Lurker comes out of closet with Brodak P...

LAST EDITED ON Aug-19-03 AT 05:08 PM (CDT)
 
Here's my newly finished Brodak Pathfinder. I've been trying to get thing finished all spring. But between my schedule and the weather it's been tough getting it together. I used mostly Brodak Dope, it has some sig clear that I had on hand for the first few coats. And I used some vinyl graphics for the lettering, and also the nose art.

I did have some trouble with the blue. I put a coat on when it was WAY to damp and it clouded up pretty bad (this has been one of the wettest summers around here in recent memory). I sanded it and put another coat on, it now it looks pretty good.

In general, I think that it's got one or two extra coats of paint. It's coming out at 52 Oz., so it may need more then the MAX-40H I have in it. However, not sure this point. Can someone indicate if this is to much weight for this engine?

I should get it in the air in a week or two if the weather holds out.

LAST EDITED ON Aug-19-03 AT 01:26 PM (CDT)
 
Nice looking PathFinder. Like the simplicity of the Navy scheme.

You did a good job with it as well.

52 oz's is at the upper end of the weight limits, but should handle it quite well. I had one I flew in competition with some success that weighed that much. I used a stock fp .40 running in the high low configuration. I used a modern TF 11-4 prop and a tongue muffler. It had plenty of power even at 4300 feet where I fly.

Try 66 feet eye to eye .015 dia.lines and shorten as necessary. Many seem happy with ~64 feet.

Have fun, the design is a great flying plane.

I'm wondering why everything is spinning around?

Lovely job, I like your paint scheme.

I predict you'll love this airplane. It is a very good design.

[photo not recovered: 3e69bb3870f12ad5.jpg]

"What if this weren't a hypothetical question?"

Lurker,
I think they missed the Question if the 0S 40 has enough power. I`ve run the 40 and it should have plenty of power for you Pf. Hope you like it. Looks great.

Lurker,

I have a Question for you. What is the stick in the back under the stab.for? Maybe to hold it on the nose wheel. If so bend the gear back alittle. ooOPPPPPPPSSSSSSSSS;)

LAST EDITED ON Aug-19-03 AT 08:15 PM (CDT)
 
Lurk,
Nice looking airframe,..well done. I'd also check the main gear install to ensure the gear legs angle toward the rear of the plane. If it is a tail sitter you'd do well to check the c.g. before first flights. The gear legs are inter-changeable between the right and left sides of course. You may only need to swap them from one side to the other to effect the fix (that's if they angle forward at present?). Attached is a snap of the plans.

Looking at the plans I'd also say that the gear doors would look better (to me) if reversed also. Keep the long edge to the front, and the rounded wheel well cut out shape to the rear. This looks more Jet like in keeping with the nose and rake of the tail lines. But of course that's just me. Nice bird you've got there!!!

Tony

edit: re-worked the pic some.

LAST EDITED ON Aug-19-03 AT 05:15 PM (CDT)
 
Yes, the dog bone behind the stab is to keep the nose down! The wheels do need bent back little further. I don't think that they are swept back as far as shown on the plans. This is really the first time that I had everything together with the paint on. Right now it balances right on the wheels. So, it balanced a little further forward before the color dope went on.

About the wheel pants, I tried the wheel pants on both ways and I wasn't convinced wich way they really went. Only after looking at the plans did I see which way they were meant to go. I think I'll try them both ways again. I might like them better the other way know also.

It's good to here that the 40 will be enough power. Though, I was think that a .46 would move the CG forward a bit. Maybe to much? The .40 is an EBAY motor that was converted with some parts from Leonard. I was truly amazed when it started on the first flip. It turned about 10,700 RPM on the test stand with the 11-4 prop in the pictures.

Also, here's a picture of the bottom, withe myler U.S.Navy decals. They were cut by Bill Fulmer and were very reasonably priced. They look great!

Thanks for great feedback.

From the above picture, the landing gear position DEFINITELY looks as if its a taildragger. I have a Pathfinder that's a taildragger and the landing gear position is exactly where the gear on the picture is. The CG on the Pathfinder is 1/4" behind the wing spar, the landing gear needs to be another 1/4" behind the CG when empty for trycicle gear.

Why don't you loose the nose gear and install a small wheel in the tail. It will fly just as well and fare much better during takeoffs on tall grass.

>
>Why don't you loose the nose gear and install a small wheel
>in the tail. It will fly just as well and fare much better
>during takeoffs on tall grass.
>
>
>Steven Yampolsky

With all due respect, and knowing the reasoning behind the trike gear, I would urge you to keep the nose gear.

Grass takeoffs aren't really any tougher, probably easier, than with a tail dragger. The prop is always protected. Landings are easier, and very seldom does the model nose over.

I always set my Pathfinders so that they barely set on all the wheels, with an empty tank. If I push the tail down, it will stay down. Makes the ground handling, especially rotation for takeoff, really smooth. When the tank is full, it sits solidly on all the wheels.

I'm wondering why everything is spinning around?

John,
I agree that tricycle gear is very nice! As a matter of fact, that's what I'm going to use on my new Pathfinder. The reason for suggesting conversion to taildragger was because Jim's plane already has main gear in the position for a taildragger setup. All Jim needs is add a small wheel in the back.

John, for my personal knowledge, on your Pathfinder, did you place the main gear 1/4 in behind the CG as per plans? I'd like to get my Pathfinder to sit like you described it.

>John,
>I agree that tricycle gear is very nice! As a matter of
>fact, that's what I'm going to use on my new Pathfinder. The
>reason for suggesting conversion to taildragger was because
>Jim's plane already has main gear in the position for a
>taildragger setup. All Jim needs is add a small wheel in the
>back.
>
>John, for my personal knowledge, on your Pathfinder, did you
>place the main gear 1/4 in behind the CG as per plans? I'd
>like to get my Pathfinder to sit like you described it.
>
>Steven Yampolsky

Steve,

Answering your question first, I used the stock gear that came with the kit. With the plane balanced where I fly it, the plane sits this way naturally.

This makes me suspect that our Lurker's plane is possibly tail heavy. He might want to check that out before taking flight with it. Gordy likes his to be slightly more tail heavy than I have in the past, but then he has the talent and ability to fly it very well in that configuration.

After listening to him give me grief, my CG has recently been moved back further than I would have, and I've gotten used to it, to the point that my other planes now feel slow and hard to turn. The PF still grooves, but is soo much easier to put into, and exit, the square corners. Makes me believe that the Cg can be carried a bit more aft than shown.

The CG as shown was taken from one of our PF's and is a good one to start with, but my recent experience tells me to go throught the normal trimming technique as far as CG placement.

Back to your question, With the CG where it is, my PF sits as I describe it. If yours is balanced where you are comfortable, and doesn't sit this way, and you have the stock gear mounted correctly, you probably have the CG incorrectly set. Of course, you can tweak the gear to get it to set right.

I believe that you'll find this plane a good one. It and the Cardinal are the best of the current profiles out there. I have both, and at this time, with the set up I'm now flying, I have to give the edge to the PF. Now to re-trim the Cardinal.....

I'm wondering why everything is spinning around?

Thanks for the info John. Like many people here, I'm waiting on humidity to come down so that I can paint the PF. I got a taste of what a PF can do when I flew a plans-built taildragger version. I loved it! It had tension everywhere, grooved easily and turned on a dime!

Boy you sure are a young guy Jim!! Great work, after all you can't go wrong with a Navy scheme.
I live in Huntsville, AL and we are 1.05 inches ahead of normal for August rain fall and it too is hard to find a time to paint. Just Sunday afternoon I took 25% retarder, 10% clear and 65% thinner and at low pressure (25 psi) sprayed a light coat over my Continental and all the haze went away. Be very careful over decals with this mixture, but it will allow the moisture to escape. Of course there is the caveat of trying it on a place that won't show first! The underside of the wing I guess or on a test piece of wood.
Your photos are making me antsy and I just got to go out to the garage and build my kit.

LAST EDITED ON Aug-19-03 AT 09:06 PM (CDT)
 
You'll love the way it flies, Jim. Even with an underdeveloped motor run, mine leapt off the ground and settled into a wonderful groove. With more time on the motor and trimming, it's gonna be great. Per Gordon Delaney's advice, I'm running 61' 3" eye-to-eye lines. SSW Tower 40 for power.