*** CG Wizard *** by Digitech
05-22-2017, 10:10 AM
#176
Sorry for the sarcasm. One note of importance. Making sure an aircraft is "level" is NOT necessarily a requirement. As has been said it should be placed on the scales in "Flight attitude" which may not always be "level".
At work our full scale aircraft is required to be balanced at 4 degrees nose down. That is how it flies in cruise flight, not level. However, most model jets will appear to fly level so that is an acceptable way to start. You must lift the tail of a tail dragger so that the aircraft is on the scales in "flight attitude". Why? Because if the tail is low on the scales, the weight bias is aft and affects the calculations. tail draggers do not fly around with their tails real low like on the ground. The CG should be verified for "flight attitude".
At work our full scale aircraft is required to be balanced at 4 degrees nose down. That is how it flies in cruise flight, not level. However, most model jets will appear to fly level so that is an acceptable way to start. You must lift the tail of a tail dragger so that the aircraft is on the scales in "flight attitude". Why? Because if the tail is low on the scales, the weight bias is aft and affects the calculations. tail draggers do not fly around with their tails real low like on the ground. The CG should be verified for "flight attitude".
Well Said! keep the sarcasm comming , all products that work where once based on sarcasm ;-)
06-05-2017, 08:32 AM
#178
You never said anything more about this and I did not see where it was addressed anywhere else. Which one are you trusting, old school or new technology? Did you get in contact with Digitech, and if so, what did they have to say? Did you ever get the CG Wizard and the standard balancer to match up?
Has anyone flown their aircraft since using the CG Wizard? The incorrect CG can make a maiden flight tough. I think it is important that this is addressed. when I get the CG wizard back I will take one of my jets we CG on my friend's standard balancer and put it on the CG Wizard to see what we get as an result.
Last edited by pcskyhi; 06-05-2017 at 12:09 PM.
06-05-2017, 09:31 AM
#179
I recently received my CG Wizard and it went immediately to a friend who is currently working on a BVM Ultra Flash. He did the same thing you did, He used the CG Wizard first and then used his standard balancer. on the standard balancer he came out very nose heavy. My friend does not trust the CG Wizard now and is sticking with old faithful (Dreamworks Model Products LLC).
You never said anything more about this and I did not see where it was addressed anywhere else. Which one are you trusting, old school or new technology? Did you get in contact with Digitech, and if so, what did they have to say? Did you ever get the CG Wizard and the standard balancer to match up?
Has anyone flown their aircraft since using the CG Wizard? The incorrect CG can make a maiden flight tough. I think it is important that this is addressed. when I get the CG wizard back I will take one of my jets we CG on my friend's standard balancer and put it on the CG Wizard to see what we get as an result.
You never said anything more about this and I did not see where it was addressed anywhere else. Which one are you trusting, old school or new technology? Did you get in contact with Digitech, and if so, what did they have to say? Did you ever get the CG Wizard and the standard balancer to match up?
Has anyone flown their aircraft since using the CG Wizard? The incorrect CG can make a maiden flight tough. I think it is important that this is addressed. when I get the CG wizard back I will take one of my jets we CG on my friend's standard balancer and put it on the CG Wizard to see what we get as an result.
as you say nose heavy? What is the difference?
sure you are using it correctly? .
tell us the difference how
much of ? Pictures of setup and data?.
most problems i have seen where incorrect measurements.
06-05-2017, 10:30 AM
#180
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recently received my CG Wizard and it went immediately to a friend who is currently working on a BVM Ultra Flash. He did the same thing you did, He used the CG Wizard first and then used his standard balancer. on the standard balancer he came out very nose heavy. My friend does not trust the CG Wizard now and is sticking with old faithful (Dreamworks Model Products LLC).
You never said anything more about this and I did not see where it was addressed anywhere else. Which one are you trusting, old school or new technology? Did you get in contact with Digitech, and if so, what did they have to say? Did you ever get the CG Wizard and the standard balancer to match up?
Has anyone flown their aircraft since using the CG Wizard? The incorrect CG can make a maiden flight tough. I think it is important that this is addressed. when I get the CG wizard back I will take one of my jets we CG on my friend's standard balancer and put it on the CG Wizard to see what we get as an result.
You never said anything more about this and I did not see where it was addressed anywhere else. Which one are you trusting, old school or new technology? Did you get in contact with Digitech, and if so, what did they have to say? Did you ever get the CG Wizard and the standard balancer to match up?
Has anyone flown their aircraft since using the CG Wizard? The incorrect CG can make a maiden flight tough. I think it is important that this is addressed. when I get the CG wizard back I will take one of my jets we CG on my friend's standard balancer and put it on the CG Wizard to see what we get as an result.
06-05-2017, 10:30 AM
#181
we have heard only positive results personally i demonstrated it lots of times.
as you say nose heavy? What is the difference?
sure you are using it correctly? .
tell us the difference how
much of ? Pictures of setup and data?.
most problems i have seen where incorrect measurements.
as you say nose heavy? What is the difference?
sure you are using it correctly? .
tell us the difference how
much of ? Pictures of setup and data?.
most problems i have seen where incorrect measurements.
06-05-2017, 10:35 AM
#182
I think the difference people are seeing is because of the zero measurement. After getting the distance from the nose to the mains, the zero point should be the main axles and not the back of the sensor.
There is no other reason for this device not to work and match up to the other methods of balancing. If the scales are consistent (they don't even have to be accurate) then it should work. I use the other brand and my planes match the hang balancing method every time.
There is no other reason for this device not to work and match up to the other methods of balancing. If the scales are consistent (they don't even have to be accurate) then it should work. I use the other brand and my planes match the hang balancing method every time.
06-05-2017, 10:40 AM
#183
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the difference people are seeing is because of the zero measurement. After getting the distance from the nose to the mains, the zero point should be the main axles and not the back of the sensor.
There is no other reason for this device not to work and match up to the other methods of balancing. If the scales are consistent (they don't even have to be accurate) then it should work. I use the other brand and my planes match the hang balancing method every time.
There is no other reason for this device not to work and match up to the other methods of balancing. If the scales are consistent (they don't even have to be accurate) then it should work. I use the other brand and my planes match the hang balancing method every time.
06-05-2017, 11:00 AM
#185
I used the wizard to check my balance as the manual and videos show I removed the 4oz of weight from the nose to achieve balance.
I have the cable port of the scales facing the center hub, not sure this matters but thought I would mention this as It places the type on front scale behind the nose wheel.
I have the cable port of the scales facing the center hub, not sure this matters but thought I would mention this as It places the type on front scale behind the nose wheel.
06-05-2017, 11:49 AM
#186
I think the difference people are seeing is because of the zero measurement. After getting the distance from the nose to the mains, the zero point should be the main axles and not the back of the sensor.
There is no other reason for this device not to work and match up to the other methods of balancing. If the scales are consistent (they don't even have to be accurate) then it should work. I use the other brand and my planes match the hang balancing method every time.
There is no other reason for this device not to work and match up to the other methods of balancing. If the scales are consistent (they don't even have to be accurate) then it should work. I use the other brand and my planes match the hang balancing method every time.
06-05-2017, 11:58 AM
#187
06-05-2017, 12:01 PM
#188
I was not with him when he did it, however, he said he did the measurements several times, one time following the video step by step. The Ultra flash CG is 230 mm from leading edge.The measurements were 813mm from mains to nose and CG to the mains was 74mm. The app initially showed the CG at 69. My friend moved his batteries/equipment around to get 74mm. When he put it on his traditional CG machine it was very nose heavy. ScaleCrazy stated in post #167 he had three aircraft that were nose heavy after using the CG Wizard but no one ever replied to his post nor did he say he rectified or figured out what was going on. I will talk to him and see if he will take pictures but he has already changed his set up so that it balances on his traditional CG machine since we have both have had great success with it. We are hoping to have great success with the CG Wizard. If You balance on the CG Wizard shouldn't it balance as well on the traditional CG machine?
06-05-2017, 12:11 PM
#189
I was not with him when he did it, however, he said he did the measurements several times, one time following the video step by step. The Ultra flash CG is 230 mm from leading edge.The measurements were 813mm from mains to nose and CG to the mains was 74mm. The app initially showed the CG at 69. My friend moved his batteries/equipment around to get 74mm. When he put it on his traditional CG machine it was very nose heavy. ScaleCrazy stated in post #167 he had three aircraft that were nose heavy after using the CG Wizard but no one ever replied to his post nor did he say he rectified or figured out what was going on. I will talk to him and see if he will take pictures but he has already changed his set up so that it balances on his traditional CG machine since we have both have had great success with it. We are hoping to have great success with the CG Wizard. If You balance on the CG Wizard shouldn't it balance as well on the traditional CG machine?
for now i can tell you , if you lift the uf untill tail hits the ground it will fall forward very slowly
did he write down total weight and separate weights?
love to see the front weight on that
measurement .
will show you pictures of our measurements and screen shots.
lets find out where it goes wrong
Last edited by digitech; 06-05-2017 at 12:15 PM.
06-05-2017, 12:14 PM
#190
06-05-2017, 12:29 PM
#192
Let me answer you tommorow , we got 2 ultra flashes flying for almost 7 years inwill measure both on the wizard.
for now i can tell you , if you lift the uf untill tail hits the ground it will fall forward very slowly
did he write down total weight and separate weights?
love to see the front weight on that
measurement .
will show you pictures of our measurements and screen shots.
lets find out where it goes wrong
for now i can tell you , if you lift the uf untill tail hits the ground it will fall forward very slowly
did he write down total weight and separate weights?
love to see the front weight on that
measurement .
will show you pictures of our measurements and screen shots.
lets find out where it goes wrong
06-05-2017, 12:45 PM
#196
yes I get nose heavy planes with the CG Wizard. I checked 3 different planes with all three CG machines. My buddy's Xicoy , EZ Ballancer , and CG Wizard. The Xicoy and the EZ Ballancer seam to be close in ballance results. The CG Wizard is nose heavy every time. That being said even at the nose heavy results the plane is still flyable. ( it's with in tollarance) I'll play with the Wizard again and see if I can get closer results.
compare weights please.
we are better of with data
is nose heavy landing with full elevator? Or a clcik on the trim.?
06-05-2017, 12:47 PM
#197
If so that is great!!
The only other thing could be the leveling of the model.
06-06-2017, 03:17 AM
#199
I was not with him when he did it, however, he said he did the measurements several times, one time following the video step by step. The Ultra flash CG is 230 mm from leading edge.The measurements were 813mm from mains to nose and CG to the mains was 74mm. The app initially showed the CG at 69. My friend moved his batteries/equipment around to get 74mm. When he put it on his traditional CG machine it was very nose heavy. ScaleCrazy stated in post #167 he had three aircraft that were nose heavy after using the CG Wizard but no one ever replied to his post nor did he say he rectified or figured out what was going on. I will talk to him and see if he will take pictures but he has already changed his set up so that it balances on his traditional CG machine since we have both have had great success with it. We are hoping to have great success with the CG Wizard. If You balance on the CG Wizard shouldn't it balance as well on the traditional CG machine?
So Ultraflash measurements :
Composite ARF recomends 220MM wich is to nose heavy
Most out there use 230-240mm
critical and high alpha 240-245mm so there is a wide range
on Daniels UF (the one in the video) 86mm
on my friends UF 87mm total weight 10964 Front weight : 640gram
The third one (my own measures 82 mm)
as you can see there is a wide range of CG between 220MM and 245MM as some seem to fly with.
easy test if you put it on its tail , tank empty uat full cockpit off . it should fall forward slowly.
if your CG is at 245 it will stay on its tail.
so you measured 69 and after weight change 74mm.
that would still suggest its tail heavy.
so tripple check your measurements since all these 3 models are flying with great succes , the 2 from my friends and mine fly over 7 years with these settings.
to be sure! : your measuring from the front where the wing is in the fuse backwards 230mm?
then from back of sensors to the mark where the 230mm is?
your outcome was 74mm? seems off ..
so saying this 87 on the wizard means 220-225 mm
so yout 74mm would be 245mm backwards
Last edited by digitech; 06-06-2017 at 03:43 AM.
06-06-2017, 10:01 AM
#200
So Ultraflash measurements :
Composite ARF recomends 220MM wich is to nose heavy
Most out there use 230-240mm
critical and high alpha 240-245mm so there is a wide range
on Daniels UF (the one in the video) 86mm
on my friends UF 87mm total weight 10964 Front weight : 640gram
The third one (my own measures 82 mm)
as you can see there is a wide range of CG between 220MM and 245MM as some seem to fly with.
easy test if you put it on its tail , tank empty uat full cockpit off . it should fall forward slowly.
if your CG is at 245 it will stay on its tail.
so you measured 69 and after weight change 74mm.
that would still suggest its tail heavy.
so tripple check your measurements since all these 3 models are flying with great succes , the 2 from my friends and mine fly over 7 years with these settings.
to be sure! : your measuring from the front where the wing is in the fuse backwards 230mm?
then from back of sensors to the mark where the 230mm is?
your outcome was 74mm? seems off ..
so saying this 87 on the wizard means 220-225 mm
so yout 74mm would be 245mm backwards
Composite ARF recomends 220MM wich is to nose heavy
Most out there use 230-240mm
critical and high alpha 240-245mm so there is a wide range
on Daniels UF (the one in the video) 86mm
on my friends UF 87mm total weight 10964 Front weight : 640gram
The third one (my own measures 82 mm)
as you can see there is a wide range of CG between 220MM and 245MM as some seem to fly with.
easy test if you put it on its tail , tank empty uat full cockpit off . it should fall forward slowly.
if your CG is at 245 it will stay on its tail.
so you measured 69 and after weight change 74mm.
that would still suggest its tail heavy.
so tripple check your measurements since all these 3 models are flying with great succes , the 2 from my friends and mine fly over 7 years with these settings.
to be sure! : your measuring from the front where the wing is in the fuse backwards 230mm?
then from back of sensors to the mark where the 230mm is?
your outcome was 74mm? seems off ..
so saying this 87 on the wizard means 220-225 mm
so yout 74mm would be 245mm backwards