Jump to content

Uno Wot


Basil
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello fellow modlers. I have had a Uno wot kit for some while I have a set of instructions but dont seem to have a drawing. I am assuming that it came with a set of plans!!!!. Can anyone say if plans exist and if so could I have a copy please. Thanks in anticipation.

Bas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advert


Basil , 

          I have one still in its box . It doesnt have a plan either . I dont think it needs one , perhaps ?

There is an electric conversion plan on the Chris Foss site . 

They fly beautifully though . Much nicer than the Wot 4 in my humble opinion . 

Richard 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Uno Wot never had a plan - there are just a couple of sketches in the instruction booklet.

 

Agree 100% with Richard - loved my Uno Wot and always preferred it to my Wot 4. Mine made a perfect trainer on an OS.25SF and was particularly flattering for a beginner's basic aerobatics with it's lovely outside loops. Still have the airframe and one day will do an electric conversion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to have one, my second r/c model. Mine was powered by an Irvine 20 car racing engine modified with an aircraft crankshaft. It flew it extremely well and was a good introduction to aerobatics. It remains one of three models which I wish I hadn't sold. The other two were a Flair Hooligan, Flair's answer to the WOT 4, and a vintage Radio Queen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am glad I'm not the only one to champion Chris's design . 

For us old hands , Ive found I can get even more entertainment from it by cutting the ailerons to operate the outer 1/3 and then use the inner aileron on a full flap setting on switch . Its a quick mod as you can just leave the outer ailerons on two servos and put two little torque rods in to drive the flaps . 

This beautiful little model really does fly like a bird (much more so then the rather slabby Wot 4) , but with the flaps down it will loop almost in its own length and land in a breeze like a helicopter . It can be trainer and intermediate sports model and STOL all in one . Way better than all these Tundra's we see popping up . 

Mine started out as 4 stroke powered but I prefer it now on 4s and 12x6 . 3s variants can have equal performance with the right motor prop . 

Its a shame that of the Foss fleet it seems over looked . I guess its because the UNO wot doesnt appear in ARTF form . 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's an interesting mod Richard. My 30 year + old Uno Wot ailerons are on a single S148 via torque rods, so such a mod would mean a slit in the underside veneer to sink a couple of mini servos further out on the wing. Something to bear in mind when I eventually get around to putting model BC#01 back in action. I'd probably replace the wing bands and dowels with wing bolts at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all you experts !!!!!. The kit as supplied has the two versions of the Uno wot, 3 and 4 channeIs it. The 3 channel has a pronounced dihedral of 3" each side whilst the 4 channel seems to have no dihedral. In order to maintain some of the stability of the 3chan' version is it possible to maintain the same dihedral with the 4 channnel version. I am aware that I will loose some /all of the advanced flying characteristics.

Many thanks Bas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I built one decades ago, my second r/c model and the first with ailerons. If I remember correctly, if you butt the wings up to one another, the joint is not exactly vertical and you have to lift one wing to ensure that the wings meet at the top. Of course they may have changed things in the intervening years. I think that a UnoWot with a flat wing would not pose any problems for an experienced pilot nor for a beginner on a buddy box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you keep the full dihedral on the 4 channel variant the stability will 'fight' the ailerons and make them far less effective. You may also find the model far less pleasant to fly. The designer knew what he was doing in making his recommendations.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

David, thanks for your prompt reply. The construction seems to have progressed. The wings are venered foam now, requiring a 'Seating' angle to be adjusted according to the required dihedral.

 

David I appear to have run off half cocked.The 4 channell version has a 1/2 - 1 1/2 " dihedral, that's more in line with what I had in mind, especially as its specified by Mr Foss. It was that I did not want to use a flat wing.

So.... my apologise to everyone for my big ' Not reading the notes correctly' moment !!!!! hope possible replies read this note.

John , I would agree the designer new what he was doing, I did not read it as I should have, thanks.

Bas

Edited by Basil
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basil . 

My one is 4 channel plus flaps (for fun ) and has about 1" dihedral under each tip . Flies really nicely . A little dihedral just seems to help them stay in a smooth turn better . 

Also feels more like a warbird , which may come in handy later on ......

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/08/2024 at 09:49, RICHARD WILLS said:

Yes Brian , I replaced the bands with two number plate bolts and a dowel at the front . As an experiment I made a second fuselage out of foam board which worked just as well . (sorry Chris ) . 

You need the number plate bolts to carry the long CAA number these days. 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Eric Robson said:

You need the number plate bolts to carry the long CAA number these days. 

 

Number plate bolts used as wing bolts needing the CAA Number...?????? First I've heard of that one,, They are just simple plastic/nylon bolts or am I missing something here??

 

Edited by GaryW
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Basil said:

David, thanks for your prompt reply. The construction seems to have progressed. The wings are venered foam now, requiring a 'Seating' angle to be adjusted according to the required dihedral.

 

David I appear to have run off half cocked.The 4 channell version has a 1/2 - 1 1/2 " dihedral, that's more in line with what I had in mind, especially as its specified by Mr Foss. It was that I did not want to use a flat wing.

So.... my apologise to everyone for my big ' Not reading the notes correctly' moment !!!!! hope possible replies read this note.

John , I would agree the designer new what he was doing, I did not read it as I should have, thanks.

Bas

 

Glad you worked it out Basil. You're going to love the UnoWot once you've built it, as I said above. I'll be watching with interest. I have an SC 32 with a Weston Power Pipe and an Irvine 39 both doing nothing so you never know...😏

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...