doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Rafa,

Many thanks. What does "AR to C" mean?

Finish? Classic. Details still being withheld...

I'll be using the ST G20's. I want to break in the 23 so that one will go in first. Unless I find it overpowered, in which case I'll replace it for the 15, she'll remain there. I have another use for the 23 while I intended for the 15 to always power this model so that may eventually happen. The only issue is that I only have one carb for the two engines.

I'm also waiting for an engine mount for the K&B 18 Aero (see early posts) to arrive along with the nose gear (). I suspect the mounting holes of the mount (DB 1519) may be the same as the mount for the ST's (DB 2025) so that might be an interesting option too. I may test fly it with the K&B 18 and a 2.5cc muffled pipe as the weight of that setup is similar to the ST 23 and muffler. We'll see.

David.

alcarafa

almost ready to cover, mi amigo !!!
Nice choice on engine, since fuel price ( almost $ 38 dlls a gallon ) is becoming higher every week south the border, I have decided to stop flying big birds for now and concentrate in building smaller ones .15 to .32 same fun lower fuel cost per flight. so one of the late plans you send to me are on the bench, either deception 10 or kaos 15, I think will be a D10

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Excellent news Rafa!

I'm really enjoying this build. The Deception is a model of compound curves. Everywhere you look, there is an airfoil - fuse, canopy, wing, stab, fin, tips, cowl...

The 40" size is cool. I chose this span in wanting to keep the physical size of the model small as the build was intended to be for practice. Were I to recommend a smaller size Deception in terms of ease of building, I would recommend the D30 (48" span) - it's just slightly larger and makes some tasks easier. Working with small models is always a bit of a challenge especially when they are all geared up (i.e., retracts, multiple servos, etc.). I'm sure a nice piped 25, a 29 or even a muffled 32 would power the D30 nicely.

BTW, the most complex part of this build was undoubtedly getting the main gear linkage to work as needed. The issue is that ideally you want to set it up before the top sheeting is applied but on the other hand you can't finish and join the wings without them being sheeted. In my case, I saw no easy way to insert pushrods after completing the wing so they were inserted at the moment the panels were sheeted (i.e., early on).

In other news, I've been working on the belly pan. At the moment it is assembled on to the wing and roughly sanded to shape. Further sanding will be required in order to obtain a continuous line from cowl to fixed rudder. As a point of interest, the bottom sheet of the pan was made in two layers; the reason being that I ran out of 1/8" sheet balsa. Since I had some 1/16" sheet, I decided to make the bottom by first applying the sheeting cross grain in three pieces and then covering this with a single piece running length wise. As a side benefit, the pan is very rigid.

to be continued...

David.

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

The tail section is also setup with the inserts done and the fuse bottom and fixed rudder installed permanently. With that done, I began shaping the fuse top... much sanding still to go.

With the airframe almost complete, I checked to see how much weight I've added since the last estimate. With several pieces of tape and much sanding still to go, she's at an even 18 oz. The last estimate was at 16 oz (1 lb) but I had forgotten to include some of the belly pan material. Hopefully, I'll be able to bring her in at 17 oz by lightening a couple of spots once the sanding is complete.

What's next...? Lots of elbow grease I guess!

David.

alcarafa

David it keeps looking better every pic you post, with no doubt she 'll fly just at it looks...wonderful craftmanship anxious to see the maiden of this master piece.

Wish I could build a plane as well, looks easy but for those of us who like to build our own planes, we sure know it's not an easy task.

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Thanks Rafa!

It is easy..., one just follows the pics!

Actually, I decided to give my hand and arm a rest - it tends to cramp up after long periods of sanding. And of course, I'd rather sand than carve and sand when things are marginal... just to make sure I don't slice off something I want!

With the above in mind and in order to vary the build a little bit, I decided to focus on the brains of the aircraft this evening. As mentioned previously, I've decided to install the radio on two plates. The rear plate will be for the four fuse servos (three wing servos) and the switch. This plate will not be screwed down but rather will slide on two rails (on either side) and will bottom out against F3. It will be prevented from sliding forward by a couple of screws on small retainer blocks on the front bottom. I've sorted out pushrod and servo arm clearance and laid out the servos accordingly (on paper). The servo tray cutouts will be made wider than needed in order to provide some lateral adjustment as required. All servos will be supported by grommets as the tray is in direct contact with the fuse.

The front tray is essentially to insulate the receiver, battery and voltage regulator from vibration and allows easier access to the gear. The tray will be grommet mounted (as a standard servo would) on hardwood standoffs. The components will then be velcro strapped to the tray with foam rubber underneath them. All wiring will pass underneath this tray providing for a tidy installation.

Photos show the layout plan, fuse overlay as well as the two trays cut and temporarily laid in the fuse.

Dinner time!

David.

Rendegade

Doxilla, looking great, a really fantastic build.

Just one question, isn't the 6100 a park flyer reciever? Wouldn't a 6200 be better?

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

I apreciate all the great comments - thanks.

I was wondering whether someone might ask that. I've been asking myself the same question.

In one word - yes! I really ought to use a 6200 unless I wish to kiss this one a quick goodbye. I guess I'll have to pull one from another project I have on the back burner. Fortunately, it doesn't change anything for the radio layout - the Aux RX will just mount against a fuse side with foam tape.

8178

My Feedback: (17)

Excellent work! Thanks for sharing.

BERUSTY

My Feedback: (3)

FAAST 2.4

When the 6EX was being tested, pre-release, Jason Shulman spent a lot of time flying the system in his trusty and what may be one of his favorite models to fly, a highwing trainer*...

My understanding that this wooden model with film covering was taken up as high as he could see it (750'+) flown in, far with the anannaes bent incorrectly and not as specified...no issues, no problems. Would it make sense to use the park flyer version in a conventional manner, probably not.

Rusty Dose
Team Futaba
Team YS parts and Service
*Trainer is a .40 size ARF.

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Rusty,

I'm not sure I follow the sequence of logic but I tend to agree that a park flyer Rx is probably not a great candidate for a fast, albeit small, pattern plane.

Of course, then there's the whole discussion of how signal transmission and reception differs (is better/worse?) between FASST and DSM2 - but that conversation is akin to, for example, Mac's vs PC's... I'd rather not embark on it because I typically don't subscribe to specific camps but rather like to sing the praises of each technology (and sometimes point out their limitations too). Of course, I also tend to be impartial in these discussions because, again to continue with the example, I was raised on Unix before I ever even saw a Mac or a PC... I guess this is analogous to being raised on 53 MHz [8D].

David.

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Mike,

thanks for your interest. Most excellent to have approval from a master builder!

David.

AndyKunz

David,

I fly a 6200 in mine simply because of the additional peace of mind, but most of my planes have 6100's in them, and I'll fly them way out w/o a problem. I know the 6200's will work out to a mile at least, and I've lost sight long before the plane would get there. The Spektrum/JR Challenge ad (same technology) makes the point pretty well.

Andy

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Oh yea!

Of course that gets into the discussion mentioned in post 186... If so, I'd probably start singing the praises of Simprop or Multiplex!

But... I suppose it makes more sense to keep the 6100's in smaller electrics.

David.

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Rendegade,

Perth, ay? Interesting... my masters research was on the Leeuwin current - half way across the planet of course! How's it to swim in? I guess the coastal water probably flows North in a thin band between land and the current...?

David.

alcarafa

I fly my picorare with AR6100E without problems, you ' ll for sure lost shight of your D10 before having transmission problems, i will keep flying mine this way as long as it works ok.

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

I'm a little stuck on some technicalities which I haven't had the time to address so the build has stalled a bit.

However, I thought I'd post an off-color picture (my camera was acting up after my daughter - 3 - decided to take some snaps... - that was smart of me) of the assembled model with legs! Yes, the nose gear finally came in. BTW, nice little unit the Robart 124. I've also installed the fuse components of the radio but have no pictures of that yet.

I need to sort out a couple of things so that I can finish the assembly, do some fillets here and there and a little final sanding before commencing the finish.

Question: The plans show the canopy rear as lining up with the rear of the wing fillets. I've been debating though, whether it looks a little too far back in that position (as shown in this picture) and whether it might look better brought forward a tad. As a reminder, my fuse has a somewhat longer nose moment due to the fuse extension of 10 mm - maybe this is what makes the model appear a little nosey with the canopy in its plans position.

Any thoughts?

David.

jmb52760

This image of the original (from the classic pattern image page) indicates that the highest point on the canopy is in line with the leading edge at the fuselage. This seems to indicate that you should move it forward a bit.

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Mitch,

yea, that's my inclination too. Although not apparent due to perspective, the location of the canopy in the above photo (not great - will substitute for better when I have one) actually does have the high point above the wing LE.

Note however, that as it is, this location is already further forward from what is shown on both the MAN and BHE plans. The plans show, the high point, the location where the curved line intersects the canopy top, as being 12% back from the LE!

I have seen a few Deception photos with the Canopies in various different places. In particular, RE engine builds often show the canopy front as sitting just aft of the FW in order to pass the header and pipe straight into it.

Aside from achieving aesthetic balance, I guess I'm also curious about how, if any, the position of the canopy affects side lift and tail airflow.

David.

alcarafa

David that is correct possition of canopy affects aerodinamic flow, so check it up well before you glue it.

sugarfox

My Feedback: (1)

David, the canopy location will have an effect on knife edge flight, in my experience. How or why I have no idea as I am no aerodynamic expert by any means. That being said, using the thumb and eyeball technology developed by me over the years, I'd move it forward a bit..sugarfox

AndyKunz

David,

How is the Deception coming along?

We flew the Gulfstream today and it ROCKS! PM me your e-mail and I'll send a few pix.

Andy

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

That's odd!!!

The new site is down now!

Seems to me that launch was a little premature. At a rate of a post every 30 sec on RCU, that's a lot of posts going amiss!

Oh well, we'll see how things look tomorrow...

David.

70s Flyer

David, your work is outstanding.How long before maiden?

Rich

BTW do not try and PM me because they have it blocked. I'm guessing because of getting on my list.

AndyKunz

Let's hope it stays that way! This one is much more usable, especially for frequent visitors.

Your PM didn't get to me because of the changeover. I PM'd you to send me an e-mail instead.

Andy