Notices
Control Lines For all you fly-by-wire fanatics!

Beginning Again

Old 01-19-2009, 10:05 AM
  #1  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hutcinson, KS
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Beginning Again

So heres the deal- Im 65, restarting control line after 55 years, when young could only afford 049 stuff, was advised by an another old control liner not to start with an 049 plane so I got a ARF Flitestreak put an old Fox 35 on it, used an old EZ Just control line handle and crashed and crashed and crashed until I decided to go another way. So I relearned on a 15 powered plane cobbled together and now have a Supertigre 40 powered plane given to me by another old guy; It is a flapless homemade stunt plane. My questions are: This plane weighs 46 ounces and takes about 25 feet to do a loop. If I speed up the controls to tighten it up I get into the PIO mode. Would a lighter plane loop better without being oversensitive? How about a plane with flaps? I can go round and round ok and do inside and outside loops but it gets close to the ground sometimes. I know Im older and slower but eventually I hope to get some modest proficiency. Advice please
Old 01-19-2009, 10:37 AM
  #2  
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Madrid, IA
Posts: 234
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again


ORIGINAL: Planehutch888

.... So I relearned on a 15 powered plane cobbled together and now have a Supertigre 40 powered plane given to me by another old guy; It is a flapless homemade stunt plane. My questions are: This plane weighs 46 ounces and takes about 25 feet to do a loop. If I speed up the controls to tighten it up I get into the PIO mode. Would a lighter plane loop better without being oversensitive? How about a plane with flaps? I can go round and round ok and do inside and outside loops but it gets close to the ground sometimes. I know Im older and slower but eventually I hope to get some modest proficiency. Advice please
I'm not sure what you are asking here - do you want to fix the plane you are flying now so that it loops a little better? If so, I would start by adding small amounts of tail weight and small increases in either control throw or handle spacing, till it turns at the rate you would feel comfortable with. (Not sure what you mean by PIO mode, but I guess you find that it gets way too sensitive)

If you want advice on a different plane, then the answers to your question are all "It depends .... ". If everything else is equal, then yes, lighter planes will turn tighter than heavy ones for the same amount of power, control throw, CG location, etc. But small differences in weight will not be noticeable unless you've got everything else trimmed to it's optimum. Same with flapped wings - if they are trimmed correctly, they can have advantages. If they are nose-heavy or otherwise not set up correctly, they are no better. In fact, if turn radius or loop size is your only measuring stick, then an unflapped wing trimmed to it's tail heavy limit will out-turn a flapped wing (think combat planes!). That doesn't mean it's flying "better", since there is way too much personal preference in the term "better".

Since you are able to do insides and outsides (how about inverted?), you mainly need to fly. As you get accustomed to your plane, you will probably want to start getting tighter loops, sharper corners and you'll fly the plane to the shape you are trying to fly. As with most things, practice is the best fix.

Best of luck and welcome back.


Old 01-19-2009, 04:30 PM
  #3  
 
skylark-flier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: VA, Luray
Posts: 2,226
Received 15 Likes on 13 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again


ORIGINAL: Planehutch888

So heres the deal- Im 65, restarting control line after 55 years, when young could only afford 049 stuff, was advised by an another old control liner not to start with an 049 plane so I got a ARF Flitestreak put an old Fox 35 on it, used an old EZ Just control line handle and crashed and crashed and crashed until I decided to go another way. So I relearned on a 15 powered plane cobbled together and now have a Supertigre 40 powered plane given to me by another old guy; It is a flapless homemade stunt plane. My questions are: This plane weighs 46 ounces and takes about 25 feet to do a loop. If I speed up the controls to tighten it up I get into the PIO mode. Would a lighter plane loop better without being oversensitive? How about a plane with flaps? I can go round and round ok and do inside and outside loops but it gets close to the ground sometimes. I know Im older and slower but eventually I hope to get some modest proficiency. Advice please
Hey Hutch! First, my hearty congrats (from a 61 yr old to a 65 yr old) on getting back into CL flying! [sm=teeth_smile.gif] Understood about the ARF problems - you're not the only one that's had them. Personally, I don't totally trust them, although I'm from the old school - I like to build what I fly so I know what's in it. That applies to both my CL and my RC planes.

Your .40-powered 46 oz plane - my first question would be "what's the wingspan"? Is it supposed to be .40 powered or maybe something less? Personally, I've been flying the old Sterling Skylarks the most, almost since they first came out, and have never put anything larger than a .40 in them - actually, all but 1 of them has used .35's, usually Enya or Fox, and they have a 52" wing. My latest Skylark weighs a whopping 57 oz, uses an old NIB K&B .35 and she flies just as well as any of the others, so if your .40 plane is anywhere even close to that 48-52" wing you might be just a bit overpowered, which can lengthen out maneuvers - she's simply going too fast.

One other item I noticed as I re-read your note for the empteenth time - you said your ST.40-powered plane is a "homemade stunt plane". Sure wish you'd included a pic of her, but in the meantime, is the wing thick enough to lift her around in loops? If she's a "home-built" kit she's probably fine, but if she's someone's home-design she might simply have too thin a wing for tighter loops.

Flapped/non-flapped, doesn't make a whole lot of difference to most plane designs as long as the plane is balanced decently, unless you're actually trying some of the tighter maneuvers where flaps CAN make a difference. I've been flying CL since I was 7 (a lot of decades ago) and in my experience the biggest difference flaps make is actually in landing - but then, maybe I've had so many flapped planes that I just don't notice the actual flying differences anymore. Some of my lighter flapped planes have had a tendency to float a bit and then actually "balloon" if I pulled up too much, too quick, in the final flare to land - makes for some interesting touchdowns on occasion.

Handles - I'm still using my 30+ yr old EZ-just handles too, with full spread and standard 3" bellcrank in the wing with control rods to the innermost point on the control horns (LOADS of control input), but then, I'm used to that set-up so I don't have much problems from it. One problem I've noticed new fliers having with similar set-ups is that they hold the handle too tight and they're too "jittery" with it - but that's what being new to CL is all about, getting used to what's more comfy and smoother for each pilot. MY handle technique (I'm left-handed, by the way) is that I actually hold the handle more with my finger-tips (2 center fingers) and control with my index and pinky finger - a VERY) light and loose touch. Yeah, I know, that's just plain WRONG according to every book I've read, every flier I've flown with, etc etc - but it works for me and always has. I also don't control with my elbow, but with my wrist, which is even more wrong to 99% of CL fliers. BUT, between wrist and finger-tip control, I can (and frequently do) fly nearly any plane right down onto the ground with full power and keep her there until I'm ready to lift off again (that little stunt gets lots of comments on the flying field every time), usually 2 or 3 complete turns around the circle.

For the life of me I can't remember what "PIO" means (that's old age setting in) but I'm going to assume it's "porpoising", plane simply won't steady-up enough to fly smoothly. My first "gut" feel for your particular plane is that you're CG is off - probably too far back. My PERSONAL rule-of-thumb is to put it just at or ahead of the main wing spar (or thickest point of the wing if the spars don't show), never behind that point. If your CG is near that point and your control throws are enough to put your elevator up/down 45 degrees you're going to get the best loops that any particular plane is capable of putting out. If your plane is flapped, the flaps and elevator should move about the same amount (elevator up - flaps down, or elevator down - flaps up).

I added that last paren part just as a reminder - I HAVE seen people set a plane up so both the flaps and elevator went in the same direction. Doesn't work so good.

Hey man, practice, practice, practice. You've been out of it for 55 years, gonna take awhile to get the feel again. Just relax, spend time getting the smell of nitro back into your system, and enjoy yourself. Yeah, your reaction times aren't the same as a guy who's 18, but who cares? Mine aren't either, but I can still fly well enough to have a ball on a Sunday afternoon (or whenever). And don't try my "touchdown at full power" trick until you're back in the groove!! It CAN be a plane-killer.

Keep us posted on how you're making out, and WELCOME BACK TO FLYING!!

Dave
(Pics below; some of my more "fun" CL planes - 2 Skylarks, 2 SIG Banshees, an old MidWest Biplane, my old TF P-63 and Cosmic Wind. Sorry about the quality, some of those pics are OLD!!!!)
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Kf12590.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	16.0 KB
ID:	1114601   Click image for larger version

Name:	Pu52766.jpg
Views:	19
Size:	20.7 KB
ID:	1114602   Click image for larger version

Name:	Un34696.jpg
Views:	13
Size:	31.6 KB
ID:	1114603   Click image for larger version

Name:	Gr91757.jpg
Views:	20
Size:	19.7 KB
ID:	1114604   Click image for larger version

Name:	Gx30203.jpg
Views:	21
Size:	21.7 KB
ID:	1114605  
Attached Images  
Old 01-19-2009, 05:31 PM
  #4  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Broken Arrow, OK
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again

You might call Marvin Denny in Wichita. He lives on the North side and I am sure he would be happy giving you a hand and tell you where they fly every (weather permitting) weekend.

[sm=lol.gif][sm=lol.gif][sm=lol.gif]
Old 01-19-2009, 06:49 PM
  #5  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again

Dave,

PIO is pilot induced oscillation. otherwise known as getting out of sync with the control response needed. A slow responding plane, headed down, may get too much up input from the handle, so when it does, finally, turn away from that hard stuff under the flight circle, it tends to go way beyond level.

...and. being a bit sluggish, it might take excess down input to get the turn started...

See where this is going?

Hutch,

A 25' loop diameter isn't necessarily a bad thing. If you prefer tighter, by all means go for it. If you are at all interested in what is now called precision aerobatics, your 46 oz .40 powered model might just be pretty suitable - as others have asked: what size is the thing, and could you post a picture?

Precision Aerobatics (the PC name for stunt) involves several figures that may not be very difficult, except that in a contest, the size, heights, repetition of the same trace in 'consecutive' figures, etc., are more important than sheer minimum loop diameter. Challenging, and can keep one practicing quite a bit.

For fun, find something s***hot and go tie knots in the sky. That's a living ball! CL Precision Aerobatics, because it has pretty stringent defined standards, gives something to KEEP striving at, and the fun angle can wear off unless it can take you somewhere further...

It's all good, and you meet plenty of great guys in CL. Welcome back. (I'll be 70, later this year, btw. CLPA still holds me captive...)

Old 01-19-2009, 10:05 PM
  #6  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (2)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hutcinson, KS
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again

Thank you one and all for your input. One thing I knew for sure was that I didn't know. My plane has a 52" wingspan and a 9 " chord. The wing is approx 1.65" Thick so it will fly thru a loop. I use a 10/5 or 11/6 prop. I don't know if it is flying too fast, it may be. I will call Mr Denny soon and meet when convient for him- thanks for that name. I also appreciated the comparison of flapped/ unflapped planes characteristics. One person mentioned 45 degrees elevator movement as the maximum and I figured that out as I tried more and it didn"t tighten things up anymore. I will get a pic of my plane and post it as soon as I figure out how that works. Thanks Again!
Old 01-20-2009, 06:52 AM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again


ORIGINAL: Planehutch888
One person mentioned 45 degrees elevator movement as the maximum and
I figured that out as I tried more and it didn"t tighten things up anymore.
I don't think anyone has mentioned CG yet. When you have too far forward CG, the elevator runs out of effectiveness. The CG range works for you when you use it.

When it's too far forward, the plane can't be turned anymore than a certain amount. Lots of people are ok with this and think it means the plane is safer. It actually isn't. There is a sweet spot. Actually, it's more of a sweet range.

When it's moved back, the elevator starts to gain back it's effectiveness. There will be more than enough pitch stability to keep level flight without having to move the elevator at all. You might not think so at first, but judging "enough pitch stability" will grow on ya'. So most times, if you suspect a plane is too nose heavy, moving the CG aft is a pretty safe bet. How do you hedge that bet?

Use something like geistware.com's CG locator application to find out what kind of CG range that specific airplane has. It'll tell you by the width of that range just how touchy that plane is. If the range is narrow, you want to be conservative with the first move. If it's wide, don't go crazy, but don't sweat it. And the results from running the numbers through geistware will be an unbiased judgement of your present CG. It'll tell you if it's "super safe and mushy" for example.

You need a yardstick to use that application. And about 5 minutes.

http://www.geistware.com/rcmodeling/cg_super_calc.htm
Old 01-20-2009, 07:08 AM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near Pfafftown NC
Posts: 11,517
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again

Oh yeah, that application is excellent for a number of things. Knowing the tail volume used to be a biggie back in the day. People used tail volume like it was the final say on aircraft design. And in our somewhat restricted envelope, it can be. And that application does the tail volume with a bunch of other things. And you don't have to add/subtract/multiply a thing. It does everything except measure your airplane.

In fact, a number of the details that application works out for you are worth knowing. Placing your CG within the computed range can be done with future models once you've gotten experience with one plane and it's numbers. The numbers you get from each plane are all based on the important details of each airplane. And the science is very, very pertinent to our problem of stability/responsiveness. I've always felt that control line is about the most reliable and accurately measured testing ground for pitch stability ever conceived. And using those pitch stability formulas showed that to be true over the years. This online application makes those formulas a piece of cake for us. All you need is the yardstick.

Find out where your CG is on your airplane now. Then get the yardstick and do the measurements geistware needs. Plug them in, pick a SafetyMargin and click the button. The way you get the most good out of the application is by running the application twice. Once with a "mushy" SafetyMargin, and again with a "sensitive" one. Note the two different CG's it gives you, where they are in inches, and percentage of MAC. The inches will relate directly to your model right now. The percentages will be useful with every model from then on. After you fly and see what your present model does and how it's CG locations feel to you, you'll know where you want the CG on next model when it goes up for the first time.

No reason not to use science to our advantage. And this science is falling off a log easy to use.
Old 01-20-2009, 12:46 PM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,086
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again

I've been flying various Old Time Stunt airplanes without flaps. I build in 20 -25 degrees of elevator movement either way. That is plenty for squareish corners. In one of the Frank Zaic books there is some calculation on elevator movement in stunt,. With too much, the tail will stall, loose effectiveness, and the turn will actually open up as you give more control. I did some experimenting with this, and found it to be the case. I start out, on that kind of airplane, with the CG at about 15% Mean Aerodynamic Chord. Perhaps on the nose-heavy side in the views of most folks.
Old 01-20-2009, 07:05 PM
  #10  
 
Hossfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: New Caney, TX
Posts: 6,130
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again


ORIGINAL: Planehutch888

So heres the deal- Im 65, restarting control line after 55 years, when young could only afford 049 stuff, was advised by an another old control liner not to start with an 049 plane so I got a ARF Flitestreak put an old Fox 35 on it, used an old EZ Just control line handle and crashed and crashed and crashed until I decided to go another way. So I relearned on a 15 powered plane cobbled together and now have a Supertigre 40 powered plane given to me by another old guy; It is a flapless homemade stunt plane. My questions are: This plane weighs 46 ounces and takes about 25 feet to do a loop. If I speed up the controls to tighten it up I get into the PIO mode. Would a lighter plane loop better without being oversensitive? How about a plane with flaps? I can go round and round ok and do inside and outside loops but it gets close to the ground sometimes. I know Im older and slower but eventually I hope to get some modest proficiency. Advice please
Hey MAN, You can DID it! I will next month complete my 73rd trip around the sun and I am trying to get back into CL. I hope to attend the Tucson Vintage Stunt Champs in March. Hoping to have a Classic T-Bird, and a OTS Vampire with a Super Cyke, maybe an Anderson Spitfire .65, and of course the Ringmaster. I can't fly CL Stunt for crap, but I will have some fun going back into my younger pursuits, plus seeing some other old timers like me. Actually right now building and stuff, I feel like a kid in a candy store.

I just joined into the Stunt Hanger forum and all kinds of help and advice are coming my way. While I can still fly the Stunt Pattern, many just may not recognize it. So come on Planehutch 888, you can do it, and if I can do it YOU can do it better.

There is the VSC, Brodak's big CL Event and the NATs. You and I can show these young whipper-snappers how it is done! Right! [sm=49_49.gif]
Old 01-20-2009, 10:09 PM
  #11  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Wollongong, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again


ORIGINAL: Planehutch888

I got a ARF Flitestreak put an old Fox 35 on it, used an old EZ Just control line handle and crashed and crashed and crashed until I decided to go another way.
Seeing as we're talking about CG - did you set up your ARF Streak with the CG as recommended in the instructions? If you did, then the crashing and crashing and crashing was not due to any lack of ability on your part! I couldn't believe how far back the recommended CG is on the Top Flite ARF Streak, and it seems to be a known issue.
Old 01-21-2009, 10:58 AM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lake Worth, FL
Posts: 1,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again

The old TF kit flite streak plans had the CG on/near the spar, which results in a rather quick response. One of my old kit FS's balances on the spar with the old Fox plain bearing .25 and its very light and quick on the controls. It could easily be moved forward 3/4" for a beginner or someone who doesn't want that sort of light "flickable" response.
Old 01-21-2009, 04:37 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,086
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again

The Brodak plans for the full size Flightstreak show the CG right behind the leading edge spar. I have George Aldrich's proof copy. I have seen one of George's plans with the CG above the spar. It is partially erased and George wrote "wrong". Another CG is drawn in as on the Brodak plan. Oddly enough, the CG on the Jr. Flitestreak is back more. I balanced my Jr Flitestreak about 3/8 forward of the plan CG and was very happy with it. It flew the pattern very well. I would not attempt to fly a large Flitestreak balanced on the spar. I wouldn't be able to control it.
Old 01-21-2009, 04:39 PM
  #14  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Wollongong, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again

I don't know about the old TF kit plans, but it seems the recent ARF models have the CG way aft of where George Aldrich intended it. A fair bit of discussion here: http://www.clstunt.com/htdocs/dc/dcb...ng_type=search
Old 01-21-2009, 05:41 PM
  #15  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Wollongong, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again


ORIGINAL: Jim Thomerson

I balanced my Jr Flitestreak about 3/8 forward of the plan CG and was very happy with it. It flew the pattern very well.
Out of interest Jim, what motor were you using in your Jr FS?
Old 01-21-2009, 09:15 PM
  #16  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,086
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again

TD 09, Cox 7 x 3.5 grey prop, Sig champion 10% nitro, 20 % 50/50 oil, backplate pressure with one way valve to uniflow. 57 ft 012 lines. @ 4 second lap time. I extended the nose a little to use a tank I had, and ended up putting some weight in the tail

I started out flying on 55 ft lines I used for the same set up on a Shark 15. The Flitestreak was considerably faster. 3.8 sec laps on those lines. Right at the edge of my flying ability.
Old 01-24-2009, 11:48 AM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Fayette, OH
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again

Hi planehutch, I'm 70 and just restarted c/l . Alot of practice and comes back easy. These guys will really help. Keep flying
Old 02-05-2009, 08:54 PM
  #18  
Senior Member
 
Huntster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: Beginning Again

wow

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.