Well I could not make sense out of that posting but you shift things around however you like - it's your model
The "perfect pattern plane" is a moving target -and 90% a subjective thing -
You don't like my approach?
Your choice -
What is a skepticle? A deep bowl where you store ideas you don't accept?

Thanks Bryan for your input, there are a lot of us out here who appreciate it.

I am just putting an Integral together and will try your set-up. It makes a lot of sense and explains a lot about why my last 2M Patternship flew the way it did.

I used Bryan's method (+ inc. and CG fwd) on my G3.5 sims and it worked to neutralize the coupling on several planes. Joe Bridi specified a half degree positive in the wing on the Dirty Birdy (just checked the plans to confirm my faded memory). I have long considered his DB flights, that I observed at Lake Charles, as some of the smoothest I ever witnessed. Not saying that it wasn't mostly piloting skill. Never could convince myself to build in that (what seemed excessive) positive incidence though. Until now. Thanks Bryan.

Terry in LP

I know you don`t understand what I wrote Dick,
because you don`t want to ,,,
it`s not 90% Taste, perception,or subjectivity it`s 100% fact
a wing has to produce lift ,,so I add positive inc. in the wing ,,not the fuse ,,like your set up requires.The airplane don`t know up,down sidways ECT we do ,
it flys the same in all positions.
yes,, we do chase these things around for the perfect design,,,,,, Every two years,,
thats when the pattern changes. whats good for one set of manuvers may not be optimum for others so we
adjust the design every two years to accomodate this.
Still Scepticle or should I say Skeptical see I told you you could help with spelling LOL.
So Prove me wrong ,,, use my methods and report back to the list ,,,Scared ?
BY THE WAY,, down here in Cajun Country a Deep Bowl is for storing a chicken and Sausage Gumbo.[sm=tongue_smile.gif]

I challange you to try it 1/2 deg pos. to the centerline of the fuse start there,,and play around with it.
Airfoil thicknes ,wing design and arcraft weight has a lot to do with this.oh yeah you will have to take out some of your downthust also.
tinker with C/g a little, ,on the exact placement ,that may be a matter of tast I`ll concide to that
see if you can prove "my" unaccepted Idea`s wrong
then we can have a debate on the facts

Dick, I know your a tinkerer what could it hurt?,
Bryan
,,

I thanked Bryan earlier in this forum, but after seeing some negative posts I would like to thank him again for helping me out with his article. I had some other trimming charts, especially the "NSRCA Trimming Chart" was really helpful. But I came to a point where none of the trim charts explained what I was experiencing, that is the left rudder tuck. I asked fellow pattern fliers and other experienced modelers around here but I could not get a satisfactory answer and a solution. So I decided to ask the question here on RC Universe and Mike Pascale recommended Bryan's article.

The article made a great sense in general and besides, pointed my exact problem. So, I had no other choice but to try the method. I followed it to the end and VOILA! I have a perfect flying pattern plane.

As I said in my opening post I can trim everything out electronically but this is not the way it should be, IMHO. I should not be depended on the transmitter's abilities to correct the plane's faults. The faults should be corrected mechanically and transmitter should assist me in flight with special thingies like dual rates, exponential etc.

I am not against using the electronic mixing and all other stuff that transmitters offer. And of course if you can not correct a fault mechanically whatever you do, you have to use the transmitter. But if you can create a neutral plane with mechanical adjustments than it is a great satisfaction.

One last thing, I believe that experience is everything in life and we should all try to learn from other's experiences, so that, we do not have to invent the light bulb again all by ourselves. Thanks again to Bryan for sharing his experiences with us, they surely help someone, sometime, somewhere.

Alp

Bryan the Chicago Mafia is on board with your suggestions. We all have copies and are going to follow the rules.
The guy who is bombing this thread with negativity has done it time and time again. I think he get's jealous when someone has an original idea that isn't his. Forget about it and thanks for sharing. Mike

well -Iwon't even suggest you change your methods of trimming -it works for you
here is a point to consider tho:
by changing the angle of the wing - you do not change the lift the wing produces -as you noted . It simply changes relative angles to stab and fuselage
the wing will assume the correct angle for lift required -all on it's own.
Ask George Hicks -
I know you don't believe me.
Example:
IF a model weighs 11 lbs -the wing must assume an angle which produces 11 lbs lift -for level unaccelerated flight at a given speed..
IF you shim the wing up 1/2 degree- it STILL flies at that angle.
However all the rest of the airframe now is at 1/2 degree LESS angle to direction of flight. (this is why you reduce your downthrust )
The horizontal stab (elevator) must reduce effective angle to maintain the necessary downforce for the new wing position.
Changing the CG changes ALL of this.
Except
the wing always flies at the same angle if the speed and weight (effective weight ) is a constant.

Thanks Alp, i`m glad you had good results
And lord knows I want to stay in good with the Mafia
thanks Guys
Hey it was just a challenge to Dick , if I handed him a perfectly trimmed airplane he would say it could not be done
I like debating with him ,,,and he likes a good debate ,I don`t take it personal
I know George Hicks a real aero,,dynamist[X(] unlike me
But he still has not produce an airplane for pattern,, just foamies
Look!,, I`m glad I could help those I have ,,,
the proof is in the results.
Bryan

As long as you are happy, what else matters - You were a bit off about bro Hicks tho - he really does understand pattern models
very well-

Hey Dick
I know George ..I know he understands Pattern models very nice, and highly educated guy
just a little tounge -in -cheek.
btw .where is his trim guide
George scolded me pretty hard a few years back ,,,{well deserved I might add }
on talking above my pay
Everyone has methods that works for them
I`m just trying to share some methods that work for everyone
Dick I know you like to tinker ,,,just thought you would be interested in proving me wrong
with the results
Bryan

Hey everyone!

Alpbak It's been a good thing for all of us that you asked your question and your timing for me was perfect just finished a Genesis with the same symptoms you had. I haven't had the time to go into trimming mode yet but that will happen (actually haven't been flying much this Spring 5 flights on three different occasions engine issues). I'm looking forward to getting the plane sorted out.

Dean P. your detailed writings ( in FM over the years) have laid the gound work for things beginning to jell for me now having looked over Bryan's steps Thanks!!

Bryan we're looking forward to the video. I hope it's availablility is made well known up here in flyover country we don't find out about things until they are out of stock or out of production...

Thanks to all of you!!!
Tom

Nothing to proove , you like the results you get, using your own approach.
As for tinkering ? well you could say that -
I tinkered my way into some commercially sucessful machine design patents and some models which sold well for many years - A tinkerer ? sure , why not

Tom, I want to wish you luck with the Genesis. I understand a few modifications were done since the original production runs, so hopefully you will have better luck than we did with it. Unfortunately there are still inherent problems with the Genesis design that prevent it from achieving a truly mix-free setup (just ask the Chicago Mafia about their experiences) If you get it down to 5-7% rudder - up elevator (and that's all), you're doing really well. Everyone I know who has ever flown a Genesis complains that it drops the nose on rudder input.

Dick, I've had many a conversation with Bryan regarding aerodynamics and trimming (in fact, I edited the K-Factor article for him), and he does not disagree that the angle of attack required to produce lift at a given speed does not change regardless of whether using a 0-0 setup or a positive incidence setup. One thing I have seen and felt from flying his designs with his setups is that his airplanes roll, snap, spin, and lock into a line better than any other planes I've ever seen or flown, with less effort by the pilot, and throughout the maneuvering speed range. Whether at 1/4 or 3/4 throttle, the plane performs the same, only requiring the pilot to adjust the timing of control inputs. I wouldn't knock a 0-0 setup, to each his own... but I'd never fly one again after flying Bryan's.

Matt

Hey Matt

Hmmm - my Genesis is from that same batch as the Chicago guys - I'll fix what I can and mix a little and finish the Impact... Thanks for the heads up.

Tom

Make sure the fuselage is straight, too!

Personally i really likes Bryan's setup. My Black Magic was setup that way, and I've always set my planes up like that. Everyone who has flown my stuff loves the 1/2 degree positive and the zero stab with a forward CG. Works really well too. Anyone who saw my black magic fly last year at Crowley will agree that airplane was DIALED in. Bryan just put into a very nice article on how to get there...which is a great reference tool,

Arch

Ahhh, trimming and aerodynamics: instant bloodbath [8D]

I'm with Bryan and Arch on this one. We all sorta traded notes last fall, and figured out we've been doing it for a long time now. But since I have been so focused on these Black Magics, I wasn't sure if it really applied to ther planes or just my stuff. I am really glad to discover that there really is a common ground. I really like the way Bryan spelled it out, that's experience right there. And guts, knowing he was going to take a beating over it, and doing it anyway! Here's your official "atta boy" Bryan!

Oh and the subject at hand? You have the info. Use it or don't, it's up to you. What do you have to lose? If it doesn't work what have you lost? I bet it works though

Of course all planes behave a little differently....but not THAT differently. Although if you like the way the 0-0 set up feels fly it that way. Personally it feels really loose and goosey (technical term LOL) to me. I'll take this method with this plane right now, and if I change my mind down the road? So be it. But it's going to take a lot.....

-Mike

No, no. The main attaboy comes from what he made one well known pilot do at the World's in France. When Dino told me, I nearly fell out of my chair laughing. Dean said " he is my new hero" and you know..... I would have to agree. I still chuckle to myself when I think about it

MattK

I've heard the stories

Funny stuff! I hope we are able to get the worlds here in -11....that would be so cool!

-Mike

Oh No !![X(]
Now they are telling stories about me
Dean should have used the Vagas slogan ,,what happens in France Stays in France

Yeah, after a phone conversation With Mike a while Back,
and,trading Notes, he and Arch took some measurements ,, we realized he and Arch was already doing 90% of what I shared with Mike
Mike just liked to sneak up on it slower
very carfull that guy,,
All airplanes are the same in theory But,
like I said before ,,,
wing airfoils ,,stab size ,aircraft weight ,,,all make you do some fine tuning.
thin, or smaller wings usually take more pos Inc. than large or thick airfoiled wings
to meet the great demands todays modern Pattern planes require,,What a dance!!!
Hopfully this will spark intrest in a young R/C fanatic <Like Dean did for Me >
and that young man will be able to explain it even better after his years in the Barrel.
May-be Goerge Hicks will help us here<so we all can understand it >

Now it`s time to tell a story on Dean
back in 1988 I went to my first Nat`s to watch and to meet 2 of my pattern Hero`s Dean Pappas
and Ron Van putte ,,what they wrote every month was "my" handbook.
I had in hand the second pattern airplane I designed,, the Storm "2stroke" with a YS60 short stroke
I looked Dean up and he took the time to look over my airplane and seemed impressed.
I was so excited, he seemed to like it ,and told me I did a Fine job he was amazed at the weight and design overall
asked me to publish the plans for FM I thought I had won the lottery !!! and did publish the Storm 4 stroke version at a later date.
I later took 3`rd in the old Sportsman pattern class at the 92 N-pac with that design. Raiko Potter won that year.
These things did more to motivate me to design and build than any thing until Jason Shulman smiled the first time he flew My Patriot in 98.
Positive feedback can do wonders for us so ,,,having said that
this information I `m sharing is a product of great people willing to share what they know and motivating others,,,
to keep at it.

thanks Guys!
Bryan

Actually I set up Arch's plane...and the red one identical, only I hadn't really gone "back" and rechecked where everything ended up after flight trimming. They both pretty much came out what I thought might be nose heavy at the time, and a little more positive incidence in the wing than I had previously run. When we went back and checked, guess what? +.5 on the wing and a more forward CG. So to make a long story short....we were using that set up for a while but not really aware of it. It just worked better, so I think in my case, the method Bryan mentions is proven...by me, Arch, and a lot of others who have had the same experience.

Gets better. The plane I am flying now had some issues when I rebuilt it. I couldn't put my finger on it. Flew fantastic, but just felt odd and did some strange things in really oddball flight attitudes that none of the others did. I went back and did some checking recently (when it was rebuilt for the second time) and discovered I had lost my original zero reference line due to sanding the plug for the canopy. I discovered I had the wing at 1.5 NEGATIVE. After a few turns on the adjusters, voila, the heavens opened and it's flying like a dream. Case proven again?

So obviously the plane will fly fine with even negative in the wing, but it won't lock on and will do some strange things that you may not even notice unless you're playing with KE loops and outside loops with integrated 4 points across the bottom. Everywhere else it flew fine with practically no mix even...but in bizarre situations, it would couple pretty wierd.

I think what we are doing is getting SO demanding on these airframes that they have to fly with every wierd angle of attack, bizarre fuselage side loads, you name it....and we as a group never really played in this area too much before. And as the schedules have changed, so have the demands on the pilot AND the airframe, putting us all into really more aggressive and demanding positions than we were years ago.

Experience will bring you to the same place eventually, if you have an open mind and aren't afraid to try something new. But you have to be ever vigilant.

Do we have it all figured out? Anybody that answers "yes" is delusional...we are ALL still learning, still experimenting, still pressing....and this is good news to everyone flying pattern IMHO. In days past we'd sell an airframe if it didn't act right, and for a while, most didn't with a 0-0 set up. Some did ok.... but all we had to go on (in general, I mean average Joe) was the trimming chart on the NSRCA site. And it's wrong fellas

Now we have a new one. THANK YOU BRYAN HEBERT FOR TAKING THE TIME TO SHARE IT IN DETAIL!

-Mike

Yeah!!!..... DON'T let it get to your head.
But I'm still laughing