Aeroic Alpenbrise 4M build

[Doc J]

WAYNE: Personally I toss out the chinese clevises and upgrade to Z bends, MP Jet or TLS depending on the application. I drill to the correct size. I have a dedicated drill index just for this reason.
----------
Doc: TBH, I think the new clevises are much better, as before they were bin food so we didnt bother to include them. But even now, experience tells, and using up-market clevises - or IDS - is what at least half of the experienced people prefer.

For reference: TLS are no doubt the best and I am having some long talks with Tomas about this and the possibility of RTF models with TLS gear and some other developments.

For me, as a manufacturer its a bit like supplying radio trays - at least half of the 'bits' supplied are never used, as the flyers who buy my models are usually very experienced and have developed thier own preferred, tried and tested methods of control activation.

Still - you do end up with a nice "bits box" of stuff that can be used on OD projects etc!

But at least we do supply the wiring looms!

Cheers,

Doc

PS: Some of the new models below - we have pushed the quality of fit and finish up another notch or two.

Now the models are described as "Easily Euro-Standard"- and there is a shipment in prepartion for Aloft.

 

[Wayne]

Me Like.

 

[Jedster]

I'm don't like the supplied M2 clevises. By the time you open them wide enough to get them on the control horns you've opened them so wide they are now bent out of shape so won't close properly - or at least you have to try and bend the clevis back into shape while now attached. I've ordered more M2 locally, hopefully they'll be better. Having said which I may swap over to my normal M2.5 which don't bend out of shape so easily, although they will need filing down one side, but that'll still leave them wider than the M2. I've used M2.5 for the rudder and it's much better, I had to file down one side and open up the fuz opening just a fraction so it passes into the fuz cleanly, but that and a bit of bent M2.5 threaded rod, job done - lovely and tight.

Talking about wiring looms...
I was taught that the female MPX wing connector should go in the fuz, which isn't how they've been supplied. As supplied, if the wing is disconnected and the rx is powered up there is the possibility of shorting the bare pins - not good, especially if you're using a lithium battery. Having said which you are certainly not alone in doing it this way, I understand both Baudis and Samba do it this way too. So there must obviously be some reason for doing it this way which is more important than the risk of shorting a battery. What is that?

 

[Doc J]

I'm don't like the supplied M2 clevises. By the time you open them wide enough to get them on the control horns you've opened them so wide they are now bent out of shape so won't close properly - or at least you have to try and bend the clevis back into shape while now attached. I've ordered more M2 locally, hopefully they'll be better. Having said which I may swap over to my normal M2.5 which don't bend out of shape so easily, although they will need filing down one side, but that'll still leave them wider than the M2. I've used M2.5 for the rudder and it's much better, I had to file down one side and open up the fuz opening just a fraction so it passes into the fuz cleanly, but that and a bit of bent M2.5 threaded rod, job done - lovely and tight.

Talking about wiring looms...
I was taught that the female MPX wing connector should go in the fuz, which isn't how they've been supplied. As supplied, if the wing is disconnected and the rx is powered up there is the possibility of shorting the bare pins - not good, especially if you're using a lithium battery. Having said which you are certainly not alone in doing it this way, I understand both Baudis and Samba do it this way too. So there must obviously be some reason for doing it this way which is more important than the risk of shorting a battery. What is that?

I think you'd have to work hard to short the pins on either side of a MPX plug assembly.

Doc.

 

[Wayne]

During transport I have damaged too many plugs when they are hanging out of the wing end, thus I prefer to have them hanging out of the fuselage. Also agree it would take some bad luck to short one out. Never had it happen to me.

 

[Jedster]

I think I've damaged more plugs hanging out of the fuz, at least when they're hanging out of the wing they are often protected to a degree by incidence pegs - as is the case here. We're all different.
I think the main risk of shorting is on the bench when it is on its side (working on rear servos), e.g. dropping something and not noticing where it went before turning the battery on. I can't help feel if they were the other way around it would be all but impossible, just wondered what the logic was. No matter, it should be pretty unlikely in the field.

 

[Doc J]

I think I've damaged more plugs hanging out of the fuz, at least when they're hanging out of the wing they are often protected to a degree by incidence pegs - as is the case here. We're all different.
I think the main risk of shorting is on the bench when it is on its side (working on rear servos), e.g. dropping something and not noticing where it went before turning the battery on. I can't help feel if they were the other way around it would be all but impossible, just wondered what the logic was. No matter, it should be pretty unlikely in the field.

I'll have to look at one of my wiring looms - TBH I forgot whch way around they are.

But at least you get one with my models!

On my planes, I have done both sides fixed which is a little fiddly; fuselage fixed/wing side loose whch is what I normally do; and wing side fixed/fuselage loose as well.

I tend to go with fuselage fixed and wing side loose and the end gets tucked into the ballast tube when not assembled. An elastic band will nomally hold the wire tentacle in place, or a bit of electrical tape.

In fact as a manufacturer I can say that it absolutely does not matter what you do to try to be as helpful as possible (did I tell you about the guy who wanted a portrait of Beethoven on the wing, and was even prepared to pay ten bucks extra for it?) - within the realms of reason - someone will have always have a different idea.

Thats how we all get better.

Cheers,

Doc

 

[Jedster]

Cheers Doc.
Now it's funny you say that, not only did I get a wiring loom but I got extra too!
Wing loom 1 (which I used) as described above and is for outer (ail) and inner (flap) wing servos.
Wing loom 2 but the MPX plugs were wired the opposite way around, however that appeared to only be for inner (flap) wing servo and middle wing servo. I couldn't work out what that was for given all models have ail but it may come in useful for another model one day!
I did of course get a couple of extension leads for the ele / rudder servos as well.
And if that wasn't enough, I also got a couple of MPX connectors as well.
As you say, no one can accuse you of not supplying wiring.

Got to love how people are different. Here the holes were so nicely sized (minimal filing required) they appeared to be designed for both sides to be fixed, which is what I've done.
Out of preference I do however normally fix the MPX plug in the wing and leave the fuz as the flying lead - I've spent many a happy session trying to retrieve wiring from the inside of a wing on a second hand model I bought, easier to retrieve from a fuz - especially for scale planes.

However I think I must have received wiring looms with the Aresti 108 and Redshift as they are fixed to the fuz and flying leads in the wing, which as you say are long enough to tuck into the ballast tubes for storage. Hmmm, Alpenbrise, Aresti 108 and Redshift, anyone would think I'm an Aeroic fanboy

But exactly as you say, that's why I asked why the loom was that way around, I'm wanting to learn.

I also notice I received 2 different sets of carbon for the elevator, one solid carbon rod and one hollow. Given there is minimal difference in weight between them I wasn't sure why that was.

The good news is the replacement M2 clevises are much nicer, nice long arms which don't distort over those horns, so that's all done and much better now, no slop on any surface either.

Almost ready to fly now, trying to sort out ~700gm of nose weight, partly my own fault, I bought 6 x KST X10's and forgot about the mini's for the tail. They can get replaced at some point if needed, but again, only about 5gm difference between them, so what's that, maybe extra 30gm in the nose??? (not bothered checking).

 

[Doc J]

Cheers Doc.
Now it's funny you say that, not only did I get a wiring loom but I got extra too!
Wing loom 1 (which I used) as described above and is for outer (ail) and inner (flap) wing servos.
Wing loom 2 but the MPX plugs were wired the opposite way around, however that appeared to only be for inner (flap) wing servo and middle wing servo. I couldn't work out what that was for given all models have ail but it may come in useful for another model one day!
I did of course get a couple of extension leads for the ele / rudder servos as well.
And if that wasn't enough, I also got a couple of MPX connectors as well.
As you say, no one can accuse you of not supplying wiring.

Got to love how people are different. Here the holes were so nicely sized (minimal filing required) they appeared to be designed for both sides to be fixed, which is what I've done.
Out of preference I do however normally fix the MPX plug in the wing and leave the fuz as the flying lead - I've spent many a happy session trying to retrieve wiring from the inside of a wing on a second hand model I bought, easier to retrieve from a fuz - especially for scale planes.

However I think I must have received wiring looms with the Aresti 108 and Redshift as they are fixed to the fuz and flying leads in the wing, which as you say are long enough to tuck into the ballast tubes for storage. Hmmm, Alpenbrise, Aresti 108 and Redshift, anyone would think I'm an Aeroic fanboy

But exactly as you say, that's why I asked why the loom was that way around, I'm wanting to learn.

I also notice I received 2 different sets of carbon for the elevator, one solid carbon rod and one hollow. Given there is minimal difference in weight between them I wasn't sure why that was.

The good news is the replacement M2 clevises are much nicer, nice long arms which don't distort over those horns, so that's all done and much better now, no slop on any surface either.

Almost ready to fly now, trying to sort out ~700gm of nose weight, partly my own fault, I bought 6 x KST X10's and forgot about the mini's for the tail. They can get replaced at some point if needed, but again, only about 5gm difference between them, so what's that, maybe extra 30gm in the nose??? (not bothered checking).

Glad its coming together Jed - though you seem to have emptied my entire wiring loom store! Better more than less, and I'll defiitely have to fire someone for that!

Joking aside, its taken a while to get semi-ok clevises etc. At least good enough to use with confidence. Still working on that one.

As I think most people know, my models are not aimed at beginners, and are designed to get the best of what is potentially available in that model class. I call the Alpenbrise an 'Alpine soaring' model because thats what it was designed for, and seems to do pretty well. Its now the largest selling 4M model in Europe by far.

The good bit is that a model that soars well in the Alps is often really good on the slope too - as long as said slope is big enough. The wing section - like many of mine - is a bit unconventional, but I think you'll be happily surprised at what it can do. Dont forget to programe in a couple of mm of reflex - that really puts a rocket up its bum and gets it cruising along nicely. Then put in ballast and you might need a new battery in that pacemaker.

You'll find it does pretty much what you ask it to do, and with really good energy retention does it with confidence. Big aeros, fast rolls and nice inverted flight work well as does the landing mode which like all my models is designed to be easy and trouble free.

On the flying side, if you need any info, talk to Red as I'm sure he can offer some cool set up data - he was the first to fly an Alpenbrise in the USA and I know he has his model dialled in tight.

Good luck with the maiden - I think after a couple of first nervy flights you'll be flashing it around.

Maybe you can post a few pics of you and your planes for this forum and our website?

Thanks for your patronage, buddy - its really appreciated.

Cheers,

Doc.

 

[Jedster]

For what it's worth I used these https://nexusmodels.co.uk/products/m2-chrome-quick-links-clevis-4-pack-5508042 and found them really good. I've got to be honest, I'm not normally a big J Perkins fan but I'll be buying these again. Not only are the arms suitably long, but the retainer at the end is strong with a very positive click. Also and I'm not quite sure how to describe this, the arms are asymmetric, i.e. if you rotate them a half turn on a rod the arm ends end up in a slightly different place - I found that really useful for encouraging the clevis under the bottom of the wing from the control horn and then accepting the rod at a suitable angle for the servo, I thought with a bigger clevis I'd need to cut away even more wing (which I'm sure we all hate doing, even if it does get covered with those nice little shrouds), but it needed very little more than I'd already done for the supplied clevises.
I suspect that's not much use for you Doc, but for anyone else in the UK, just bin the supplied ones and use the above, given that Neil has more AB in stock and others may soon be reading here.

I need to finish sanding the carbon rods before I can put the tailplane on to take any photos, but I'm sure a photo of the models can be arranged - not sure I'll be in it though Big aeros and energy retention is just what I'm after. I'll be testing out it's ability to bunt and square loop too, I'm quite sure it will do it easily. Looking forward to it.

Oh, just one other final thanks - I can't think of another glider manufacturer where you can actually communicate easily with the designer! Hats off!!

 

[Doc J]

Oh, just one other final thanks - I can't think of another glider manufacturer where you can actually communicate easily with the designer! Hats off!!

The way I see it Jed, you have spent your hard-earned cash on my models - which in essence means that you have invested in me; in my ideas that I have made into my designs.

The very least I can do is to answer questions or give my advice on those models to people - like you - who have made that investment.

The other half of the coin is that more brains = more horsepower and I often get good suggestions from the great people who fly my models.

We are all modellers, and all in it for the fun, and I'm completely sure I dont know everything - so lets share ideas and chat away!.

Cheers,

Doc.

 

[Jedster]

Well she flies, rather nicely actually. Had several flights today, made it over 1300' without too much effort and over 1000' on all flights bar one (still getting to know it). Eerily quiet though, usually my antics high up get people looking, but they didn't notice today One pleasing comment from someone however was 'can't you do loops any bigger than that' boy can she do nice big loops. Nice big bunts too. I was surprised how fast she rolls without flaperons. I did try 100% flaperons (i.e. same travel as ail), she didn't appear to like that, (I know they aren't suggested, but you have to try), I've reduced them to more like 30% and it seems happy with that though, although I'm not sure how much difference they make. But she just goes up and up, conditions were nice but I was mostly just leaving everyone on the slope while I was going up almost continuously. Thermals nicely too. She happily took everything I threw at her, 8 point rolls, square loops etc., not a problem and I didn't even notice the wings bending at any point - even with the S they seem nicely strong. I put the CoG at 104mm to start, but I reckon that needs to go back a bit, I like my models to stay in a dive when I put them into one, instead as is, it just gently pulls out - which I know is how most prefer things, also inverted required more elevator than I like - personal taste and a matter of trimming. I didn't detect any particular vices (once I'd removed full flaperons). Even on the maiden it just went straight away, no trimming required at all. I see what Doc means about it being a big slope model - 300' isn't really enough to have fun with, she wants height and speed. Landing is a piece of cake too, I adjusted the elevator compensation curve and weight on the maiden and the first landing was almost spot on, just touching the path and maybe 10m away - I'll get that closer to me yet. Numerous admiring looks too. Primarily that CoG to shift, always best to start safe though. Yeah, all in all a happy bunny.

 

[Wayne]

Excellent - Great flight report. Glad she is working so well for you.

 

[Red]

Congrats! I really didn't like a ton of flaperon either, to much adverse yaw for my taste. I have my CG a little further back, it just keeps getting better. Enjoy.

 

[Doc J]

Well she flies, rather nicely actually. Had several flights today, made it over 1300' without too much effort and over 1000' on all flights bar one (still getting to know it). Eerily quiet though, usually my antics high up get people looking, but they didn't notice today One pleasing comment from someone however was 'can't you do loops any bigger than that' boy can she do nice big loops. Nice big bunts too. I was surprised how fast she rolls without flaperons. I did try 100% flaperons (i.e. same travel as ail), she didn't appear to like that, (I know they aren't suggested, but you have to try), I've reduced them to more like 30% and it seems happy with that though, although I'm not sure how much difference they make. But she just goes up and up, conditions were nice but I was mostly just leaving everyone on the slope while I was going up almost continuously. Thermals nicely too. She happily took everything I threw at her, 8 point rolls, square loops etc., not a problem and I didn't even notice the wings bending at any point - even with the S they seem nicely strong. I put the CoG at 104mm to start, but I reckon that needs to go back a bit, I like my models to stay in a dive when I put them into one, instead as is, it just gently pulls out - which I know is how most prefer things, also inverted required more elevator than I like - personal taste and a matter of trimming. I didn't detect any particular vices (once I'd removed full flaperons). Even on the maiden it just went straight away, no trimming required at all. I see what Doc means about it being a big slope model - 300' isn't really enough to have fun with, she wants height and speed. Landing is a piece of cake too, I adjusted the elevator compensation curve and weight on the maiden and the first landing was almost spot on, just touching the path and maybe 10m away - I'll get that closer to me yet. Numerous admiring looks too. Primarily that CoG to shift, always best to start safe though. Yeah, all in all a happy bunny.

View attachment 20832

Hey Jed - glad the Maiden went well and you like the model.

As you have found out, this plane really likes a lot of space - it was designed for Alpine use, and if you can get into fresh air above the slope 'clutter' she will make you happy. Of course its always great to burn off that height with a bit of showboating on the way down.

This model is not an "Oar wing" .The lift distribution on the wings is designed to be efficient - the lift is where it should be, and only there. Because if this, the spanwise flow and the sunsequent vortices are really concentrated right a the tip and so the model is not very noisy - only the "screeeee'" whistle you get from well desined (I hope!) wing and tail tips.

I saw your comment on inverted flight "inverted required more elevator than I like" This is true, but you are obviusly a good flier, and as you say that will ease as you dial the CG back to suit your tastes. To explain, this is a product of the undercambered aerofoil section which I designed for pretty good climb - maybe too good! But when you think that an undercambered section really shouldn't do very well in inverted flight or bunts - its not too bad!

I hope you have a lot of great fun flying the beast - because that what its all about.

Cheers,

Doc

 

[Jedster]

Thanks Doc, I hadn't closely inspected the section so hadn't noticed it was slightly under-cambered. As you say, not exactly designed for inverted etc. flight, so as well as moving the CoG back there may be an element of me resetting my expectations of how much down ele is normal for inverted flight for the AB. There are of course other options such as making the elevator curve asymmetric with more down than up to improve the feel, although it's possibly not a bad thing having to push more than normal as a reminder, trying to be too clever may result in me asking too much of the AB inverted without realising it, which close to the slope may not end well. Still in the trimming / learning stage here, lots to play with. Thanks for the comment.

 

[Wayne]

I think you may notice there is a "under camber" to both the top and bottom of his airfoils. Some might call this pressure recovery, or double cusp, etc. Whatever you want to call it it helps keep the airflow attached, trailing edge responsive and sure james has his other little tricks. But I like his airfoils a lot.

 

[Hill Hobbit]

Hi Jed, I was just wondering if you’re using (or are considering) snap flap in the up t.e. direction with down elevator?

 

[Jedster]

Hi, I have it programmed in but haven't really played around with it yet.

 

[Red]

Hi, I have it programmed in but haven't really played around with it yet.

I'm using on mine, it helps. I have it full span.