If you read my first post you can see that I bought a Cessna 182 class 500 with 51" wing span. The nose cowl was split from front to back when I unboxed it. When I looked at the motor and shaft from the front it looked like the motor shaft was way off center of the cowl but I thought it looked that way because the cowl was busted and sort of warped. I got the cowl off and the motor is mounted crooked to one side. If your are facing the planes front the motor is slanted to the left. Is this right or just another flaw in this palne???</p>

It is difficult to say without seeing the model BUT it is usual to have sidethrust on the motor. To which side depends upon the prop rotation .

This is normal for most plane. The spin of the propeller usally causes the plane to pull to the left (when viewed from behind the plane). To counteract this many planes build some right thrust (once again, viewed from behind the plane) into the plane. Also, many planes will build in some down thrust as well. If you look at the plane from the side you may notice that the motor may be pointing slightly down. This is not set in stone and not all airplanes have these built in. But if you have them they are there to make the plane handle a little bit better and you should leave them setup that way.

Ken
<br type="_moz" />

It is normal for communication in all aircraft is to referance right and left from a pilots point of view as if he were sitting in the airplane, in other words the pilots left is the left side of the airplane and so on to try to communicate as if looking at the propellor from the front will cause no end of confusion when seeking help.

Now having said that it is normal for most highwing aircraft to use down and right side thrust. In other words the motors shaft will point a little down from a horizontal referance line in the fuselage and it will also point to the right (pilots pov). Now because of this right thrust the end of the motors shaft will not exit the fancy cowling in the middle and to correct this it is normal to mount the motor a little to the left (pilots pov) so where the shaft exits the cowl will be in the middle where the hole and spinner is intended to be.

OK DR I have been following your other thread and I beleve this attempt to fly this ship on your own will result in a lift off of some sort but there will be no landing and most of us here have seen this sort or thing at the fields thousands of times and who knows aways from the fields.

You are going to totally p- away your investment for no reason and thats what everyone has been trying to tell you.

To destroy the airplane is just senseless just because you are angry and disappointed in it. What does make sense is to connect with your local field, find a mentor (yes the evil instructor word if you insist) and get help. Since these persons/folks are the ones that will be helping then let them decide which new and key word here APPROPRIATE trainer you use. For now park that first airplane, if you do you will find going back to it later that it could in fact be a very enjoyable airplane for you but you are never going to know that unless you park it now, get an APPROPRIATE trainer and most important of all find a Mentor.

John

Great answer to my question. The motor is mounted on a plastic sleeve shaped mount that's about 2 1/2 inches long. The mount looks to be made to slant the motor but I just wanted to make sure. Your thrust equation make's complete sense. I like the way you guy's alway's explain thing's so that I can undersatand them. Thanks again!

Ditto to what JohnBuckner said about "parking" that airplane for now and saving it for later! I have been reading your other thread and have resisted chiming in until now. Several others have given you good (and similar) advice but you seem determined to be that one in a million that succeeds against the odds and generally accepted advice. You said your wife would take videos so I'll just wait for the crash photos. Flying weather is going to be good in Georgia this weekend so my wait won't be long.

Just to offer an alternative view, it is possible to learn to fly RC planes without an instructor or buddy box, etc. I know, because that is how I learned. I call it the "learn by doing it wrong" method. The way it works is, flight is attempted, something goes wrong and the plane crashes. The post crash analysis determines what went wrong eg. lifted off the ground before flight speed was attained, thus the stall and crash. Then the pilot learns not to do that anymore. The plane is repaired (or replaced) and flight is attempted again, resulting in another crash, eg. overcontrolled ailerons on the turn and rolled into the ground. Same process repeats, learn not to do that any more. Repair/replace, and so on. Eventually, one runs out of new things to do wrong, and the plane goes home in the same condition as it left. Doing the same wrong thing doesn't count as learning, only as crashing. Thirty five years ago when I was doing all this learning, it was typical, as models were built by the modelers then, so repair skills were readily available. You built the model, you repaired the model.

It can be done.

I would not want to be anywhere near that plane when you fly it for the 1st time, i hope you consider the safety of others.

I'll have to second dirtybirdy's concern. You'll need about twice as much space as you plan to use, and make sure you are someplace where you can't even see any buildings, cars, or people.

Relax, this was done at the Sepulveda Basin (Apollo Field). There was adequate space and flying conditions, also far fewer prople involved in the hobby then.

So, how was the flight ?

Must not have gone well. The old saying no news is good news, not always true. Would love to hear how things went, hopefully they went well.