Hi Sunny2 . .

Where did you get the Lazer incidence meter??? . . sure looks a cool instrument.

Cheers, JB

Got it from Great Planes Hobbies. Sadly, it is discontinued. [link=http://www.greatplanes.com/discontinued/gpmr4020.html]LASER INCIDENCE METER[/link]


As for the incidence problem, I took a zero reading from the canopy line and checked it 3 times against the wing and the stabilizer. The wing is zero and the stabilizer is plus 0.8 degrees to the canopy line. This is exactly what UAL767 found on his model. So looks like the easy fix on the wing is out of the question. Removing, adjusting and then replacing the stab is too much work for me. I'm going to send an email to Fedon to see if they have any production models that are true or if the jig is off in China so all Angels come with this fault. I'm not a jerk and would be happy to buy another at some discounted price for the sake of "perfection". I'll be sure to keep everyone updated. Too bad . . . it's such a great plane otherwise.



Joe

I would still adjust the wing . . it is easy to do. Then fly it and see what the thrust is doing, then adjust the thrust (also fairly easy).

You won't even notice the slight tail high flying attitude, and it certainly won't affect the flying (other than trimming better).

I wouldn't bother cutting the stab out . . just not worth it.

For what it's worth, My angel trimmed out perfect with only a very slight right thrust change. Elevator, ailerons and rudder are all trimmed dead center. No such problem with my version. On a calmish day, would get a good score in F3A competition. It flies great.

Cheers, JB

My Angel had its ailerons slightly off, that can be expected from ARFs I guess. I will be taking my CG further back and see it the trim on the elevator is level. I saw some great F3A planes and they are all level, drool drool!

Stuart, I felt Luigi was saying a half a degree off would be within factory, builder, and wood tolerances, but I believe zero is ideal on the wing and the stab. Did you feel the note indicated 0.5 negative on the wing is the norm? I certainly am not perfect at interpreting these things myself. I also think many folks may not see any deflection depending on their combination of weight and CG.

In any case, I wholeheartedly agree with Jeff, the plane flies beautifully regardless of the incidence trivia, and I'm hopeful that come spring time I will do just fine as a "Sportsman" in my second competition with this plane as is. Plus my mentor and master The Great Flyer himself Chris (a.k.a.)UAL767 is going to give me a lesson in "mixology" so I can fine tune my new toy, or so I hope


On a final note I was just looking over my graph and realizing that a 15 minute flight would be very conservative on my setup. My 10 minute flight yesterday only put 1917 mAhs back into the pack. Does anyone else fly their Angel for 15 minutes?



Thanks again one and all,


Joe






P.S. Just for the record here's a copy of the email I sent to Fedon:

I guess I can accept 1/2 degree from plans, although that is a lot for a laser cut kit. My question would be what is it supposed to be. If the wing is supposed to be say +.25 degrees with respect to the stab then yours would be off by over 1 degree. If plans are fro 0/0 then yours is just off by .8.

Jeff, any chance of measuring your incidences relative to the top of the fuse where the canopy sits?

Thanks,
Stuart

Just a quick check . . measured with a digital vernier from the top of the fuse (canopy base) to the top of the wing locating (anti-rotation) pin holes is:-

LEFT
Front = 53.03mm
Rear = 53.39mm

RIGHT
Front = 53.34mm
Rear = 53.71mm

Cheers, JB

JB this is most interesting ... very interesting for sure.

Thanks Jeff, so you have about .35 mm positive in the wing compared to the fuse. Close enough to 0. But what I was hoping for is that you could measure your stab compared to that
Any chance of even propping your fuse up level and measuring up from the table to the front and rear of the stab at the fuse at their respective midpoints (centerline of stab)
Thanks,
Stuart

EDIT: I found that the change in thrust line was not a good idea. I had someone more knowledgable than I run the plane through it's paces, and they found the thrust changes were not good. So I am taking out the change. My bad.


For those that are visually oriented here's data from today using the Hacker A50-12S with a TP 5S 5000mAh and an APCe 16x10 in the first graph, and then the same setup but using TP 4s 5000 mAh in the second graph. I ran out of data logger memory so the 4s test was cut short. Roughly 1100 watts/65 Amps on 5s and 800 watts/60 Amps on 4s. Anyways, just one more tid bit for the visually geeky types like myself.

As for flying, I was practicing the F3A AMA Sportsman Sequence and found the 800 watts on 4s was plenty of power to "get the job done", but accelerating in the vertical is fun too . I also played around with the motor thrust lines and added 2mm of up thrust and left thrust. My novice pattern skills said this was a vast improvement as I found the downline was perfect with no more pitch to the canopy, the same was true in the knife edge, the up elevator required for level flight was almost eliminated, and most importantly where before I was adding a hint of left rudder in the upline I now could hold the upline vertical with no rudder input at all. I'll wait to have my buddy the "Master" fly it out, but so far I like the improvement. I must be honest and say that I have not been as impressed with the Angel as I expected especially when I compare it to the Element which flew and continues to fly amazingly straight lines right out of the box with zero coupling issues. In fact I kept going back and forth between the two planes today trying to see if it was me or if there really was a difference and even my flying buddies commented that the Element seemed to look better, but then I'm certain that the fact I have so little flight time with the Angel is a big factor. We'll see how it goes in the coming months

So flew today and recorded some data on TrueRC packs. I'm keeping logs on the internal resistance of Thunder Power versus TrueRC packs. The TrueRC packs were less than half the cost of the TP packs and so far are superior. We'll see if that lasts . . .

First graph is:

Hacker A50-12S
TrueRC 5s5000 mAh Lipo
APCe 16x10

peak amps were right around 65 with one momentary excursion towards 80.

Second graph is a full run on:

Hacker A50-12S
Thunder Power 4s5000 mAh
APCe 16x10

interesting to note again that 800 watts is more than adequate for serious pattern flying with unlimited vertical. Not accelerating vertical, but climbing.


Lastly a note on the flying characteristics . . . first off I should mention that my recent changes to the thrust line were bad. When allowed to go from power on to power off in level flight the plane had a bad tendency to dive and turn right meaning my attempt to take out some of the down thrust and right thrust was deleterious to the overall performance. Aside from that I was definitely becoming more comfortable already, and rather enjoying the plane overall. I look forward to the day when I can fly the Angel as well as I fly my Element.

Sunny ... looks like my my Hyperion 4025-12 almost has the power as your Hacker, almost. I am really glad I bought it, the extra power is nice. Now time to learn to fly straight.

I've never owned an Hyperion motor or plane, but now you have me thinking maybe it's time to try, and let me add that the next video I want to see is of you flying. And be sure to show us some pictures around Kuala Lumpur. Not like most of us get out their too often, but I sure would love to see it someday Sadly today was rain and 20 mph winds so no more Angel reports


Joe

Sunny ... if you want to see how a drunken pilot flies then fine, I will put a video up! Hehehehe ... KL is a nice place but last 3 weeks been bad, rains back and we hardly get to fly in the afternoons. I put in 3 flights today and am getting used to the new motor. Something is amiss and I can't quite put my finger on it. Guess I am not discerning enough yet with this sort of flying.

Wanna see more of KL, try this:

[link=http://www.kualalumpur.gov.my/]Kuala Lumpur[/link]

This is my hometown but I work in KL now:

[link=http://www.tourismpenang.gov.my/]Penang Island[/link]

So that's a copy of the email I sent. I have not received an answer. Has anyone determined what the proper incidence design is? I have purchased 3 models so far and all of them have a stab that is more than +.8 degrees off from the wing and the canopy. I would mention that if anyone needs parts from a Red/Green design they should send me a PM as I have an entire plane dedicated to parts.


Joe

I've heard that the "design" incidences are supposed to be "zero/zero"...............................(obtained from the manufacturer) tho' I'd prefer a LITTLE wing positive incidence, say 0.25deg rel to stab.
0.8 deg the wrong way, seems to be in error of approx 1deg from the "norm" for a Pattern plane.
PS it's worth fixing if you don't mind doing a bit of "modding" as the a/c is VERY good! (or you can't get a replacement)
Regds, Bill.

I have had two Angel50 S's? Great model, although the first one I had was suspect, I don't think the fus was put together properly, as the wing/tail incidence was wrong, there is not much you can do to get it wrong when you build it,you can only slot the tailplane in and that is it. Needed to move the wing pins a little to get it right, also I also had an ESC fry on me, was most dissapointed,got power to the motor but suddenly nothing to the r/c, terminal! they don't stand any abuse.having said that, my second is perfect, straight out the box, both built exactly the same way so I am sure the first one was faulty as was the ESC.Incidences spot on, ESC ok (so far) ! Al.

I only ever use the internal BEC on Park Flyers . . I use a 650mAh 2S LiPo through a seperate regulator to feed the Rx. Not worth the risk on EP's this size and up.

Cheers, JB

I received a replacement plane from Fedon (Have to return the original) and the new one measures essentially 0-0-0 top of fuse, wing and stab.
Stuart

NEWS FLASH ! ! . . . How good is this plane ! ! . . in the hands of one of our local F3A pilots (John Tonks), this plane flew to a convincing second place in F3A (PO9 schedule only) at our recent South Australian Championships ! !

An awesome performance, legitimately taking one round off an Australian Team member flying an OXAI Aries with YS170 power who competed in the top 10 at the CAOCC event in Taiwan only a week or so prior.

PS. John is a great pilot . . . BUT the plane has to be capable too [8D]

Cheers, JB

PS. Just for the record, the wind speed was between 20 and 30 kmh. It was NOT calm.

Does that mean I can sell my Fliton Element now? Heheheheehee ...

On a similar vein, at the UK F3A British National Championships, Bob Ryan flying a Standard Angel placed 2nd in the Masters class, 1st and 3rd place where Peter Scoles and Alan Connelly both flying an OS 140 powered Protch Tojeiro, yes the same plane, it just goes to show you don't have to spend a fortune to compete at this level.

Mike

Hahahaha . . NO . . I think John would probably have WON with the Elemnt (BUT don't fly against him with the Angel :-)

Cheers, JB

I don't remember if I have put this up here but anyways, here are some videos of the Angel flown by one of the Singaporean guys, they are flying P09 I believe and the first one you can hear its a windy day:

[link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzyPoqQavQc]Angel 1[/link]

[link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ehpzna3FOcU]Angel 2[/link]

Jeff

Hanger 9 also make a digital incidence meter, its a bit more accurate than my Laser incidence meter which looks the same as the one Sunny has.

Mike