Hello guys, I'm just beginning work on my new Impact and have been reading intently all the excellent info that everyone has contributed. I downloaded the pdf manual and printed out the template for the tail former, however, when I print it out and put a ruler against the 100 mm scale it measures to 104 mm. I have made sure the printer is set to 100% scale.

Is anyone else having this problem? I'm trying to determine if this is a problem with the pdf file or with my printer. I can use a bitmap editor to scale this to 100 mm, but before doing this I want to make sure the scale drawn on the template is correct.


Thanks for your help,
Keith Black

Keith its most likely a scaling problem w/ your printer. You can probably also use the % feature when you print to reduce the size as well.
So print it at 96% of size, depends on your printer/computer whether you will be able to do this.

That's the same calculation I came up with, but at 96% it prints out at 95 mm []. It appears that my printer doesn't deal with scaling very well. FYI, at 98% it came out at 96 mm, go figure.

Time to scale in a bitmap editor!

Thanks,
Keith

Keith try a dry fit run. Chances are the part will not fit exactly. If your fuse is anything like the one I worked on, the part will be too small and you'll have to make it larger anyway

OK, I got it by reducing it on the copier (96% btw ).

Thanks,
Keith

Thanks for the FYI MTK, that may save me some balsa.

BTW, it calls for 3 mm balsa, does this seem beefy enough?

Keith

I used 3/16" which is 4 1/2 mm. You probably can get away with 3mm (1/8"). You can glass both sides with 2oz and that should be plenty. The glassed 3/16" part weighed about 4 grams as I recall so weight is really very minimal consideration. If you build the adjusto-stab, you might consider bringing the horizontal stiffener all the way to the post.

MattK

finally found the perfect spinner for my Impact and Abbra. It is plastic has lightened backplate comes in different colors I got orange for my impact. It is 3.6" diameter fits Impact/Abbra perfectly - it weighs 55 grams and cost $38. My tru-turn 3.5" is slightly smaller than front of Impact cost $75 with lightened backplate/menz cut slot and weighs 95 grams. my 3.5" carbon fiber spinner cost $75 and weighs 65 grams and has a funny shape. don't know how it will hold up to electro starters the plastic is very thin but it should work great on my zdz40 gaser hand start.

Hey pizza man,

Is this the big tease -- so what is it and where did it come from? In the meantime I will just have to keep using the 3.5" Dave Brown ($35 from Tower Hobbies).

CARF do a carbon one as well -- not sure what it costs as it came with the kit to Oz -- but backplate is a bit flimsy.

DG

I found that the former was a little undersized so I made up a new one that was a little larger and then slowly sanded it down until it was just the right fit. It took me about 15 minutes...

Pizza...where'd you get the spinner?

The carbon spinner C-Arf sells for the plane, the backplate is flimsy. Eventually lost the one on my Rev Pro as the spinner bolt fatigued and broke.

All the latest techno rc goodies come from euro - just put up some euros and you can get these beautiful spinners from ed at escomposites. he has many different sizes and colors in stock - they are in metric sizes and fit all the euro metric airplane kits perfectly. I hope people don't think I am trying to sell products on this list - I don't profit from these ed is my friend but he charged me full price $38

Two questions:

1. Why would an adjustable stab require more reinforcement?

2. How did you go about making the stab adjustable? Are there any examples/pictures on the Internet of and adjustable implementation?

Thanks,
Keith

FYI - There are two basic types of adjustable stab out there.

In one case you adjust each stab half with an adjuste in each half.

In the other case the adjuster is central in the fuse and it adusts the incidence of both stabs at the same time. (A bit like an AMT)

correction - these spinners are not plastic, they are painted in the mold glass

Hi Keith,
In response to your two questions the first being of why we should reinforce the fuselage near the stab.
Stabs that are the plug in type ie: on joiner tubes, usually have both the spar joiner tube and the anti-rotation pins glued in position so they cannot move ( fixed incidence ). By fixing these tubes in position, a strong joint between the two insides of the fuselage is established with the result of an inherently stronger area. However, if you use stab adjusters there are a couple of types that I know of. One replaces the straight through anti-rotation pin at the rear of the stab with two independent pins, one into one stab half and one into the other, this allows you to set the incidences independently of each other. This effectively means that the rear fuselage sides are free to move in and out ( flex ) under load. The other is the type that still joins the two stabs together but moves both stab incidences at the same time, still no fixed point at the rear end though. If I were to fit this system to an airframe, I would add extra formers to this area which not only act to increase the structural strength of this area but also help to absorb the effect of loads placed on it.
As for the types available, one brand I can suggest is MK which is widely available on the web.
Iv'e seen adjuster sets in use on several models with good effect but have been told that they can eventually wear with time, I'm happy to use more traditional methods and save myself a lot of fuss![sm=spinnyeyes.gif][sm=spinnyeyes.gif]

I'm no expert, but I hope this helps!

Andy P.

KeithB,

Here is a construction article that will provide some insight on installing an adjustable stab.

http://actionsports500.com/Pattern/P...nstruction.htm

Take Care,

Glen,

Thanks for the link; I built adjustable stabs on both of my Aries using the Bob Noll approach (which is what it looks like Earl used). My real question was what people were doing on the Impact to #1 make the stab adjustable and #2 cause it to be weaker. Perhaps Andy's reply identifies the issue, I guess because the Impact already has the holes in the stab for the rear anti-rotation pin, people must be putting the adjusting mechanism on the fuse rather than on the wing, as is done for the primary wing.

Will you be flying an Impact this year?

KeithB

Keith,

You are welcome...perhaps Earl's information will help someone else who reads this thread...

I am heavily invested in other airplane stock to try an Impact at this time....however appears to be a good choice and several will be campaigned in D6 this season.

Aeroslave must have a bounty on your head for venturing outside the family...

test

LOL

Actually I built a second Aries, fixed gear this time, spent a ton of time on it and had it flying VERY SWEET. It would slow roll like nobody's business. After Art Wagner flew it he told me it flew better than any plane he'd ever owned.

Then, with only one contest flight on it, and in my first Advanced contest, I had a mid-air with none other than Art in Hot Springs.

Having spent two winters immersed in building I was really looking forward to spending more time with the family during the holidays. Then the mid-air happened and I was again with no backup. Initially I considered building a Symphony (awesome plane by the way), but I was so bummed out by the mid-air that I just didn't feel like taking on another full kit build. That's why I chose the Impact.

Once I finish, hopefully I can keep both planes in the air and take a break from building. Then I'll probably be up for building a Symphony.

Hey, the AeroSlave guys can't be too upset, I won District Champ in Intermediate and Wayne won in Advanced with both of us flying AeroSlave planes!

KeithB

Hi All,

Does anyone have any installation photos of an adjustable stab in an Impact?

I'm to the stab installation part of assembly but will hold off....

I'm new to pattern planes and unfamiliar with a lot of things pertaining to pattern planes (IMAC pilot)


Thanks in Advance, Dave Stoik

Matt,

I've measured both the method that you've described above and Andy's suggested method and for me they do not come out the same as you suggested. If I shim the tail 33.5 mm then the height of the top of the chin cowl is closer to 40 mm below the centerline of the stab tube.

Are you sure these two methods are supposed to be the same? If so, please explain.

Thanks,
KeithB

Matt,

I've measured both the method that you've described above and Andy's suggested method and for me they do not come out the same as you suggested. If I shim the tail 33.5 mm then the height of the top of the chin cowl is closer to 40 mm below the centerline of the stab tube.

Are you sure these two methods are supposed to be the same? If so, please explain.

Thanks,
KeithB


If you blocked the flat chin area such that it is parallel to your flat surface, and the bottom of the fuse just touching the surface, then the tail post sits 33.5 mm above the surface. Then reference your stab at zero and wing at +0.25 with the fuse blocked up this way.

If you decide to lower the tail, say 10 mm or more, the model will likely pitch to U/C on knife edge. If you raise the tail 10 mm or more, then it will likely pitch to canopy. Remember knife egde pitching is largely a function of where on the vertical stab the CP is located.

Good luck

MattK

Matt, I'm not suggesting it should be changed to 40 mm, what I'm saying is that the 33.5 mm tail shim method you describe and the 30 mm below the center of the stab hole method that Andy describes do not come out the same for me.

Question on the the 33.5 mm shim method. Is the point of this intended to level the plane so the existing stab tube and anti-rotation pin location will be level, or are you moving the location that is used for the anti-rotation pin as Jason did?

KeithB