you mounted the canopy the way it was intented? so with two screws on the side?

I did not ... aaarrrgggghhhhh ... that was what was missing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AaAaaarrrggggghhhhHHHHhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! How smart of me!!!!!!!!! I was flying my Sebart SU29-30 first so you can imagine why I was so dumb. Sigh ...

You're serious? You just placed the canopy and took off?!?!

If you were being sarcastic (:P); I was asking because a lot of people invent something to replace the '2 screw mechanism'.. for instance canopy latches. Those won't work in my opinion because in my experience the canopy is a structural part of the plane, if well attached it adds strength and in flight several forces will work on it.

If you're not being sarcastics.. everybody makes misstakes. I've seen the wings come of an edge in flight, because the pilot forgot to attach them.. he just slided them over the tube untill they were flush with the fuse and then forgot to put the screws in.. sh*t happens.

Hezik ... yeah I did it, forgot the canopy screws, I used them for the wings too! I have not flown the Wind S for months so after flying the SU29 you can understand why I did it. Sigh ... I did see a wing come off on a QQ Yak ... 100cc too!

What servo's are people using in the Wind? I have not decided on what to use, I want something good, but I don't want to go overboard.

My Wind has arrived, wow is it well built!!!

Right now..

Ailerons: 2x Futaba BLS 153
Rudder: Futaba BLS 451
Elevator: 2x Futaba S9650

Ailerons. : 2x JR 8411
Rudder. :Futaba BLS 451
Elevators. :2x Futaba S9650

Finally got to power the system up:

Scorpion 4035-250
CC ICE HV80 controller
Zippy 5000mah 30C 10S battery packs
APC 17x12e Prop

70A with auto throttle curve, 65A w/ fixed point throttle
2500W

Headed to the field in a few for a maiden

Ofcourse this setup will work, but in my opinion the 8411 on roll (i think Sebart also recommends them in the manual) is way to heavy and overkill. They're strong and relatively slow, and weigh about 57 gram a piece, so that's 114 gram in wingservo's.

I originally used the S9650's on ailerons, which do fine. I replaced them with the brushless successors (BLS 153) since they are 30% stronger. Both have enough power to handle ailerons on this plane, and both are faster than the 8411 and a lot lighter. The 9650, being the weaker, will be as fast as the 8411 (speed and strength are related), the BLS version will be faster.

Together they weigh 58 grams.. so that's 56 grams less on wingservo's. So the BLS 153 are faster, strong enough, cheaper and lighter.

Don't get me wrong, it's a minute difference. This airframe has a low wingloading as is, so the extra weight isn't that big of an issue. Both setups will work just fine.

@garRCfield: what AUW (weight including battery) does your setup have?

70A at 37v is 2590 Watt consumed power, but that doesn't mean you have 2.5kW power, it also depends on the efficiency of the engine.

Have fun tomorrow with your maiden. I loved the WindS from the first flight and still do after having made roughly 600 flights with it by now. It's a great plane.

Maiden went pretty well. Rates were way too high for precision, plane felt really pitch-sensitive (due to the large wing? That's what I saw in the videos and was hoping to overcome with increased ballast). Turned down the low rates down but still not enough.

Got two flights in today; first flight was 7min just flying lazily around and getting used to the plane - 2000mah consumption. Second flight I forgot the timer - flew a long time, battery at 37.4V when I was done, on the charger now to see the consumption.

Can fly around a long time on 5000mah. Plane definitely did not seem heavy, and with 95% break on the CC ESC there was barely any acceleration on down lines. I think the plane could handle more weight if I decided to throw weight into it (which I might with a switch or something).

Not sure I like the 12 pitch prop. 18x10 is probably the best choice, however I could use some more time to get used to electric flight and throttle usage - it's different when you can't hear the engine RPM to judge your throttle position. Felt a lot like the 15x10 on the Venus w/120AX, where it had plenty of top speed for winds but lacked the acceleration and pull for immediate throttle response.

Plane had TONS of power; accelerated in up lines, plenty of bite in the head wind today to keep constant speed. Again, acceleration in down lines was not that significant, and with 18x10 prop or 100% break it may be totally fine.

Up-elevator trim wasn't enough that there is space between the stab and elevator - just a few clicks and not enough to complain about.

Breezy conditions with head wind; plane bumped around and it was too choppy to start making trim flights or adding mixes. Definitely a nose dip with rudder input, slight roll on KE and I think it pulled to the belly on KE but can't remember.

I think with a few more flights and some fine-tuning, I will really like this plane. Biggest problem I found is that I haven't flown a plane in 6mos. and I was just horrible flying the plane.

CG I think was 185cm as per the manual; inverted 45* line and plane just faintly started to pull out with hands-off - pretty perfect for pattern flying.

Congratulations Joe! Sounds like a great day of flying no matter what.

What kind of break in did you use on the batteries? Was there any noise from the Castle coming out of brake? Do you use a flight idle switch?

Anyways, just curious



Joe

Joe,
I have the same setup. I played around with KE flight and it pulled to the belly on left rudder KE. So kept moving the CG forward until it went away. Now I'm at 7.0 to 7-1/16". I reset the wing incidence from 0 deg to +0.5 deg (the elevator is now level with the stab). Now it flies like it's on rails including KE both sides (no mix), 45 deg inverted and rock solid landings.

I'm also running around 11 deg throws. Not the hot setup for 3d, but for pattern it suits me.

When I first flew it I had the CG at 7-1/4" and it seemed super sensitive to elevator inputs especially landing. As I mentioned before, I had a world class pattern pilot fly it and he was adamant it was too tail heavy.
Great plane to fly, have fun with it.

Hi
How much surgery did it take to modify the Wing incidence and how did you go about it?

Mike

Hezik...yes of course I have.a problem with those servo (JR 8411),but..it was a final decision,cos I'm only have 2 ea of S9650,hard to find those servo in indonesia.And the result of AUW including battery(zippy 10s 5000mAh) is 4502 gram..
But she still can fly very well,lot of power in vertical,and only use half throttle to do that.
Maiden flight only 6minute,and but motor was too hot to touch,so I change the prop with 16x10..result was good.
I have a little bit of mix of rudder to elevator(up elevator) in both side,to compensate KE..

First you need an Incidence meter. Measure the current incidence, should be zero on both wings.
I simply elongated both dowel pin holes (per wing panel) with a rat tail file until I acheived 0.5 deg+. Once I had the correct incidence I bonded some 1/16 lite ply doughnuts around the dowel pins to fix the position. Since the wing no longer slides into the 1/16" cutout in the fuse, I elongated the 4mm hole in the wing hold down stub. That's it. It took about an hour to do, no biggie.

After reading Bryan Herbert's thoughts on trimming a pattern plane, I think getting incidence and the CG right for your type of flying is very important.

Anyone have info on a good set of nylon geared servos that fit inside the stab with no modification?

If you follow his triangulation trimming technique, yes. However this is no law or absolute truth, there are more ways to trim an aircraft and there is simply not one 'guaranteed correct method', a lot of it depends on personal preferences.

For instance, you created an incidence wheres Sebart chose not to. Sebart probably flies 'zero gravity', in which case you trim an aircraft in such a way that it DOES NOT fly level without stickinput. If you level it out and release the sticks, it wil slowly lose altitude. The idea here is that you trim it in such a way that the behaviour, without further stickinput, is exactly the same level as inverted.

I have a contest coming up this weekend so I'm not going to change anything, but agree with you, one of the things I have said ever since I got this plane, was that, to my personal preference, it should have a slight incidence, though instinctively I would say .5 is a lot. I would give it like 0.25 or something in that neighbourhood.

Anyone who's going to do this, remember that it's relative and that this plane is a woodbuilt ARF, so it might differ from plane to plane. On a single plane you can even get different readings at different temperatures.

The downside to having a forward CG as Brian Herbert advertises, is that your airspeed will go up, both in regular flight as on landings. Since this is not a 2m bird, you want to fly somewhat closer and smaller, and so a high airspeed might not be what you really want.

Igot these servos on my wish list for the elevators. They should fit without any mods.
http://www.jrradios.com/Products/Def...dID=JRPS3421SA</p>

My only problem with this plane (and it's a small problem) is the lack of adjustability for the incidence. I guess I should have installed adjusters from Central Hobbies, but this fixed method is probably good enough for me. Adding the 0.5+ deg allowed me to remove the "up" elevator trim.
If you do make a change to the incidence please post your impressions here afterwards.

Good luck at your contest!

It might be easier to make the stab adjustable in stead of the wing. Only downside is that if you do your fuse won't 'fly level'.

Adjusting the wing incidence is prettier and I have already thought about it, but chose not to change it right before a contest.

However, I would slightly alter the method. In stead of just accepting that the wing wont fit the slots in the fuse anymore, I would first try to find the correct incidence (as in: the correct incidence for me) and then change the cutout in the fuse. That doesn't have to be much work, basically you can trace the outline of the wing on the outside and then just use a #11 knife to remove excess material.

As far as the contest goes; I don't expect much. This is my first year in the top class here in the Netherlands and from the looks of it we'll be facing a 15~20 kts wind, 90 degrees cross. Not the best weathertype for this plane (or for any other kind of plane).

Downside for me is that everyone else is flying 2m birds.

Ouch, 15 to 20 knot crosswind!

Say isn't moto-GP or F-1 on this weekend??

I am NOT a Wind 110 owner . . . yet . . . so please take this as one guy's simple opinion only, but honestly I can't imagine why you would mess with incidence on this plane. I have seen two fly in completely stock form, and they were both down right spectacular to watch. Granted a lot has to do with the person behind the controls, but talking to the owners they had nothing but raves and had done little more than slight radio mixing to achieve veritable Pattern perfection. Anyways, just a thought and a little added perspective for anyone following this thread.



Joe

Thanks everyone.

One question Joe, are you using the brake function in the CC ICE HV80?

Is anyone using the brake function in the ESC?

I have the break set to 95% and a 0.8s delay. However I'm going to spend today flying with the trim up a little for an idle RPM, and will probably eventually start to use my idle down feature to activate the break.

I was told by my mentor that anything less than 90% break is useless with CC.

You'll WANT to use a brake on this plane, otherwise it will accelerate a lot on downlines. Also you need a configurable brake.

I was first flying with the Master Basic Spin that Sebart sells in his combodeal, but the break on that ESC doesn't cut it. Only has 4 settings 'soft, medium, hard, extra hard' and none of them will slow it down in downlines.

Switched it for a Hacker Spin 99, which has a configurable brake.

Have it set to start at 40% up to 80%, .3s delay, .5s speed. This seems to work.