Tail Weight methods

I have observed that most if not all models come out nose heavy, in part due to heavier motors and, I suspect due to the designer wanting to be sure his design was not likely to be built tail heavy off the board. Several methods of tail weighting come to mind. If a guy was smart he would build a booby hatch into the aft end of his new jewell, but how about profiles. You can bolt on large washers, epoxy on stick-on weights or linotype sheet, or drill and fill with lead shot and epoxy and refinish the hole or use the washers to get your weight then do something more permanent. Any other ideas?

For profiles I drill a hole through the fuse & put a 4-40 blind nut on the right side under the stab. Then I bolt on half ounce &/or quarter ounce pre-drilled tip weights on the left side until I get what I want. You could paint the lead to match your fuse I suppose but it doeesn't show enough for me to bother.
Nils

Windy says just about the oposite: he figures that most put way too much paint on, and that paint is 75% or so behind the cg?

"Hot rod" guys would first look to the nose to see what can be lightened before adding weight.

The blind nut is a good idea.

See Ya

I guess one thing to easily overlook is that although the weight is pushing the tail down, when we are flying it also is pushing the tail OUT - which makes adjustable leadouts and/or rudder offset a bit more important.
George

>I guess one thing to easily overlook is that although
>the weight is pushing the tail down, when we are
>flying it also is pushing the tail OUT - which
>makes adjustable leadouts and/or rudder offset
>a bit more important.

> George

But it is part of the "barbell effect" George, and the engine is doing the exact same thing at the other end. When we get the CG too far back, we lose stability, and, sometimes, penetration. If the plane won't glide when the engine quits, that is a good indication that the CG is too far back. Of course it could, also, mean that the flaps and elevators aren't at neutral together. If you have a little "up" flap when the plane is flying level, then it won't glide well, either. And I have seen that, done that.

Be that as it may, leadout position is extremely important relative to the location of the CG, but it is not the weight that is pulling the tail down OR pushing it out. The stabilizer pushes the tail down (unless you are flying a canard, the CG will always be ahead of the center of lift), and it is not the tail weight that is pushing the tail out (proper leadout location will put the leadouts about an inch behind the CG).

We gave up using rudder offset long ago. It generally kills overhead tension. Although Matt's latest ship may incorporate an adjustable rudder--and mostly for cosmetic reasons--we fully expect it will be set at "0" when the plane is in proper trim.

When I was building my oversize Nobler profile, I made the OB tip out of pine, instead of hanging dead weight out there. I guess you could do the same with the horizontal stab or rudder; use some of that HARD balsa. Or basswood. Might as well get some structural bennies.

But Peabody is right; a lot of times, all that paint throws the CG aft. Currell