my plane weights

Finally bought a little electronic scale. Assuming it's accurate, here are the weights of my planes:

Sig Mustang Stunter with K&B .40 (still needing about 1.5 oz tailweight to balance): 47.3 oz

Vector 40 with .46 LA: 51.7 oz

Legacy with .55 Stalker RE: 61.2 oz (I originally had 62.2 here, but 3 lbs 13.2 oz should equal 61.2)

Olympic with .46 LA: 50.5 oz

Nobler with .36 Irvine: 54.2 oz (I knew this one was too heavy from start)

ARF Nobler with Brodak .40: 38.2 oz

What did I learn? I apparently build and paint heavy. Oh well, they all fly pretty darn good, except I haven't tried the Mustang yet.

Imagine a Saito 72 powered 750sq stunt ship with extra reinforcing to keep the 72 from blowing apart the nose and you are just about to put it on the scale.

My back hurts just to think about it

I busted my rear end on my Legacy, trying to keep it at 60 ounces (Saito .56). When it hit the scale at 65, I almost cried. Then I got a message from Bob Zambelli saying he was flying his Euclid at 60 ounces with a Saito .40 - and loved it. Go figure.

I guess when we reach a certain size, it's almost like full-scale. I don't worry about a pound or two in the Bonanza; what's another suitcase on the Queen Mary? An ounce or two on a 700 square inch bird shouldn't matter. Maybe there are some things I don't want to know. The final verdict is how it flies.

Hi Ron,

65 ounces with a Saito .56 should be O.K. If not you can always upgrade to the .72. You did leave enough room in the nose for a .72 right???

I'll be back in Manassas Firday afternoon. I forgot when the club party/meeting is, next weekend I hope?

>Hi Ron,
>
>65 ounces with a Saito .56 should be O.K.

Yes, it will.

Jim,

Welcome back. The party is next Friday (December 19). C U there.

I have a Saito .72 with UHP manifold on standby, but really don't think I will have to switch. I test ran the .56 with a 12-6 APC and YS20/20 fuel. Very strong. Let's hope for some flyable weather soon.

>Imagine a Saito 72 powered 750sq stunt ship with extra
>reinforcing to keep the 72 from blowing apart the nose and
>you are just about to put it on the scale.

It's been done. Gordans Tony is ~743 sq inches, weighs in in the mid 60's, has a special reinforced construction in the nose for a Saito 72. Seems to fly well, and it can be done.

>>Imagine a Saito 72 powered 750sq stunt ship with extra
>>reinforcing to keep the 72 from blowing apart the nose and
>>you are just about to put it on the scale.
>
>It's been done. Gordans Tony is ~743 sq inches, weighs in in
>the mid 60's, has a special reinforced construction in the
>nose for a Saito 72. Seems to fly well, and it can be done.

I saw Gordon's plane fly at a recent contest where he took second to Keith Trostle's Bearcat. Pretty plane. It actually weighs 69oz.

How about a Baby Clown with PAW 55 at 5 ounces, or a 1/2A Snapper with a Holland Wasp at 4 ounces. Both are fully pattern capable and have flown in open competition.

It's OK to be a little heavy compared to optimum as long as it is balanced and trimmed well.

I tried to remove all weight from the front of my Golden Falcon to balance it, but I never did add enough tail weight because it was already at 71.5 oz. I added 3 oz to the tail at the last contest of the season(13 years after it was built) and it moved the CG to a point that now it really flies well.

Moral, it flies better at 74.5 oz than it did with a forward CG at 71.5 oz.

That answer, my friend, means I might as well change the Mustang weight to 50 oz!!! I think you are right, though. An overweight mustang at 50 ounces in good trim should probably outfly an slightly lesser overweight mustang in horrible trim.

>It's OK to be a little heavy compared to optimum as long as
>it is balanced and trimmed well.
>
>I tried to remove all weight from the front of my Golden
>Falcon to balance it, but I never did add enough tail weight
>because it was already at 71.5 oz. I added 3 oz to the tail
>at the last contest of the season(13 years after it was
>built) and it moved the CG to a point that now it really
>flies well.
>
>Moral, it flies better at 74.5 oz than it did with a forward
>CG at 71.5 oz.
>
>Chris...

CHRIS

A BRAVE BUT TRUE ADMISSION. IF IT TAKES MORE WEIGHT TO GET AN AIRPLANE PROPERLY TRIMMED YOU JUST HAVE TO BITE THE BULLET AND DO IT.

IN THE CASE OF A TRULY NOSE HEAVY SHIP LIKE YOURS THE ACTUAL LOADS ON THE SURFACES IN MANEUVERS MIGHT WELL BE LESS EVEN WITH THE ADDITIONAL STATIC WEIGHT. THE ADDITIONAL LOADS PLACED ON THE WING BY THE NEED FOR DRAMATIC CONTROL DEFLECTIONS AND THE RESULTING LARGE NOSE DOWN PITCHING MOMENT FROM THE FLAPS WOULD BE CONSIDERABLE.

MOVING THE CG AFT DRAMATICALLY REDUCES THE AMOUNT OF PITCH INPUT REQUIRED TO MAKE THE TURNS AND, ASSUMING STILL ADEQUATE LIFT (IT AIN'T STALLING!) THE FLAP DEFLECTION IS MODERATED SIMULTANEOUSLY...A TRUE WIN/WIN SITUATION!

BY THE WAY, I JUST JUDGED CHRIS FLYING THIS AIRPLANE A COUPLE MONTHS AGO BEFORE THE TRIM CHANGE (SUGGEST, I THINK BY BOB WHITELY) AND EVEN IN THAT STATE OF TUNE CHRIS FLEW IT EXCEPTIONALLY WELL. I'M CONCERNED BOB MIGHT NOT HAVE DONE US HOT SHOTS A FAVOR!