Wing design question
08-21-2003, 09:38 AM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dubai, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing design question
Hey guys,
Can anyone give me an explanation about the different handling characteristics between an Extra, a giles and an edge wing design. I don't want a description, I already know what they look like, but rather how each of the different wing design handles (ie stall characteristics, speed, snap-ability etc....). Surely there has to be a reason why Extra's are the most popular aerobatic copetion aircraft.
Cheers!!!!
Can anyone give me an explanation about the different handling characteristics between an Extra, a giles and an edge wing design. I don't want a description, I already know what they look like, but rather how each of the different wing design handles (ie stall characteristics, speed, snap-ability etc....). Surely there has to be a reason why Extra's are the most popular aerobatic copetion aircraft.
Cheers!!!!
08-21-2003, 02:17 PM
#2
My Feedback: (9)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Midland,
TX
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing design question
Feel free to correct me if this info is not correct
It is my understanding that there is a definite difference in performance.
The giles wing plane form tracks better in large maneuvers
IE loops in and outside up and down lines level flight paths which is great for imac up to a point it snaps well but is hard to stop
not good for up line snaps in & outside the giles has and does do all of the 3d maneuvers but not as well as others,think about pattern ships I believe all of the competition planes have the giles type wing. The full scale giles was all the rage when it came out because of the roll rate I think it was 700 or so degrees per second also the full scale giles is very small airplane next to an extra, (good power to weight )
the edge wing plane form is pretty much the opposite
not as good for the level flight maneuvers snaps easy yet the straight leading edge is easier to stop and recovers from stalled maneuvers better I think,the edge type wings do 3d better than others
the extra wing is or is soposto be the best of both worlds
I realize that all of these types 3d and some one has probable won the nats with each different type
I personally don't like the looks of the edge or the giles wing at first glans these two planes look like an extra that had the wings built wrong
o the cap 232 full scale has an extra wing "copyed"
thats what Ive been told hope this helps and mybe some one else can tell us both about the differant airfoil types.
It is my understanding that there is a definite difference in performance.
The giles wing plane form tracks better in large maneuvers
IE loops in and outside up and down lines level flight paths which is great for imac up to a point it snaps well but is hard to stop
not good for up line snaps in & outside the giles has and does do all of the 3d maneuvers but not as well as others,think about pattern ships I believe all of the competition planes have the giles type wing. The full scale giles was all the rage when it came out because of the roll rate I think it was 700 or so degrees per second also the full scale giles is very small airplane next to an extra, (good power to weight )
the edge wing plane form is pretty much the opposite
not as good for the level flight maneuvers snaps easy yet the straight leading edge is easier to stop and recovers from stalled maneuvers better I think,the edge type wings do 3d better than others
the extra wing is or is soposto be the best of both worlds
I realize that all of these types 3d and some one has probable won the nats with each different type
I personally don't like the looks of the edge or the giles wing at first glans these two planes look like an extra that had the wings built wrong
o the cap 232 full scale has an extra wing "copyed"
thats what Ive been told hope this helps and mybe some one else can tell us both about the differant airfoil types.
08-21-2003, 04:49 PM
#3
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
13 Posts
Wing design question
Dean:
Generalities:
The rounder the leading edge, the gentler the stall.
Leading edge sweep-back gives the same effect as dihedral without making the plane act differently upright and inverted.
Tapered wings with no wash-out have a greater tendency to tip stall than straight planks.
The further forward the thick point, the better the aerobatic characteristics.
Please note these are rules of thumb, any one can be overdone.
Popuilarity? Easy. The Extra is an older design, there's been more time to build more models, and the Extra planes still look better (IMO) than the Giles.
And considering looks, I can't see why anyone would build a Cap. To me, that's one butt-ugly plane.
Bill.
Generalities:
The rounder the leading edge, the gentler the stall.
Leading edge sweep-back gives the same effect as dihedral without making the plane act differently upright and inverted.
Tapered wings with no wash-out have a greater tendency to tip stall than straight planks.
The further forward the thick point, the better the aerobatic characteristics.
Please note these are rules of thumb, any one can be overdone.
Popuilarity? Easy. The Extra is an older design, there's been more time to build more models, and the Extra planes still look better (IMO) than the Giles.
And considering looks, I can't see why anyone would build a Cap. To me, that's one butt-ugly plane.
Bill.
08-21-2003, 08:54 PM
#4
My Feedback: (12)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Frederick,
MD
Posts: 1,319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAP looks
As posted above by William Robinson "And considering looks, I can't see why anyone would build a Cap. To me, that's one butt-ugly plane."
And to me it's one of the most attractive. Beauty is still in the eye of the beholder. I'll be building a Carden 40% CAP over the winter. Seeing Matt Chapman fly his full scale is another thrill.
EXCAP232
And to me it's one of the most attractive. Beauty is still in the eye of the beholder. I'll be building a Carden 40% CAP over the winter. Seeing Matt Chapman fly his full scale is another thrill.
EXCAP232
08-22-2003, 08:28 PM
#5
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dubai, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing design question
Thanks guys,
I got a bit of information today... I was told that a straight trailing
edge, as on the giles, will produce more axial rolls, and the swept
back leading edge causes the wing root to stall first reducing
tiping tendancies. Better straight line stability, but not as great
to snap. IMO I don't like the look of the Extra's... i'm sure its
bacause every second aerobatic plane seems to be some kind of
extra. I do like the giles, but because of their lack of popularity, I
wanted to question their handling characteristics and because it
only seems to be the wing design that changes, I suspected that
that had something to do with it.
Has anyone flown a giles or at least seen one fly. Where I like
EVERYBODY flies extras. I want something different.
I got a bit of information today... I was told that a straight trailing
edge, as on the giles, will produce more axial rolls, and the swept
back leading edge causes the wing root to stall first reducing
tiping tendancies. Better straight line stability, but not as great
to snap. IMO I don't like the look of the Extra's... i'm sure its
bacause every second aerobatic plane seems to be some kind of
extra. I do like the giles, but because of their lack of popularity, I
wanted to question their handling characteristics and because it
only seems to be the wing design that changes, I suspected that
that had something to do with it.
Has anyone flown a giles or at least seen one fly. Where I like
EVERYBODY flies extras. I want something different.
08-28-2003, 05:25 PM
#6
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: kansas city,
MO
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing design question
I have flown the Great planes giles 202 and buddy was flying giles 300 we both had the same tip stall problem and it was a bad problem we tried using edge 540 wings on the giles fuse it helped some but did not cure the tip stall . I like the look of a giles but it just does'nt handle well .
I'm with you I'm tried of every other plane being the same .
right now Katana's have taken over our field, and I have one too. but even it will tip stall if you push it to far.
WYLDMAN
I'm with you I'm tried of every other plane being the same .
right now Katana's have taken over our field, and I have one too. but even it will tip stall if you push it to far.
WYLDMAN
09-02-2003, 09:46 PM
#7
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dubai, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing design question
wyldman,
I actually decided to go for an 96" Extra 330 and design a set of gile type wings for it. I plan on giving it a little more surface area to get a lighter wing loading and see how that works out. I will place an order at the end of the month from a company in Australia called Model Design ( http://www.modeldesign.com.au ) kits look good, but I haven't heard much about it. Fingers crossed!!!
I actually decided to go for an 96" Extra 330 and design a set of gile type wings for it. I plan on giving it a little more surface area to get a lighter wing loading and see how that works out. I will place an order at the end of the month from a company in Australia called Model Design ( http://www.modeldesign.com.au ) kits look good, but I haven't heard much about it. Fingers crossed!!!
09-03-2003, 12:41 PM
#8
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: kansas city,
MO
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing design question
I checked out the website . nice looking plane .
we finally figured out the problem with the giles ,the wing tips are'nt thick enough ,so the tip stalls before the rest of the wing does and the unexpected roll this causes make landing a little tricky.
And I'm with you ,tired of all the planes on the flight line looking the same , some times it's hard to tell one design from another.
So is any one up to the task of designing a new plane ? something a little different,Okay alot different?
WYLDMAN
we finally figured out the problem with the giles ,the wing tips are'nt thick enough ,so the tip stalls before the rest of the wing does and the unexpected roll this causes make landing a little tricky.
And I'm with you ,tired of all the planes on the flight line looking the same , some times it's hard to tell one design from another.
So is any one up to the task of designing a new plane ? something a little different,Okay alot different?
WYLDMAN
09-03-2003, 01:04 PM
#9
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
13 Posts
"Differenrt" plane.
IF YOU ARE UP TO IT the Duellist 2/40 is a very different plane, positive stability yet capable of pattern flight as delivered. With slight modifications it becomes neutral, and makes an even better aerobatic plane.
Here's one built by jamesg33 and his comment on it.
This was posted in the thread "Pica Duellist."
Bill.
Here's one built by jamesg33 and his comment on it.
I’ve attached a picture of my Duelist that I’ve been flying the last 2 years. I am having a blast with this plane. It was interesting and challenging to build and the flying excitement never ends. Even after 50+ flights my heart rate still goes up on every takeoff! And usually SOMETHING happens on every flight that notches up the excitement meter even higher. Here are a few random thoughts about my plane that may be of interest:
- Kit was built per the plans and instructions except I used 48 inch long sheeting for the fuselage instead of the spliced 36-inch pieces supplied with the kit. Easier to build and makes for a smoother, stronger, more continuous skin. Also, I used rectangular blocks on the rear portion of the nacelles instead of the triangular blocks in the kit to improve the looks.
- Covered it with Monokote
- Used single servo for ailerons and single servo with bellcranks for throttles (per the plans)
- Installed Spring Air retracts (strong and reliable, easy to install). I also added a fairing to the nose gear wheel well opening. The opening is huge and not clean aerodynamically. The fairing covers area not needed for the gear to pass through and is removable for gear maintenance.
- Dry weight is 11 lbs., including 8 ounces of lead in the tail.
- Used 8 ounce fuel tanks in each nacelle
- Initially had Tower 46’s installed but went to OS 46’s last summer. The Tower’s really pulled the plane fast, but I had difficulty getting them to run consistently. Had 6 engine failures, 2 of which resulted in slight damage to the plane. Since going to the OS’s the plane is a little slower, but I haven’t had a failure in 35+ flights.
- I use 10-8 props, and go through them like crazy. If you land slightly wing down with this plane, the prop will hit the runway.
Things I’d do different if I ever build another:
- I’d lengthen the landing gear. This is the one annoying feature this plane has. The short gear makes operating off a grass field a challenge, although it can be done. I usually have someone hold the plane back while I run up the engines, then have them let it go. This minimizes the ground run. I also hold a little back stick to keep the nose up during the takeoff run.
- I’d do a better job of hollowing out the balsa blocks forward of the CG (particularly the nose block) to improve the balance and save some weight. I got lazy with this one as construction time was long, and I didn’t expect the plane to last this long.
- I’d add flaperons. This plane lands fast and could use some help getting slowed down. I say flaperons and not flaps as I wouldn’t want to give up the propwash over the ailerons – it has saved the plane a few times when I botched takeoffs (rotated too soon, got the plane nose high and stalled) and was still able to maintain roll control and pull it out.
- I’d use a throttle servo in each nacelle for each engine. The single servo bellcrank linkage is a pain to install and is buried in the wing if something goes wrong with it.
Great thread! I wish I had read this stuff before I built mine!
Jim Greenwood
---------------------------
- Kit was built per the plans and instructions except I used 48 inch long sheeting for the fuselage instead of the spliced 36-inch pieces supplied with the kit. Easier to build and makes for a smoother, stronger, more continuous skin. Also, I used rectangular blocks on the rear portion of the nacelles instead of the triangular blocks in the kit to improve the looks.
- Covered it with Monokote
- Used single servo for ailerons and single servo with bellcranks for throttles (per the plans)
- Installed Spring Air retracts (strong and reliable, easy to install). I also added a fairing to the nose gear wheel well opening. The opening is huge and not clean aerodynamically. The fairing covers area not needed for the gear to pass through and is removable for gear maintenance.
- Dry weight is 11 lbs., including 8 ounces of lead in the tail.
- Used 8 ounce fuel tanks in each nacelle
- Initially had Tower 46’s installed but went to OS 46’s last summer. The Tower’s really pulled the plane fast, but I had difficulty getting them to run consistently. Had 6 engine failures, 2 of which resulted in slight damage to the plane. Since going to the OS’s the plane is a little slower, but I haven’t had a failure in 35+ flights.
- I use 10-8 props, and go through them like crazy. If you land slightly wing down with this plane, the prop will hit the runway.
Things I’d do different if I ever build another:
- I’d lengthen the landing gear. This is the one annoying feature this plane has. The short gear makes operating off a grass field a challenge, although it can be done. I usually have someone hold the plane back while I run up the engines, then have them let it go. This minimizes the ground run. I also hold a little back stick to keep the nose up during the takeoff run.
- I’d do a better job of hollowing out the balsa blocks forward of the CG (particularly the nose block) to improve the balance and save some weight. I got lazy with this one as construction time was long, and I didn’t expect the plane to last this long.
- I’d add flaperons. This plane lands fast and could use some help getting slowed down. I say flaperons and not flaps as I wouldn’t want to give up the propwash over the ailerons – it has saved the plane a few times when I botched takeoffs (rotated too soon, got the plane nose high and stalled) and was still able to maintain roll control and pull it out.
- I’d use a throttle servo in each nacelle for each engine. The single servo bellcrank linkage is a pain to install and is buried in the wing if something goes wrong with it.
Great thread! I wish I had read this stuff before I built mine!
Jim Greenwood
---------------------------
Bill.
09-03-2003, 01:24 PM
#11
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: kansas city,
MO
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing design question
Please don't take this wrong I like the duelist have flown one .
but it has limits that I don't like , no 3d, poor knife edge .
And this is the problem , maybe I'm asking to much but,
I want a plane with good ground handling for starters , then it need to have a good speed range ,now I'm not wanting to burn holes in the sky but I don't want a floater , it must be able to preform 3D and pattern like moves with NO tip stalling ,and knife edge flight with little to NO roll coupling, unlimited vertical ,stable hover ,and a wing loading of 24oz per sqft or less .I have flown alot of aircraft that have many of these qualities but one one plane had them all.
there was always one or more things I did'nt like about most of them. And what started all this for me was the fact that I have a dozen aircraft and only two or three that are favored, I just finished a katana flew it for a couple of months and sold it because it had a tip stall problem along with a high wing loading.
SO for me the search is on for the perfect airplane. And any idea's or sugestions would be greatly appreciated.
WYLDMAN
but it has limits that I don't like , no 3d, poor knife edge .
And this is the problem , maybe I'm asking to much but,
I want a plane with good ground handling for starters , then it need to have a good speed range ,now I'm not wanting to burn holes in the sky but I don't want a floater , it must be able to preform 3D and pattern like moves with NO tip stalling ,and knife edge flight with little to NO roll coupling, unlimited vertical ,stable hover ,and a wing loading of 24oz per sqft or less .I have flown alot of aircraft that have many of these qualities but one one plane had them all.
there was always one or more things I did'nt like about most of them. And what started all this for me was the fact that I have a dozen aircraft and only two or three that are favored, I just finished a katana flew it for a couple of months and sold it because it had a tip stall problem along with a high wing loading.
SO for me the search is on for the perfect airplane. And any idea's or sugestions would be greatly appreciated.
WYLDMAN
09-03-2003, 01:45 PM
#12
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
13 Posts
Wing design question
wyldman:
Don't worry, I wont be offended by an honest statement of opinion. I could get angry, or I might well shake my head at your lack of appreciation of an excellent airplane, but not offended.
Haw.
But I wish you much luck in your search for the "Perfect" airplane. It has yet to be designed, much less built.
Bill.
Don't worry, I wont be offended by an honest statement of opinion. I could get angry, or I might well shake my head at your lack of appreciation of an excellent airplane, but not offended.
Haw.
But I wish you much luck in your search for the "Perfect" airplane. It has yet to be designed, much less built.
Bill.
09-03-2003, 09:27 PM
#13
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dubai, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing design question
wyldman,
Great to hear, but what do you mean by not thick enough. Are you referring to the camber of the wing, or the chord. This is great information. Love to hear more...
THanks!!!!
Great to hear, but what do you mean by not thick enough. Are you referring to the camber of the wing, or the chord. This is great information. Love to hear more...
THanks!!!!
09-04-2003, 12:42 PM
#14
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: kansas city,
MO
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing design question
Hey Deanoo ,
I was talking about the airfoil thickness at the tip is to thin,
when we replaced the wing with edge 540 wings we found that the edge wing tip airfoils were thicker ,this kept the tip from stalling before the root of the wing did.
now before you get to excited we were able to tip stall the edge wing as well but it took alot more elevator and a high angle of attack to do it ,but then again you can do that to any airfoil ,the main advantage was the fact that the whole wing stalled equally and the plane did'nt roll over.
the key to making a giles fly is weight it needs to be as light as possible and then some . and after doing some reseach on the webb I fond that the full scale giles has this problem as well ,although the full pilots did'nt think it was problem and it's not if you like snap rolls.
If you are going to replace the wing I would sugest trying a wing off of an extra 300 it might give you the best of both ,I have not tried this yet but hope to build one over the winter,either that or going to become a giles bipe . I have read something about droop wing tips this is added to the leading edge from the tip into the root about 40% and it's a drop leading edge that suppost to help tip stall. maybe someone esle on this forum knows more about it
WYLDMAN
I was talking about the airfoil thickness at the tip is to thin,
when we replaced the wing with edge 540 wings we found that the edge wing tip airfoils were thicker ,this kept the tip from stalling before the root of the wing did.
now before you get to excited we were able to tip stall the edge wing as well but it took alot more elevator and a high angle of attack to do it ,but then again you can do that to any airfoil ,the main advantage was the fact that the whole wing stalled equally and the plane did'nt roll over.
the key to making a giles fly is weight it needs to be as light as possible and then some . and after doing some reseach on the webb I fond that the full scale giles has this problem as well ,although the full pilots did'nt think it was problem and it's not if you like snap rolls.
If you are going to replace the wing I would sugest trying a wing off of an extra 300 it might give you the best of both ,I have not tried this yet but hope to build one over the winter,either that or going to become a giles bipe . I have read something about droop wing tips this is added to the leading edge from the tip into the root about 40% and it's a drop leading edge that suppost to help tip stall. maybe someone esle on this forum knows more about it
WYLDMAN
09-04-2003, 12:57 PM
#15
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: kansas city,
MO
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing design question
Bill, I'm glad you don't offend easily.
the duelist is a great airplane and nothing sounds as good as a twin .
as for the perfect plane ,this may take a while .I have started collecting data on aircraft that have overall good qualities and then I can see if there is a common link in all the designs .
So would you mind posting the wing area ,weight , what are using for engines and the tail plane area's for the duelist ,I would appreciate it and if I ever figure all of this out I will be happy to share it.
WYLDMAN
the duelist is a great airplane and nothing sounds as good as a twin .
as for the perfect plane ,this may take a while .I have started collecting data on aircraft that have overall good qualities and then I can see if there is a common link in all the designs .
So would you mind posting the wing area ,weight , what are using for engines and the tail plane area's for the duelist ,I would appreciate it and if I ever figure all of this out I will be happy to share it.
WYLDMAN
09-04-2003, 08:41 PM
#16
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
13 Posts
Wing design question
Wyld:
You shouldn't do things like that to someone like me. Do you have any idea how many Duellist versions there are?
Four versions flying, a fifth one close, and two more in design!
The version kitted by Pica is listed as the 2/40 (Mk I). Dave Platt kitted the 2/40 Mk II for a short time, and plans are still available. The 2/60 (Mk I) was built as a prototype only, Dave Platt had planned to kit it, but it never was done. The 2/60 Mk II was kitted by a small consortium, only 50 were made.
Here are the current ones (and the close one, the 2/15.)
Version____Span__Length__Wing___Stab___Elev____Fin ___Rudder
2/15 Mk 0I_51.00__42.00____632.0__137.00__42.00__30.00__23 .25
2/40 Mk 0I_67.00__54.00____837.5__182.25__54.00__34.50__32 .00
2/40 Mk II_69.00__57.00____856.0__177.18__54.00__38.25__29 .20
2/60 Mk 0I_80.00__68.00___1190.0__262.50__81.25__78.00__50 .00
2/60 Mk II_86.25__71.25___1338.0__277.38__84.38__85.00__45 .82
The numbers for span and length are inches, the others are square inches.
In the wings are the 2/05 and the 2/120.
Did I say I like the Duellist design?
Bill.
PS: The 2/15 and 2/60 Mk II are to be available in kit form soon, from a New Hampshire company. wr.
PPS: Sorry about the column headers, vb codes don't allow a proper table. wr.
You shouldn't do things like that to someone like me. Do you have any idea how many Duellist versions there are?
Four versions flying, a fifth one close, and two more in design!
The version kitted by Pica is listed as the 2/40 (Mk I). Dave Platt kitted the 2/40 Mk II for a short time, and plans are still available. The 2/60 (Mk I) was built as a prototype only, Dave Platt had planned to kit it, but it never was done. The 2/60 Mk II was kitted by a small consortium, only 50 were made.
Here are the current ones (and the close one, the 2/15.)
Version____Span__Length__Wing___Stab___Elev____Fin ___Rudder
2/15 Mk 0I_51.00__42.00____632.0__137.00__42.00__30.00__23 .25
2/40 Mk 0I_67.00__54.00____837.5__182.25__54.00__34.50__32 .00
2/40 Mk II_69.00__57.00____856.0__177.18__54.00__38.25__29 .20
2/60 Mk 0I_80.00__68.00___1190.0__262.50__81.25__78.00__50 .00
2/60 Mk II_86.25__71.25___1338.0__277.38__84.38__85.00__45 .82
The numbers for span and length are inches, the others are square inches.
In the wings are the 2/05 and the 2/120.
Did I say I like the Duellist design?
Bill.
PS: The 2/15 and 2/60 Mk II are to be available in kit form soon, from a New Hampshire company. wr.
PPS: Sorry about the column headers, vb codes don't allow a proper table. wr.
09-04-2003, 09:01 PM
#17
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
13 Posts
Wing design question
Wyldman:
Sorry, I forgot the weights and engines.
2/15 - trying for 4 pounds. 10-25 engines
2/40 Mk I - 8-12 pounds, hard to keep under 10. Uusally come out around 12. 30-46 engines.
2/40 Mk II - Same, but has some structural revisions, easier to keep the weight down. 30-46 size.
2/60 Mk I - Don't know, sorry.
2/60 Mk II - 12-15 pounds. Major structural redesign, 12 pounds can be done. Engines from 50 to 90.
The average Duellist isn't too happy with four stroke engines, but only because of the weight. They tend to build nose heavy anyway, and the heavier engines make it that much worse. If the blocks in the forward part of the airplane are really hollowed it's not so bad, but most people leave a lot more wood than the plane needs. Picking the lightest nose gear helps too, you can save a lot of weight by using mechanical retracts instead of pneumatic. You still have a servo to work them, but you eliminate the air tank, valve, and the hoses.
So. When are you going to build yours?
Bill.
The engine size is the second part of the designator, e.g. 2/40 means 0.40 size engines. With the usual acceptable range, of course.
Sorry, I forgot the weights and engines.
2/15 - trying for 4 pounds. 10-25 engines
2/40 Mk I - 8-12 pounds, hard to keep under 10. Uusally come out around 12. 30-46 engines.
2/40 Mk II - Same, but has some structural revisions, easier to keep the weight down. 30-46 size.
2/60 Mk I - Don't know, sorry.
2/60 Mk II - 12-15 pounds. Major structural redesign, 12 pounds can be done. Engines from 50 to 90.
The average Duellist isn't too happy with four stroke engines, but only because of the weight. They tend to build nose heavy anyway, and the heavier engines make it that much worse. If the blocks in the forward part of the airplane are really hollowed it's not so bad, but most people leave a lot more wood than the plane needs. Picking the lightest nose gear helps too, you can save a lot of weight by using mechanical retracts instead of pneumatic. You still have a servo to work them, but you eliminate the air tank, valve, and the hoses.
So. When are you going to build yours?
Bill.
The engine size is the second part of the designator, e.g. 2/40 means 0.40 size engines. With the usual acceptable range, of course.
09-05-2003, 03:52 AM
#18
Wing design question
I'm not sure what they're called; but what about putting those little wingtips on the wings of the Giles?
They are supposed to keep the air from "sliding" off the tips. It keeps the air going over the surface and generates the lift required to keep the plane from tip stalling.
It looks like a wing rib glued to the tip, but it's usually about 1/2" or 3/4" bigger profile all the way around.
Friend of mine did this on a 25% Lanier Cap. It was a tip stalling beast. After the wingtips; it was a totally different plane. Landings were predictable and slow enough not to eat up 500' of runway. Tip stalls were almost nonexistant after the wingtips were installed.
They are supposed to keep the air from "sliding" off the tips. It keeps the air going over the surface and generates the lift required to keep the plane from tip stalling.
It looks like a wing rib glued to the tip, but it's usually about 1/2" or 3/4" bigger profile all the way around.
Friend of mine did this on a 25% Lanier Cap. It was a tip stalling beast. After the wingtips; it was a totally different plane. Landings were predictable and slow enough not to eat up 500' of runway. Tip stalls were almost nonexistant after the wingtips were installed.
09-05-2003, 12:34 PM
#20
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: kansas city,
MO
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing design question
thanks for the information Bill I will add it to the spread sheet.
how does the 2/60 mkII handle ?
Any bad habits at all ?
WYLDMAN
how does the 2/60 mkII handle ?
Any bad habits at all ?
WYLDMAN
09-05-2003, 03:22 PM
#21
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mary Esther, Florida, FL
Posts: 20,205
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
13 Posts
Wing design question
Wyld:
Haven't heard of any 2/60 versions flying yet.
But.
The 2/40 Mk II is a really nice airplane, the 2/60 is a slightly revised and enlarged version, wing loading is projected to be a fair bit lower than the 2/40 Mk II. And have you ever heard "Bigger flies better?"
I look for it to be the nicest aerobatic twin yet.
Bill.
Haven't heard of any 2/60 versions flying yet.
But.
The 2/40 Mk II is a really nice airplane, the 2/60 is a slightly revised and enlarged version, wing loading is projected to be a fair bit lower than the 2/40 Mk II. And have you ever heard "Bigger flies better?"
I look for it to be the nicest aerobatic twin yet.
Bill.
