Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
01-24-2005 | 01:17 AM
#226
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: La Herradura Edo. de Mexico, 53920 MEXICO
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Mike: You will have them, never fear!! But I will be taking my time getting the Mintor 170 run in.
01-24-2005 | 02:20 AM
#227
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Kecskeme\'t, HUNGARY
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Hi,
I'm ready with planking the fuselage bottom side. I made wing and stab adjusters, and hyde mount and special engine mounting are in progress.
I'm ready with planking the fuselage bottom side. I made wing and stab adjusters, and hyde mount and special engine mounting are in progress.
01-26-2005 | 09:39 PM
#229
Senior Member
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Mike if the model pitches to canopy in the vertical up line (power on), you can "fix" it with another degree or 2 of down thrust. If it pitches to gear on same vert line, reduce the down thrust. Don't be affraid to add upthrust if you have to.
Poweroff downlines are "fixed" with wing incidence. Thrust adjustmenst will not affect the knife edge hardly at all, but wing incidence changes will. If the plane pulls on the downline, increase the incidence and re-trim elevator or whole stab if adjustable. Vice versa for pushing on downline. Also to assist pulls on downlines, aft cg helps.
Matt
Poweroff downlines are "fixed" with wing incidence. Thrust adjustmenst will not affect the knife edge hardly at all, but wing incidence changes will. If the plane pulls on the downline, increase the incidence and re-trim elevator or whole stab if adjustable. Vice versa for pushing on downline. Also to assist pulls on downlines, aft cg helps.
Matt
ORIGINAL: MHester
That's cool you guys are building a T2k and a Tempest. It'll be interesting to see how much different they are, and how alike they are in other areas. I'm really looking forward to some feedback. I know the Tempest isn't perfect, no plane is. But it's definitely competetive and agile. That fuse simply limits a few things. When you fix one thing, something else suffers a little.
I can say this about the Tempest, after darn near 1000 flights. When it's on, it's awesome. If you're off with it in just the right wind conditions, you'll have your hands full. But them most planes are like that. They have some things they do well and some not quite so good.
The snapping capability of this plane is awesome. It snaps and spins better than any plane I have ever flown, very precision and contollable. It's very stable inverted. It's very sensitive to rudder input, and all of the control throws are tamed on regular box flying, only cranked up for snaps and spins. It lands very easy for a pattern plane. It tracks well in 90% of wind conditions, and the other 10% you simply have to lead the rudder a little more than with other planes.
Which leads me to things I don't like, and couldn't really change with it. It's taken me a LOT of flying to find any real weaknesses, but here they are, in my opinion.
In certain wind conditions, especially turbulent crosswinds, it's a lot of work to keep the wings level. I believe this to be an effect of the radical taper. This is the trade off for doing other things so well. Stay on top of it and it's not an issue.
What little mix it needs is strange. While it pitches a bit noticably in up lines and somewhat on flat lines, it doesn't pitch much at all in knife edge. We're only talking 3-4% here, but it's noticable and if you want PERFECT, you'll need to get a little creative. The truth is it's very easy to just fly and ignore, it doesn't pitch nearly as hard as practically anything else I've ever flown. Again I think it's a trade off for the radical taper.
Since snaps and spins are such high K manuevers, and especially at advanced and above, I prefer the snapping capabilities and the smal touch of odd habit the taper displays. I took a little of it out on my new plane because I think it's on the very edge. Some people it may drive crazy, I guess. So far everyone that has flown it has loved it and marveled at how easy it does a lot of things. It's definitely a better plane than the T2K for the upper classes, no doubt. In sportsman, I'd prefer the T2K. Maybe intermediate too. But advanced and above, definitely the Tempest if I had to choose between the 2. Just fly advanced or masters in a high wind with both, then you tell me [8D]
I still love it, and won't get rid of mine. It's been the best plane I've ever had, hands down.
-Mike
That's cool you guys are building a T2k and a Tempest. It'll be interesting to see how much different they are, and how alike they are in other areas. I'm really looking forward to some feedback. I know the Tempest isn't perfect, no plane is. But it's definitely competetive and agile. That fuse simply limits a few things. When you fix one thing, something else suffers a little.
I can say this about the Tempest, after darn near 1000 flights. When it's on, it's awesome. If you're off with it in just the right wind conditions, you'll have your hands full. But them most planes are like that. They have some things they do well and some not quite so good.
The snapping capability of this plane is awesome. It snaps and spins better than any plane I have ever flown, very precision and contollable. It's very stable inverted. It's very sensitive to rudder input, and all of the control throws are tamed on regular box flying, only cranked up for snaps and spins. It lands very easy for a pattern plane. It tracks well in 90% of wind conditions, and the other 10% you simply have to lead the rudder a little more than with other planes.
Which leads me to things I don't like, and couldn't really change with it. It's taken me a LOT of flying to find any real weaknesses, but here they are, in my opinion.
In certain wind conditions, especially turbulent crosswinds, it's a lot of work to keep the wings level. I believe this to be an effect of the radical taper. This is the trade off for doing other things so well. Stay on top of it and it's not an issue.
What little mix it needs is strange. While it pitches a bit noticably in up lines and somewhat on flat lines, it doesn't pitch much at all in knife edge. We're only talking 3-4% here, but it's noticable and if you want PERFECT, you'll need to get a little creative. The truth is it's very easy to just fly and ignore, it doesn't pitch nearly as hard as practically anything else I've ever flown. Again I think it's a trade off for the radical taper.
Since snaps and spins are such high K manuevers, and especially at advanced and above, I prefer the snapping capabilities and the smal touch of odd habit the taper displays. I took a little of it out on my new plane because I think it's on the very edge. Some people it may drive crazy, I guess. So far everyone that has flown it has loved it and marveled at how easy it does a lot of things. It's definitely a better plane than the T2K for the upper classes, no doubt. In sportsman, I'd prefer the T2K. Maybe intermediate too. But advanced and above, definitely the Tempest if I had to choose between the 2. Just fly advanced or masters in a high wind with both, then you tell me [8D]
I still love it, and won't get rid of mine. It's been the best plane I've ever had, hands down.
-Mike
01-26-2005 | 10:19 PM
#230
Thread Starter
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Woodstock, GA
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Hey Matt, the up lines are perfect, the down lines pull to the canopy VERY slightly, like about 1-2% mix to idle gets rid of it totally. That's my typo and I see it now, I said up instead of down lemme fix it...
I did play with the incidence on this plane, I went as high as +1 full deg and low to about -1/4 deg. It likes about 1/10 of a degree to clean up any pitching and still break into a spin nice. When I had it down at 0 or lower, the plane would just hover. I would have to dial the throttle way way back, and it's idling at about 1500 right now.
But at 1/10 deg and higher, it breaks sweet. But any higher than +1/4 and it starts pitching both in down lines and in knife edge. So, after much play, I settled right about back where I started, 1/10 of a degree positive. Everything just seemed to balance there.
-Mike
I did play with the incidence on this plane, I went as high as +1 full deg and low to about -1/4 deg. It likes about 1/10 of a degree to clean up any pitching and still break into a spin nice. When I had it down at 0 or lower, the plane would just hover. I would have to dial the throttle way way back, and it's idling at about 1500 right now.
But at 1/10 deg and higher, it breaks sweet. But any higher than +1/4 and it starts pitching both in down lines and in knife edge. So, after much play, I settled right about back where I started, 1/10 of a degree positive. Everything just seemed to balance there.
-Mike
01-26-2005 | 11:16 PM
#231
Senior Member
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
when you go to +1/4 degree WI which ways does it pitch in knife edge? to canopy or belly?
ORIGINAL: MHester
Hey Matt, the up lines are perfect, the down lines pull to the canopy VERY slightly, like about 1-2% mix to idle gets rid of it totally. That's my typo and I see it now, I said up instead of down lemme fix it...
I did play with the incidence on this plane, I went as high as +1 full deg and low to about -1/4 deg. It likes about 1/10 of a degree to clean up any pitching and still break into a spin nice. When I had it down at 0 or lower, the plane would just hover. I would have to dial the throttle way way back, and it's idling at about 1500 right now.
But at 1/10 deg and higher, it breaks sweet. But any higher than +1/4 and it starts pitching both in down lines and in knife edge. So, after much play, I settled right about back where I started, 1/10 of a degree positive. Everything just seemed to balance there.
-Mike
Hey Matt, the up lines are perfect, the down lines pull to the canopy VERY slightly, like about 1-2% mix to idle gets rid of it totally. That's my typo and I see it now, I said up instead of down lemme fix it...
I did play with the incidence on this plane, I went as high as +1 full deg and low to about -1/4 deg. It likes about 1/10 of a degree to clean up any pitching and still break into a spin nice. When I had it down at 0 or lower, the plane would just hover. I would have to dial the throttle way way back, and it's idling at about 1500 right now.
But at 1/10 deg and higher, it breaks sweet. But any higher than +1/4 and it starts pitching both in down lines and in knife edge. So, after much play, I settled right about back where I started, 1/10 of a degree positive. Everything just seemed to balance there.
-Mike
01-26-2005 | 11:42 PM
#232
Thread Starter
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Woodstock, GA
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
canopy, but JUST barely. The more incidence I feed in, the more it pitches. If I stay at +1/10, the 4% rudder to elevator mix works both in level and knife edge, and verticals are fairly pure as well. If I go to a full degree, it pitches HARD...but spin breaks are on the dime 
Although at this incidence the thrust changes pitch pretty noticably as well. +1/4 deg is good all around with barely slight tendancies, but at +1/10 it seems to be a good balance between everything.
Whatcha thinkin? I'm all eyes.
-Mike
Although at this incidence the thrust changes pitch pretty noticably as well. +1/4 deg is good all around with barely slight tendancies, but at +1/10 it seems to be a good balance between everything.Whatcha thinkin? I'm all eyes.
-Mike
01-27-2005 | 02:49 AM
#233
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Kecskeme\'t, HUNGARY
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Hi Mike,
this is my home-made landing gear!
Attila
ORIGINAL: HuaChu
Nice work ata !
What type of the landing gear you are using?
Mike
Nice work ata !
What type of the landing gear you are using?
Mike
Attila
01-27-2005 | 01:00 PM
#234
Senior Member
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
That's what i wanted to hear. This is extremely close to neutral. On the next one, lower the tail about 1/4"-3/8" and use the 1/4 deg positive in the wing. It will eliminate canopy pitch in knife (or belly pitch for that matter) and will help spin entry. Keep engine offsets unchanged. This is nitpicking but would be worth the experiment. Any roll coupling?
ORIGINAL: MHester
canopy, but JUST barely. The more incidence I feed in, the more it pitches. If I stay at +1/10, the 4% rudder to elevator mix works both in level and knife edge, and verticals are fairly pure as well. If I go to a full degree, it pitches HARD...but spin breaks are on the dime Although at this incidence the thrust changes pitch pretty noticably as well. +1/4 deg is good all around with barely slight tendancies, but at +1/10 it seems to be a good balance between everything.
Whatcha thinkin? I'm all eyes.
-Mike
canopy, but JUST barely. The more incidence I feed in, the more it pitches. If I stay at +1/10, the 4% rudder to elevator mix works both in level and knife edge, and verticals are fairly pure as well. If I go to a full degree, it pitches HARD...but spin breaks are on the dime
Although at this incidence the thrust changes pitch pretty noticably as well. +1/4 deg is good all around with barely slight tendancies, but at +1/10 it seems to be a good balance between everything.Whatcha thinkin? I'm all eyes.
-Mike
01-27-2005 | 09:56 PM
#235
Thread Starter
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Woodstock, GA
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Extremely slight proverse coupling. So minor you can fly it pole-to-pole knife edge with rudder only, and the wing only rolls about 10 degrees or so. 1% mix is too much, so I left it alone. Basically, I guess the answer is no, it doesn't roll couple in knife edge.
Except inverted, it DOES roll couple slightly proverse when a lot of rudder is used inverted, like coming out of the bottom of a 2 of 4 triangle in a strong crosswind. None that I am aware of upright. I checked this afternoon. I wonder what would make it roll couple inverted, but nowhere else? Even in the top of a stall turn, with full rudder deflection, it rotates fairly flat. Could it be the sweep of the leading edge, or somthing more insidious?
Oddly enough, I find it needs less mix the more I fly it. As of today, I have 4% mix on the rudder to elevator and that's ALL, I increased it from 3 and removed everything else. I'm really not sure if it's just me subconsciously correcting or what. Like today, it was dead perfect in every attitude, except for the forementioned roll couple inverted. I'm beginning to think power setting and a 17.5" prop are playing a huge part. I'm flying a tad faster in the wind. Not screaming, but not as slow as usual. More constant I'd say. I think that's a good thing.
-Mike
Except inverted, it DOES roll couple slightly proverse when a lot of rudder is used inverted, like coming out of the bottom of a 2 of 4 triangle in a strong crosswind. None that I am aware of upright. I checked this afternoon. I wonder what would make it roll couple inverted, but nowhere else? Even in the top of a stall turn, with full rudder deflection, it rotates fairly flat. Could it be the sweep of the leading edge, or somthing more insidious?
Oddly enough, I find it needs less mix the more I fly it. As of today, I have 4% mix on the rudder to elevator and that's ALL, I increased it from 3 and removed everything else. I'm really not sure if it's just me subconsciously correcting or what. Like today, it was dead perfect in every attitude, except for the forementioned roll couple inverted. I'm beginning to think power setting and a 17.5" prop are playing a huge part. I'm flying a tad faster in the wind. Not screaming, but not as slow as usual. More constant I'd say. I think that's a good thing.
-Mike
01-28-2005 | 06:18 AM
#238
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: -.--.-..---..---.-.-.-....-.., FINLAND
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Hi all,
Just trowing my spoon into soup as well... Ata, why not shave a couple of grams from your hyde mount:
Picture tells more that my limited english can tell:
edit: here is my "hyde" for 160FX and similar version bolted on Syn 90 ARC (I´ll try this without nose-ring, rubber is same on both)
Just trowing my spoon into soup as well... Ata, why not shave a couple of grams from your hyde mount:
Picture tells more that my limited english can tell:
edit: here is my "hyde" for 160FX and similar version bolted on Syn 90 ARC (I´ll try this without nose-ring, rubber is same on both)
01-28-2005 | 10:00 AM
#239
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Kecskeme\'t, HUNGARY
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Hello Jatik,
my engine has rear intake and a Walbro carb, so I had to make such a big metal frame. But there is a good thing what I liked, the engine will be well mountable, you can see 3 bolts in easily reachable position. The hyde mount is lightened out (plywood), I think the whole assembly has up to 10-15 gramms overweight only.
my engine has rear intake and a Walbro carb, so I had to make such a big metal frame. But there is a good thing what I liked, the engine will be well mountable, you can see 3 bolts in easily reachable position. The hyde mount is lightened out (plywood), I think the whole assembly has up to 10-15 gramms overweight only.
02-01-2005 | 08:48 AM
#240
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: -.--.-..---..---.-.-.-....-.., FINLAND
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Jó estét kivánok,
Yes if your Aluminium part is 50 gr. then hyde part must be around 68 gr.
Petrol engine ... are you putting in ZDZ40RE or MVVS ?
Szia!
Yes if your Aluminium part is 50 gr. then hyde part must be around 68 gr.
Petrol engine ... are you putting in ZDZ40RE or MVVS ?
Szia!
02-01-2005 | 10:06 AM
#241
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Kecskeme\'t, HUNGARY
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Päivää!
Anteeksi, ***** minä en puhu suomea.
Jatik, you speak hungarian better than me english... You are right the Al part is 50g, did you measure it ? I will put an AW moki into my plane, its not petrol but glow engine.
Näkemiin!
Anteeksi, ***** minä en puhu suomea.
Jatik, you speak hungarian better than me english... You are right the Al part is 50g, did you measure it
? I will put an AW moki into my plane, its not petrol but glow engine.Näkemiin!
02-03-2005 | 09:54 AM
#242
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: -.--.-..---..---.-.-.-....-.., FINLAND
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
HI Ata,
Just Curious.... Your AW, is it like this one:
http://www.airworld.online.de/Deutsc...i_20/index.htm
or this :
http://www.airworld.online.de/Deutsc...0_HD/index.htm
looks like one strong motor... These are Benzin ones, is there also rear exhaust methanol available?
Regards: Jari
Just Curious.... Your AW, is it like this one:
http://www.airworld.online.de/Deutsc...i_20/index.htm
or this :
http://www.airworld.online.de/Deutsc...0_HD/index.htm
looks like one strong motor... These are Benzin ones, is there also rear exhaust methanol available?
Regards: Jari
02-04-2005 | 02:15 AM
#244
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Kecskeme\'t, HUNGARY
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Hi Jatik,
My engine is like the first, but methanol version. Rear intake rear exhaust, ~750g, with different Walbro carb.
I glued the tube sockets into the fuse and mounted the homemade wing adjusters. The vertical stab glued on too, and I started planking fuselage upper rear section.
My engine is like the first, but methanol version. Rear intake rear exhaust, ~750g, with different Walbro carb.
I glued the tube sockets into the fuse and mounted the homemade wing adjusters. The vertical stab glued on too, and I started planking fuselage upper rear section.
02-07-2005 | 03:07 AM
#245
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Kecskeme\'t, HUNGARY
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Hi,
I finished setting up the adjusters. The fuse rear is planked, it needs a lot of sanding. Before I apply the second sheeting of wing I should make the wing retainer hooks. Could somebody give me any idea how should I make them?
Attila
I finished setting up the adjusters. The fuse rear is planked, it needs a lot of sanding. Before I apply the second sheeting of wing I should make the wing retainer hooks. Could somebody give me any idea how should I make them?
Attila
02-07-2005 | 09:42 AM
#246
Senior Member
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Ata, surprised to see all the planking in the tail?! It's MUCH easier to take a whole sheet, wet it, and mold it around the structure without glue. Secure it with masking tape, leave it overnight to dry, then glue it the next day. MUCH nicer result with minimal sanding/filling.
You can actually do compound curves (engine cowlings and canopies) with this technique.
MattK
You can actually do compound curves (engine cowlings and canopies) with this technique.
MattK
ORIGINAL: ata
Hi,
I finished setting up the adjusters. The fuse rear is planked, it needs a lot of sanding. Before I apply the second sheeting of wing I should make the wing retainer hooks. Could somebody give me any idea how should I make them?
Attila
Hi,
I finished setting up the adjusters. The fuse rear is planked, it needs a lot of sanding. Before I apply the second sheeting of wing I should make the wing retainer hooks. Could somebody give me any idea how should I make them?
Attila
02-07-2005 | 10:19 AM
#247
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Kecskeme\'t, HUNGARY
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Hi MTK,
I have bad experiencies with your method, but maybe this was my failure. I feel the upper radius too sharp bending sheet around it, especially near to vertical stabilizer. But next time I will give it a try.
Attila
I have bad experiencies with your method, but maybe this was my failure. I feel the upper radius too sharp bending sheet around it, especially near to vertical stabilizer. But next time I will give it a try.
Attila
02-07-2005 | 10:40 AM
#248
Senior Member
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Okay
MattK
MattK
ORIGINAL: ata
Hi MTK,
I have bad experiencies with your method, but maybe this was my failure. I feel the upper radius too sharp bending sheet around it, especially near to vertical stabilizer. But next time I will give it a try.
Attila
Hi MTK,
I have bad experiencies with your method, but maybe this was my failure. I feel the upper radius too sharp bending sheet around it, especially near to vertical stabilizer. But next time I will give it a try.
Attila
02-07-2005 | 10:55 AM
#249
Thread Starter
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Woodstock, GA
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
Atilla, what I do with this plane is make a solid sheet and wet it and mold it to the sides, tapered from 4" at the front to about 1.5" at the rear. Then plank over the top. It is a little lighter and requires less sanding, but you're already done [8D]
-Mike
-Mike
02-07-2005 | 11:59 AM
#250
My Feedback: (7)
RE: Typhoon 2000 (TEMPEST) modifications thread
I used a combination of these methods on my T2K. I used the "wet sheet" method for the lower part of the turtle deck; I don't remember if I used 3" or 4" sheet. Then I planked the upper part because the sheet tended to split with the small radius there.
