Quote:
Originally Posted by briankizner
Very normal that a trainer like the Eagle would be built heavier than a higher performance aircraft. Trainers have a lot of lift and are built to handle some abuse so they do not suffer too much from extra weight. They also were designed with considerations for inexperienced builders, hence the foolproof interlocking parts. Intermediate planes built for more aerobatic flight need to be light to perform and will sacrifice some strength for lighter weight. Ie, built to fly, not to crash. It also helps to keep the posterior part of the fuselage light so that it should not require added weight up front to establish a correct center of gravity. Added triangles and doublers will be great for stiffness, but be careful not to add much weight. Higher performing airframes, especially ones designed for electric power, tend to be quite flimsy (1-not much concern for damage caused by the engine’s vibration but a lot of concern about the weight of the batteries 2- I realize the Tiger is designed for glow engines and so is fairly solid, though perhaps less solid than a trainer)
I never experienced or heard of vibration problems of the sides around the engine. Maybe because I used a fair bit of epoxy on them for fuel proofing.
Personally, I found the Tiger to be very well designed to be a great everyday flyer without any important changes. That being said, I know that many builders Enjoy modifying kits to their liking. More power to them. The great thing about kit building compared to ARFs is that no two are identical. The only other plane that I have had that was it’s equal in that it was as easy as a trainer and a lot of fun to fly aerobatics with was the Sig Kavalier. However, I found Goldberg kits were easier and more fun to build than Sig. I’d go farther and say that They were the best builds of any of the kit manufacturers that I had experience with ( Including Graupner, Sig, Midwest., Balsa USA, possibly others that I have forgotten. I’m not counting Assembly of ARFs here, only boxes of wood and hardware with plans and instructions).
Good idea to keep it clamped for a while to keep it straight. I think you’re right that the wood may have warped after years in the box. One tip I learned a long time ago for warped wood was to wet the wood before bending it back to normal. After drying, it should remain straight. I’m sure you’ll build a real beauty. Great start!
|
Very meaningful insight, thank you very much Brian!
That is true, in wood constructed airplanes, light can still be (relatively) stiff and durability can suffer weight gain. I am realizing now that I have to be more comfortable that the wood joints will keep the airframe sound. Point well taken on being careful not to go wild and crazy with triangle stocks.
Thank you for the reminder about wetting the wood to conform to curves. Yes, I will definitely do this next weekend. The planking on the front lower side requires a forward bend to the firewall so I will use this technique on that part and a few others.
I look forward to meeting you in on the field next season and show you this airplane when it's ready. Cheers!