Orion Starliner RC RG

[burkefj]

Something I've been working on. I used the general wing planform from the 2001 orion III shuttle design, but then added a appropriately shaped vertical fin(which doesn't exist on the 2001 shuttle) and used estes PS-II 2" tubing and the standard estes PSII 9.5" cone. I angle cut the rear to give the look I wanted and also to push the motor mount forward. I did not use centering rings but used a notch cut in the vertical fin tab to hold the motor mount. The vertical fin tab also locks through a notch in the wing. I played with wing location and CG to optimize the wing location and wound up with a 9.75 oz rtf model with no nose weight needed. I painted it in a shuttle like black bottom and leading/trailing edge pattern using testors flat black, then did some line markings with a sharpie and added accents on the vertical fin and wing using trim vinyl. Test flights showed a very nice boost to around 700' and a really nice glide with easy flare on landing using an E-6.

Wingspan is 25" and length is 36.5" 2" diameter.

I decided to go with TWA markings since I already have a Pan-Am marked model and "Trans World" seemed more appropriate for a space plane....

Boosts to 600-700'

Flight video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYxOJCGfFwU&t=11s

Some flights the day before which had 10mph with 20mph gusts.....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyRXuzCg_9o

[burkefj]

I just finished a 1.5x upscale using 3" BT-300 and a pnc-300 from BMS along with a doubled thickness wing and tail. I built it for 32mm G-12 motors, dry weight rtf is 22 oz, 26.5 oz with a G-12, no nose weight was needed. Mark at stickershock did an upsized version of the markings he did for my smaller version and they look great. 55" long, 37" wingspan. I have plans on my dynasoar website including instructions if anyone wants to reproduce it. Maiden will wait for my casing/reloads to arrive, but it's a direct scale up and I don't expect any surprises.

Frank

[neil_w]

Would you expect the upscale to glide better or worse than the smaller one? I would assume it involves various ratios of weight, wing area, and this and that.

Just don't ask me what I mean by "glide better or worse" because I'm hoping you can tell me. :)

[burkefj]

At 1.5x you have 2.25x the wing area, so wing loading in this case is similar,slightly higher for the large version, however larger aircraft tend to fly slower than a direct scaling would indicate, a more useful relative comparison is the cubic wing loading, or weight in ounces divided by the wing area in sq feet raised to the 1.5 power. It allows a more direct comparison of how different size models will fly, in this case the small model is 8.6, large model is 6.8, my hypersonic delta wing is 6.54, so it should be
closer to the slower gliding plane.

In the end they are a flat plate wing sport flyer that looks cool and will never be a competition duration glider but that's not what I wanted.

[AstronMike]

Would you expect the upscale to glide better or worse than the smaller one? I would assume it involves various ratios of weight, wing area, and this and that.

Just don't ask me what I mean by "glide better or worse" because I'm hoping you can tell me. :)

In my experience with doing these sorts of things, I find that if the 'original sized' glider does well, an upscale will as well - sometimes better!

Now, as far as wing loading goes, the larger the glider, the LESS important this becomes. In fact, once you get to HPR sizes, something I call *Boost Loading* comes into play. That is basically the 'on pad weight' versus the wing area, and 'higher BL' birds tended to boost straighter - even in the 15-20mph winds I used to fly the Classic Astron SST in. :cool:

On a related note to wing loading, having a lower net WL on the upscale does NOT always portend to a better flying glider. Sometimes, yes, but not always. I've had upscale flexie RGs that did not glide nearly as well as their smaller counterparts (flex wings don't really like to carry all that extra 'rocket weight').

Sometimes you just throw out all the math and 'wet thumb' it! :o

[burkefj]

Here is the flight video from yesterday. Boost to around 600' or so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXpDShKZP2M

Parts tracings/parts list and instructions are at: http://www.dynasoarrocketry.com/orion-starliner-large-shuttle-plans.html

[burkefj]

Sent a Beta version of a kit to Mark Hayes for evaluation, it is using the flite test water resistant foam board for the wings/tail. Since the paper covering is brown it does require paint, and it is sensitive to the type of paint like depron is. Also, it needs some scuffing prior to paint application, and CA and epoxy don't stick well to it so you need to use beacons foam-tac or bob smith foam cure, which is not very expensive, just different. Weight for the foam board version is .5 oz heavier than depron, just due to the paint weight.

Here are the two versions, flite test foam board in Pan Am colors and depron in TWA colors. 9.75 oz for depron, 10.25 for flite test foam board.

[AstronMike]

Frank,

You've mentioned this stuff before, what is it? I do not believe it's Adams Readiboard, nor any standard office-store type fare. Speaking of which, those places now sell thinner lighter stuff, warpy as heck, and NOT the 'original' 3/16" thick stuff.

Really would like to know about any 'new' stuff out there, especially for midpower sorts. This Flite Test stuff might be worth a look...

[burkefj]

flite test has contracted wth Adams to build a flat 4.5mm water resistant paper covered foam board, you can do a search for flite test foam board. It's pretty stiff unless it gets bent enough to kink, like most foam boards. I've used a carbon spar like my other designs to try to preven that under flight loads.

https://store.flitetest.com/flite-test-water-resistant-foam-board-by-adams-50-pack/

Often they offer free shipping over $99. Sheets are 20" by 30" It is possible to use a monokote trim iron to carefully roll the edges which makes them hard and the paper stays attached, it sort of melts the styrene and it becomes more dense...it's an advanced technique. For the kit I suggest sanding slightly round then coating with the foam tac/foam cure cement to seal it.

Frank

[AstronMike]

flite test has contracted wth Adams to build a flat 4.5mm water resistant paper covered foam board, you can do a search for flite test foam board. It's pretty stiff unless it gets bent enough to kink, like most foam boards. I've used a carbon spar like my other designs to try to preven that under flight loads.

https://store.flitetest.com/flite-test-water-resistant-foam-board-by-adams-50-pack/

Often they offer free shipping over $99. Sheets are 20" by 30" It is possible to use a monokote trim iron to carefully roll the edges which makes them hard and the paper stays attached, it sort of melts the styrene and it becomes more dense...it's an advanced technique. For the kit I suggest sanding slightly round then coating with the foam tac/foam cure cement to seal it.

Frank

Aahhh, so is *is* an Adams product..... The 'stuff' Adams uses for the 'core' of their boards is so much lighter than the 'usual stuff', albeit not quite as stiff, but that's not been too big an issue there.

Hmm, so Adams is using a 'water resistant' coating on this variant? Hmm, back around '97 there was something called Artcor, which was a foamboard type deal, but this had plastic outer sheeting instead of paper. Was fully waterproof....BUT....it was discontinued soon thereafter.

Did sell some kits back then with this stuff, as it was only 1/8" thick, and lighter than the standard foamboards around. Adams was not around then, so this stuff 'won'.

Back to the flite test stuff......how is its warp resistance, if you can tell?

[burkefj]

I dont think there is any warp risk especially with a spar and through the tube mount. The paper is water resistant, but the glue is water based, do you have to seal the edges most likely.

It's slightly heavier than depron, but not enough to matter in this wing size...

[AstronMike]

It's slightly heavier than depron, but not enough to matter in this wing size...

Can you weigh a sheet of this stuff, or a decent sized portion thereof? I'd like to know how many sq-in per oz this really is. If it's not really heavier than standard Adams fare, then FTFB would be certainly a winner.

Like that they're selling this by the 50 sheet case. Once, back in like '06, I contacted Adams themselves, about getting their stuff in 1/8" instead of 3/16". Well, they actually HAD some, and shipped me a case! Can't believe I went through all that in like 2.5 years, but I was quite the design/build weenie then :o

[burkefj]

I'll have to check, on a trip for a week.

[burkefj]

the flite test waterproof foam board is 117 grams for a 20" by 30" sheet or 28 grams per sq foot.
depron 6mm is 171 grams for a 27.5" by 39" sheet, 23 grams per sq foot.

A typical wing+tail for me is 2-3 sq feet total, so diff is 10-15 grams heavier with this board.
Since this weight is more toward the tail, they might require maybe 2-5 grams more nose weight and then paint weight since the board needs to be painted since it is brown. If you design something from scratch you can optimize wing placement to avoid the nose weight increase.

So an increase of .5-.75 oz total approx. compared with a an indentical depron setup. With a an original wing loading of 6 oz/sq foot, it isn't much of an increase.

Frank

[AstronMike]

the flite test waterproof foam board is 117 grams for a 20" by 30" sheet or 28 grams per sq foot.
depron 6mm is 171 grams for a 27.5" by 39" sheet, 23 grams per sq foot.


Frank

Frank,

Thanks for doing this! So, in other words, a full sheet of FTFB weighs like 4.2z, which is lighter than I'd figured. That might get me to bite....

One other thing. How glueable is it? I mean, with wood glues and such? Have you tried to use it that way? If you could glue together two decent sized scraps and see how well/badly it adheres, that'd be great!

Thanks again!

Oh, one more curious thing....I just weighed a plain Adams sheet, one I'd gotten a few months ago. *That* only came in at 3.3z??? So, it appears that Adams *IS* making this stuff lighter and lighter......but not as strong or warp resistant?

When I first discovered Adams stuff back in '04, those first sheets weighed right around 5z, before slowly working their way down to 4.5z.

[burkefj]

Mike, foam safe CA and epoxy don't stick well, most people use hot glue since it is sticky but it is heavy. The other good option is beacons foam tac, or bob smith foam cure glues. I prefer the foam cure, you can use it as a normal glue and hold it in place till it cures, or use it like clear fillets, or you can apply to both sides, then stick together like a contact cement. Foam Cure is pretty cheap for a big bottle. I've glued my servos in place with this as well. I don't think wood glue will stick to the paper covering. For painting you need to scuff with 320 grit and I've only had success with testors and model master enamel spray cans, other paints I've had soak through the paper and dissolve the foam slightly causing wrinkles in the paper. You need to be careful using not too sticky masking and removing it carefully to not pull off the paint, that was the same with depron.

For laminating sheets, I've used 3m-77 spray adhesive with no problems, it destroys the sheets to try to separate them. That's the lightest option.


Frank


Frank,

Thanks for doing this! So, in other words, a full sheet of FTFB weighs like 4.2z, which is lighter than I'd figured. That might get me to bite....

One other thing. How glueable is it? I mean, with wood glues and such? Have you tried to use it that way? If you could glue together two decent sized scraps and see how well/badly it adheres, that'd be great!

Thanks again!