Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > ARF or RTF
Reload this Page >

Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

Notices
ARF or RTF Discuss ARF (Almost Ready to Fly) radio control airplanes here.

Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

Old 11-29-2005, 10:15 AM
  #1  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

A discussion of the .46 size Ultimate in another thread caused me to investigate an idea that I'd thrown out about the aileron hookup in my World Models Ultimate.

The WM model used one servo to drive the lower ailerons. The lower ailerons were connected to the uppers with regular horns that stuck up/down and a solid connecting rod between the two horns. It looked obvious that the configuration would introduce a differential throw to the upper ailerons compared to the lower ailerons. The uppers ought to move less than the lowers and they would move even less going down than they'd move going up.

Well, I didn't really know what the amounts were because I didn't rig my model with the supplied hardware and certainly didn't even use anything like that layout. But now, the discussion in the other thread has convinced me that I ought to work out the details to see just how "bad" the ARF would be for others who followed the directions. And the situation warrants it's own thread.

I used the plywood template that came with the ARF that's used to align the two wings when you're installing the top wing. It's a perfect place to start for where all the pertinent points will wind up. And I used the discarded hardware to give me accurate measurements to use.

It turns out that the setup will give a fair ("fair"?? maybe "lousey" would be a better word) amount of differential to the upper ailerons. And it's going to be skewed both ways: up:down and left:right since we're talking about a biplane here.

Since the servo drives the lower ailerons, they're going to move "full lock" as the transmitter stick is moved. But since the hinge point of the connecting rod is relatively far above the lower aileron center line it might push that rod differentially to/from the upper aileron. Truth is, the angle the rod makes relative to a line drawn from the connect point to the surface hinge line is fairly close to a right angle FOR THE LOWER AILERON and the movement imparted to the rod by the lower aileron movement isn't badly different when pushing up compared to pulling down. It's the upper aileron connect point location that messes up the whole deal.

When the lower aileron moves the suggested 10mm, it moves the lower aileron about 22degrees. And that deflection moves the connecting rod just a small amount less going up than going down, maybe 10% less. But the connection for the upper aileron is a real problem. When pulled down, it actually only moves the connection hole a very little amount down. And while the lower aileron moves 22degrees, the upper one is only going to move about 10degrees. It's not so bad going the other way. When the lower moves 22degrees, the upper will go up about 20degrees.

Now, think about it. This is happening one direction on one side of that little biplane but in the other direction on the other side.

When you move your tx stick to get a roll to the right.....
The right wings are going to see ailerons that're about 10% different in deflection, with a change in lift and drag coming from the top wing giving less than the bottom. But the left wings are going to have down ailerons that are about 50% different in deflection between top and bottom, with the top wing's aileron moving less than half what the lower wing's aileron moves.
Not only are you going to get a significant difference in lift and induced drag between the top and bottom but a lot different left side to right side, AND what you're getting is opposite what you often want from simple aileron differential on a monoplane. We often rig aileron differential into an a/c to have more drag on the wing that's inside the turns. This ARF deal is going to give more drag and less lift to the outside wing!

I got a feeling that my model has a lot less twitchiness than the ones put together by the book, and I bet it is a lot less apt to snap unexpectedly. But I'll never know. And truth is, these little planes sometimes don't do what the books say they should. I bet some of them fly decent. (Of course, it they fly decent with this screw up built in them, wonder how they'd fly if........)
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Sp45117.jpg
Views:	52
Size:	27.6 KB
ID:	362037  
Old 12-13-2005, 07:18 PM
  #2  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

Since introducing this thread I ran into someone who wanted pictures. So I did one.

What has interested me more than anything is the aerodynamic question I'll never see answered since I'm not going to use the provided hardware nor the WM layout. But it is an interesting aerodynamic question.

When you're rolling that model with it's "variably differential" ailerons, that setup is going to cause more lift and drag on one side. And on the side that's giving less l/d, there is going to be a fairly large difference in the l/d between the top and bottom wing. And the difference in the side-to-side l/d is also going to be working on the yaw axis. Wonder what all that does to the models propensity to snap?
Old 12-14-2005, 01:45 AM
  #3  
forestroke
Senior Member
 
forestroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taipei, TAIWAN
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

i had the ultimate 30 and felt no issues with it in this respect but i see you want an educational discussion. might i suggest you move this thread to aerodynamics forum.

also, it might help if you use the lower hole. the closer the hinge point is to the wing and the further it is out toward the trailing edge, the less differential you'll have.
Old 12-14-2005, 09:22 AM
  #4  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

Thanks for the info.

They suggest using the holes closest to the surfaces, well, actually only have a picture with tiny little arrows pointing to those holes, and I used measurements for that when I figured the throws. My picture was just slapped together in a minute and I didn't think to draw the connector rod to the inside holes.

Quite frankly, I really aren't looking for a "aerodynamic" discussion. What I was really hoping for was just what you provided, some actual flying observations. But truth is, I wasn't really hoping for that either, as much as I wanted to simply put the info out there for anyone about to stick the model together.

And btw, closer to the TE and/or the hinge point actually won't correct the differential. The connect points only need to both be on a line that's 10degrees above the aileron center line and then an equal distance from the aileron hinge line. The closer they are to being the same distance from the hinge line and the right angle from the CL, the less the differential. Matter of fact, the WM lower connect point is very close to being a good location. But the upper connect point has to be in that orientation also.
Old 12-14-2005, 09:54 AM
  #5  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

Sorry to do a quick and dirty example picture. Here are a couple of better examples.

The first picture has the connection points that're in the WM booklet. They actually don't have any text about the connections, just a picture. The picture actually isn't like the one in the booklet because that one doesn't have any stagger shown. (Maybe if they'd drawn the stagger in they'd have seen what was wrong with the design) And in their picture, the connectors are outside the horns and there are tiny little arrows looping around to point to the inside holes.

The second picture isn't to scale and isn't an attempt at a blue print. It just suggests what is one appropriate solution to the connection problem. Any time connected ailerons are on staggered wings, all you have to do is measure the angle of stagger. In this picture, that'd be the red line. If you then use that angle, you can simply put your "horns" so that their connect hole is that same angle above each aileron and out from the hinge line equal distances.

For my Ultimate, I simply cut the "horn" off the control horns and threw away the base, and epoxied the upper parts into slots cut into the ailerons so that the outermost hole was where I wanted it. The other holes in the horn provide a place for the epoxy to bridge the cut in the ailerons from balsa to balsa so the glue joint is continuous and strong. The look of the final installation is clean, neat, and there is almost no hardware out in the breeze. A picture taken from directly behind the airplane shows connecting rods that look like they're just sorta floating there.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Sq46240.jpg
Views:	27
Size:	23.4 KB
ID:	369940  
Old 12-14-2005, 10:00 AM
  #6  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

Here's the second picture.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Qo41022.jpg
Views:	34
Size:	19.7 KB
ID:	369944  
Old 12-14-2005, 10:15 AM
  #7  
MinnFlyer
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
 
MinnFlyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Willmar, MN
Posts: 28,519
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

Are you having some sort of problem because of the difference in deflection?

There are many biplanes out there that don't even have ailerons on the top wing, so ANY deflection of the top ailerons is a big help.

I guess what I am trying to say is. If it flies well, why worry about it?
Old 12-14-2005, 10:54 AM
  #8  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

Are you having some sort of problem because of the difference in deflection?
Nope. I caught that while reading the construction booklet. I'm posting this to simply give others who haven't built theirs a chance to decide what they want to do. And to find out what I'm missing. I thought that was fairly clear through all my windy posts. I guess I oughta try and be clearer.

Truth is, bottom line on these deals is that most people won't notice. And there will never be a comprehensive study that pulls together all the experiences and sorts out the snaps on landing to find out if this deal caused it or actually helps.
Old 12-14-2005, 11:18 AM
  #9  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

There are many biplanes out there that don't even have ailerons on the top wing, so ANY deflection of the top ailerons is a big help.
Actually I didn't much want to wind up muddling along about aerodynamics but.....

That's actually not really entirely true. "ANY" deflection might help and it might not. When you couple the top to the bottom the entire system winds up operating at "the same" angle of attacks. And if both wings see the same AOA but have different stall angles thanks to the different aileron deflections, your total system is going to stall a measurable bit sooner than it would if both wings/ailerons were working the same. Or for that matter, it might also stall sooner than if there was no other aileron. Might....

The Hawk didn't have them on the bottom and was a functional airplane. It did have some handling characteristics that were pecular to it. But it's smaller lower wing "had less aileron movement", not the top wing. So if the lower stalled sooner the pitch introduced might actually have corrected the excessive AOA of the entire airplane. But the Hawk was the same on it's left side and it's right side.

By having the top wing's aileron deflection less than the lower's will have the upper wing stall sooner or later than the bottom wing. But you also have to consider that the other side of the airplane is not seeing anything like the same situation. This connection strategy for all 4 ailerons has them move about 10% difference going up and about 50% difference going down.

With this deal, the side-to-side imbalance probably is going to introduce yaw. And yaw when rolling really should make snaps happen sooner than they might. And the imbalance top to bottom is going to probably make one side want to snap sooner than it would if it was better balanced.

I'd agree with you that any deflection would be a help if it was the same side-to-side, but it's not even close in what I'm talking about with this model.
Old 12-14-2005, 03:01 PM
  #10  
av8r4aa
My Feedback: (82)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Coppell, TX
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

I am with DAROCK on this one.

Thanks a lot for the awesome explanation. I will copy your idea.

I was a little concerned about the aireron differential also.

Your setup should be a crisp, accurate way to go!
Old 12-14-2005, 10:09 PM
  #11  
forestroke
Senior Member
 
forestroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taipei, TAIWAN
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

i stated that having the linkage toward the trailing edge decreases the differential. it doesn't solve it but because your horn wasn't to the end, it could've been reduced by putting it further back.

and, if you're going to do what you proposed, why not go ahead and do the following. i'm going to do it for my NIB Ultimate 40 when i build it!
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Xu62720.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	13.3 KB
ID:	370269  
Old 12-14-2005, 10:19 PM
  #12  
forestroke
Senior Member
 
forestroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taipei, TAIWAN
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

while i agree that there will be some adverse yaw, i highly doubt that it will be perceivable. there are some speed planes out there that have only one aileron and they fly around fine
Old 12-15-2005, 07:59 AM
  #13  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

Thanks for the guess. It's interesting to see what people think might be similar examples, and it's always informative. But do you wonder how well those speed planes do aerobatics? And if they might just snap easier one direction than the other? Like on takeoffs with different wind directions? Wouldn't you guess that they'd suddenly snap on you sooner one way or the other in just about any situations that're different one way from the other, like inside versus outside loops or loops upwind versus downwind? It's been fairly well documented that this little Ultimate will surprise you with unexpected snaps.

Keep in mind that one point of this thread is that it's dead simple to configure these 4 different ailerons to operate all the same.
Old 12-15-2005, 09:31 AM
  #14  
MinnFlyer
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
 
MinnFlyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Willmar, MN
Posts: 28,519
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

I understand what you are saying, and I agree that you have a very bonafide point, but personally, I feel that a plane like an Ultimate - which is designed for aerobatics - should be flown like an Ultimate. Or in this case landed like an Ultimate.

I have this argument with my dad all the time. He feels that he should be able to land every airplane in the world like a Cub, and that they should always float in. If you do that with an Ultimate, or a Citabria or an Extra 300, you're probably going to tip-stall it and crash.

So first off, when you're coming in on final, you shouldn't need to add aileron imputs which are large enough for the difference to make much - uh, difference. And if it does make a difference, you're talking a matter of 1 or 2 mph.

I say, "Keep your speed up and you won't need to worry about stalling"
Old 12-15-2005, 08:32 PM
  #15  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

I understand what you're saying too. But there is a very small detail about this setup in this Ultimate.

There are a TON of Ultimates out there in every size. And the linkage design that's in this one isn't actually in most of the others if in fact it's in any one of the others at all. Fact is, I've not seen another one that had this problem. So if you want to fly and land an Ultimate like "an Ultimate", your argument would suggest that this one ought to have equally moving ailerons like all the others. And that's sort of within this whole thread, just not been stated out loud.

If you figure the way an Ultimate flies as being the way the majority of them would fly, then equally moving ailerons would be the setup.
Old 12-16-2005, 11:09 PM
  #16  
forestroke
Senior Member
 
forestroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taipei, TAIWAN
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

actually i think this setup is very common among smaller bipes. don't know any single servo four aileron designs that don't have this design. maybe you can show me one so i can buy it!
Old 12-17-2005, 08:32 AM
  #17  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

There are a TON of Ultimates out there in every size.

Sorry that I'm not familiar with all the small bipes that're on the market. I've been out of RC for 15-20 years and only did a search on Ultimates when I first saw the problem with this linkage. But what I do know is that there is a set of "biplane linkage" available at both my LHSs. That'd suggest to me that some of the industry does understand what it needed to link uppers to lowers.

forestroke,
I guess it could be comforting to you that the WM Ultimate isn't the only mfg that's offering this somewhat flawed linkage, but truth is, I started the thread to give people a head's up so they might have a chance to decide for themselves after seeing what that linkage does and how to fix it very simply and easily. I thought I'd presented fairly clear pictures and explanation so that everyone could see fairly clearly what the deal is and I've offered the figures that're true for the linkage. When MinnFlyer suggested that Ultimates were made that way and everyone ought to take what's given, it wasn't exactly true about the a/c and I responded to that about all Ultimates. Truth is, I tried to offer information that might help people.

Hey, I've got a slogan I use at the field every time I get somebody's balky engine going, or sort out why their motor runs funny in flight, or help them fix damage: If you're not entirely satisfied, there will be no extra charge.

maybe you can show me one so i can buy it!
What I did, forestroke, is show you how to fix the problem with all those models so you can go ahead and buy any one that you like. And the fix doesn't require any extra hardware purchase. You can easily use the provided horns by modifying them. And I showed you clear drawings of what the problem is and how simple the fix is so that you can decide. And there is no extra charge for all that.......
Old 12-17-2005, 04:22 PM
  #18  
forestroke
Senior Member
 
forestroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taipei, TAIWAN
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

thanks... but i had already thought of that already even before you asked the question. but it was to hook up the rudders on my twin boom cessna, hence why my rendition makes it symmetric. didn't think the ultimate needed it, but since it does apply (as you've pointed out graciously), i will use it there as well.

other ideas were:

- cutting a hole toward the trailing edge of the control surface and gluing a pin and connector in it on both sides
- using rc car snap-in ball links nestled in the middle of the control surface

anyway, by saying that no other bipe uses this design, you are misleading people into thinking that as long as they don't buy this particular bipe, they will have as you put it "biplane linkage". i was just letting people know that you cannot expect that type of linkage in any smaller (60 and below) arf's.

i do think that it's an easy fix and i sorry about that slightly sarcastic comment about showing me one you've got a good think going here!
Old 12-17-2005, 05:17 PM
  #19  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

anyway, by saying that no other bipe uses this design, you are misleading people into thinking that as long as they don't buy this particular bipe, they will have as you put it "biplane linkage".
forestroke,
I'm sorry, but those are your interpretations and don't come close to what I said. You've just put your words in my mouth and they aren't close to what was written. If you reread what I wrote, I think it'll be clear to you that I was talking about the Ultimate models that're available right now. I mention the Ultimate in about every sentence of that paragraph on other models, and I really don't say anywhere that no other model uses this linkage. And the mention of "biplane linkage" is about the hardware that our model mfg's are marketing to us so that we will have a fairly accurate aileron linkage system. Hey, I appreciate your attention to my writing and ideas.
Old 12-17-2005, 05:41 PM
  #20  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

BTW, for anyone who has read this far, I appologize to any of you who have decided that I'm knocking the WM .46 Ultimate.

I'm just finishing mine now and I'd like to make it very clear just what a decent ARF that little sucker really is.

I've been impressed with everything about it since first opening the box. I've been building since the late '50s and designing since the '70s, and that baby IS RIGHT! It's truly been a pleasure putting it together. And darned if mine isn't coming out under the advertised weith of 4.5 pounds. Jeez, I got a feeling the OS.46AX is gonna pull the thing into a little UltraCote bag of accelertation crushed balsa!

If I was going to sit down right now and design an Ultimate model in this size, I really can't think of anything I could do different to improve on this one. UH.... well.... ok, maybe one tiny detail I would change.... chuckle chuckle.....

How strongly do I feel all that gushy praise? Well, I'm sticking together a purple one and I got a yellow one a couple of weeks after the purple one was delivered by UPS. I figured after seeing the quality of the 1st one, that I knew I'd be wanting to have a backup.
Old 12-18-2005, 01:15 AM
  #21  
forestroke
Senior Member
 
forestroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taipei, TAIWAN
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

you're right, you didn't say all bipes, my bad!

but i meant all bipes INCLUDING ultimates and pitts and other acrobatic models. the first four single/dual servo, four aileron ultimates i saw when i searched it all had the same type of linkages as the WM. just don't want people to think that they are getting something they are not!

five pictures are:
cox ultimate arf
carl goldberg ultimate arf
great planes ultimate kit
global ultimate arf
dave patrick ultimate arf
kyosho pitts arf
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Li21328.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	18.1 KB
ID:	371981   Click image for larger version

Name:	Gc91138.jpg
Views:	22
Size:	15.1 KB
ID:	371982   Click image for larger version

Name:	In26194.jpg
Views:	25
Size:	15.6 KB
ID:	371983   Click image for larger version

Name:	Bu58480.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	15.4 KB
ID:	371984   Click image for larger version

Name:	Tf49549.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	21.8 KB
ID:	371985   Click image for larger version

Name:	Ct17464.jpg
Views:	35
Size:	43.9 KB
ID:	371986  
Old 12-18-2005, 01:17 AM
  #22  
forestroke
Senior Member
 
forestroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taipei, TAIWAN
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

tragedy is that i can't count there are five ultimates and one pitts for a total of six pictures!!!
Old 12-18-2005, 09:05 AM
  #23  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

Good work, but you left out the pictures of the RaidenTech .46 and of course the little jewel from World Models.

As long as you're focused on the little ones, we ought to mention AGAIN the big ones.

You might find the same aileron connections on bigger biplanes. The probability lessens because the bigger they are the more servo strength the ailerons are going to need. So from the BIG ones back down, you'll most often encounter multiple servos with the BIG ones usually having one servo per aileron.

But no matter what size biplane you're working with, if it's got linked ailerons, it would be worthwhile for you to look at the linkage and decide if it's what you really want to fly.

And something to consider, keeping the size in mind.....

With the little biplanes you often see very narrow ailerons. My cute little WM Ultimate has ailerons with 1" chord. That's pretty narrow. And the chord plays a very important part in this connection layout and whether or not the layout will cause differential deflections. Whenever the connection points are close in to the aileron hinge line, the necessity to have a right angle connection increases. And the closer the connection comes to the hinge line, the more displacement caused by using rudder/elevator/aileron horns that have the connector holes "far" out from their base.

If you look at the pictures forestroke gathered, and look at the Pitts (the last picture), you'll see that it has ailerons with probably better than twice the chord as the others. They're probably what? .3C surfaces? Using rudder horns in that linkage won't give even half the differential you'll see on the other airplanes with their ~ .12C ailerons. Now, while the Pitts is the subject, it's actually true that with those wider ailerons you probably WANT TO HAVE the lower horn stand the connection off more. You want the connection point to be above the CL of the aileron the same angle that the wings stagger. Now the deal to consider with the Pitts (and bigger biplanes) is that the connection for the UPPER ailerons should be above their CL. So keep that in mind as well. But all of them can usually be "fixed" easily with the included hardware.

It's humorous to note that the BIG biplanes could actually need the style connectors that are less than appropriate for their smaller brothers.
Old 12-18-2005, 09:31 AM
  #24  
da Rock
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

Speaking of BIG biplanes....

Back before the Aerospace Museum building at the Smithsonian opened, I had the opportunity to work at Silver Hill restoring one of the aircraft that was to be prominently displayed when they had their grand opening. I was tickled to have the opportunity to help and was absolutely floored when I got to Silver Hill. Turns out the Silver Hill liaison for us workers was one of the A&Ps who were restoring other aircraft. He happened to be responsible for the Zero they were redoing. (but that's another story) And he happened to be very interested in models. And I was the only one in the group who cared much for airplanes and history so he and I hit it off great. And he wound up showing me all over the place a couple of times. (but that's another story)

While looking over his project Zero, I noticed a wing rib hanging on the wall. Turns out it was from a WWI Nieport and it had bullet damage repaired with a cigar box sides (but that's another story). Looking at the rib got me curious about some odd supports that were part of it and when I went home I did some research to find out what those "holes" were. Turns out that I discovered a fairly good work on how those old biplanes were rigged. How the stiffiner wires were done and how they rigged the control wires.

Turns out that back then not all the "aircraft designers" knew everything about everything. Turns out that some of their aileron control designs were such that it wasn't odd to encounter accounts of field modifications that were to correct the way some of the planes flew. And it also was almost common to see rigging design that provided adjustments.

There was one a/c with relatively thick profile wing that had the connect point for the wires that moved the aileron within the ailerons. And the connector there was for both the "drive" wire and the "other aileron connection" wire both. And it was adjustable from the CL of the aileron to the top surface of the aileron (and looked like it could be moved even higher, above the aileron surface. Of course, that biplane also had wing stagger. And the drawings showed the connectors for both upper and lower to be at the top surface.

Neither aileron had adjustments that would allow the connect point to be below the CL of either the top or bottom aileron. Not really surprising is it.
Old 12-18-2005, 04:41 PM
  #25  
desmobob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Whitehall, NY
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Ultimate .46 a/c aileron differentials

All this biplane talk has me really wishing I could maiden my Dave Patrick Ultimate/Saito 1.50 (one servo per aileron) and my generic Chinese Ultimate .46 (WM knock-off) with the rigging as described by darock in this thread. The proof is in the pudding, so to speak....

Between the winter weather that will be here for another four months and my work schedule, it's not looking good.

Good flying,
desmobob

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.