RE: F1D rubber and o-rings

From: John Barker <john.barker783_at_ntlworld.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:43:13 +0100

Tapio
I have never flown an F1D so what follows is just thoughts.

Your F1D is overweight so (from energy considerations) it will be impossible
to match the performance of models that are down to weight. However I don’t
see that this prevents assessment of the propeller and the aerodynamics of
the airframe. My suggestion is to reduce the length of the motor as far as
possible to reduce the total weight. This would then be very similar to
flying a light model on part motors but without using ballast weights; your
ballast is already built in!

If the ‘part motor’ performance is comparable to other, lighter, F1Ds then
you will know that the important propeller/motor cross section aspect is
good. It should then be worth changing other components piece by piece as
you manage to produce a lighter one. If the ‘part motor’ performance is not
good then perhaps the propeller does need to be looked at.

I hope that is not too trite and obvious. As I said, I am just an
interested observer standing on the sidelines.

On the rubber ‘climbing’ problem I think that diamond hooks are prone to
this. Crocket hooks, S hooks, and rings all seem better on a shaft hook
where there is a straight piece of wire at right angles to the prop shaft.
Lots of flyers advocate a ‘Z’ bend on this ‘straight’ section.

John Barker - England



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Received on Sun Sep 16 2007 - 13:10:39 CEST