Flair Puppeteer

[GrahamC]

I put my Puppeteer together yesterday to see where the CofG would come out. I've just got the pilot to fit and the receiver, switch and ESC to install. Currently I'm about an inch behind the front centre cabine strut. I need to do a bit of research to see what people think. I know that there seems to be a bit of consensus that the CofG is too far back on the plan.

Anyway.. here are some pics to inspire other builders!

 

 

I'm quite pleased with my altered undercarriage. In my opinion it looks a lot better. It will be interesting to see how she handles on the ground !?!

 

Edited By GrahamC on 07/05/2013 08:16:12

[Terry Walters]

Good on you Graham - looks lovely - nice simple colour scheme allows you to appreciate the model itself. Really like it - I feel even more guilty now - so much to do so litte pension time left to do it in!

Terry

[bouncebounce crunch]

Graham, you have produced a beauty there. Love it. with most of my models (gliders included) i tend to move the c.g forward so i fly a little nose heavy. as the saying goes may fly badly with a heavy nose, but that dreaded carnival ride from being tail heavy is worse. Good luck with her, she is a joy to look at.

bbc.

[Danny Fenton]

Hi Graham, doesn't that look lovely

I increased the undercarriage length on the one I built too. Looks much better in my opinion. I also shortened the nose by several inches

Cheers

Danny

[Dean]

That looks superb GrahamC, give me more inspiration to crack on with mine.

Being a novice builder/flyer I will be using the undercarriage as it is, although they do look better how you and Danny have done them, I do want to split the fuselage though if I have the bottle to give it ago!!!

[ian ludwell]

Hello all,

Have just aquired a Flair Puppeteer.

Looking to fit a power unit.

Having trouble fitting a TT pro .46 2 stroke.

The exhaust fouls the underside of of the fuz.

Considering an SC .52 FS 4 Stroke,would appear to be the the limit of sze to fit inside the cowl.

Regards..Ian

Edited By ian ludwell on 08/05/2013 17:01:33

[stu knowles]

Flair used to do a simple box type silencer which attached with a 'jubilee clip' fitting around the cylinder, specially made for the scout series. I have one on a Pupp / OS50 combination. If you can find one they are very effective and spot on for the purpose.

stu k

[Concorde Speedbird]

Graham, what a lovely Pup there! Nice to see one in different colours too, good luck for the flights! Get her in formation with your Spitfire!

CS

[Kevin Fairgrieve]

If you go down the 4 stroke route, then you can get a 90 degre bend from Just Engines.

Thats what is in the front of my Pup.

You can just about make it out in this shot.

Kev

[Flanker .]

Guys. Why does no one fit a RCV 58 ? it is the perfect motor for the Puppeteer, it has a low cylinder height and fits well. The power is ample.

Support a bit of British engineering huh ?

F

[GrahamC]

No Flanker... This is the perfect motor for a Puppeter

There is a thread on here where at least two Puppeteers were being built for RCV 58's

More seriously, I'm now in the final stages of balancing and getting ready to fly - and my CofG has come out in front of Flair's recomendation. [Yes really!]

My plan to deliberately over-motor the aircraft as a way of getting a very low current draw, and a big prop seems to have worked [well on the ground!]

THE QUESTION.... There are lots of hints that the Flair suggested C of G [130mm from LE of top wing] is too far back. I'm close to the spar with a few fairly light bits to fit [switch, pilot, and receiver] - about 100mm back - Am I too far forwards? Opinions appreciated!

Edited By GrahamC on 16/05/2013 08:49:58

[cymaz]

C of G is wrong on plan. It needs to be more forward. I think mine is main spar top wing but I need to check got a heavy SC 4 stroke in mine plus half a church roof of lead!!!!!!!

[David Davis]

Cmaz's point seems to be the conventional wisdom. I stalled and damaged one on take off with the balance point in the recommended position. When I've repaired it, I'm going to put some lead in the nose and bring the C of G forwards.

[stu knowles]

I'll measure mine when I get home tomorrow and post the position here. It seems to be that there is a suggestion that the Pup can be a handful and I think that thats wrong!

Mine is built as per plan, has an OS 50 two stroke, 5 cell AA battery in the tank bay and no ballast at all. I have many hours flying on my example and it is the most friendly, stall averse aeroplane that you could wish to lay hands on.

I'll be back with an accurate cg position tomorrow

stu k

[GrahamC]

Thanks Stu - that will be helpful.

I don't think I'm far out. I have that heavy motor, and then there is 3000mah 6 cell Lipo just behind the firewall. I was just concerned knowing that there is an often raised suggestion that the plan position is wrong, but I was concerned about how far forwards to go.

[Danny Fenton]

A Pupeteer I built for a fellow modeller was extremely lively on the first flight, and now that you have raised this that could have been the cause. I put it down to an errant rx, but as the owner took the model away after the maiden I am not sure what sorted it out in the end.

Knowing the position of your c of g Stu could only benefit all I am sure

Cheers

Danny

[bouncebounce crunch]

G'day Stu, I did read an early thread of getting the nose weight low and forward for a Sop Camel. this was on our RCM&E website. forward is always better for those test flights. we always test glided down a nice slope years ago but as we all know they are very rare today.

good luck for up down and landing.

bbc

[stu knowles]

Hi Guys,

Right, measured the cg on mine tonight, With the fus level / just nosing down a bit, 135mm back from the le of the top wing. just back from the mid way spot between the cabane struts. Main spar of the top wing would be way too far forward.

If I have a Pupp plan I've no idea where it is, so how does that compare with the plan position?? For test flights maybe 125mm would be a safe start

I've been reminded of a guy in the club some time ago who put masses of lead into the cowl of his Puppeteer because 'it wouldn't come down' in his words He never flew it at less than flat out and dived for the runway when trying to land then forced it onto the ground. He wouldn't have it at all that it would fly slowly

stu k

stu k

[GrahamC]

Thanks Stu, that's helpful. Flair say 130mm on their web site, I'll have a look at the plan later. I seem to remember that the figure used to be listed as 138mm which might explain the number of folks who suggest that the CofG is too far back on a Puppeteer!

When I started flying I did like a forward C of G, but I suspect like lots of pilots, as expereince is gained and skills improved, you begin to find that the figure listed in plans and instructions tends to be too far forward! I may see if I can get the ballance nearer Flair's suggested figure.

As I write, I wonder how much of the 'its too tail heavy' talk has to do with the Puppeteer needing rudder to be used with ailerons in order to make a neat turn. My mini pattern ship looks like she's dragging her tail if you try and turn without rudder.

[stu knowles]

I fly mine with a lot of rudder input. The Party Piece, only done on a flat calm evening is to fly circuits and figure eights inside the field boundary and trying not to go above head height. Speed is stall plus one, turn on rudder with out turn aileron to keep the wings reasonably flat. If I get it wrong the result is usually no more than an untidy landing in the outfield, getting it right is good!

I also have a set of the Flair vintage floats which have also been well used on water snow and grass. The Pup is a great all rounder (so long as it goes in the car in one piece)

cheers

stu k

[Martyn K]

I maidened my Pup' this morning. After practising for the past couple of months with an AcroWot, this was rather like chalk and cheese.

I actually started building the model about 8 years ago and eventually finished it 2 years ago then promptly lost interest in it. After a couple of gentle prods by Ian Jones, I decided to get it airworthy.

It is powered by an ancient (1979) HB40 with a 10.5x6 prop. As the prop barely clears the cowl, I was convinced it would never get enough ground speed to get off the ground.

After about 20 mins of messing around trying to get the engine right I put it one the end of the strip and opened it up. Tail up after a few feet and tracking perfectly it literally lifted off and shot very nose up. Full down trim and it settled down, but it was still flying nose up and very twitchy on elevator. Although the model balanced on the CG recommended by Flair, my thoughts are that it is about 0.5" too far back. I also think it needs about 3 degrees of downthrust.

Getting it to land was also a challenge. With the engine on a fast tickover, it wouldn't actually come down and aileron response at low airspeed was frighteningly sluggish.

Anyway after about 5 minutes of cavorting around the sky, I got it down in one piece even if it was a cross strip landing.

Great fun though. I didn't get a second flight today though, I couldn't get the engine to run reliably and the radio gear cut out momentarily. Time to take it home and investigate.

Apart from adding additional lead, I need to add some downthrust. Not sure how feasible this will be as I built it as per plan with wooden bearers.

Certainly worthwhile persevering with though.

Martyn

[Flanker .]

Glad you got down in one piece ! For sure the balance point is wrong ! Mine was the same 22 years ago ! Add some lead and fly befor adding down thrust. You can do the down thrust thing by adding some washers under the rear mounting holes on the engine.

You can improve the aileron response by mixing in a small amount of rudder, Pupeteers like rudder.

The landing issue. The airframe will fly amazingly slowly. Get to a good hight and use the elevator trim. Add some up and throttle back untill it stops climbing. Keep adding a bleep at a time untill it gets stally. The stall is a non event with the Pup and it WON¨T spin - I have tried very hard !

The aircraft has a wide speed range so don't be afraid to use the trims to get "Scout Mode" - good for strafeing runs and aerobatics, and Slow mode for landing and silly stuff.

Enjoy. F

[GrahamC]

Mine is now finished and ready for the maiden. The G60 motor pulled 18A on six cells flat out - with a wooden 14x6, (which is exactly what the hobbyking web page said it would) I'm using a 3000mah, so that would equate to about 10 minutes flat out. I'm hoping that ten minute flights will in practice leave plenty of spare capacity. Balance point is now just a touch in front of the Flair recommendation without ballast! (Well there is a fairly heavy battery just behind the fire wall!

So I have 450 watts to play with.... I wonder what she weighs? I have no way of knowing without taking her to bits and weighing all the bits on the kitchen scales!

All I need now is some suitable weather, and the forecast is not looking hopeful in this part of the world!

[Martyn K]

Just spotted the note above saying the CG should be 130mm - mine is as per plan - 138mm.. That's nearly 1/2" in old money.

 

Thanks for the advice!

BW

Martyn

Edited By Martyn K on 20/05/2013 14:55:04

[GrahamC]

The skies cleared.... and the wind died away.... and it was looking like there might be a window of opportunity so here's what happened!

 

 

I have to say that she was fantastic to fly. Just the thing, as has been said, for a summer's evening.

 

Just a few tweaks to do. I need some bungee cord for the undercarriage. Elastic bands are not up to the job! A touch of down thrust might improve things, and I need a better catch for the battery hatch, but I'm over the moon!

 

5 minutes in the air and the 3000mah 6 cell had 77% capacity left! That means 20 minutes is theoretically possible! I was flying on half throttle or less most of the time.

 

 

Edited By GrahamC on 22/05/2013 22:39:19