[rebel-builders] Rebel Questions: tail wrap; engine fit; riveter modificati
Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:38 am
Ken,
I was thinking about all the comments about increasing throat angle on
floats to get off the water quicker, and I wondered if anyone tried
increasing wing incidence. Your comment about high deck angle in cruise
reinforces the idea that maybe the standard incidence is too low. I guess
you are specifically talking about Rebels with cuffs, but it seems like a
stock wing might benefit from more incidence as well, especially since
everyone seems to cruise with up elevator. I don't remember seeing the
recommended incidence anywhere, but if you did increase it, how much would
you try? Do you know what yours currently is?
I haven't permanently set my rear attach points yet, or built the fairing
boxes, so I might be a willing guinea pig.
Jesse
[quote]From: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
Reply-To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Rebel Questions: tail wrap; engine fit;
riveter modification, W&B
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:52:25 -0500
Hi Rick
I'd leave the lead as I don't think the center of lift really changed on
mine or I wouldn't need the bit of up elevator that I seem to carry.
I don't have much to compare it to but mine and Angus's plane seem to
cruise with a little nose up attitude. ie the bottom of the wing is a
bit nose high relative to the horizon. Angus is on floats and I only
did one short flight in his aircraft. Maybe all Rebels do that but I
doubt it??
If I were doing a new airplane with cuffs or with wing VG's I'd be very
temped to increase the wing incidence if floats were planned. It would
complicate the wing root fairings but it would lower the nose a bit in
cruise and should reduce the need for so much throat angle on the floats.
Have a great "first flight"
Ken
Rick Harper wrote:
[quote]G'day Bob, Wayne, Ken & others !
just to put in our 2
I was thinking about all the comments about increasing throat angle on
floats to get off the water quicker, and I wondered if anyone tried
increasing wing incidence. Your comment about high deck angle in cruise
reinforces the idea that maybe the standard incidence is too low. I guess
you are specifically talking about Rebels with cuffs, but it seems like a
stock wing might benefit from more incidence as well, especially since
everyone seems to cruise with up elevator. I don't remember seeing the
recommended incidence anywhere, but if you did increase it, how much would
you try? Do you know what yours currently is?
I haven't permanently set my rear attach points yet, or built the fairing
boxes, so I might be a willing guinea pig.
Jesse
[quote]From: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
Reply-To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Rebel Questions: tail wrap; engine fit;
riveter modification, W&B
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:52:25 -0500
Hi Rick
I'd leave the lead as I don't think the center of lift really changed on
mine or I wouldn't need the bit of up elevator that I seem to carry.
I don't have much to compare it to but mine and Angus's plane seem to
cruise with a little nose up attitude. ie the bottom of the wing is a
bit nose high relative to the horizon. Angus is on floats and I only
did one short flight in his aircraft. Maybe all Rebels do that but I
doubt it??
If I were doing a new airplane with cuffs or with wing VG's I'd be very
temped to increase the wing incidence if floats were planned. It would
complicate the wing root fairings but it would lower the nose a bit in
cruise and should reduce the need for so much throat angle on the floats.
Have a great "first flight"
Ken
Rick Harper wrote:
[quote]G'day Bob, Wayne, Ken & others !
just to put in our 2