Anyone have the SAB Havok or Drake?
04-14-2021, 03:21 PM
#29
My Feedback: (37)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North Myrtle Beach, SC
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I actually balanced my Drake 1 7/8 inches further back than the manual states.
I just keep moving things rearward a bit at a time until it flew really well.
I just acquired a Xicoy electronic balancer and as you can see from these photos the balance is near perfect
The - 318 mm is the distance behind the mains wheels to where I added weight (at the engine area)
I just keep moving things rearward a bit at a time until it flew really well.
I just acquired a Xicoy electronic balancer and as you can see from these photos the balance is near perfect
The - 318 mm is the distance behind the mains wheels to where I added weight (at the engine area)
05-23-2021, 10:14 PM
#30
Just flew my Drake after a long time with a Rhino 170N and we had barely about 5knots headwind & I just couldn’t slow her down enough for landing, resulting in roll outs almost the length of the runaway.
Strangely the test flights were with a Rhino200N and she would land easier
Seems to be too much residual thrust with the Rhino on landing , anybody have this problem ? Any specific technique for landing ?
I guess using the canards as brakes isn't an option?
Will the Thrust vectoring help to get the nose up and slow it down a little more on landing ?
Nandan
Strangely the test flights were with a Rhino200N and she would land easier
Seems to be too much residual thrust with the Rhino on landing , anybody have this problem ? Any specific technique for landing ?
I guess using the canards as brakes isn't an option?
Will the Thrust vectoring help to get the nose up and slow it down a little more on landing ?
Nandan
05-24-2021, 01:09 PM
#32
My Feedback: (57)
This is an absolute MUST!!
The problem on mine was, I could not achieve nearly enough inward throw because the rudders were "rubbing" hard on the bottoms and would not allow them to go in enough. If I remember correct, you need at least about 50 degree deflection.
The problem on mine was, I could not achieve nearly enough inward throw because the rudders were "rubbing" hard on the bottoms and would not allow them to go in enough. If I remember correct, you need at least about 50 degree deflection.
06-29-2021, 07:10 PM
#38
My Feedback: (37)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North Myrtle Beach, SC
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would not suggest an airbrake on the engine cover. There is not enough structure there to take the air load with the air brake extended.
Also the mounting holes that the screws go thru the engine cover probably would not withstand the strain of the air load and in my opinion the cover will eventually depart the airframe.
The first thing to do is rebalance the airplane so it is not EXTREMELY nose heavy if the CG is at the recommended point as per the manual.
Slowly adjust the CG rearward until when you invert the airplane it is SLIGHTLY nose heavy.
The first time I did a CG test with the CG at the recommended point the airplane literally did a split S.
I would suggest starting at 1 in (25 mm) REARWARD from the recommended CG of where the wing meets the fuselage as shown in the manual.
In landing mode I have both rudders move inboard 2 1/2 inches as measured at the base of the rudder.
You will have to mix the Elevator to displace Down (at least 1/2 in) to compensate for the pitch up caused by the rudders moving that far inboard.
I could not seem to slow mine down either even with the rudders in 2 1/2 inches.
That was because I was carrying too much power and I only have a JC Cheetah 160 in mine.
When you bring the rudders in you have the reduce power to no more than 20 - 25 % thrust (I use a Linear thrust setting) on downwind.
Turning base leg I reduce the power to about 15 % and then cut power depending on my height as I am lined up on the runway.
Higher power settings than that with the plane in a descent will not allow it to slow to an acceptable approach and landing speed.
On final once the plane is in a slightly nose high attitude let it settle in on its own.
On landing I reduce the Canards throws and do not use thrust vectoring to make the plane less pitch sensitive.
It is difficult to get the throttle settings back when you are watching the plane but with a Jeti I could set voice readouts of throttle position when I am in Landing mode.
Since then I have not had any trouble getting the Drake to come in a reasonable landing speed without using all the runway
Two other thing to mention:
Since the rudders are moving in so far against the air load and you can only fit a mini servo I use Savox SV-1261MG servos which at 7.4 v are rated at 277 in/oz (20Kg)
I also set a mix when the rudders are in that they will not move further inboard with rudder stick movement to prevent overloading the servo. Left rudder stick moves the left rudder back towards neutral. the right rudder remains at 2 1/2 in inboard giving you left yaw.
I have over 100 flights on my Drake and since moving the CG rearward, bringing the rudders in and setting up voice readouts of my throttle position can slow my Drake down to acceptable and consistent landing speeds.
I do not do 3D ( only have a 160 in mine) and fly mine as a sport plane but the thrust vectoring is useful for knife edge, high alpha and REALLY tight loops and pull up to vertical,
Also the mounting holes that the screws go thru the engine cover probably would not withstand the strain of the air load and in my opinion the cover will eventually depart the airframe.
The first thing to do is rebalance the airplane so it is not EXTREMELY nose heavy if the CG is at the recommended point as per the manual.
Slowly adjust the CG rearward until when you invert the airplane it is SLIGHTLY nose heavy.
The first time I did a CG test with the CG at the recommended point the airplane literally did a split S.
I would suggest starting at 1 in (25 mm) REARWARD from the recommended CG of where the wing meets the fuselage as shown in the manual.
In landing mode I have both rudders move inboard 2 1/2 inches as measured at the base of the rudder.
You will have to mix the Elevator to displace Down (at least 1/2 in) to compensate for the pitch up caused by the rudders moving that far inboard.
I could not seem to slow mine down either even with the rudders in 2 1/2 inches.
That was because I was carrying too much power and I only have a JC Cheetah 160 in mine.
When you bring the rudders in you have the reduce power to no more than 20 - 25 % thrust (I use a Linear thrust setting) on downwind.
Turning base leg I reduce the power to about 15 % and then cut power depending on my height as I am lined up on the runway.
Higher power settings than that with the plane in a descent will not allow it to slow to an acceptable approach and landing speed.
On final once the plane is in a slightly nose high attitude let it settle in on its own.
On landing I reduce the Canards throws and do not use thrust vectoring to make the plane less pitch sensitive.
It is difficult to get the throttle settings back when you are watching the plane but with a Jeti I could set voice readouts of throttle position when I am in Landing mode.
Since then I have not had any trouble getting the Drake to come in a reasonable landing speed without using all the runway
Two other thing to mention:
Since the rudders are moving in so far against the air load and you can only fit a mini servo I use Savox SV-1261MG servos which at 7.4 v are rated at 277 in/oz (20Kg)
I also set a mix when the rudders are in that they will not move further inboard with rudder stick movement to prevent overloading the servo. Left rudder stick moves the left rudder back towards neutral. the right rudder remains at 2 1/2 in inboard giving you left yaw.
I have over 100 flights on my Drake and since moving the CG rearward, bringing the rudders in and setting up voice readouts of my throttle position can slow my Drake down to acceptable and consistent landing speeds.
I do not do 3D ( only have a 160 in mine) and fly mine as a sport plane but the thrust vectoring is useful for knife edge, high alpha and REALLY tight loops and pull up to vertical,
Last edited by leelevinson; 06-29-2021 at 07:20 PM.
06-30-2021, 03:42 AM
#39
My Feedback: (53)
I think that SAB missed that boat completely….shame really, while they make spectacular Heli, these planes sold on look….and then are either broken, parked or sold off (difficult as well)…..can they be made somewhat flyable y’a sure….but there’s much better out there.
And yes I have a broken Havok…..like many, what a waste of $$$$ that was….sure wished it was different, I was a very early buyer…
And yes I have a broken Havok…..like many, what a waste of $$$$ that was….sure wished it was different, I was a very early buyer…
07-22-2021, 12:58 PM
#40
My Feedback: (37)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North Myrtle Beach, SC
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dansy,
Sorry about your broken Havok.
Can't agree with you about the Drake.
I have 140 flights on my Drake and it flies and lands great.
Sab has the CG way too forward which is why people have trouble landing it because you have to come in too fast.
With the CG moved back it makes it easier to get it slowed up for landing.
It is a unique looking airplane which is what drew me to it..
I got a lot of positive comments about how well it flies and lands at Kentucky Jets last week.
My guess is the SAB recommended CG for the Havok is way to forward also but don't know that for sure.
Sorry about your broken Havok.
Can't agree with you about the Drake.
I have 140 flights on my Drake and it flies and lands great.
Sab has the CG way too forward which is why people have trouble landing it because you have to come in too fast.
With the CG moved back it makes it easier to get it slowed up for landing.
It is a unique looking airplane which is what drew me to it..
I got a lot of positive comments about how well it flies and lands at Kentucky Jets last week.
My guess is the SAB recommended CG for the Havok is way to forward also but don't know that for sure.
07-22-2021, 01:31 PM
#41
My Feedback: (53)
Dansy,
Sorry about your broken Havok.
Can't agree with you about the Drake.
I have 140 flights on my Drake and it flies and lands great.
Sab has the CG way too forward which is why people have trouble landing it because you have to come in too fast.
With the CG moved back it makes it easier to get it slowed up for landing.
It is a unique looking airplane which is what drew me to it..
I got a lot of positive comments about how well it flies and lands at Kentucky Jets last week.
My guess is the SAB recommended CG for the Havok is way to forward also but don't know that for sure.
Sorry about your broken Havok.
Can't agree with you about the Drake.
I have 140 flights on my Drake and it flies and lands great.
Sab has the CG way too forward which is why people have trouble landing it because you have to come in too fast.
With the CG moved back it makes it easier to get it slowed up for landing.
It is a unique looking airplane which is what drew me to it..
I got a lot of positive comments about how well it flies and lands at Kentucky Jets last week.
My guess is the SAB recommended CG for the Havok is way to forward also but don't know that for sure.
The price of being an early adopter…..if I was the only one, I would say I’m a poor flyer….but unfortunately I’m not the only one
07-22-2021, 05:58 PM
#42
Tone
Last edited by Agrav8ed; 07-22-2021 at 09:27 PM.
07-26-2021, 04:16 PM
#43
My Feedback: (37)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North Myrtle Beach, SC
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agrav8ed,
I agree that the SAB quality is very good.
As for the Drake the CG as per the manual is WAY too forward.
See my earlier post on where my CG is now it flies and lands great.
Can't speak to the CG on the Havok.
At Kentucky Jets some one came up to me after he saw my Drake fly and he said he will probably get one.
I told me that I would go with Electron Gear instead of the SAB gear as the SAB tires are pneumatic and I prefer solid tires.
I bought my Drake used and it came with the SAB retracts and brakes.
And I gave him my contact info and if he did buy one to call me and I would tell him how I set up and balanced mine.
Haven't seen a Tortuga or Lizard fly but glad they do well
I agree that the SAB quality is very good.
As for the Drake the CG as per the manual is WAY too forward.
See my earlier post on where my CG is now it flies and lands great.
Can't speak to the CG on the Havok.
At Kentucky Jets some one came up to me after he saw my Drake fly and he said he will probably get one.
I told me that I would go with Electron Gear instead of the SAB gear as the SAB tires are pneumatic and I prefer solid tires.
I bought my Drake used and it came with the SAB retracts and brakes.
And I gave him my contact info and if he did buy one to call me and I would tell him how I set up and balanced mine.
Haven't seen a Tortuga or Lizard fly but glad they do well
