miamiflyer

My Feedback: (1)

Hey Campbec,
nice fusion on the Chiptendermonkey,
all the best for the maiden.
My Contender is ready to cover in the bones.
Just need to get the wingsaddle right. There is quite a gap like
in your last picture and it bothers me.
I replaced the wooddowels with birchwood filled aluminum arrowshaft and glued
brass tubing to match in the doubled bulkhead, came out with no slob [sm=thumbup.gif] but the wingsaddle
doesn't match now. [&o]
I thought about taking the shape from the plan and glue another wingsaddle on each
side of the fuse to get closer to the wing.

or

spread some epoxy microballoon mix on the saddle and bolt the wing on with
waxpaper to make it fit.
do you have another idea?

2slow, where did you end up with the battery pack?

campbec

Hi Pat,

I would suggest to finish the saddle area that you glue in slivers of balsa to close the gaps to the minimum then use the glad wrap/wax paper on the wing and the epoxy microballoon method. I use an alcohol dipped finger to finish the fillet shape.

Cheers,

Colin

miamiflyer

My Feedback: (1)

[sm=lol.gif] sounds like a mess, but i'll go for it.

cheers!

sledge_78

My Feedback: (24)

Miami Flyer,

I'm curious as to why you have such a wide gap in the wing/fuselage slot. I finished my Contender a few months ago and found the wing - fuselage gap was near non existent. Be cautious of your wing incidence. Since you have a noticeable gap, there may be reason to believe the wing incidence could also be affected. The Contender is a beautiful flying airplane. It literally goes where you point it. So unlike a high wing trainer. The landings are fabulous, no surprises, no tip stall, and best of all no last second corrections necessary, it doesn't float up just before landing. The only strange operational flying feature I have found was the rudder action. Applying rudder during flight seems to make the airplane "wiggle" in the turn. Nothing that dramatically affects flying, it just looks weird - You'll see. I used the modified wing tip option and the flap. I have yet to use the flap since it hasn't been necessary . I may try it on take offs to see how much shorter the take off may be. I have a OS 50sx in mine and it is more power than really, really necessary.

Sledge_78

Safebet

My Feedback: (12)

Hi Sledge 78:

I noted in your post you are using a 50 SX. I have purchased a OS .61 FX for my Contender. Do you think this is too much engine for this plane. I haven't started my build yet, but am looking forward to it. Especially, in light of the comments you and others have made concerning its handling characteristics.

Thanks

miamiflyer

My Feedback: (1)

sledge,
the gap wasn't as much as in colin's chiptender.
Guess the brass tubing got shifted a little when i pulled out the dowels too early
before the epoxy set in.

the epoxy-micro balloon mixture didn't fill as much as i expected, which means
it was a good fit and me too worried about that.
It's good stuff though. easy cuttable before set and sandable when fully set.
love it.

sledge_78

My Feedback: (24)

Safebet,

Your choice of an OS .61 FX will work fine. The plans actually illustrate an OS .61 and an OS .40 LA. The Contender has a real thick airfoil so a pylon racer it will not be, regardless. My logic for using the .50 SX was: I had seen the Contender fly with .46 FX's and it performed very well. The .50 SX had more power than the .46, it fit the same foot print as the .46, and I really wanted to try the engine. Since I enjoy building airplanes and feel I do a good job at it, but I'm basically lazy, and really did not want to squeeze in the .61, I therefore opted for the .50 SX. Also you have a 10 OZ fuel tank and flying a .50 consumes less fuel and let's you stay aloft longer. Since you already have the OS .61 use it, it may even let you move the battery pack back where the plans illustrate.

Good luck, and enjoy the Contender.

Sledge_78 (Gerry)

foxflyr

I received a partially completed original (20 years old) contender about 5 years ago and completed it . Powered by a 40FP inverted with a functional chin scoop as per the original. No flap, straight wing. On the original you had a choice to build it with either a straight wing or with a dehedral break at the joint between the ailerons and flap.Since the wing was 90% done i just added a slight upturn on the tip though not as much as on the new edition. With the staight wing it has some adverse roll coupling with the rudder. You can do a roll using only the rudder, the interesting thing is that it is opposite the rudder deflection. It makes control coordination for knife edge kind of interesting.
I also stretched the covering over the fin and body joint not easy but it does look nice. If some one tells me how to attach pictures i'll try to post them

miamiflyer

My Feedback: (1)

fox,
of course we would love to see your contender.
hit reply and below the window for the text message is
the word "file" click here to upload.
than browse to locate the file on you computer and hit ok.

foxflyr

Here's the pictures ,sorry for the poor quality. The color scheme was taken from the JPATs trainer program

miamiflyer

My Feedback: (1)

NICE!
that is one sexy contender!
should've gone inverted with mine, looks so much better.
do you remember the covering sequence?
are you still flying it?
it must be 25 years old right?

sledge_78

My Feedback: (24)

foxflyr,

I had to look carefully to beleive that was the Contender. Nice job on the alteration. That inverted engine sure does look good. How old did you say that plane is? - 20 years?. WOW ! I am impressed.

Sledge_78

flmlm

Foxflyr,

I would have to agree with Sledge 78, the cover scheme on your Contender looks great and the inverted engine really adds to the overall effect. The front of the airplane looks so much cleaner. Well done!

Regards

foxflyr

Thank you for all the compliments. The kit was 20 years old, I finished it 5 years ago and have been flying it since.
For the covering,I started on the top centerline and applied the white on the left and right down to the uppercorner on the side. Then the bottom and lower side was done in dark blue. On the wing, I pre cut the blue ond white panels, overlapped them 1/8" and joined them with a trim iron. This piece was then applied to the wing,
I have included some more pictures. As a note the old kit only had a 46" wing span. The inverted engine was the recomended way to build the original kit. If you look at the pictures you will notice that the ailerons are driven by a single servo thru belcanks at the ends.

robert92679

Some of you might notice that back on page one of this thread I posted some pictures of my Contender in the bare bones. That was mid December. I'm happy to say that the plane is finished and had a sucessful maiden flight yesterday! No, it didn't take six months to cover. I got a bit burned out on it, and put it aside for about three months.

I'm still working on the right prop and control throws. The first flight was a 12x6 on the .61FX, and it was a dog. Switched to an 11x7.5 for the second flight and it was much better. Still too much aileron though, so it's a bit twitchy on the roll, but I'll get it tuned up.

I got the idea for the flag on the bottom from a thread over in the Tips forum. It wasn't too hard at all. Here's a picture or two...

Blade47

Very Nice !

b.bixel

My Feedback: (123)

I had an MDS .68 on my Contender with a 13 x 5 Zinger. Great performance to say the least!!!!

Regards,
Bart

flmlm

Robert92679,

Your project was worth the wait! The finished Contender looks great.

Regards
Mike

kqutob

Hi all
My Contender is almost complete and hopefully I can test fly it sometime in Sept.
I installed a .61fx thinking it will fulfill the potential of the Contender. However as I read these threads and spending sometime on the simulator I'm begining to feel that the .91fx might be the better choice. The .91 is the same weight and size as the .61 ??!!

robert92679

I fly mine with a .61FX and I don't think a .91 would be a good idea. It already has plenty of power with the .61. If you do go for the .91, my guess is you'll have to be very careful with throttle managment. Otherwise you might pull the wings right off.

sledge_78

My Feedback: (24)

Tomcat,

I built my Contender with the upswept wing tips. Protection against tip stall I'm told. I also used the Flap option. I think the Contender is the best plane to fly. Landings can be almost eyes cloed. I have tried the Flap once and we nearly did a loop. So I have not expeimented since. Here's a few things I learned. 1. Use blind nuts for the nose wheel mount. You need to place them before you cement the bottom cowl. This will prevent ripping the wood scews out and having large hole where the screws used to be. The fuel tank pictured on the plans is not the same as the one they specified in the instructions. I used the one pictured on the plans since it fit exactly as shown. The one in the instructions will take work to fit. I used an OS .50 sx and it is more than enough power. It fit in easy without paper thin cowls. I had to move the battery pack under the fuel tank to balance. Your .61 may let you place the pack behind the cockpit as spec'd. Some advice on the covering. I used 1/32 planking on the fuselage bottom and top behind the cockpit. It made for a very nice finish with the monocote and gives a very nice shape to the fuselage that the monocote cant do alone. With the thick airfoil the plane slows down and will land slowly without stall ot tip stall. It is the greatest. You will enjoy. Mine wweighed about 6.5 - 7.00lbs.

Sledge_78

Charlie P.

You won't need a .91 in the Contender. I'm swinging a 13 x 8 on an OS FS-70 4-stroke and I can take off of grass at 1/3 throttle.

Wish I'd set the engine on it's ear with the exhaust down below and not built the wing tips bent up. Foxflyr's is a much sleeker looking plane than my Frankenstein. The optional tip build is/was supposed to prevent a Dutch Roll (a yaw and sudden snap roll in the opposite direction of an intended roll). One in our club has the regular tips and shows no tendency to do that.



I added 30% more rudder area and made the scoop functional with a 1/4" x 3/4" half cylindrical opening. Doesn't really need the apron flap but it is fun to play with. Nice, rugged model.

(Say, how do you add images so they are thumbnails that can be enlarged as needed instead of poster sized to begin with - sorry.)

Bax

My Feedback: (11)

The upswept wingtip option on the Top Flite Contender is to eliminate adverse roll coupling when you apply rudder. With the standard tips, you'll get left roll when you apply right rudder, and vice-versa. The upswept tips give you proverse coupling: right rudder results in a right roll, and vice-versa. The model has not had a problem with tip stalls, regardless of the type of wingtips installed.

Daniel-EL

My Feedback: (9)

Charlie P., Like this:

Aerobatx

My Feedback: (1)

bump
I received my ki bought off RCU today, and plan on buildingmine soon.
Has anyone ever built the wingtips drooped insead o upswept?