RE: Increasing Wing Loading
 

Hi Guys

I am a new member and actually joined when i read this discussion forum.
I own 2 fiberclassic geebee r2's and fly them with 3W 150 engines they fly unbelievable and i can only say as long as the CG is correct and you keep the controll throw not to big or use some exponential they fly like babys.
I can land my GeeBee as soft as any one of my 40% 3D planes.
Setup for this plane is the most important thing.
I can pull the plane through 10G turns with no problem and no snapping out.
When you slow them too much they only become mushy and stall straight ahead the moment you apply power it is flying again.
I also own one Jamara GeeBee R2 with 36 inch wingspan, thw Adrian Page model Z and R2 and now the great planes model R2.
I hve over 50 flights on each one of these planes excluding the greatplanes one as the first flight will be in about 10 days only but all of them fly absolutely great and can do all the manouvers in the book.

The only GeeBee that i ever had that flew bad was my first one and it was a kyosho model Z but i might have had the CG completely wrong as the first ones did have this problem according to the instructions.

I have to back adrian on this topic and say that most poeple that critisize the GeeBee has never had one or did not get the CG and controll throws right.
They truly are amazing planes.

Alex Louw

RE: Increasing Wing Loading
 

Alex,

Finally! Someone who has actually flown one! :D
I am very eager to hear how the Great Planes R2 stacks up to all the other versions you have flown.

Adrian

RE: Increasing Wing Loading
 

I have a Midwest Stearman that flies like a "heavy" Gee Bee, not worth a hoot! it weighs 15 lbs. and has a calculated wing loading of 33oz/sq. ft. It is so easy to stall when in a landing approach that I wish it would break into a thousand pieces. Unfortunately, I have been able to minimize damage by saving it too many times after stall. I also have Adrian Page's .25 Gee Bee framed up which I suspect is gong to handle a lot better because of its light wing loading! Isn't wing loading a major factor in "easy" flying characteristics. I think a major factor![sm=drowning.gif]

Now attached is a real airplane

RE: Increasing Wing Loading
 

i have had the honour to fly one of alex's gbee's the past weekend and it was an awsome experience - so smooth but so fast - it was a fibre classics 40% with 3w 150- here are some pics.:D

RE: Increasing Wing Loading
 

AT-6's bad flying models? well... I yes if you load it down with the fiberglass finish and 17 coats of paint for a detailed scale model it would be. But its a model of a TRAINER... trainers generally are forgiving. RC models of trainers tend to fly as per the full scale if not overweight.

There's the key... don't get it too heavy. Even a P-51 (notorious for being hard to fly as a scale model, worse than the P-40) can be tamed by keeping the weight down.

Yes, you mention high wing loading... but they DON'T have to be heavy.

RE: Increasing Wing Loading
 

FHHUBBER,

According to Paul, it seems like anything with a tailwheel is best avoided. Apparently the landing gear design (?) is what causes the "poor flight characteristics" of the Gee Bees. (I can't figure out the logic in that one.) I'm not sure what causes the AT6's troubles. (unless it's that pesky tailwheel)
"Any attempt to 3-point usually tip-stalls the poor thing." is a sure sign of someone who has never heard of washout.
I'm sure you were as dissapointed as I was to learn that the plane you enjoyed flying was "poor flyer.";)

Adrian

RE: Increasing Wing Loading
 

Adrian,

I was wondering, do you have any video of either version of your R2 flying?



Neo

RE: Increasing Wing Loading
 

.
Oh dear, I've offended...
I thought earlier in the thread stuff that high wingloadings AND poor handling were always lurking to catch the unwary had been satifactorily covered.
.
Some of my best friends fly tail draggers. MOF, I even have dozen or twenty right around home here, which get exercised when the spirit moves..
Note the mention of the "unwary"... models which have high wingloadings are NOT for the novice! The novice OTOH can be easily swayed into wasting time and money on such things by experts who fail to comprehend the inexperience of the novice, (apparently forgetting they had a learning period also) and willy-nilly won't blink an eye when a novice plunks down his cash for a doomed plane!
Possibly the economic situation overwhelms common sense?
A lightly loaded plane is a good flier.
A highly loaded plane isn't!
When you have little flight experience!
.
Tail draggers can ground-loop a LOT, and break props beyond any reasonable expense, when a novice attempts one.
Making the conversion to a tail-dragger is a popular subject on these forums, which says many people notice there's a difference, or have found out the hard way and come looking for real advice.
Glossing over the problem is not real advice, and is in fact ill-advised, for a place where people with genuine concerns about their interests come without expecting to encounter snow-jobs.
.
Adrian, your Gee-Bees are noted by those who use them for their lightness. If lightness, and the consequent easing of the handling problems was common, why would it even be noticed, except that it does make problem airplanes into flyable airplanes for an average flier, and a light Gee-Bee is rare in the commercial offerings.
.
When locals ask me for information on converting or adding tail wheels to their models, I show them these easy mods in the sketch...
.
A careful viewer of the multiple images might even notice the main wheels, which retract, on the Goldberg Tiger 60 are way aft of the location Goldberg places them on their ARF. This plane gets up on the mains and will go straight, forever, because the wheels are properly located for a taildragger. The ARF, though a decent handler on the ground is a ground-looper for the unwary.

RE: Increasing Wing Loading
 

I thought you were offended. I'm not.

I guess the point that I keep trying to make is that almost any lightly loaded plane can be set up to fly well. Look at what the 3D guys can do with a bit flat foam.

A model Gee Bee is not a full scale Gee Bee. (the models are much smaller) I'm willing to bet that they even handle differently. For example the model does not snap out of high g manouvers (like a real pylon racer??) nor do its ailerons reverse at low speeds and high angles of attack.

Loading enough bricks inside the best airplane ever devised will make it fly bad with no changes whatsoever to the aerodynamics. (it's still a good design...it just weighs too much) That said, you are quite right that Gee Bees are not for beginners. They are easy enough to fly but at some point you're going to want to land. Washout eliminates tip stalling but all the aerodynamic tricks in the world won't shorten those gear legs....you really need to know how to land a tail dragger. Landing into a good breeze will make things much easier. How many times have we waited and waited for a dead calm day to test fly our new planes? This is definitely counter productive on a plane with a high wing loading and/or long gear legs.

I do not want to offend anyone...just point out that because something is presumed to be so does not make it so. That is to say "Gee Bees look funny so they must fly funny." It ain't neccesarily so.

Adrian

RE: Increasing Wing Loading
 

Neo,

I'm sorry but I do not have any video of my planes in flight. It's something I really want to add to my website. Maybe get to it this summer.

I just reread this entire post and as I recall I did recommend (in a private email) that you should use an engine a bit smaller than a 1.70 radial in your .60 size Gee Bee. It won't sound as good but it sure will fly alot better. Although, if you can keep it down to 30 oz/sq foot it will still fly fine. Just be sure gap seal everything and brace up that firewall a bit.[X(]

Adrian

RE: Increasing Wing Loading
 

I heeded your warning, and decided against the radial. The GeeBee has since been put on the back burner tue to a 46% Giles I'm working on. It will get done soon, hopefully yet this season.




Scott