Contact email for Chris Foss Designs?

[911hillclimber]

I have just assembled a Wot4 Foam-e, a Xmas present.

Most unimpressed by the quality and fragility of this plane, the fit and finish is poor compared to my long suffering Kingfisher.

 

I want to contact Chris Foss about this via email, but the web site looks very old giving a FAX number to contact them.

 

Does anyone have an email I can use please?

The plane is from Ripmax via my local model shop.

Thanks in advance,

Graham.

[leccyflyer]

Why would you want to contact Chris Foss, since it's a Ripmax model?

 

AFAIK Chris Foss doesn't sell the Wot-4 Foam-E, which is an excellent flyer, as it happens.

[911hillclimber]

I asked this because all the stickers and the instructions refer to Chris, even a whole page on Chris's background, just assumed it was by them!

Instructions say it is distributed by Ripmax, not made by them (just 'made in China'), so design/manufacture source/contact not too clear!

I've seen several WOT 4 electrics fly, and that is why I had one, but is is 'delicate' compared to my Kingfisher by FMS and had glue excess in places where a good fit is required, esp around the tail and elevator.

I expect it to fly well, not convinced of its robustness as a trainer.

Edited December 27, 2022 by 911hillclimber

[leccyflyer]

Sounds like the excess glue could be something to take up with Ripmax, if it was a significant issue during the assembly.

 

The robustness of the model is really only something to be established in use -it it is marketed as a trainer. Personally I'd consider the Wot 4 Foam-E as a lightweight sports aerobatic model.

 

[David Davis 2]

Years ago I spoke to Chris Foss over the telephone long before there were any foamy electric powered ARTF WOT 4s. Even in those days he said that his business was "a computer-free zone," so best of luck on getting in touch with him by email. He certainly designed the original WOT 4 and AFAIK he has nothing to do with the ARTFs which are all marketed by Ripmax.

 

If you have a problem with your model I'd contact Ripmax and see what they say. They are excellent fliers. I've had two of them.

[911hillclimber]

Thank you.

I will keep sorting the model and it's issues, but I simply want to give feed-back so hopefully changes can be made.

Quality control is needed, I have 3 hours in the build which is nearly done.

I will contact Ripmax and see what happens.

The wing has 2 good gouges in the top surface, clumbsy fingers when packing/handling, and other things.

The FMS Kingfisher is a far superior product.

 

I think with restricted control surface movements the plane can be a trainer and opened-up if I wish (much) later this 2023.

[911hillclimber]

Finally have this WOT4 together and working on the transmitter.

What a lot of messing about in many areas.

Really not impressed with the build of this plane, has taken 6 hours to finish and a LOT of weight added to the nose to get a slight nose down attitude.

Instructions say weight may be needed to the tail...

 

The C of G is stated as 70mm from the leading edge, this is printed wrong, it is 80mm and makes quite a difference to the weight needed in the tight nose.

 

I could list a good dozen problems, but will save you all from that and send it to Ripmax.

I wonder if anyone will respond?

[RottenRow]

5 minutes ago, 911hillclimber said:

The C of G is stated as 70mm from the leading edge, this is printed wrong, it is 80mm and makes quite a difference to the weight needed in the tight nose.

 

80mm opposed to 70mm from the LE means less weight would be required.

 

The manual states that no additional weight is required to get the correct balance point.

 

Have you got the LiPo battery as far forward as it can possibly go?

 

A few of my club mates have had these (and the foam Acro Wot) and none have mentioned any problems with their models.

 

Brian.

[leccyflyer]

The only problem I've had with my Wot 4 Foam-E rescue has been that the battery hatch was missing and the battery compartment is a bit tight for a 3s1p 2200mah Lipo. That manifests itself in being a bit difficult to get the battery out at the end of the flight, but saves on battery retention as it sits quite snug without any retaining straps. No added lead for balancing.

[911hillclimber]

My batteries are a good fit in the nose too, and hence very secure, they are from 4Max.

Thus everything thing in place, but about 60 grams of weight needed crowded on the motor mount to give a slight nose down angle T 80mm c of g.

the cowl only just goes back on.

[Dale Bradly]

I note that the manual states "...achieve a level attitude". So i question why you are then struggling to fit extra (unneeded) weight to achieve a (uncalled for) "slight nose down attitude"?

As you point out, weight can be added to the tail to provide extra manoeverability later, which again suggests the initial setup (80mm/level) is a safe conservative starting point. 

Edited December 28, 2022 by Dale Bradly
Clarity

[David Davis 2]

Neither of mine required any nose weight and they flew beautifully.

[911hillclimber]

Just read that the model may have a good weight already in the tail!

Have checked this, and well glued in is a substantial metal weight in the tail.....

 

Will extract it tomorrow and see where the balance is.

seems the ideal c of g is 82mm.

I have only read a slight nose down is ideal for a novice, which is me!

[Dale Bradly]

YMMV, as may others, but im not a fan of putting the cg too far forward. The end result is a plane that is hard to control because it lacks elevator authority right when you need it, like when flaring to land. 

Ripmax know their product, they sold enough of them, go with what they recommend.

[911hillclimber]

So, what to do?

plane built as boxed, tail drops like a stone @  70mm c of g much the same at 80mm

Plane then needs lots of weight to get slight none down.

build plan out of the box and try to fly.I doubt my buddy n the field will take par!

[Dale Bradly]

As per instructions: balance level at 80mm. 

[leccyflyer]

You should aim to balance the model in a level flying attitude, not sitting nose down. 80mm from the leading edge, at the wing root, seems to be the recommended CG position, which differs from that stated in the manual, which has been noted as incorrect by multiple retailers.

[Jonathan W]

At an early stage in my return to RC flying, I too purchased a WOT4 foam-e. I too added lead to the nose to "make it balance". It flew like a brick and ended up in a tree, due to lack of elevator response. On account of that, I have never bothered with one since, especially as I considered it to be of flimsy quality irrespective of any flying characteristics. If I were you, I'd take the advice of those who had succes with theirs though!

[911hillclimber]

Thank you both.

Now, the large weight glued by the factory into the tail base.

If I remove it then a lot of the weights I added today will need to be removed to get 'level' again

 

Is it best to remove the tail weight and re-set the balance, or leave it in the tail?

 

Jonathan, saw your post elsewhere on this site.

The plane's construction is very light compared to the FMS Kingfisher, only the motor mount is more substantial.

Edited December 28, 2022 by 911hillclimber

[leccyflyer]

I'd be inclined to balance the model in a level attitude at the 80mm balance point and fly it, before removing any manufacturer inserted weight.

[David Davis 2]

I agree with Leccyflyer.

 

[Learner]

Maybe a silly question, but you are balancing with battery in place?

I had an original mk1 wot 4 foamie and put lead on the tail to get cg nearer 80-85mm and it still needed slight up trim to fly hands off.

Not a trainer but for someone aiming for their A cert its ideal and will easily fly a B schedule in the right hands.

Edited December 29, 2022 by Learner
Cg measurements

[911hillclimber]

Learner:

Yes, my largest battery used. 2 x bats I have are 15mm shorter than the other 2, so using the longest.

The long ones are a perfect snug fit in the tight chamber.

There is a club flyer who has 3 Wot$ electrics, maybe not Ripmax ones, but I'll ask him today and also the guy who is still my RC buddy on their thoughts.

[911hillclimber]

Just to conclude this little issue:

 

I am still a novice/trainer so need a calm plane.

 

Took the large weight out of the tail, probably the best bit of gluing on the whole plane.

Took all the weight I put on the nose off.

Battery in etc and the tail was 'just' too light, so added in the cavity back there 5 grams and put the patch back on. Now everything is well balanced (to the advice given to me by fellow WOT4 pilots at the club) and I'm happy.

 

Just need some weather to trim and try it.

As ever, thank you to all who have contributed.

[Denis Watkins]

6 minutes ago, 911hillclimber said:

I am still a novice/trainer so need a calm plane

 

Next time out, just throttle back,

And when it starts to act like a rip rap,

Be aware of the throttle at all times, and get the stick back in the middle.