Converting a Mascot to ailerons. HELP

[Nigel Finch]

Hi,

Just purchased a almost built Mascot with 2 to 4 Chanel's printed on the box. Looking at the end it has " B version non aileron ". Dam !

I have the plans in the box and see for ailerons the dihedral needs to be less but advice on the conversion please. I had planned to recover as it's not been done well so rebuilding the aileron area not a issue.

These planes seem to be very highly though off and purchased for a little project and to learn so happy to carry out any work.

thanks all

[XK50]

Just finishing one .........

Put 3 inches under one wing tip to set the dihedral.

The ailerons are designed as an integral part of the built-up wing structure and might be simplified. So, at 5 inches out from the centre line, inset some 1 ⅜ inch leading edge, length 24 inches. This places the aileron just inside the wing tip finisher. Clearly, you'll need to finish off the wing cutout area.

The recommended throws are minus 6mm and plus 9mm.

Hope this helps.

Best wishes,

John

[Erfolg]

I have just taken my "A" test using a Mascot, using non standard wing.

Whoever built it, had no dihedral, completely flat.

The ailerons are nothing special either, being probably 1.25 or there abouts.

The wing is a clipped wing at I think 54".

So pretty non standard, yet it flies a treat. No need for dihedral, as the high set wing and pendulum action keeps it stable. The ailerons are narrow by modern standards, but are effective without being as powerful as my own trainer, they do the job. As for the reduced wing area, well, I have not flown the std span model, but it is hard to imagine it being any better.

As a model, it is very good, rugged, the tailplane being so large, dampens pitch very well.

The model I flew has a Thunder Tiger 40 in I believe. Enough power to convincingly drag it around, with a sound take off.

There is not a thing I can say against it.

[David Davis]

Did you pass your A Erfolg?

[Erfolg]

Did I pass!

If you have two days to waste I could answer that question, properly.

Let us just say the Mascot was awarded the certificate, on the second attempt, inspite of me, a wayward helicopter pilot, and a motor that was apparently sick. The sickness was a consequence of incompetence.

Yes, the Mascot is one fine model for the "A" test.

[Peter Miller]

Speaking personally I would only have 1" dihedral under each tip at the most. You could even get about with no dihedral.

[Cuban8]

High wingers always look a bit odd with completely flat wings - even half an inch of dihedral makes all the difference to the appearance - won't affect the operation of the ailerons at all

[Erfolg]

Over night I have thought about my time with the Mascot and another club trainer.

Personally I am very much wedded to electric flight, needing a "A" cert, it was natural for me to want to use a electric model. In fact this one

On our field duration was an issue for undertaking the "A" test. To the extent that the model moved from, one 2300 4s, to two 2300 4s. Duration remained an issue.

By chance i was introduced to the IC club trainer. From a rather favourable impression, stemmed an offer to use another club trainer the "Mascot" on the proviso that I looked after it, fuelled it etc.

I flew the model twice weekly for a year.

At the same time there are two other members who are looking towards the "A" cert. They have been using modern electrics, well known models, well made models, that perform well. That is other than a few attributes that DB Mascot with IC has.

The attributes it has,

• is extreme ruggedness, compared to modern ARTFs. I think 2 or 3 of the ARTFS have been and gone.
• Although heavier by some margin, this has helped in handling windy weather, the inertia and momentum keep it going.
• The UC is made from spring steel, not knitting needles and will take some punishment without a single complaint of any type.
• Dead stick landings are very easy compared to a lightweight electric, it is the weight, momentum and inertia thing again
• Perhaps for the "A" test, the most important aspect is that 15 minutes is always available, +20 minutes is possible to a empty tank.
• Although not unique, the model handles extremely well and is forgiving. An example is the figure 8. It now requires a tangential cross over, this is easiest achieved by pylon type change in direction and keeping the circles relatively small. At our field this is important as the manoeuvres has nearly always to be undertaken in a cross wind. To large a diameter and you will go over the Mersey, not always a good thing to do.

Although apparently not designed as a aileron models from comments here, the model behaves if always intended for ailerons.

Perhaps the highest accolade the model has, is that the other two "A" test candidates have both purchased IC models for the test. Time will tell how much is the IC and how much is the model. I am placing my money on the model, in conjunction with a IC motor.

[David Davis]

I can get a twenty minute flight out of a six-foot Telemaster 40 fitted with a 5000 4s LiPo.

[Erfolg]

David

I am a fan of electrics, nothing against them. In fact I find the advantages of electrics very compelling. Although not for the "A" test at our club. My own test, took over 1 hour, although some of it is on the ground, in preparation and the verbal testing.

With respect to the ARTF electric trainers, they are not designed to carry very large capacity Lipos. To the extent one of the trainers, could not make it back to the field twice this week, ending up in the trees that surround our field.

The draw back that in windy weather, which we have been having for some time, the models are operating on full power for most of their flights.

With the Mascot, there is no need to have to stretch the flight time by careful throttle management. In my case I found this most reassuring. We will now wait and see if the other members have similar experiences.

[David Davis]

I'm actually much more of an i/c man than electric Erfolg! I only have two electric models but I understand what you're saying about ARTF electric trainers not being designed to carry big batteries. The Telemaster 40 was originally designed for a 40 two stroke with at least a six ounce tank, so the weight of a 5000 4S battery is not a problem.

[Erfolg]

David

It would not surprise me if the Telemaster is made to the same recipe as the DB Mascot.

Relatively large and with some weight, yet not overweight.

In the case of Nigels model, I personally think there is one thing to avoid, and that is excessive Dihedral. I personally think the reduction in dihedral is more important than the actual size of the ailerons. Although the Mascot I flew had quite minimal width ailerons although full span strip ailerons, they were quite powerful. Powerful enough, that the club tutor insisted in reducing the throw to reduce effectiveness, as I from time to time would throw it about a little.

Excessive dihedral, will cause Dutch Rolling. I have a Tomboy which originally had the FF amount. Totally uncontrollable by all who tried it as a rudder elevator RC jobbie.

Edited By Erfolg on 27/04/2014 21:03:47

[XK50]

Regarding the differing views expressed, I should have pointed out, in my original post, above, that the dimensions I supplied for the Mascot's ailerons and dihedral are simply those taken from a Mascot kit, purchased from DB Sports and Scale, during Summer 2013.

In particular, the dihedral is set by two wooden, laser-cut wing joiners.

I will admit that I have yet to maiden the model in this configuration, so it may not prove ideal.

Best wishes,

John

[Erfolg]

Mr XK 50

I do not know what is the correct, if there is actually one, dihedral setting.

I am sure in the case of the DB Mascot, that that stipulated on the plan will work. I suspect that the amount stated is primarily intended for the rudder and elevator version.

In the case of a aileron version, normally the amount would be reduced, primarily to aid response.

I can say with confidence that no dihedral works just fine for the DB Mascot, that is not to say that having some dihedral is detrimental, or correct or incorrect. I would go as far as say, that in principal there is no correct amount, what being deemed appropriate is as much about what is wanted from the aeroplane.

What I can say with total confidence, that your DB Mascot is one fine kit and should build into a very competent model. I will also say that in my opinion, the Mascot is a much better model than the vast majority of ARTF models. Just one aspect, is the UC, the wire will not bend due to a heavy landing, nor will the UC assembly part company with the rest of the model just because it is your 4th or 1,000th landing.