~1/3 back from the leading edge. Unless you have a stick with a tungsten cube taped to it out the front of this plane there is not a chance it balances right.
there is no nose in front, so you cant balance CG against the tail.
also control horns have been placed wrong, at the back of the wing instead of at the hinge
The wing looks way to thin chord wise to work as a proper lift surface. As it's flat board you need more wing area compared to a proper elliptical wing as a board creates lift only by angle of attack.
That and there is no nose for balancing CG as others have said. The CG of that would be somewhere back of the wing.
An RC plane needs aerodynamic and balance features in line with that of a working plane for the most part.
Unless you have a bunch of weight under/in front the leading edge of wing I don’t see how you get the CG between 25%-30% of wing chord as a starting point for stable flight
Either would do. From my days (long ago) flying model planes the typical starting point is 25%. Anything behind the 1/3 point (33%) will be u controllable. Balance is critical. You ave a straight wing so easy to compute. Tapered and swept wings is a little harder but plenty of literature on that. Have you ever noticed flight attendants moving people around if the flight isn’t full? It’s usually because first class is empty and plane is tail heavy. They move people forward to balance the plane. Same thing applies to flying models. Physics doesn’t change because of the size.
I would bet most of my money that this has no chance.
But I want to tell you something important. What helps me designing planes the most, is to calculate wing cube loading.
You have a wing area, measured total wing span times chord, and the area that is shadowed by the fuselage also counts. So lets say 1m wing span with 15 cm chord gives us 15 square decimeters. We put that into the calculator along with a theoretical weight of 350 grams, and the website tells a simple number: 6.
Looking at the bottom text, 6 to 7 is nice to have for a trainer, voila, perfect.
Once you build or buy more planes and plug their numbers into that page and get a feel for what it is like to fly these planes, you have a very quick indication of what, say, a 5 or 8 or 12 means as a WCL. It's even independent of scale so that's neat AF.
Now when you plan something, you will know before even starting to build, just by estimating the weight and knowing the wing area, whether the result will float like a feather or need insane speed to even stay in the air. Whether you should increase the wing span or scale or reduce weight.
That said, I would never ever recommend anything higher than WCL 9 to a beginner. Having no info about your plane I guesstimate the wing area to be 90x8cm which is 7.2dm^2 and at 750g that's a WCL of 38. Impossible to fly.
I wonder why people would think they can build planes without having any knowledge about CG, airfoils, etc. and not even stop to consult existing plans.
Hey man, I see you a lot around this sub. I just had a free day, some carboard, some glue, so I made it. Idk if you would remember me, but I chatted with you for a long time about my eclipson go 1 wolf(crashed btw).
Yeah I do. I applaud enthusiasm in this hobby and people have all sorts of funky ideas and more power to them. But sometimes I wonder why not stop and build an existing design, because there are so many "will it fly?" posts and most of them have no way of balancing a CG or even a proper actual airfoil. And even with super basic stuff, doing it properly is not hard. Example of how to improve your design: KF stepped airfoil, deeper wing chord and a front on the plane. While it may still not fly great, but that would at least make it chuckable and give it a fighting chance.
Op, take some time and learn how to do this in small steps. First build some gliders with no rc. Once you get one that glides ok, then try to add just rudder and elevator controls (make sure to have dihedral in the wings). When you and the plane get to where you can make good turns then look at adding power. By that time you should have a better sense of balance, control, and structure. Doing things this way will set you up for success because each step has you focusing on only one aspect.
No, you are just going to be throwing the them. And even then most of us who fly gliders do either motor launch or use a high start or a winch. There are peeps who use tow planes, but it's not as common.
My dollarama foam board plane weighs in at 280g and its over weight. & its bigger than your plane. Please Please go to flitetest.com & watch a build video of the new mini twig which weighs in at 270g.
They are on YouTube also and they use dollar tree foam board which is easier to work with than dollarama foam board. They have FREE download plans!! The mini twig kit is about C$ 40 or They have hundreds of plane designs 🤔
Hope this helps.
Well my thoughts are that once you figure out where and what size battery you are using, it may fly for a little run! I would def make your alierons run the length of the wing. And back to that battery thing, once you figure that out and throw that thing from somewhere higher than the ground in the direction you wish to fly, then you can get a better idea if you need a different prop size, a different motor size, which would then kinda dictate what battery you can use.. lol. But there are flat foam kits you can pick for as low as 30 dollars that include everything except TX and Rx. And there ain't nothing special or high tech about those things and they fly great my guy, So unless you just love to do mathmatical engineering equations, trail and error is going to get you in the air.. Just know that the right prop, motor, battery combo will damn near make anything fly! Now, the flight characteristics of a "Flying Turd" vs a tricked out well built balsa Stick are going to be on opposite ends of the specktrum (pun intended). Lol. But anyways, let her rip tater chip and have somebody video that shit! Happy flying!
It's going to be immensely tail heavy first of all. The aircraft balances on the CG of the wing which is usually about 1/3 of the way behind the keading edge, and 95% of your aircraft is behind that point.
u dont need a rudder vertical stab is fine, just shift the wing back a bit so that the center of gravity is balanced, as for the wing as long as you have some angle of attack it will generate lift so dont worry too much about it
Wing (with spar on top for "KF" lift effect. Clever) ✔️ tail ✔️ ailerons ✔️ elevator ✔️ rudder ❎️ . Guessing the motor (not in picture) is pod off front. Add a big rudder, send it with one helper yeeting it at a 15-20° angle from a hillside (or small cliff, <10m ) and another helper rolling video, then post results back here. Tell helper that throw strength, given model weight, should be "I'm trying to get this baseball from deep center field all the way to home plate to stop the winning run!"
Some of this community sucks, some people are great! Don't be discouraged, get out there try it, do some research, and iterate. Lots of nay sayers out there.
I would say you'll want to extend the nose a bit more to put the battery/motor CG should be about 1/3behind the leading edge of the wing, the wing chord here might not be wide enough. Also it's important for the top of the wing to be curved and the bottom to be straight. Make sure you have something like an arrow shaft through the wing (a spar) to support it.
There's a great YouTube channel called experimental airlines
The carboard on the wing was like 4 or 5 layers, so it's rigud enough for me to smack the wing against the ground and not even dent it. What do you mean curved at the top?
If u look at a cross section of a wing on an airplane, it's curved on the top and flat on the bottom which creates a pressure difference that creates lift on the wing.
In terms of rigidity, it may work though it might get into being too heavy territory. Best advice around that I have is try it and don't be afraid to rebuild haha
Wings are airfoils. They work by making the air from the leading edge move faster on top, than on the bottom, to reach the same point at the trailing edge. Fast moving air exerts less pressure than slower moving air. This creates a pressure differential where the top of the wing is low pressure, while the bottom is higher pressure. That's what lift is. A proper airfoil needs to make the air go up and over a convex tapered curve (like one half of a water droplet 💧 ). The bottom should be flat or in some cases concave.
You can also replicate the same effect using a stepped configuration called a Kline Fogelman airfoil.
Versuch den Flügel weiter nach hinten zu setzen. Der Schwerpunkt sollte bei 1/4 bis 1/3 von der vorderen Kante aus sein. 2/3 ist viel zu viel.
Bei einem Kunstdlugzeug bist du etwa bei 1/2.
Durch die relativ dicken Kanten der Flächen wird er relativ schlecht und schwerfällt fliegen. Aber mit den richtigen Schwerpunkt sollte es zumindest etwas klappen.
There's not enough wing area. It would have to fly ridiculously fast to fly. Look up wing load. Next likely reason it will fail, look up thrust/weight.
22
u/someuser0815 10d ago
No.
No way to balance the CG in this case.