New Mini Xcalibur
09-20-2015, 11:59 PM
#1
Thread Starter
New Mini Xcalibur
The Mini Xcalibur was shown for the first time at JP over the weekend. Its 1320mm span and this one is a little over 3kg dry.
The project has been ongoing for a while and this is the latest prototype which will complete flight testing in the next few weeks.
Its going to come with electric gear, still has a moulded tank. Its likely it will be sold as a complete boxed package.
The sale release is expected just after Xmas, so early in 2016.
The project has been ongoing for a while and this is the latest prototype which will complete flight testing in the next few weeks.
Its going to come with electric gear, still has a moulded tank. Its likely it will be sold as a complete boxed package.
The sale release is expected just after Xmas, so early in 2016.
09-21-2015, 03:19 AM
#3
Thread Starter
Its cute! Too small for the 45, 35N is the max. This is a Sprite 35 (prototype for the M-35)
I'll also fly it with a JetCat P-20 as people already say it would be too small...The airframe is like all the Xcalibur's and low drag.
I'll also fly it with a JetCat P-20 as people already say it would be too small...The airframe is like all the Xcalibur's and low drag.
09-21-2015, 10:12 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should do well on P20
If this is kept light it should fly very well on a p20 the wingspan being 1320 is very close to the vortex 32 which is one of the best jets for a p20 at 1300 span. The vortex does not have retracts or flaps so the xcalibur will probably be a little heavier. It is now almost impossible to buy a vortex 32 so this small xcalibur should fill the gap nicely if it is not priced too high
09-21-2015, 10:32 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming that this will be built in the same way as the other xcaliburs it will be far better than the vortex as you cannot easily disassemble the vortex. The xcalibur should hopefully give the option to leave it built or just take the wings off
would also be nice to see this as an option with all your servos and leads in the box sort of add turbine, receiver and fly
would also be nice to see this as an option with all your servos and leads in the box sort of add turbine, receiver and fly
09-22-2015, 12:29 PM
#10
Thread Starter
The original plan was EDF or small turbine, but the inlets were too restrictive. Like anything if you wanted to hack it about it might work.
Dave
Dave
09-22-2015, 11:04 PM
#14
Thread Starter
Scheme like this Red Arrows and a sports scheme.
Each size has its own scheme, sorry its not possible to get a mass produced kit in a huge range of different schemes. I had someone at JetPower wanted a middle size in the Plus green red scheme.
Luckily its not difficult to do yourself. We have people swapping trim around to make theirs unique
Dave
Each size has its own scheme, sorry its not possible to get a mass produced kit in a huge range of different schemes. I had someone at JetPower wanted a middle size in the Plus green red scheme.
Luckily its not difficult to do yourself. We have people swapping trim around to make theirs unique
Dave
09-23-2015, 01:20 AM
#16
Thread Starter
Mike I'm sure you will do well with that too. Like me you will be order #1 its going to be a great grab and fly jet
Good to see you and talk about the other projects
Dave
Good to see you and talk about the other projects
Dave
09-23-2015, 12:51 PM
#18
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't see flaps in the photo. Which makes me ask how I would slow this sleek low-drag plane enough to land on our short mown strip in a farmer's field after coming in over a tree-lined boundary. Crow isn't an option, though split rudder braking would help.
My Wren 44 Nano now uses both - which it didn't need when operating from Chivenor airfield's tarmac runways, but does now that it flies in rural Cheshire skies and not over a Devon military airfield any more.
Gordon
My Wren 44 Nano now uses both - which it didn't need when operating from Chivenor airfield's tarmac runways, but does now that it flies in rural Cheshire skies and not over a Devon military airfield any more.
Gordon
09-25-2015, 02:52 AM
#21
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dave do you know the weight of it with its current setup?
I hope those wheels are larger than 2" for grass flying. i changed the standard wheels on my habu 32, from 1 3/4" to 2 1/4" wheels and the takeoff run reduced to less half without any change to the power system.
I hope those wheels are larger than 2" for grass flying. i changed the standard wheels on my habu 32, from 1 3/4" to 2 1/4" wheels and the takeoff run reduced to less half without any change to the power system.
09-25-2015, 03:39 AM
#22
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the flap pic Dave. It's the same configuration as the Nano of course but a rather neater installation. I suspect that crow and splayed rudders will be needed at our field to control airspeed during our steeper than normal landing approach path.
The main gear installation looks neat too. Looking at the bent legs and the u/c bay mouldings shaped to accommodate them, is it envisaged that sprung trailing link legs will be made available?
Gordon
The main gear installation looks neat too. Looking at the bent legs and the u/c bay mouldings shaped to accommodate them, is it envisaged that sprung trailing link legs will be made available?
Gordon
09-25-2015, 04:03 AM
#23
Thread Starter
I played with different wheel dia and tyre width on my Habu's and I don't think it made a figs difference!
This has loads more area than the Habu, so will float off.
Will be flying it off our grass strip with varying grass lengths just like we did with the other two-it will be thoroughly tested like all the Xcalibur range...
Gordon
Will see, certainly airframe drag will be less than some, but wing loading will also be low. This one has one of the Sprite turbines which is quite heavy and the whole thing ready to fly is just over 3kg.
No plan for trailing link legs yet, again I tested the Tams legs on a Habu and they had good and bad tenancies. Overall I like wire legs, they are totally maintenance free and low cost! Made from decent wire I don't expect a problem with bending.
All of these questions can be answered after 30-40 flights...
This has loads more area than the Habu, so will float off.
Will be flying it off our grass strip with varying grass lengths just like we did with the other two-it will be thoroughly tested like all the Xcalibur range...
Gordon
Will see, certainly airframe drag will be less than some, but wing loading will also be low. This one has one of the Sprite turbines which is quite heavy and the whole thing ready to fly is just over 3kg.
No plan for trailing link legs yet, again I tested the Tams legs on a Habu and they had good and bad tenancies. Overall I like wire legs, they are totally maintenance free and low cost! Made from decent wire I don't expect a problem with bending.
All of these questions can be answered after 30-40 flights...
09-29-2015, 10:46 PM
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dave
Does/will the nose cone come off in the same way as on the normal xcalibur or will in be moulded in with the fus. If it is removable which would be good I think please get a better fit than on the normal as a gap on a small plane would look horrible
Does/will the nose cone come off in the same way as on the normal xcalibur or will in be moulded in with the fus. If it is removable which would be good I think please get a better fit than on the normal as a gap on a small plane would look horrible