represents.
The rest is CG of complex shaped wings.
05-07-2012, 03:56 PM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Issaquah,
WA
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
Actually the bat wing is easy to calculate without a computer. The rear is an ellipse, an easily known equation. Remember high school geometry class? The leading edge also is a straight line. Integrate between the two lines for area. Take 25% and viola, CG of said wing panel. Do this on all the wing panels in question, weight the wing panels to lift generated and viola, you get your MAC.
Integration between two lines is generally the 3rd quarter of calculus. Don't need calculus on a delta wing though. Delta wing is very straight forward. Find MAC of each wing panel, same way you do for a straight wing. That finds overall MAC of wing shape. How much wash-out you decide to add to compensate for the delta wing induced angle of attack is a bit of rule of thumb. I suggest looking at all modern commercial airlines, actually not a good example as they calculate wing flex and rotation in their wings for cruise, so ground orientation is generally shows far more wash-out than what is seen in the air. A better example would be the frontal aspect of an F-4 and other fighter planes when viewed from the front. This will most closely represent how much wash-out you need depending on the swept back angle.
Likewise this also explains why many delta wing RC planes have very poor handling qualities as their wing tips stall. Why? Because many RC builders don't know delta wings create an induced angle of attack and therefore they build like a standard trainer with no wash-out and the tips stall sending the airplane right INTO the ground. I have seen this many times on guys with turbofans and turbines. The designer didn't know what the heck they were doing, but they got the kit sold anyways! Uh, Hem, BUYER BEWARE!
Integration between two lines is generally the 3rd quarter of calculus. Don't need calculus on a delta wing though. Delta wing is very straight forward. Find MAC of each wing panel, same way you do for a straight wing. That finds overall MAC of wing shape. How much wash-out you decide to add to compensate for the delta wing induced angle of attack is a bit of rule of thumb. I suggest looking at all modern commercial airlines, actually not a good example as they calculate wing flex and rotation in their wings for cruise, so ground orientation is generally shows far more wash-out than what is seen in the air. A better example would be the frontal aspect of an F-4 and other fighter planes when viewed from the front. This will most closely represent how much wash-out you need depending on the swept back angle.
Likewise this also explains why many delta wing RC planes have very poor handling qualities as their wing tips stall. Why? Because many RC builders don't know delta wings create an induced angle of attack and therefore they build like a standard trainer with no wash-out and the tips stall sending the airplane right INTO the ground. I have seen this many times on guys with turbofans and turbines. The designer didn't know what the heck they were doing, but they got the kit sold anyways! Uh, Hem, BUYER BEWARE!
ORIGINAL: rctech2k7
Sorry it's quite confusing to write that in simple word but thanks for asking. Here's my explanation. First your guess is correct because he used TLAR and it did work. Second pertains not on your comment but for those who used TLAR in CG location on their build aircraft prior to maiden. For me this method require a lot of skills to become successful. Actually not just skills even how expert the pilot is anything could happen. However cg calculation in the example is not easily accessible due to the nature of the wings and TLAR is the most common used in estimate and it's the closest one available. In some aspect it is critical depending on the skills of the test pilot and the cost that may bring considering all safety procedure has been implemented on the test site. The problem is the non linear structure of the wings which require method to determine cg location prior to maiden in order to become successful as possible on the first flight. This pertains to the subject matter of having complex shape wing. A method that will generate function to represent wing chord for determining MAC. In other words without this, other method needs to be consider like graphical analysis, taking small increment of chord, etc. to be used in approximation rather than using integration since curve tracing is complicated although the wings can divided in portions. On our example look like the leading edge has linear portion while a semi ellipse is on the trailing edge. In addition to become more accurate such as calculating wing area for wing loading of such design may solve easily by integration IMO (because computer is available now a days). Aerodynamics is the law that governs our aircraft, airspeed is the reason why airplane stays safe in the sky. However there are hidden parts in aerodynamics which cannot be expressed in math. Those things require wind tunnel to determine. I've been in electrical and it's invisible form of energy but from small scale power plant to large scale, ohm's law is always there. From small energy cell to utilization there's always simple calculation available if we could only know it's accurate and easy.
Sorry it's quite confusing to write that in simple word but thanks for asking. Here's my explanation. First your guess is correct because he used TLAR and it did work. Second pertains not on your comment but for those who used TLAR in CG location on their build aircraft prior to maiden. For me this method require a lot of skills to become successful. Actually not just skills even how expert the pilot is anything could happen. However cg calculation in the example is not easily accessible due to the nature of the wings and TLAR is the most common used in estimate and it's the closest one available. In some aspect it is critical depending on the skills of the test pilot and the cost that may bring considering all safety procedure has been implemented on the test site. The problem is the non linear structure of the wings which require method to determine cg location prior to maiden in order to become successful as possible on the first flight. This pertains to the subject matter of having complex shape wing. A method that will generate function to represent wing chord for determining MAC. In other words without this, other method needs to be consider like graphical analysis, taking small increment of chord, etc. to be used in approximation rather than using integration since curve tracing is complicated although the wings can divided in portions. On our example look like the leading edge has linear portion while a semi ellipse is on the trailing edge. In addition to become more accurate such as calculating wing area for wing loading of such design may solve easily by integration IMO (because computer is available now a days). Aerodynamics is the law that governs our aircraft, airspeed is the reason why airplane stays safe in the sky. However there are hidden parts in aerodynamics which cannot be expressed in math. Those things require wind tunnel to determine. I've been in electrical and it's invisible form of energy but from small scale power plant to large scale, ohm's law is always there. From small energy cell to utilization there's always simple calculation available if we could only know it's accurate and easy.
05-07-2012, 04:03 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Issaquah,
WA
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
OOps, forgot to add how to find equation for an ellipse. Trace said ellipse onto a piece of cardboard. Take 2 pins and a piece of string. Find the center of the two pins by trial and error by using string. String length will determine the trace shape by using a stick in the middle of the string as it travels the edge of the ellipse as said string is attached to the two pins.
Ellipse equation is 1= x^2/a^2 + y^2/b^2 Where a is the distance between the two ends divided by two of the ellipse, and b is the max distance from the top of the ellipsoid to the pin line.
Ellipse equation is 1= x^2/a^2 + y^2/b^2 Where a is the distance between the two ends divided by two of the ellipse, and b is the max distance from the top of the ellipsoid to the pin line.
05-08-2012, 11:34 PM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Issaquah,
WA
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
There is a reason that all delta wings have their tips set so that at cruise their wingtips provide NO LIFT and in fact generally provide negative lift. It ain't for high speed performance either. Its called low speed control performance or lack thereof and maneuverability.
I know, I hate wiki quotes, but in this case they are correct and you can look it up in aeronautics books as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tailless_aircraft
Read the longitudinal stability section.
Here is the best frontal picture I could quickly find showing the washout.
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-10820.html Scroll down a little bit.
Enjoy
I believe the F4 washout is VERY noticeable at the break, but didn't quickly find a picture.
I know, I hate wiki quotes, but in this case they are correct and you can look it up in aeronautics books as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tailless_aircraft
Read the longitudinal stability section.
Here is the best frontal picture I could quickly find showing the washout.
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-10820.html Scroll down a little bit.
Enjoy
I believe the F4 washout is VERY noticeable at the break, but didn't quickly find a picture.
ORIGINAL: combatpigg
I aint got NO use for NO washout on NO deltas.....[>:]
I aint got NO use for NO washout on NO deltas.....[>:]
05-09-2012, 10:30 AM
#36
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 2,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
ORIGINAL: combatpigg
I aint got NO use for NO washout on NO deltas.....[>:]
I aint got NO use for NO washout on NO deltas.....[>:]
05-09-2012, 12:25 PM
#37
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
ORIGINAL: Mike Connor
Totally agree. Diamond Dust, Screamin Demon and other deltas. Build em straight for a docile low or high speed bundle of fun
ORIGINAL: combatpigg
I aint got NO use for NO washout on NO deltas.....[>:]
I aint got NO use for NO washout on NO deltas.....[>:]
I have a hard enough time as it is keeping washout from creeping in......
05-09-2012, 12:41 PM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Issaquah,
WA
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
The bundle of fun would be better yet if you added washout... That way you can stall and recover faster and more smoothly.
You don't have to use washout to achieve washout. IF you still want a straight wing and simple building, simply change the camber of the main airfoil at the tips. Last few inches. You can even go inverted instead of the more complex reflex airfoils.
You don't notice diamond dust etc deficiencies because they are so overpowered along with their very low wing loading combined with the fact that deltas have VERY high angle of attack compared to a "straight wing" that landing such super cheap, awesome fun planes is very benign. You will notice I prefaced my original comment regarding those using ducted fan/turbine airplanes which even though are a delta in general have FAR FAR higher wing loading and they CANNOT get away with building a straight wing like a fun plane. If such scale planes tip stall, they don't have the ability to recover as quickly as a Diamond dust.
Go to a scale JET RC get together and see how many of them tip stall and roll their plane into the ground. Seems there is ALWAYS at least one or two of them at every get together. Why? See above. No washout or washout equivalent, because said designers figured like you two clowns.
You don't have to use washout to achieve washout. IF you still want a straight wing and simple building, simply change the camber of the main airfoil at the tips. Last few inches. You can even go inverted instead of the more complex reflex airfoils.
You don't notice diamond dust etc deficiencies because they are so overpowered along with their very low wing loading combined with the fact that deltas have VERY high angle of attack compared to a "straight wing" that landing such super cheap, awesome fun planes is very benign. You will notice I prefaced my original comment regarding those using ducted fan/turbine airplanes which even though are a delta in general have FAR FAR higher wing loading and they CANNOT get away with building a straight wing like a fun plane. If such scale planes tip stall, they don't have the ability to recover as quickly as a Diamond dust.
Go to a scale JET RC get together and see how many of them tip stall and roll their plane into the ground. Seems there is ALWAYS at least one or two of them at every get together. Why? See above. No washout or washout equivalent, because said designers figured like you two clowns.
05-09-2012, 02:58 PM
#39
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 2,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
ORIGINAL: BFoote
...because said designers figured like you two clowns.
...because said designers figured like you two clowns.
I was not trying to belittle your knowledge and you make a valid points under many circumstances. However, those rules do not apply to deltas like the Diamond dust for some reason.
05-09-2012, 03:25 PM
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Issaquah,
WA
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
Let me quote myself. Maybe the 2nd time you read it you will contemplate.
You don't notice diamond dust etc deficiencies because they are so overpowered along with their very low wing loading combined with the fact that deltas have VERY high angle of attack compared to a "straight wing" that landing such super cheap, awesome fun planes is very benign. You will notice I prefaced my original comment regarding those using ducted fan/turbine airplanes which even though are a delta in general have FAR FAR higher wing loading and they CANNOT get away with building a straight wing like a fun plane. If such scale planes tip stall, they don't have the ability to recover as quickly as a Diamond dust.
You don't notice diamond dust etc deficiencies because they are so overpowered along with their very low wing loading combined with the fact that deltas have VERY high angle of attack compared to a "straight wing" that landing such super cheap, awesome fun planes is very benign. You will notice I prefaced my original comment regarding those using ducted fan/turbine airplanes which even though are a delta in general have FAR FAR higher wing loading and they CANNOT get away with building a straight wing like a fun plane. If such scale planes tip stall, they don't have the ability to recover as quickly as a Diamond dust.
05-09-2012, 03:48 PM
#41
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
ORIGINAL: BFoote
The bundle of fun would be better yet if you added washout... That way you can stall and recover faster and more smoothly.
You don't have to use washout to achieve washout. IF you still want a straight wing and simple building, simply change the camber of the main airfoil at the tips. Last few inches. You can even go inverted instead of the more complex reflex airfoils.
You don't notice diamond dust etc deficiencies because they are so overpowered along with their very low wing loading combined with the fact that deltas have VERY high angle of attack compared to a ''straight wing'' that landing such super cheap, awesome fun planes is very benign. You will notice I prefaced my original comment regarding those using ducted fan/turbine airplanes which even though are a delta in general have FAR FAR higher wing loading and they CANNOT get away with building a straight wing like a fun plane. If such scale planes tip stall, they don't have the ability to recover as quickly as a Diamond dust.
Go to a scale JET RC get together and see how many of them tip stall and roll their plane into the ground. Seems there is ALWAYS at least one or two of them at every get together. Why? See above. No washout or washout equivalent, because said designers figured like you two clowns.
The bundle of fun would be better yet if you added washout... That way you can stall and recover faster and more smoothly.
You don't have to use washout to achieve washout. IF you still want a straight wing and simple building, simply change the camber of the main airfoil at the tips. Last few inches. You can even go inverted instead of the more complex reflex airfoils.
You don't notice diamond dust etc deficiencies because they are so overpowered along with their very low wing loading combined with the fact that deltas have VERY high angle of attack compared to a ''straight wing'' that landing such super cheap, awesome fun planes is very benign. You will notice I prefaced my original comment regarding those using ducted fan/turbine airplanes which even though are a delta in general have FAR FAR higher wing loading and they CANNOT get away with building a straight wing like a fun plane. If such scale planes tip stall, they don't have the ability to recover as quickly as a Diamond dust.
Go to a scale JET RC get together and see how many of them tip stall and roll their plane into the ground. Seems there is ALWAYS at least one or two of them at every get together. Why? See above. No washout or washout equivalent, because said designers figured like you two clowns.
What's the point of that exercise of futility...?
I'm quite happy with models that fly great from a hand launch, get up to a thrilling cruising speed and land at walking speed right at my feet.
I see no need to waste more money on inferior flying planes when the ones I fly already cost enough.
05-09-2012, 04:35 PM
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Issaquah,
WA
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
So, why are you commenting on an AERODYNAMICS forum?
Just because you don't want to fly a scale (real airplane) JET RC aircraft, now makes you an expert?
Guess what? Paper airplanes also fly. Does my experience with a folded 8.5" x 11" paper airplane make me an expert on Aerodynamics of a scale RC JET? Uh, NO.
The mind boggles at such leaps of logic that you postulated.
You must enjoy pissing people off as you do so regularly.
Just because you don't want to fly a scale (real airplane) JET RC aircraft, now makes you an expert?
Guess what? Paper airplanes also fly. Does my experience with a folded 8.5" x 11" paper airplane make me an expert on Aerodynamics of a scale RC JET? Uh, NO.
The mind boggles at such leaps of logic that you postulated.
You must enjoy pissing people off as you do so regularly.
ORIGINAL: combatpigg
I'm not dumb enough to fly over weight models.
What's the point of that exercise of futility...?
I'm quite happy with models that fly great from a hand launch, get up to a thrilling cruising speed and land at walking speed right at my feet.
I see no need to waste more money on inferior flying planes when the ones I fly already cost enough.
ORIGINAL: BFoote
The bundle of fun would be better yet if you added washout... That way you can stall and recover faster and more smoothly.
You don't have to use washout to achieve washout. IF you still want a straight wing and simple building, simply change the camber of the main airfoil at the tips. Last few inches. You can even go inverted instead of the more complex reflex airfoils.
You don't notice diamond dust etc deficiencies because they are so overpowered along with their very low wing loading combined with the fact that deltas have VERY high angle of attack compared to a ''straight wing'' that landing such super cheap, awesome fun planes is very benign. You will notice I prefaced my original comment regarding those using ducted fan/turbine airplanes which even though are a delta in general have FAR FAR higher wing loading and they CANNOT get away with building a straight wing like a fun plane. If such scale planes tip stall, they don't have the ability to recover as quickly as a Diamond dust.
Go to a scale JET RC get together and see how many of them tip stall and roll their plane into the ground. Seems there is ALWAYS at least one or two of them at every get together. Why? See above. No washout or washout equivalent, because said designers figured like you two clowns.
The bundle of fun would be better yet if you added washout... That way you can stall and recover faster and more smoothly.
You don't have to use washout to achieve washout. IF you still want a straight wing and simple building, simply change the camber of the main airfoil at the tips. Last few inches. You can even go inverted instead of the more complex reflex airfoils.
You don't notice diamond dust etc deficiencies because they are so overpowered along with their very low wing loading combined with the fact that deltas have VERY high angle of attack compared to a ''straight wing'' that landing such super cheap, awesome fun planes is very benign. You will notice I prefaced my original comment regarding those using ducted fan/turbine airplanes which even though are a delta in general have FAR FAR higher wing loading and they CANNOT get away with building a straight wing like a fun plane. If such scale planes tip stall, they don't have the ability to recover as quickly as a Diamond dust.
Go to a scale JET RC get together and see how many of them tip stall and roll their plane into the ground. Seems there is ALWAYS at least one or two of them at every get together. Why? See above. No washout or washout equivalent, because said designers figured like you two clowns.
What's the point of that exercise of futility...?
I'm quite happy with models that fly great from a hand launch, get up to a thrilling cruising speed and land at walking speed right at my feet.
I see no need to waste more money on inferior flying planes when the ones I fly already cost enough.
05-09-2012, 07:38 PM
#43
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 2,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
ORIGINAL: BFoote
You must enjoy pissing people off as you do so regularly.
You must enjoy pissing people off as you do so regularly.
05-09-2012, 08:46 PM
#44
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
ORIGINAL: BFoote
There is a reason that all delta wings have their tips set so that at cruise their wingtips provide NO LIFT and in fact generally provide negative lift. It ain't for high speed performance either. Its called low speed control performance or lack thereof and maneuverability.
There is a reason that all delta wings have their tips set so that at cruise their wingtips provide NO LIFT and in fact generally provide negative lift. It ain't for high speed performance either. Its called low speed control performance or lack thereof and maneuverability.
I've also been approached by guys like you for the same amount of time, with all of the typical wive's tales and myths that do not pertain to an intelligently engineered flying wing/delta model.
Long story short...get yourself any engine from 1 cc to 6.5cc, then do your level headed best to build the fastest delta/flying wing you can, then look me up for a speed contest from hand launch to touch down.
05-09-2012, 09:28 PM
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Issaquah,
WA
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
Still seems you haven't a clue what wing loading is and how it effects the discussion at hand. Nor how a Delta works.
A brick flies if it has enough power. Lands well too.
A brick flies if it has enough power. Lands well too.
05-09-2012, 11:02 PM
#48
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
let's review somethings that you said.......
All deltas..?
Low speed performance has been terrific at this end without any gimmicks, myths or legends.
Pay close attention to intelligent weight management...that's all.
I wasn't aware that scale models are "real" airplanes. I guarantee you would be convinced that mine are "real" if you were ever unfortunate enough to stand in the way.
Diamond Dust type deltas fly splendidly at all speeds and power levels.
Exagerrated AoAs with deltas vs conventional planes is more myth unless your model is either so overweight or flying so slow that it has to be flown like a kite.
Expect pretentious, blanket statements that only pertain to some models to be met with contentious replies in the aerodynamics forum. My purpose is to debunk myths so that some onlookers wont be mislead into believing things that are only half truths.
ORIGINAL: BFoote
There is a reason that all delta wings have their tips set so that at cruise their wingtips provide NO LIFT and in fact generally provide negative lift. It ain't for high speed performance either. Its called low speed control performance or lack thereof and maneuverability.
Just because you don't want to fly a scale (real airplane) JET RC aircraft, now makes you an expert?
You don't notice diamond dust etc deficiencies because they are so overpowered along with their very low wing loading combined with the fact that deltas have VERY high angle of attack compared to a ''straight wing''
There is a reason that all delta wings have their tips set so that at cruise their wingtips provide NO LIFT and in fact generally provide negative lift. It ain't for high speed performance either. Its called low speed control performance or lack thereof and maneuverability.
Just because you don't want to fly a scale (real airplane) JET RC aircraft, now makes you an expert?
You don't notice diamond dust etc deficiencies because they are so overpowered along with their very low wing loading combined with the fact that deltas have VERY high angle of attack compared to a ''straight wing''
Low speed performance has been terrific at this end without any gimmicks, myths or legends.
Pay close attention to intelligent weight management...that's all.
I wasn't aware that scale models are "real" airplanes. I guarantee you would be convinced that mine are "real" if you were ever unfortunate enough to stand in the way.
Diamond Dust type deltas fly splendidly at all speeds and power levels.
Exagerrated AoAs with deltas vs conventional planes is more myth unless your model is either so overweight or flying so slow that it has to be flown like a kite.
Expect pretentious, blanket statements that only pertain to some models to be met with contentious replies in the aerodynamics forum. My purpose is to debunk myths so that some onlookers wont be mislead into believing things that are only half truths.
05-10-2012, 02:22 PM
#50
Senior Member
RE: Complex shape flying wing/delta CG calculator
Let's leave out the cute insults aimed at each other. They need more than washout to keep from stalling this topic.
I've removed a number of posts that were nothing of value to the topic. When you find yourself filling a post with your opinion of another member, please take a moment and contemplate the paragraph directly above the Fast Reply box.
Please resist the urge to curse, flame, degrade, insult or embarrass someone in your post. We encourage the free flow of your ideas, but believe that they can be communicated (and received) much more effectively if you keep things civil. If you have to vent, take it offline. We carefully monitor posts and will ban individuals who engage in offensive conduct within the forums. Thanks. (RCU Policies)
I've removed a number of posts that were nothing of value to the topic. When you find yourself filling a post with your opinion of another member, please take a moment and contemplate the paragraph directly above the Fast Reply box.
Please resist the urge to curse, flame, degrade, insult or embarrass someone in your post. We encourage the free flow of your ideas, but believe that they can be communicated (and received) much more effectively if you keep things civil. If you have to vent, take it offline. We carefully monitor posts and will ban individuals who engage in offensive conduct within the forums. Thanks. (RCU Policies)
