Jump to content

Bruce Collinson

Members
  • Posts

    930
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Bruce Collinson

  1. 10 hours ago, MattyB said:

    Sebart factory CGs are notoriously nose heavy; every modeller I’ve seen with a Sebart (including me on my Miss Wind) end up flying them with a CG well behind where the manual recommends. I would not worry too much if you can’t achieve their position if it looks reasonable n a TLAR check.

    Isn't the mantra, c of g forward, flies badly; c of g rearward, flies once?   Nevertheless I take your point but am keen to hear where the c of g sweet spot is.

     

    16 hours ago, Philip Lewis 3 said:

    My rudder servo is mounted in the tray behind the wing tube which is as it comes from the factory as shown on page 13 of the manual atached, I think having the rudder servo in the tail is your problem.

    Assembly-AngelS Evo 50E.pdf 1.53 MB · 8 downloads

    Grateful for this.

     

    What I conclude is that mine was built off piste, with two elevator servos, within the tailplane, hidden by what does look like original film.   The plan elevator servo location is occupied by the rudder servo, so three servos in the rear and I cannot access the elevator servos to check weight etc.   I think it needs to be ballasted to 145mm, flown, trimmed then put on a diet, probably starting by reverting to closed loop rudder, maybe with the servo a bit further forward as the LiPo will still be well forward.   I'll move the Rx forward too, not that it will make a huge difference, but "Tesco" (every little etc.).   Hopefully the ballast can then be removed incrementally.

     

    Bit frustrating.   In the confines of a back-of-van seller at Weston, four of us scrutinised it carefully, one a lifetime F3A competitor, and we didn't twig any of this.   Never stop learning.

     

    Any empirical evidence of flyable c of g location, as opposed to what might be a very defensive 145mm, will be welcome.   Thanks for your input thus far.

     

    Bruce.

  2. Thank you all.   Probably, the fact that it was assembled (not but me) with three servos at the back is most of the problem.   Have subsequently worked out that it will need c. 250 g of ballast so we might be turning it back to closed loop rudder.   I notice that the horn on rudder is double sided so there’s a clue.

     

    There seem to be discrepancies in the replies thus far.   Odd.

    BTC

  3. Hello all,

    struggling with c of g with this plane which I bought secondhand but unflown.

    Manual has c of g at 145mm behind LE.   With a 6s LiPo pushed right up to the bulkhead/firewall it’s tail heavy.   LiPo weighs 654 gm and is far forward of the battery tray (not insurmountable per se) and will still need ballast on the motor box, which is anathema to me.

     

    What am I doing wrong?   The tail servos are in the tail and having spent some time and effort to get them in and tidy I’m reluctant to take them out again although lighter servos would help.   Won’t get the LiPo where it was designed to go though.

     

    Wondering if anyone has experience of this plane?

    Bruce.

  4. Unincorporated Associations like our clubs have nightmares changing bank mandates; we had horror stories at work with certain client accounts too, sometimes taking months before all the stars aligned.   Retail banking in this country is deteriorating rapidly.   Thank goodness for our village Post Office for depositing cheques and drawing cash.

     

    BTC

    • Like 2
  5. We treat this whole issue as one of incidents, rather than safety per se.   Thus, it includes issues of reputation and public relations as well as safety.   For example, once in a blue moon we get a Joe Public at our gate, which is close to the highway, spouting off about noise.   The “rule” is that the senior member present engages as well as circumstances will permit then completes an incident report sheet.   This is referred to the committee for detailed investigation and follow up.

     

    Safety issues and club rule infringements are recorded in the same way and it is the committeee which has the responsibility to investigate and then deal with the incident.   It doesn’t fall to a single member, whether or not wearing a hi-viz, and any follow up action is dignified by the whole committee, not one individual.   In practice the incident coordinator does the legwork but it has yet to be onerous.   I would commend this procedure.

     

    BTC

  6. Can’t be bothered to trawl through all 3 pages to eliminate repetition, but what seems to be missing from this rant is that simply regarding BMFA as a means of obtaining insurance misses the whole bigger picture by a country mile.

     

    It is also a bit of a slap in the face to the numerous volunteers who man Buckminster and do much of the donkey work on the site in return for expenses only, which I can attest consists of 40p/mile and that won’t run my (non-electric) car.   Buckminster is a terrific asset and some of the opprobrium directed towards it above is, at best, ill -informed.   I’d prefer not to be Mod-cancelled so I will leave that point where it lies.

     

    Combining the back-office function of Leicester with the current resources of Buckminster is bound to create significant savings across the entire Association.

     

    As for golf, I doubt you’d be able to buy a two-round green fee for £47, certainly not round here, and that’s merely two good walks ruined, in one day.   Multiply by 365; “do the math”.   There is a very parsimonious strain in a minority of aeromodellers, manifesting itself in buying £3 servos from a counterfeiter in China then whining when it fails; it’s a great shame that this frame of mind extends to annual subs for an organisation which covers all our backs.

     

    Phil, did you eat all the pies too?

    BTC

    • Like 8
    • Thanks 2
  7. See if this visual gag translates to this thread.

     

    piece of paper and pen.

    Write down the Beanstalk giant’s four word riposte.

    Repeat on line two but in a different order.

    Ditto three and four, so no two words the same in any of the four columns.

    Read it out aloud.

     

    When sufficient prompts are seen I’ll tell you what it means.

    BTC

  8. Precisely.   I think it will be a case of claim on own policy but expect full retrieval post facto, though compared with the removal of thousands of tons of contaminated concrete it might be a stroll.   BTW Jon, the rebar has clearly melted in places so I wouldn't go anywhere near it and "shoring up" would be tantamount to a partial rebuild.

     

    BTC

  9. I stick to Savox on the basis that they seem to be good quality, voltage isn’t an issue and I reckon they will be re-cyclable for some time to come.   And they’re not Chinese.   I suspect equivalent Hitec are probably as good as.   Buy once, buy well.

     

    BTC

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...