advice on the Yellow Aircraft f-16
#1
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
advice on the Yellow Aircraft f-16
Hi friends
Recently I am about to finish a project that has been going on for years and this is the conversion to the turbine of the Yellow Aircraft F16.
The plane last flew in 2005 and has since been on the unused side. A few years ago we started this conversion including quite a few necessary structural changes.
After my partner passed away a few months ago, I decided that the end of this process that had been dragging on for years, would rise to the most initial importance possible in his memory.
The conversion was to the Kingtech K70 turbine.
The advice and opinions I would love to hear from you, are about the fact that I decided to do a setup, Taileron and I also wanted a Flapron, but it can not be done, because when the flaps are deployed,
then the Taileron also responds with no need, and I have no option when the flaps are deployed to disable the alierons in the wings but that the Taileron will continue to work.
So,I decided on a Taileron setup and flaps in the wings. what do you think?
Avi
Recently I am about to finish a project that has been going on for years and this is the conversion to the turbine of the Yellow Aircraft F16.
The plane last flew in 2005 and has since been on the unused side. A few years ago we started this conversion including quite a few necessary structural changes.
After my partner passed away a few months ago, I decided that the end of this process that had been dragging on for years, would rise to the most initial importance possible in his memory.
The conversion was to the Kingtech K70 turbine.
The advice and opinions I would love to hear from you, are about the fact that I decided to do a setup, Taileron and I also wanted a Flapron, but it can not be done, because when the flaps are deployed,
then the Taileron also responds with no need, and I have no option when the flaps are deployed to disable the alierons in the wings but that the Taileron will continue to work.
So,I decided on a Taileron setup and flaps in the wings. what do you think?
Avi
#2
My Feedback: (4)
Avi
Do you know if it is a "C" model or an "A" model. I would be reluctant to change the tail from the simple alum "hoop" to tailerons. The factory configuration produced a really sorted flying experience with the elevators and ailerons. A little programming to give some "flaperon" (10 degrees) at max elevator deflection on takeoff produced a smooth liftoff. The planform of the 16 allows predictable "high-alpha" activity, so flaps on landing were not necessary for that kit. I would focus on keeping it light, and maybe sourcing one of the latest generation turbines which are smaller and lighter than the -70 if possible. Good luck with your efforts, very noble of you.
Do you know if it is a "C" model or an "A" model. I would be reluctant to change the tail from the simple alum "hoop" to tailerons. The factory configuration produced a really sorted flying experience with the elevators and ailerons. A little programming to give some "flaperon" (10 degrees) at max elevator deflection on takeoff produced a smooth liftoff. The planform of the 16 allows predictable "high-alpha" activity, so flaps on landing were not necessary for that kit. I would focus on keeping it light, and maybe sourcing one of the latest generation turbines which are smaller and lighter than the -70 if possible. Good luck with your efforts, very noble of you.
#4
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Thank you guys for your posts, I'm really considering changing my way of thinking.
Are there any others who may have experienced the Taileron this plane, the Flapron?
Patrick... it is the C version, and it was flown with regular alierons and the funny elevator with the
yok system. I have changed to two close elevators servos.
now my thoughts is to leave the idea to use taileron but to stay with flapron...
Another issue... what is the best CG for the YA F16, there are some guys who flown it as an electric which in this case there aren't any CG changes during the flight,
but with turbine, with the fuel cells in front of the CG area, there are CG changes during the flight.
avi
Are there any others who may have experienced the Taileron this plane, the Flapron?
Patrick... it is the C version, and it was flown with regular alierons and the funny elevator with the
yok system. I have changed to two close elevators servos.
now my thoughts is to leave the idea to use taileron but to stay with flapron...
Another issue... what is the best CG for the YA F16, there are some guys who flown it as an electric which in this case there aren't any CG changes during the flight,
but with turbine, with the fuel cells in front of the CG area, there are CG changes during the flight.
avi
Last edited by bandit_av; 08-18-2021 at 06:55 AM.
#5
Yellow F-16
Hi Avi
I am in the same process. I will put an X45 into mine. During summer, the project is on hold, but I will continue in Winter. I will control it by ailerons/flaperons and tailerons, used as stabilizer.
Landing gear will be the HSD F-16 gear. Negative moulds were made for a central fuel tank.
Shalom,
Christof
I am in the same process. I will put an X45 into mine. During summer, the project is on hold, but I will continue in Winter. I will control it by ailerons/flaperons and tailerons, used as stabilizer.
Landing gear will be the HSD F-16 gear. Negative moulds were made for a central fuel tank.
Shalom,
Christof
#6
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Hi Avi
I am in the same process. I will put an X45 into mine. During summer, the project is on hold, but I will continue in Winter. I will control it by ailerons/flaperons and tailerons, used as stabilizer.
Landing gear will be the HSD F-16 gear. Negative moulds were made for a central fuel tank.
Shalom,
Christof
I am in the same process. I will put an X45 into mine. During summer, the project is on hold, but I will continue in Winter. I will control it by ailerons/flaperons and tailerons, used as stabilizer.
Landing gear will be the HSD F-16 gear. Negative moulds were made for a central fuel tank.
Shalom,
Christof
how you will do flaron and taileron at same time. I'm using the Spektrum radio and catching my head in thinking how to mix it.
Avi
#7
I will do normal roll control by the flaperon, pitch control by the stabs. Maybe when gear is down, I do a switchover to Flaps and roll/pitch by the stabs.
But it is still a long way untill I am there. Apologies I cannot help you about the programming, better ask some Spektrum user.
#9
My Feedback: (9)
This is incorrect. Charles who owned yellow gave a reward CG for the ducted fan because he new a UAT would be installed in the nose to add weight in the nose. The factory CG is tail heavy and very hard to fly if the plane is empty. So if you go electric the CG must be moved forward. Going turbine though the CG would be close to factory. I would CG it empty so the UAT gives it a little nose weight and you will be good.
No need to over complicate this plane. The ailerons are the way to go big time. The plane flies so much better with ailerons. I would mix in a little taileron with the flapperons down but that's it.
For programming... I have only used DX18s and 20s so not sure if your radio is capable. If its not then you dont really need flapperons anyway. You only use them for the scale look. F16s have no problem bleeding off speed and drag when flown correctly. The programming is cake though and is done with mixes if you did use separate servos for the elevators. All you do is make a mix say from ail 1 to elev 1 and put it on the flap switch so it only comes on with flapperons down. Then do the same for the other side. Very simple stuff.
#10
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
This is incorrect. Charles who owned yellow gave a reward CG for the ducted fan because he new a UAT would be installed in the nose to add weight in the nose. The factory CG is tail heavy and very hard to fly if the plane is empty. So if you go electric the CG must be moved forward. Going turbine though the CG would be close to factory. I would CG it empty so the UAT gives it a little nose weight and you will be good.
No need to over complicate this plane. The ailerons are the way to go big time. The plane flies so much better with ailerons. I would mix in a little taileron with the flapperons down but that's it.
For programming... I have only used DX18s and 20s so not sure if your radio is capable. If its not then you dont really need flapperons anyway. You only use them for the scale look. F16s have no problem bleeding off speed and drag when flown correctly. The programming is cake though and is done with mixes if you did use separate servos for the elevators. All you do is make a mix say from ail 1 to elev 1 and put it on the flap switch so it only comes on with flapperons down. Then do the same for the other side. Very simple stuff.
No need to over complicate this plane. The ailerons are the way to go big time. The plane flies so much better with ailerons. I would mix in a little taileron with the flapperons down but that's it.
For programming... I have only used DX18s and 20s so not sure if your radio is capable. If its not then you dont really need flapperons anyway. You only use them for the scale look. F16s have no problem bleeding off speed and drag when flown correctly. The programming is cake though and is done with mixes if you did use separate servos for the elevators. All you do is make a mix say from ail 1 to elev 1 and put it on the flap switch so it only comes on with flapperons down. Then do the same for the other side. Very simple stuff.
thank you my friend.
I'll do as your advice
Avi
#11
My Feedback: (57)
Avi
Do you know if it is a "C" model or an "A" model. I would be reluctant to change the tail from the simple alum "hoop" to tailerons. The factory configuration produced a really sorted flying experience with the elevators and ailerons. A little programming to give some "flaperon" (10 degrees) at max elevator deflection on takeoff produced a smooth liftoff. The planform of the 16 allows predictable "high-alpha" activity, so flaps on landing were not necessary for that kit. I would focus on keeping it light, and maybe sourcing one of the latest generation turbines which are smaller and lighter than the -70 if possible. Good luck with your efforts, very noble of you.
Do you know if it is a "C" model or an "A" model. I would be reluctant to change the tail from the simple alum "hoop" to tailerons. The factory configuration produced a really sorted flying experience with the elevators and ailerons. A little programming to give some "flaperon" (10 degrees) at max elevator deflection on takeoff produced a smooth liftoff. The planform of the 16 allows predictable "high-alpha" activity, so flaps on landing were not necessary for that kit. I would focus on keeping it light, and maybe sourcing one of the latest generation turbines which are smaller and lighter than the -70 if possible. Good luck with your efforts, very noble of you.
#14
Hi,
As much as I hate to admit how I know, Gunn is correct about the CG concern. Regarding 'several necessary structural changes', that tells me you're building an older polyester version? Do you have pics? If it's the latest version, the only structural mod I could consider necessary for turbine ops is adding the inlet spike. What else did you do?
As much as I hate to admit how I know, Gunn is correct about the CG concern. Regarding 'several necessary structural changes', that tells me you're building an older polyester version? Do you have pics? If it's the latest version, the only structural mod I could consider necessary for turbine ops is adding the inlet spike. What else did you do?
#15
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
Hi,
As much as I hate to admit how I know, Gunn is correct about the CG concern. Regarding 'several necessary structural changes', that tells me you're building an older polyester version? Do you have pics? If it's the latest version, the only structural mod I could consider necessary for turbine ops is adding the inlet spike. What else did you do?
As much as I hate to admit how I know, Gunn is correct about the CG concern. Regarding 'several necessary structural changes', that tells me you're building an older polyester version? Do you have pics? If it's the latest version, the only structural mod I could consider necessary for turbine ops is adding the inlet spike. What else did you do?
Yes, you are correct, it is the older 'c' polyester version, and Unfortunately we did not take any pictures of the process of renovation and conversion,
but, reinforcements were made in the area of the wing connections to the body, with the help of carbon reinforcements.
The engine bay was little changed to accept the engine and the tail pipe and two batteries.
2 servos, as the Skymaster configuration replaced the elevators yoke.
The big ducted fan inlet is split in two, since the turbine does not need such a large air intake, so the top is utilized in favor of adding a fuel tank.
I used the original saddles that were converted to jet fuel, and I added another tank so that together with the hopper tank there is about 1.9 liters of fuel that will be enough for about five six-minute flights.
I got a little carried away and put on a Powerbox and a Gyro, and in the meantime on the second flight I setup the Gyro gain at a level of 25 percent and the plane flew straight without any strange behavior.
There will still be a lot of flights to check and reset it to setup the right gain.
The CG was setup approx. 8.25 in. ,maybe a little more, in front of the hinges line.
It is powered by Kingtech K70 winch according to first flights seems to be a very good match up.
I'll take some pictures later.
Avi
BTW Shaun, I sent you a private message some weeks ago, apparently it eluded you and you did not seeWink
Avi