Helis & Planes Compared

[19000rpm]

Feb 2, 2010 12:28:48 GMT -6 mimir said:

I started out as a plane flyer long before I got into helicopters. I still have a couple, but they are in need of repair. High wing planes with a little dihedral will also self right even with ailerons. If you want an even more beginner type plane, look for a high wing one with a flat bottom airfoil as that will also help it self correct back to level flight.

That's good advice mim. Slight dihedral and a flat bottom wing are both used in the Hobbyzone SC design. Makes the SC quite a challenge to fly inverted the first few times. Again, more power and increased elevator throw will help to overcome the asymetrical wing design in inverted flight.

Happy landings

[dubehigh]

i enjoyed reading this as its about all i can right now l.o.l

[BTCat]

Feb 2, 2010 14:34:56 GMT -6 dubehigh said:

i enjoyed reading this as its about all i can right now l.o.l

Hey Dube, with the stock controls on that Hobbyzone, you could dam near fly one handed. ;D

[BTCat]

I did a bad, bad thing. I know I was supposed to wait until spring, but I remembered about that gift card and had to push the button on one on Ebay. It is the one I mentioned about with the burnt ESC. I went ahead and got another ESC also. That way I can start with stock and gather up stuff to modify later -- maybe this spring ;D ;D

Should be here Thursday.

BTW, that's interesting info, Mim. Educate me, though. What is dihedral?

[akphill]

Dihedral is the amount of rise above the horizontal line in the wing theoretical the more you have the more it will be stable and self righting.

mostly all high wing aircraft have dihedral built in as they are designated trainer's

[Solitaire]

Here's a couple of examples of dihedral...




And an example of anhedral...



And to really confuse you...there's polyhedral...



I think Elk's F-4 Phantom falls in the polyhedral category as well.

[mimir]

Sol and akphill beat me to it!

The plane that I learned to fly on was a glider that was polyhedral in that it had a dihedral center and the last 6 or 7 inches on each end were at an even higher angle.

[19000rpm]

Feb 2, 2010 19:25:04 GMT -6 BTCat said:

Feb 2, 2010 14:34:56 GMT -6 dubehigh said:

i enjoyed reading this as its about all i can right now l.o.l

Hey Dube, with the stock controls on that Hobbyzone, you could dam near fly one handed. ;D

BT's right. Once you set the throttle it's all one stick most of the time.

Congrats on the new plane BT. Have fun.

Happy landings

[scarface26]

That photo of the Harrier (which I used to fly BTW) is shown as an example of an aircraft with anhedral, and it results in an airplane that is unstable and more difficult to fly. You don't take your hands off the controls and expect the plane to sort itself out and end up straight and level...it will always go further away from straight and level. You are always flying such a plane, and can never relax on the controls. It would be lousy as a trainer.
The HZ Super Cub with its dihedral is an example of a great RC trainer. Folks are always trying to hop up performance of this plane by putting larger motors on it, and adding ailerons to increase the roll rate. Why?? It was designed as a trainer, and it excels in that roll. If you want more performance, get a plane that is designed to have more performance. It bothers me to see people modifying planes and helis to do more than they were designed to do. Get a product that is designed to perform for your desired purposes. There are 6 channel 3D helis, or 3D type planes and EDF jets that will give you all the performance you want.

[mimir]

I agree with scarface.
If you want to do 3d, then get a 3d designed plane.

[dubehigh]

Feb 2, 2010 20:42:06 GMT -6 Solitaire said:

Here's a couple of examples of dihedral...




And an example of anhedral...



And to really confuse you...there's polyhedral...



I think Elk's F-4 Phantom falls in the polyhedral category as well.

my dad had a little j3 piper cub, nice plane, slow fly.i grew up around all this, but realy never paid att, my dad worked for nwa for 41 years, so i wish i would have opened my ears more to what he was telling me. thanks my two cents

[19000rpm]

Feb 3, 2010 8:58:57 GMT -6 scarface26 said:

That photo of the Harrier (which I used to fly BTW) is shown as an example of an aircraft with anhedral, and it results in an airplane that is unstable and more difficult to fly. You don't take your hands off the controls and expect the plane to sort itself out and end up straight and level...it will always go further away from straight and level. You are always flying such a plane, and can never relax on the controls. It would be lousy as a trainer.
The HZ Super Cub with its dihedral is an example of a great RC trainer. Folks are always trying to hop up performance of this plane by putting larger motors on it, and adding ailerons to increase the roll rate. Why?? It was designed as a trainer, and it excels in that roll. If you want more performance, get a plane that is designed to have more performance. It bothers me to see people modifying planes and helis to do more than they were designed to do. Get a product that is designed to perform for your desired purposes. There are 6 channel 3D helis, or 3D type planes and EDF jets that will give you all the performance you want.

I'm one of those guilty of modding the Hobbyzone SC. After flying it stock for a long while I wanted a bit more. Actually, with ailerons, it flies more like the real SC and can get fairly aerobatic. Although, you're right; a plane that is designed for aerobatics (symetrical airfoil, bigger control surfaces and more power) would be a better choice if you didn't already have a SC that was so easy to convert to a first aileron plane or simply a plane that flies like the real thing.

Happy landings

[BTCat]

Feb 4, 2010 10:01:01 GMT -6 19000rpm said:

Feb 3, 2010 8:58:57 GMT -6 scarface26 said:

That photo of the Harrier (which I used to fly BTW) is shown as an example of an aircraft with anhedral, and it results in an airplane that is unstable and more difficult to fly. You don't take your hands off the controls and expect the plane to sort itself out and end up straight and level...it will always go further away from straight and level. You are always flying such a plane, and can never relax on the controls. It would be lousy as a trainer.
The HZ Super Cub with its dihedral is an example of a great RC trainer. Folks are always trying to hop up performance of this plane by putting larger motors on it, and adding ailerons to increase the roll rate. Why?? It was designed as a trainer, and it excels in that roll. If you want more performance, get a plane that is designed to have more performance. It bothers me to see people modifying planes and helis to do more than they were designed to do. Get a product that is designed to perform for your desired purposes. There are 6 channel 3D helis, or 3D type planes and EDF jets that will give you all the performance you want.

I'm one of those guilty of modding the Hobbyzone SC. After flying it stock for a long while I wanted a bit more. Actually, with ailerons, it flies more like the real SC and can get fairly aerobatic. Although, you're right; a plane that is designed for aerobatics (symetrical airfoil, bigger control surfaces and more power) would be a better choice if you didn't already have a SC that was so easy to convert to a first aileron plane or simply a plane that flies like the real thing.

Happy landings

I never modified my HBFP simply because I didn't want a tricked up FP when I could spend the additional money on a CCPM. BUT, those modes were pretty costly compared to the price of the bee.

I agree, in principle, that if you want a 3D bird, buy a 3D bird. And I am sure I will do that (I want a EDF eventually). More bang for the buck in the long run, but if simple modes like aileron and brushless are relatively cheap, I'll probably do it just for the helluvit. The biggest cost involved is the RX, and since I would really prefer to keep it on my TX, I would probably be out the cost of an RX anyway. Already have the ESC, brushless motors are cheap, servos are cheap (at least the ones I would use). And I am liking bench work more and more. More to tinker with.

Maybe not. This is all academic until I figure out how I will like this stuff

[mimir]

I have no problem with simple, easy mods like adding ailerons or going to brushless. The thing is, you will still have a trainer type plane when you are done. Too much motor or too much control throw can and will overcome the airframe.

[dubehigh]

you no guy its been some time that i did planks, but now tha i read this stuff i think i am getting the bug again

i always loved that little j3 pipercub, on floats but then i like jets to may when i get back to work i will look in to it, but i like boats to