WWI British pilot's journal describing an encounter with the Red Baron.. Pilot has every advantage, sun at his back, elevated dive attack from the rear etc.. He says the Triwing just turned around, 180 mid air on the spot and started firing back.. So much power and so much lift the plane could do about anything..
So I built something nearly identical but my "slats" pivoted in the "wingframe". The trick to making it work ended up being tying the slats together so they moved together. I used them as ailerons later by attaching a servo. The best version I came up with I made the slats "nest" into each other. That way I had a normal wing that could transform into a slow wing or fly fast depending on the setting. The coolest thing about it was I could slow flight off the ground almost vertically with the smallest amount of wind and transition to the fast wing WITHOUT a high aspect ratio. It stayed relatively flat. Landed almost vertically as well. For awhile I played with the "wingerons" and had them slaved to the elevator. That was crazy. Level flight was quick. Slight elevator was just elevator. Heavy throws on the elevator changed the wing slats. In the beginning I didn't tie the slats together. It sort of set them itself. It was fine MOST of the time. But when it departed normal attitude it went nuts quick. But if it was high enough it would level the wings and the slats would flutter in "louvre mode". No stable recovery was possible but the fluttering would slow it down to a nice touch down. I used springy landing gear. That became the preferred way to land. UNLESS there was rough air or conditions were windy. It could start rocking and would tumble into the ground. Those were the only real crashes. But they were catastrophic. The loss from a "Rock Tumbler" incident was total.
@@kwhp1507 I started looking right after commenting..... There weren't even cell phones much less cell phone cameras when I was doing this stuff. I DO keep all my plans though and I am pretty sure I can come up with something. I took two years of drafting in high school so I used to draw all my plans. Then usually notate them as I changed stuff. So they are going to be a mess, but I was pretty lazy back then. Most of what I have built over the years has been done from the minds eye. HOWEVER, I couldn't visualize that many interconnected parts back then. Wife pointed me in the right direction. I think there is at least a chance she has them somewhere and is trying to get me to clean out the attic. So it may be a couple days.
Without each slat having a separate distinct tip* I feel like the there is serious drag and turbulence being generated here at the wingtips. *hard to maintain rigid uniform distribution without an single edge joining them
Probably the biggest weaknesses are added mass and/or reduction of fuel storage space (for planes that store fuel in the wings). But I'm interested in real wirld application of this.
You should get in touch with Mike Patey on youtube who built the Draco turboprop. Check to see if you need a patent for your wing (?). He might be able to turn your design into a full size aircraft.
This stuff has been done before, I’m pretty certain you can’t patent something like this. Furthermore, such a wing wouldn’t really be practical for a full sized aircraft. Concerning Mike Patey, I’m not sure if he would go so far as to build a full scale version.
To Bailey assuming you read every comment. To be able to really see the effects of the wing the airplan needs to be heavier. Your camera doesn't really capture the full effect in part because the sun is often in the lens. You might want to put a ring aroudn the lens or make sure you are shooting from the southerly direction this time of the year. Now regarding extra weight you can add about the weight of about 8 quarters and place that weight trhoughout the aircraft so that it will react less quickly and the camera will capture the effects of the change in pitch. Also those ailerons are oversized in my view. BTW my goal is to incorporate this idea in a human capable aircraft. I have been inspired by this idea.
Hi, Folks. Please correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that a stall happens for either or both of two reasons: 1. The angle of attack is too steep for the airspeed at the time causing loss of lift. 2. The airspeed is just plain too slow to generate enough lift to keep the plane in the air. Quote: " Once you get too slow, there is not enough air speed for the air to go above the wing." Unquote. Also as I understand it, the air still flows above the wing whatever the airspeed short of being dead stopped. What really happens is that there is not ENOUGH air flowing past the wing, both above and below, to create sufficient pressure differential to provide the lift needed to keep the plane airborne. With all of that said though, GREAT idea and great videos. Thank you, Bailey Harris. Just my 0.02. You all have a wonderful day. Best wishes. Deas Plant.
Close but not quite there. Stall is determined by angle of attack, and thats it. As a general rule: no matter what speed, your plane will stall at same aoa. So for 1) the aoa is not "too steep for the airspeed" it's "too steep" period. This also means you can stall the plane going much faster than "minimum speed" (some planes can even stall at Vne).
Hi, @lingSpeed . I probably used the wrong term there. I suspect that I should have used 'thrust' or 'power' instead of speed. Does that alter anything? A kew-ree-yuss mind would like to know. Just my 0.02. You have a wonderful day. Best wishes. Deas Plant.
@@dplant8961 Issue is in the statement: "The angle of attack is too steep for the airspeed". Angle of attack and airspeed are not connected when it comes to stall. You can stall at any speed (or power) as long as aoa is above critical number. Another thing is causality. "aoa too steep for the airspeed causing loss of lift". There are two different "lifts" here. 1) The unspoken "lift requirement" that governs aoa and speed interaction. That lift is fixed and assumed to be equal to plane weight. And then 2) the reduced lift after stall, when you release the aoa-speed relation. So in practice it's the requirement for lift that's "too steep for the airspeed" to keep aoa below stall. The last part is confusing because of how aoa works. For low values of aoa incresing it increases lift, for high aoa increasing it reduces lift. The aoa value at which the relation flips is called Stall aoa and it's constant. This is also why stall warning systems are just aoa sensors with a buzzer. They dont care about power, lift or speed. Their only job is to inform pilot when the relation flips.
Negative to both/all. Stall is when flow separates from the top. Smooth flow is necessary for lift. If flow separates and leaves only turbulence above the wing (when the tufts of string aren't straight but are tangled), lift is lost, and the trailing edge controls don't have smooth flow making it uncontrollable. Slats and these slat wings redirect smooth flow over the parts trailing them.
Just a thought, is it possible that you are stalling the horizontal stabs? Maybe with fully articulate horizontal stabs, you can go full post stall without the paper airplane affect
Next you have to try very-low aspect-ratio. Not just a "Nut Ball" that can stand on its tail, but very low power, very high "A". Stalling is departure from controlled flight due to only turbulence over the top of the wing, instead of the smooth flow that is necessary for lift and the trailing edge controls. A known way to get a super-STOL, stall-proof wing is by using very-low aspect-ratio planform. See the Arup planes from Indiana in the '30s, and in the same time period the Nemeth "Parachute plane" with a circular wing. Named for its steep descent and near zero landing roll with any wind, it was faster than the Alliance Argo biplane which the fuselage came from. Would not stall. "A" of up to 45 degrees has been demonstrated. Even if the wing is going too slow to generate enough lift to stay up, it doesn't depart from controlled flight (as you demonstrate). Like the Arup, the Nemeth and the Farman & others of the type are demonstrably not inherently highly draggy at cruise normal flight due to alleged wing-tip vortices (which only exist at slow speed, high "A"). Also the similar Farman 1020; faster than the original monoplane, super-STOL, stall-spin proof. Like the Nemeth, the Arup, the Vought V-173, and the '90s Wainfan "Facetmobile", others. With aspect-ratio (span^2/area)
I really think there's something else going on here besides having multiple aero foils. I think they're close proximity to each other and somehow keeping later ones from stalling by redirecting the air that each one encounters... At low angle of attack it functions as one large normal airfoil, but a high angle of the attack, each individual aero foil is preventing the next one from experiencing that ridiculously high AOA. Maybe it's very draggy, but it's obviously very stable at low speeds, I wonder how similar this is to the way that bird wings operate. Would also be very very interesting to see what happens if you could individually rotate each of the arrow foils, as to reduce drag at high speed
Would be interesting to design a wing with a line of air ducts within the wing so air flows over, under and through the wing to see the results of the lift capacity and the effects of the air flow and air vortices plus other technical issues also maybe to incorporate circular tube Wingtips ???
What if you put laminar flow slats (paper) on the trailing edge if the airfoils so it acts as 1 wing in normal flight but when you increase the angle of attack they open and you get the effect of multiple airfoils? "Slats" is probably not the right terminology for what im talking about, but im sure you get the picture
@@baileyharrisRC And the ugly stick and other "stick" models. I could be wrong but I think the Ugly Stick was the first one. It had the Red Baron paint job..... You used to be able to buy just a wing kit for them. The idea was a simple modular kit.... Back when we bought a lumberyard in a box. You spent the summer mowing lawns to pay for them. The winter building them. The spring waiting to fly them.... Oregon..... AND the first nice day of almost summer you crashed them. If you were lucky, it was early enough in the summer to repair and try again... The worst thing was crashing at the end of summer. You flew too much, didn't mow enough lawns to buy your winter kit. So you raked leaves in the fall. You make a lot more money in the summer when its warm mowing but the grass takes longer to grow. In the fall, you rake, then you shake the tree for job security. Cut, rake, shake repeat as necessary. My birthday is in july, sometimes that helped. Report cards came in the mail at the end of June..... That wasn't as helpful to me as others probably......
Did you say you designed the wing so that the aft wing stalls first? If so, when the aft wing stalls, the tail drops and that increases the angle of attack and stalls the forward wing. Why not design a test where the only the forward wing stalls first which would decrease the angle of attack slightly and allow a much more docile stall because the rear wings would not reach the critical angle of attack at the same time the forward wing does?
You should try to increase angle of attack for shorter takeoff. Let me explain: your plane have slowest speed at steeper angle, then angle of plane on ground. Matching angle of plane on ground with angle of slowest fly will allow takeoff without need to accelerate more to reach enough speed to climb up at lower angle on ground.
You should mount a normal wing and a slatted wing on the same aircraft with aileron control. You will be able to quickly determine the wing's effectiveness against the baseline wing thru control inputs. Rudder for drag and Aileron for lift. p.s. The aileron probably only needs to be on the normal wing since the craft would already be way out symmetry.
Very nice work! But does a plane falling flat with control mean it's not stalled? I have 3d planes and flying wings that I can land vertically with accuracy like a heli/drone just like as shown in this vid. I is called an"elevator." It actually falls a lot flatter and with more stability (no gyros) compared to this plane and my planes that can do this have no dihedral but they do have huge control surfaces. Look up on RUclips "Learn How to fly 3D Beginner to Pro Series - The Elevator by Daniel Dominguez" for a detailed video about this by Precision Aerobatics.
Can I point you towards the "free wing" designs. Instead of pitching the entire plane, and shifting the stability to an extreme, consider only tilting the wing. I wonder how that would behave with the segmented wing...
2:28 - Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!!!!, ERROR. That's not the way a stall works. A stall can happen at any speed. An aircraft pulling too sharply out of a high speed dive can stall. A stall is simply a lack of proper smooth airflow over the lifting surface. Sure, going too slow can cause one, but it's not the only way, or the strict definition of a stall. The Shoreham airshow crash was a stall, and that aircraft was most likely travelling at least 150kts coming out of a loop. In certain footage you can see the moment it loses lift and bobbles around.
BZZZZZ. Hope you feel better lol. You still didn’t nail the definition. Stall is entirely based around angle of attack. The definition of a stall is when the wing exceeds the critical angle of attack. This is based on the angle between the relative wind and the chord line. Most rc planes critical angle of attack is between 10-17 or so degrees.
@@nwpilot1218 Yes, absolutely. Considering the unstallable wing nature of the video, and the demonstrated angle of attack - it didn't seem like the best argument to the contrary regarding the oft quoted 'going too slow' theory. RC heli guys (hard 3D) tend to draw the limit at 15°, and even then you're pushing it. I use 12°.
@@nwpilot1218negative. Stall is loss of smooth flow over the top, leaving only turbulence eliminating lift and depriving the trailing edge controls of anything to do. Stalling is departure from flight because of the loss of lift and loss of controls.
you seem to understand that the stalling of an aircraft is, in part, a function of elevator deflection.! thus, if this model had 'less' elevator travel, max elevator (at zero power) would NOT cause a stall.!!!
conclusion: this is a Heavy, high-drag wing, that has a too-low aspect ratio.! when mass (servos) is added to a main wing, that mass SHOULD BE located forward of the cg line (main spar); aka at thirty percent of chord. the addition of the ailerons, CHANGED the wing's Chord and airfoil.!!!
WWI British pilot's journal describing an encounter with the Red Baron.. Pilot has every advantage, sun at his back, elevated dive attack from the rear etc.. He says the Triwing just turned around, 180 mid air on the spot and started firing back.. So much power and so much lift the plane could do about anything..
Its like using the slot effect between jibs and mainsails on a sailing yacht. 😊
just watched part one and two this week, nice!
im excited for future videos
So I built something nearly identical but my "slats" pivoted in the "wingframe".
The trick to making it work ended up being tying the slats together so they moved together.
I used them as ailerons later by attaching a servo.
The best version I came up with I made the slats "nest" into each other.
That way I had a normal wing that could transform into a slow wing or fly fast depending on the setting.
The coolest thing about it was I could slow flight off the ground almost vertically with the smallest amount of wind and transition to the fast wing WITHOUT a high aspect ratio.
It stayed relatively flat.
Landed almost vertically as well.
For awhile I played with the "wingerons" and had them slaved to the elevator.
That was crazy.
Level flight was quick. Slight elevator was just elevator. Heavy throws on the elevator changed the wing slats.
In the beginning I didn't tie the slats together.
It sort of set them itself. It was fine MOST of the time.
But when it departed normal attitude it went nuts quick.
But if it was high enough it would level the wings and the slats would flutter in "louvre mode".
No stable recovery was possible but the fluttering would slow it down to a nice touch down.
I used springy landing gear.
That became the preferred way to land.
UNLESS there was rough air or conditions were windy.
It could start rocking and would tumble into the ground.
Those were the only real crashes.
But they were catastrophic.
The loss from a "Rock Tumbler" incident was total.
Any pics or videos of this wing? I would like to see it.
This is the way.
@@kwhp1507 I started looking right after commenting..... There weren't even cell phones much less cell phone cameras when I was doing this stuff. I DO keep all my plans though and I am pretty sure I can come up with something. I took two years of drafting in high school so I used to draw all my plans. Then usually notate them as I changed stuff. So they are going to be a mess, but I was pretty lazy back then. Most of what I have built over the years has been done from the minds eye. HOWEVER, I couldn't visualize that many interconnected parts back then.
Wife pointed me in the right direction. I think there is at least a chance she has them somewhere and is trying to get me to clean out the attic. So it may be a couple days.
I'd be interested in a wind tunnel simulation of your wing design, just to see what the effects are in tip vortices.
Without each slat having a separate distinct tip* I feel like the there is serious drag and turbulence being generated here at the wingtips.
*hard to maintain rigid uniform distribution without an single edge joining them
I almost think the connecting bar at the end would serve to limit slippage down the length
Probably the biggest weaknesses are added mass and/or reduction of fuel storage space (for planes that store fuel in the wings). But I'm interested in real wirld application of this.
You should get in touch with Mike Patey on youtube who built the Draco turboprop. Check to see if you need a patent for your wing (?).
He might be able to turn your design into a full size aircraft.
This stuff has been done before, I’m pretty certain you can’t patent something like this. Furthermore, such a wing wouldn’t really be practical for a full sized aircraft.
Concerning Mike Patey, I’m not sure if he would go so far as to build a full scale version.
To Bailey assuming you read every comment. To be able to really see the effects of the wing the airplan needs to be heavier. Your camera doesn't really capture the full effect in part because the sun is often in the lens. You might want to put a ring aroudn the lens or make sure you are shooting from the southerly direction this time of the year.
Now regarding extra weight you can add about the weight of about 8 quarters and place that weight trhoughout the aircraft so that it will react less quickly and the camera will capture the effects of the change in pitch. Also those ailerons are oversized in my view. BTW my goal is to incorporate this idea in a human capable aircraft. I have been inspired by this idea.
Hi, Folks.
Please correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that a stall happens for either or both of two reasons:
1. The angle of attack is too steep for the airspeed at the time causing loss of lift.
2. The airspeed is just plain too slow to generate enough lift to keep the plane in the air.
Quote:
" Once you get too slow, there is not enough air speed for the air to go above the wing."
Unquote.
Also as I understand it, the air still flows above the wing whatever the airspeed short of being dead stopped. What really happens is that there is not ENOUGH air flowing past the wing, both above and below, to create sufficient pressure differential to provide the lift needed to keep the plane airborne.
With all of that said though, GREAT idea and great videos. Thank you, Bailey Harris.
Just my 0.02.
You all have a wonderful day. Best wishes. Deas Plant.
Close but not quite there. Stall is determined by angle of attack, and thats it. As a general rule: no matter what speed, your plane will stall at same aoa. So for 1) the aoa is not "too steep for the airspeed" it's "too steep" period. This also means you can stall the plane going much faster than "minimum speed" (some planes can even stall at Vne).
Hi, @lingSpeed .
I probably used the wrong term there. I suspect that I should have used 'thrust' or 'power' instead of speed.
Does that alter anything?
A kew-ree-yuss mind would like to know.
Just my 0.02.
You have a wonderful day. Best wishes. Deas Plant.
@@dplant8961 Issue is in the statement: "The angle of attack is too steep for the airspeed". Angle of attack and airspeed are not connected when it comes to stall. You can stall at any speed (or power) as long as aoa is above critical number.
Another thing is causality. "aoa too steep for the airspeed causing loss of lift". There are two different "lifts" here. 1) The unspoken "lift requirement" that governs aoa and speed interaction. That lift is fixed and assumed to be equal to plane weight. And then 2) the reduced lift after stall, when you release the aoa-speed relation.
So in practice it's the requirement for lift that's "too steep for the airspeed" to keep aoa below stall.
The last part is confusing because of how aoa works. For low values of aoa incresing it increases lift, for high aoa increasing it reduces lift. The aoa value at which the relation flips is called Stall aoa and it's constant. This is also why stall warning systems are just aoa sensors with a buzzer. They dont care about power, lift or speed. Their only job is to inform pilot when the relation flips.
Negative to both/all.
Stall is when flow separates from the top. Smooth flow is necessary for lift.
If flow separates and leaves only turbulence above the wing (when the tufts of string aren't straight but are tangled), lift is lost, and the trailing edge controls don't have smooth flow making it uncontrollable.
Slats and these slat wings redirect smooth flow over the parts trailing them.
Do you think this could be used for full scale aircraft too?
Just a thought, is it possible that you are stalling the horizontal stabs? Maybe with fully articulate horizontal stabs, you can go full post stall without the paper airplane affect
Stall has nothing to do with airspeed it is only to do with angle of attack.
It would be awesome to see a scaled up model with blown flaps like a Shinmeiwa US-2. Could probably take off almost vertically.
Those are some massive control surfaces
Hello, And if you put the wing down the fuselage with more angle and/or long legs? Probably a shorter takeoff.
I think you will be very interested to check out Witold Kasper. And his revolutionary wing!
I also began viewing as a result of part 2. Looking forward to more innovation and ingenuity.
Next you have to try very-low aspect-ratio.
Not just a "Nut Ball" that can stand on its tail, but very low power, very high "A".
Stalling is departure from controlled flight due to only turbulence over the top of the wing, instead of the smooth flow that is necessary for lift and the trailing edge controls.
A known way to get a super-STOL, stall-proof wing is by using very-low aspect-ratio planform.
See the Arup planes from Indiana in the '30s, and in the same time period the Nemeth "Parachute plane" with a circular wing. Named for its steep descent and near zero landing roll with any wind, it was faster than the Alliance Argo biplane which the fuselage came from.
Would not stall.
"A" of up to 45 degrees has been demonstrated. Even if the wing is going too slow to generate enough lift to stay up, it doesn't depart from controlled flight (as you demonstrate).
Like the Arup, the Nemeth and the Farman & others of the type are demonstrably not inherently highly draggy at cruise normal flight due to alleged wing-tip vortices (which only exist at slow speed, high "A").
Also the similar Farman 1020; faster than the original monoplane, super-STOL, stall-spin proof. Like the Nemeth, the Arup, the Vought V-173, and the '90s Wainfan "Facetmobile", others.
With aspect-ratio (span^2/area)
Great research.
Frustrating for VTOL competitions. Landing within a centimeter will abolish a sport.
A good control would be to cover that exact wing and make it a solid wing….. see how same/different it is.
Agreed. Gotta rule out other design factors
Yeah, bud. You are also unstallable. Keep it up.
If we are doin metaphors, then I’m like a paper airplane. I stall out then regain momentum again just to stall out and repeat.
I really think there's something else going on here besides having multiple aero foils. I think they're close proximity to each other and somehow keeping later ones from stalling by redirecting the air that each one encounters... At low angle of attack it functions as one large normal airfoil, but a high angle of the attack, each individual aero foil is preventing the next one from experiencing that ridiculously high AOA. Maybe it's very draggy, but it's obviously very stable at low speeds, I wonder how similar this is to the way that bird wings operate. Would also be very very interesting to see what happens if you could individually rotate each of the arrow foils, as to reduce drag at high speed
I’d actually agree with you 100% I got this idea from another RUclipsr by the name of sam shepherd, in his video he talks about that.
fyi, the use of ailerons with a dihedral wing is not recommended. because, there is a major tendency to over-control, in the roll axis.
what??? i have bunch of planes that have both characteristics.
How do you attach the motor to the stick?
I think this design could benefit from a larger scale model
Much larger... :)
Would be interesting to design a wing with a line of air ducts within the wing so air flows over, under and through the wing to see the results of the lift capacity and the effects of the air flow and air vortices plus other technical issues also maybe to incorporate circular tube Wingtips ???
What if you put laminar flow slats (paper) on the trailing edge if the airfoils so it acts as 1 wing in normal flight but when you increase the angle of attack they open and you get the effect of multiple airfoils? "Slats" is probably not the right terminology for what im talking about, but im sure you get the picture
Bro! That is a killer idea! Good thinking. That might actually work pretty well. I’ll definitely keep that in mind, thanks for the comment!
@@baileyharrisRC hell yea! Hope it works or at least leads to more innovation. Keep it up man, looking forward to the update
amazing! mad props.
now can you apply this wing to something that can handle somee payload?
Actually that is a great idea! Ill have to do video on that ha ha
Enjoyed your video keep doing it I too like Experimenting, Thanks for sharing
Thank you, Will do!
Awesome: and… can you add wingtips…? Drag would reduce but wondering what the affect (of anything) there would be on stability (the yawing)….?
Very Cool! Please demo on a no wind day.
Thats dumb stable! What a great idea!
For some arbitrary data, do a few comparable flights without and with some stretch foil tensioned over the wings
haha thats cool lol *now make the motor pivot up and down for extreme sTOL*
Now you did it, he'll do it, just watch! 😀
**
That is mad impressive!
You should show this to the guys from the Flight Test RUclips channel.....they would love it!
Stalls/hovers like a hawk. Cool
The sun make me can't see ...
Good work .
it seem like a multi-slats wing.
Why the iron cross on the rudder?
They were the standard decals for the slow stick models. Ha ha
@@baileyharrisRC And the ugly stick and other "stick" models.
I could be wrong but I think the Ugly Stick was the first one. It had the Red Baron paint job.....
You used to be able to buy just a wing kit for them. The idea was a simple modular kit....
Back when we bought a lumberyard in a box. You spent the summer mowing lawns to pay for them. The winter building them. The spring waiting to fly them.... Oregon.....
AND the first nice day of almost summer you crashed them.
If you were lucky, it was early enough in the summer to repair and try again...
The worst thing was crashing at the end of summer.
You flew too much, didn't mow enough lawns to buy your winter kit.
So you raked leaves in the fall.
You make a lot more money in the summer when its warm mowing but the grass takes longer to grow. In the fall, you rake, then you shake the tree for job security.
Cut, rake, shake repeat as necessary.
My birthday is in july, sometimes that helped.
Report cards came in the mail at the end of June.....
That wasn't as helpful to me as others probably......
@@baileyharrisRC Oh okay, no problem! I like your videos, keep it up.
Respect for your engineering art
I look all your videos. Maybe I would try an T tail for get them smooth on elevator also an -1 EWD
This is great. Can't wait to see your next idea.
Really good work 👍🏼
Did you say you designed the wing so that the aft wing stalls first? If so, when the aft wing stalls, the tail drops and that increases the angle of attack and stalls the forward wing. Why not design a test where the only the forward wing stalls first which would decrease the angle of attack slightly and allow a much more docile stall because the rear wings would not reach the critical angle of attack at the same time the forward wing does?
You should try to increase angle of attack for shorter takeoff. Let me explain: your plane have slowest speed at steeper angle, then angle of plane on ground. Matching angle of plane on ground with angle of slowest fly will allow takeoff without need to accelerate more to reach enough speed to climb up at lower angle on ground.
You should mount a normal wing and a slatted wing on the same aircraft with aileron control. You will be able to quickly determine the wing's effectiveness against the baseline wing thru control inputs. Rudder for drag and Aileron for lift.
p.s. The aileron probably only needs to be on the normal wing since the craft would already be way out symmetry.
Very nice work! But does a plane falling flat with control mean it's not stalled? I have 3d planes and flying wings that I can land vertically with accuracy like a heli/drone just like as shown in this vid. I is called an"elevator." It actually falls a lot flatter and with more stability (no gyros) compared to this plane and my planes that can do this have no dihedral but they do have huge control surfaces.
Look up on RUclips "Learn How to fly 3D Beginner to Pro Series - The Elevator by Daniel Dominguez" for a detailed video about this by Precision Aerobatics.
Wow a new part! Very interesting series :)
Nice... Differential thrust may give you smooth transition to vtol
Part 4: full sized plane 😎
Can I point you towards the "free wing" designs. Instead of pitching the entire plane, and shifting the stability to an extreme, consider only tilting the wing. I wonder how that would behave with the segmented wing...
Nice vid! Keep it up man
nice model
Never seen a plane better balanced!
Cool
FAR 103?
Audio is low.
2:28 - Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!!!!, ERROR. That's not the way a stall works. A stall can happen at any speed. An aircraft pulling too sharply out of a high speed dive can stall. A stall is simply a lack of proper smooth airflow over the lifting surface. Sure, going too slow can cause one, but it's not the only way, or the strict definition of a stall. The Shoreham airshow crash was a stall, and that aircraft was most likely travelling at least 150kts coming out of a loop. In certain footage you can see the moment it loses lift and bobbles around.
BZZZZZ. Hope you feel better lol. You still didn’t nail the definition. Stall is entirely based around angle of attack. The definition of a stall is when the wing exceeds the critical angle of attack. This is based on the angle between the relative wind and the chord line. Most rc planes critical angle of attack is between 10-17 or so degrees.
@@nwpilot1218 Yes, absolutely. Considering the unstallable wing nature of the video, and the demonstrated angle of attack - it didn't seem like the best argument to the contrary regarding the oft quoted 'going too slow' theory. RC heli guys (hard 3D) tend to draw the limit at 15°, and even then you're pushing it. I use 12°.
@@nwpilot1218negative.
Stall is loss of smooth flow over the top, leaving only turbulence eliminating lift and depriving the trailing edge controls of anything to do.
Stalling is departure from flight because of the loss of lift and loss of controls.
@JFrazer4303 interesting if true
I'm just here to ride the hype train. Go Wildcats
you seem to understand that the stalling of an aircraft is, in part, a function of elevator deflection.!
thus, if this model had 'less' elevator travel, max elevator (at zero power) would NOT cause a stall.!!!
But you changed the frame and have no idea what a flat plank wing would do
at 2:37, i will defer comment.
You should have patented this.
Delta wings are unstallable.
Bro. Bro.
Seems tail-heavy..
ok, dal nord est italy.
conclusion: this is a Heavy, high-drag wing, that has a too-low aspect ratio.!
when mass (servos) is added to a main wing, that mass SHOULD BE located forward of the cg line (main spar); aka at thirty percent of chord. the addition of the ailerons, CHANGED the wing's Chord and airfoil.!!!
dont yell all right at people ya goober