Jonathan M

Glad to hear that Jerry. Do you have any photos?

Kim - That's why I'm determined to get mine finished and finally airborne...! Andy - You got me worried enough to dash into my workroom, bolt the engine on, and pop the battery roughly on top of its intended position to check the balance, which is currently about 4"... phew! Once the fuselage is covered, the prop and cowling on, and the U/C in place etc, I don't think I'll be far off the 90mm (3.55") I'm aiming for.

There is no plan, just a very basic instruction sheet. If you do build one, then go back through this thread (and others) for all sorts of advice and modifications to the basic structure to produce a more robust model. A canopy is included, but the cowling is extremely flimsy. I've been trying to stiffen mine by building up layers of cloth soaked in Poly-C. The alternative is to devise a balsa cowling. PS - Just seen Kim's reply. He's right: "TBH it's not the nicest kit I've ever built". My experience is that it's only half-baked as a design/kit with loads of small but annoying errors in the parts. They're reputed to fly very well, which is why I didn't give up on building mine, but as I've said if you do buy one then be aware of the shortcomings and be ready to make your own mods.

Hi Andy You're probably right, but I've already added some extra weight to the rear fuselage by beefing things up and the tail parts are all solid; also fitted a slightly smaller fuel tank. The RX battery will be fitted as far back as possible at the former above the TE of the wing... then it'll be down to a few inevitable 10g stick-on-weights at the tail! I'm aiming for (guessing!) 5.5lbs to give a wing loading of 17.5oz/sqft, which shouldn't be too shabby even if it creeps up a tad. (For comparison my Wot4 is just over 21oz/sqft and the Boomerang up at 24.) What did your Gangster top out at?

How much washout, and where's it measured (on a curving wing-tip that is)?

So (just idly wondering!) what would be an appropriately-sized engine for the DG?

In general yes, but the Outerzone page for this particular model notes that it is a "low resolution" plan. Personally, I'd just splash £12.50 and wait for the postman.

Mike, the boys are just having a bit of word-play fun (in an immature/senile sort of way, possibly fuelled with a bit of French brandy). It all started when I pointed out that you'd not said in your opening post exactly what you'd designed, and added that for all we knew you could have designed a flying 'carrot peeler' (which is the same thing as a potato peeler) only because it was the first object that came into my head! Mind you, I'm now seriously exploring the potential for a whole series of free plans in RCM&E of designs which are inspired by kitchen utensils... starting with a potato/carrot/parsnip peeler! Please let us know whether your thrust-line changes make the desired difference. It'll probably be a bit of trial-and-error with different thickness shims or washers, but I'd build up the shimming gradually as you don't want a sudden nose-down when the power comes on! Jon

Cheers Mark. There's plenty of time left to get yours finished... after all I started this build thread four and a half years ago and am only just getting there! ?

Yellow bits almost finished! On account of wanting black Oracover for the middle third-ish of each wing bottom, I wound up applying a total of six panels per wing, twelve all told... no wonder the thing took so long! Ailerons will be all yellow, but later the top of each wing will have a white Oratrim stripe applied span-wise - exact size and shape yet to be decided, but the intention obviously is that I hopefully shouldn't have any major problem seeing which way is up! ? Fuselage to be a lovely 1970s brown... also with white go-fast stripes! Brown fin and rudder might get a large white "G" each side...?

Nice serrations Mike! With that fully exposed motor thrust adjustments should be pretty quick and easy. If that doesn't help solve things satisfactorily, then - as John Lee suggests - a slight down-elevator to throttle mix would definitely be worth trying.

Yes. Although a high-wing design, my rubber-powered 16" Pilatus Porter float-plane didn't need any down-thrust at all. My electrified 13" Bristol Scout needed a significant amount of both down- and side-thrust, which was largely a function of its very short nose. That's what I was alluding to in my previous post - too many factors in any given model design for a one-size-fits-all solution. EB is right - for all we know right now the OP has designed a flying carrot-peeler...!

Covering underway, the yellow bits first... Servo leads coiled and lightly zip-tied, so that in the unlikely event an aileron servo needs to be replaced the extension lead won't be effected.

I disagree with absolute views. Without some down-thrust my Wot4, my Boomerang and my old Acrowot (for examples) all of which have very rearward/neutral CGs, will climb dramatically the moment I open the throttle, which is no good for anything approaching precision in aerobatic manoeuvres. Without a bit of down shimmed in I'd have to lean heavily forward on the stick when speeding up towards show centre for say a loop or stall-turn. Similarly, without a smidge of right-thrust they'd kick over to the left when the power comes on. All of this increases pilot workload unnecessarily. (Maybe if one flies scale warbirds then learning to anticipate and correct for these effects is part of the challenge?) But it surely depends on the actual model type/design and a whole host of interrelated factors and forces. The OP hasn't been clear about what he's actually designed, but if its a "wing" (the missing word in his opening post?) then it is quite feasible that the rotating prop-wash is in fact having a magnified adverse effect on the pitch of the model when the power comes on? In which case experimenting with down-thrust - after having played around with CG - might reduce the problem (which in turn will also depend to some extent on the diameter and pitch of the prop)? I build and fly FF scale models: trimming these is an iterative process which involves isolating and tweaking each element (CG, thrust line, rudder pre-set, wing-tabs, wing-weights, even incidence) one at a time - some of which need re-tuning the moment one installs a rubber motor of thicker/thinner cross-section (power) or shorter/longer length (duration).

Me, I'd just recover usable components (RX, servos, those parts of the power-train that weren't totalled) and fit them in a new model. The wing that fluttered down, I'd mount above the door as an aide-memoire...

Well done! Look forward to seeing it in its eventual full livery.

I thought that's what you meant, but wasn't sure until you showed the photo from above. Also I'd always assumed they were called slots (as in Handley Page slots) but are also apparently known as slats... I suppose the slats create the slots!

Gary, are the 'slats' those things under the top wing LE in the last photo above - and what do they do?

Be careful not to shrink too tight - the TE isn't very stiff.

I'm still here EB !? Look forward to more ?

Interesting question. The flex itself is intrinsic to the combination of spar, LE and TE stiffnesses. There are 22 ribs/riblets in each wing of the RES Eagle. Each joint will have a degree of elasticity and resilience which, while not great at the individual level, amounts to quite a lot along the whole wing. There will of course be a critical point beyond which any given joint is fatigued to the point of failure - but this would require repeated excessive force beyond those imposed by normal launches off a bungee of 6mm diameter.

Oracover (and light and tex) isn't actually expensive - its just the distributors who're ripping us off by adding a colossal markup! I use it for all my RC models but now order it from German retailers at 1/3rd of the cost (£10 instead of £30) of UK ones, sent by courrier (add another £15 but still 2/3rds of the total cost delivered even for a single roll!) in just a few days. e.g. Oracover Cub Yellow

Agreed.

Tapered rod is available - as per the Eli 2mRES middle-section spar, the whole wing of which illustrates your post perfectly.

No problem David - I've also been gradually learning the technical principles as I've gone along! The pink beastie in my profile picture is from the maiden flight of my Chris Foss Middle Phase which I built a while ago, but with the semi-symmetrical section aileron wing for added enjoyment rather than the basic trainer version which has a flat bottom section and dihedral.