Amazing John! And surprisingly maneuverable. Sometimes it reminded me of those Sukhoi Su-27s that seem to defy aerodynamics and do just what they damn well want.
The windier it gets, the more forward the balance point moves; got to be able to push the nose down into the gale to penetrate! See the moment @3:23 as a prime example.
Way back (I'm 61) I built a canard from two crashed models. It Had a wing from a Veron Big Impala and a foreplane from a combat Models F16 which I had piled in during high winds at Mam Tor. The moment arm was longer than your model here. After realising that I had to shift the CG well forward it flew OK but had a curious habit at certain low speeds of latching into a nose up attitiude that it was reluctant to recover from, even with full down applied. /A project that never happened was a model that could reverse flight direction while in flight. Climb vertical, switch mode and come back down in the other direction (Conventional to Canard). It Involved a servo powered CG shift and quite a big trim change and of course a special symmetrical wing profile that would work in both directions and all moving panels as ailerons. I never got it past the design stage and have never seen a reference to a model that can do it. Impossible?
@@SlopeRCGliders and Tim, well, all very interesting. I designed a canard microlight that never got built..another story. However, I built a Flight-sim model to test-fly it. Definitely not symmetrical aerofoils (very low Re high lift cambered foils) Flew well, yet in loss of control situations it had a habit of inverting and being difficult to re-invert or recover whilst being quite stable. High-wing, 15 deg. Sweep, low canard, 2 sear side by side pusher, tip fins.
As always very nice, do you have some in flight tests you do to check your CG position? Eg like the dive test? You seem to have really nailed the tuning of Canards and I'd love to hear some more about your trimming process on them.
Pippa seems to be easy on the flying toy. Where I´m living I know some crazy dogs, running and trying to catch the plane and even biting the wings.. Lucky you. But most and for all for that incredible location... Most enjoyable. Great!!!
John, Have you ever considered putting headphones on while flying, and playing the music you plan to add to the clip later? I think a chap of your skill level would be able to match a track you know well to the actions of the glider and thus create something exquisite. Just a thought. Joe.
I would like to reproduce this glider in a reduced size for indoor flight. Can you tell me where the CG is located? is it on the front fender? and the duck should we add 1 or 2 degrees of positive impact? I read your comment regarding the online CG calculator but never got it to work.
The front canard does have about 1 -2 degrees of positive incidence. The CG is about half way along the fuselage. Try this online calculator rcplanes.online/cg_canard.htm
Hi John, Nice flights. The wind was definitely giving your fingers a workout. Katherine was great with the camera. What's the name of you four legged friend? You both stay safe.
Are canard-based planes harder to fly? Also, how do you find the CG of a Canard type aircraft? Is the canard on that model fixed or are there elevators on it?
A Canard is no harder to fly than a conventional layout and they do have some very good stall characteristics. I use an online CG calculator to work out the balance point. You just put in all the dimensions and it comes up with a CG measurement. On this model, I went with a fixed front wing. It keeps the build a lot simpler and still seems to fly well.
@@SlopeRCGliders : Interesting. So does the angle of incidence on the canard match that of the main wing or is there a slight positive angle of incidence on the canard? (such a positive angle would surely make inverted flight more difficult) . I assume that all controls are from the elevon setup only? Just two moving parts for everytrhing? Is that correct?
If the angle of incidence of the two flying surfaces match, then could one assume it would essentially behave as a delta wing design but with bits missing in the middle? Is that really what a canard ends up being?
The front canard does have about 2 degrees of positive incidence. The control is purely elevons with just two moving parts. I guess the other way it could be achieved is with 0 degrees of incidence on the canard and some reflex on the elevons.
Amazing John! And surprisingly maneuverable. Sometimes it reminded me of those Sukhoi Su-27s that seem to defy aerodynamics and do just what they damn well want.
Always impressed with your editing, choice of music, your wife's camera work and your flying skills John! You guys should have 100K subs!
Thanks Paul. I guess flying gliders is quite a niche thing
I'm amazed to see how well your Canard formula models fly...and the way you handle them.May be you like "foie gras" ?Congrats and cheers !
The windier it gets, the more forward the balance point moves; got to be able to push the nose down into the gale to penetrate!
See the moment @3:23 as a prime example.
Way back (I'm 61) I built a canard from two crashed models. It Had a wing from a Veron Big Impala and a foreplane from a combat Models F16 which I had piled in during high winds at Mam Tor. The moment arm was longer than your model here. After realising that I had to shift the CG well forward it flew OK but had a curious habit at certain low speeds of latching into a nose up attitiude that it was reluctant to recover from, even with full down applied. /A project that never happened was a model that could reverse flight direction while in flight. Climb vertical, switch mode and come back down in the other direction (Conventional to Canard). It Involved a servo powered CG shift and quite a big trim change and of course a special symmetrical wing profile that would work in both directions and all moving panels as ailerons. I never got it past the design stage and have never seen a reference to a model that can do it. Impossible?
That’s a really interesting idea! I guess it would have been very difficult to make work, but I don’t think it’s impossible…..
@@SlopeRCGliders and Tim, well, all very interesting. I designed a canard microlight that never got built..another story. However, I built a Flight-sim model to test-fly it. Definitely not symmetrical aerofoils (very low Re high lift cambered foils) Flew well, yet in loss of control situations it had a habit of inverting and being difficult to re-invert or recover whilst being quite stable. High-wing, 15 deg. Sweep, low canard, 2 sear side by side pusher, tip fins.
LOVE those "hovering" shots!
Your glider is so cool and awesome. So I want to make it, but is there any site related to production?
It would be better if you could get a drawing.❤
Hi there and thank you. Unfortunately there isn’t any site showing how it was built. I mostly just made it up as I went along.
As always very nice, do you have some in flight tests you do to check your CG position? Eg like the dive test? You seem to have really nailed the tuning of Canards and I'd love to hear some more about your trimming process on them.
Another unknown object sighted off the coast. 🤘😁
Nice John 👍 Reminds me of Nigel Hawes, Candoo.
That not only is a very well configured canard John, but your aerobatics defy what some people would have you believe about them 🤔
Thank you!
Looks really good in the air.
Man that thing really rocks!
Amazing, wonderful !!🙃🙂😁😄😃😀
Thank you so much 😀
Nice John!! Looks like your snow melted! 8 degrees below zero here this morning!
Oh wow. It’s slowly getting nicer here…
@@SlopeRCGliders Good building weather over here! C'mon Spring!!!!!!!
Lovely as always!
Pippa seems to be easy on the flying toy. Where I´m living I know some crazy dogs, running and trying to catch the plane and even biting the wings.. Lucky you. But most and for all for that incredible location... Most enjoyable. Great!!!
Thank you again.
John,
Have you ever considered putting headphones on while flying, and playing the music you plan to add to the clip later? I think a chap of your skill level would be able to match a track you know well to the actions of the glider and thus create something exquisite. Just a thought.
Joe.
Never thought about doing that. May have to give it a go sometime..
I would like to reproduce this glider in a reduced size for indoor flight. Can you tell me where the CG is located? is it on the front fender? and the duck should we add 1 or 2 degrees of positive impact? I read your comment regarding the online CG calculator but never got it to work.
The front canard does have about 1 -2 degrees of positive incidence. The CG is about half way along the fuselage. Try this online calculator rcplanes.online/cg_canard.htm
@@SlopeRCGlidersIt's really complicated to use this software for CG. I'll find it by throwing the plane by hand🙄👍
Hi John,
Nice flights. The wind was definitely giving your fingers a workout. Katherine was great with the camera. What's the name of you four legged friend? You both stay safe.
Thank you. The little dog is Pippa.
His canards can only fly east so he never loses any over the water. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. 😁
What's the music? Good choice!
Sticks in the corners a few time John?
Yup, definitely.
Are canard-based planes harder to fly? Also, how do you find the CG of a Canard type aircraft? Is the canard on that model fixed or are there elevators on it?
A Canard is no harder to fly than a conventional layout and they do have some very good stall characteristics.
I use an online CG calculator to work out the balance point. You just put in all the dimensions and it comes up with a CG measurement.
On this model, I went with a fixed front wing. It keeps the build a lot simpler and still seems to fly well.
@@SlopeRCGliders : Interesting. So does the angle of incidence on the canard match that of the main wing or is there a slight positive angle of incidence on the canard? (such a positive angle would surely make inverted flight more difficult) . I assume that all controls are from the elevon setup only? Just two moving parts for everytrhing? Is that correct?
If the angle of incidence of the two flying surfaces match, then could one assume it would essentially behave as a delta wing design but with bits missing in the middle? Is that really what a canard ends up being?
The front canard does have about 2 degrees of positive incidence. The control is purely elevons with just two moving parts.
I guess the other way it could be achieved is with 0 degrees of incidence on the canard and some reflex on the elevons.
Berber melody
Hay John,
How is this set up ?
Elevons ? or ailerons and elevator ?
It’s just elevons on this one. It keeps the build a lot easier and a moving canard is always vulnerable to damage on landing.
Oh was this today? I was evening thinking of coming down.
I filmed this a while ago but have only just got round to editing it.
What part of the world is this, it's beautiful
It’s Cornwall, England