Aloft Forums
Welcome to Aloft Forums. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Forza 2.5
- Thread starter Wayne
- Start date
Hill Hobbit
Very Strong User
Hi, let’s fire this thread up again to talk about this excellent model, rather than clogging up other threads. Makes sense.
Konrad
Very Strong User
Agreed! Here is a link to thread that has moved a bit off topic.
As Doc, doesn't appear to like the use of the name Stormbird with this product. Can the title of this thread be changed to add whatever is the current name for the Aeroic 2.5 meter ship?
As Doc, doesn't appear to like the use of the name Stormbird with this product. Can the title of this thread be changed to add whatever is the current name for the Aeroic 2.5 meter ship?
Doc J
Very Strong User
Doc J
Very Strong User
Just a quick note on names:
Most of you gents know of my troubles with a certain unsavoury character named Zhou. After all my stuff was stolen by him I re-designed and renamed all of my original models or simply discontinued them. One of the casualties was the "Stormbird" now renamed Forza - FORCE in Italian - a language that I love.
Since Zhou is still knocking this model off and selling it to unscrupulous buyers, then you can probably understand the need I felt for a name change, however confusing.
Apologies for any actual confusion this may have caused.
Doc.
Most of you gents know of my troubles with a certain unsavoury character named Zhou. After all my stuff was stolen by him I re-designed and renamed all of my original models or simply discontinued them. One of the casualties was the "Stormbird" now renamed Forza - FORCE in Italian - a language that I love.
Since Zhou is still knocking this model off and selling it to unscrupulous buyers, then you can probably understand the need I felt for a name change, however confusing.
Apologies for any actual confusion this may have caused.
Doc.
Hill Hobbit
Very Strong User
Poor performance of the elevator hinge? Just what are you going on about? My Forza has been my ‘go to’ model for just under 3 years now, to such an extent that my mates have said that my other models must be gagging to be flown. Considering I slope usually several times a week for at least 3 hours up on the hill every time, it’s had a great deal of airtime.
It is also in virtually ‘as new’ condition, an excellent testament not only to its build quality, but furthermore its superb handling when landing.
The elevator hinges are absolutely perfect, 100% fine, as are the hinges on all of the control surfaces. The wing leading edge join lines are smooth, nothing to scrape or sand, and no different to 2 brand new Baudis models maidened in a flying session some weeks ago.
Tell you what, you are this Forum’s self professed ‘engineer’, so how about you take a brand new Servorahmen bearing servo mount, either the original yellow type or the black, mount a horn on a KST 125/135 or x10 then screw the alloy bearing spigot/horn retainer on, then on the bench slide the servo into place as it would be in a model. The very first time I used one of these bearing mounts back in 2018, I did exactly that, and it brought something to light that I’ve been waiting and waiting for you, and nobody else, to notice.
Please get back to us with your findings, rather than continuing on this path of finding something, anything, to criticise a model about that is well built, has great performance, and is quick and easy to fit out.
Cheers
It is also in virtually ‘as new’ condition, an excellent testament not only to its build quality, but furthermore its superb handling when landing.
The elevator hinges are absolutely perfect, 100% fine, as are the hinges on all of the control surfaces. The wing leading edge join lines are smooth, nothing to scrape or sand, and no different to 2 brand new Baudis models maidened in a flying session some weeks ago.
Tell you what, you are this Forum’s self professed ‘engineer’, so how about you take a brand new Servorahmen bearing servo mount, either the original yellow type or the black, mount a horn on a KST 125/135 or x10 then screw the alloy bearing spigot/horn retainer on, then on the bench slide the servo into place as it would be in a model. The very first time I used one of these bearing mounts back in 2018, I did exactly that, and it brought something to light that I’ve been waiting and waiting for you, and nobody else, to notice.
Please get back to us with your findings, rather than continuing on this path of finding something, anything, to criticise a model about that is well built, has great performance, and is quick and easy to fit out.
Cheers
Konrad
Very Strong User
On the Servorahmen issue I've mentioned that some don't have the external bearing support retainer on the correct side of plastic frame journal. Also that the material tying the bearing support to the mount often need to be removed to allow clearance for the mono rod at ether extreme of the servo motion. If you are mentioning that the bore of the external journal appears to not align (is a bit low) with the axis of the servo output shaft. This actually isn't the case if using a tolerance band of say 0.03 mm. For a soft plastic housing this is right on, in my book.
I have mentioned that the molds for the servo arms are wearing out. I've also mentioned that the splines on the X-08 and HS08a are different enough as to not allow for the reuse of the arms across servo model type. ( The press fit of the Servorahmen arm results in an adequate slop free fit on the first use servo model. But if changing out a servo from say an X-08 to an HS08a you will experience some spline backlash if using the same arm)
If you think there is a flaw in the design why have you sat on this for 5 years? Really how does that help the membership?
What does the color have to do with anything?
Really is this the proper thread to discuss the Servorahmen mount? This is looking like gross thread creep.
No argument from me that the Forza is a fun model.
P.S.
This is why I install all servo frames with the servo installed. I want the wing skin to see the mount in its installed condition when the mount is being glued in. There is a high probability that the mount will distort a bit when the screws and the servo are installed. Also the installed servo will help control the installation of the aft legs where the cross beam is found. If installing the frame without the servo there is high risk that these forces will distort the top wing skin.
I have mentioned that the molds for the servo arms are wearing out. I've also mentioned that the splines on the X-08 and HS08a are different enough as to not allow for the reuse of the arms across servo model type. ( The press fit of the Servorahmen arm results in an adequate slop free fit on the first use servo model. But if changing out a servo from say an X-08 to an HS08a you will experience some spline backlash if using the same arm)
If you think there is a flaw in the design why have you sat on this for 5 years? Really how does that help the membership?
What does the color have to do with anything?
Really is this the proper thread to discuss the Servorahmen mount? This is looking like gross thread creep.
No argument from me that the Forza is a fun model.
P.S.
This is why I install all servo frames with the servo installed. I want the wing skin to see the mount in its installed condition when the mount is being glued in. There is a high probability that the mount will distort a bit when the screws and the servo are installed. Also the installed servo will help control the installation of the aft legs where the cross beam is found. If installing the frame without the servo there is high risk that these forces will distort the top wing skin.
Last edited:
JJ Colorado
Very Strong User
Well my Forza is on the way so once I get started building I'll post any questions or progress reports here. X10 Minis for flaps HS08s everywhere else. Might use a bearing support from for the flaps but not sure the extra weight and/or bearing is all that necessary for ailerons. I plan to fly it fast every once in a while maybe even race or F3F, but not going to be DSing it so don't anticipate too much load on the HS08s.
Doc J
Very Strong User
Sound plan JJ.
BTW this section is particularly sensitive to small amounts of 'de-cambering' by raising flaps and ailerons. Giving a 1~1.5mm raise on the TE will make the plane pick up speed very quickly.
Well, that and a nice shot of ballast in the wings.
Cheers,
Doc.
Doc J
Very Strong User
Woohoo Tie...could be a race on!Don't give JJ any ideas about making his Forza fly faster. When he says he may race it I'm pretty sure he's talking about racing at a Midwest event against me.
Doc.
JJ Colorado
Very Strong User
Now would I do something like that?
Ty already knows the answer.
But I also still have my speedy Moth flying well in case I need a backup. And yes, a Moth. Don't know why but my Moth is particularly speedy for a small hunk of foam.
Ty already knows the answer.
But I also still have my speedy Moth flying well in case I need a backup. And yes, a Moth. Don't know why but my Moth is particularly speedy for a small hunk of foam.
JJ Colorado
Very Strong User
Picked up my Forza at the local UPS store this morning. Very impressed with the build quality and paint on this Forza. Parts fit snug, but not too tight and the checkerboard paint lines are crisp. Build quality is as good as some F5J models at more than twice the price. Maybe even too nice for a sloper. Model and accessories weight (not including servos or frames) 1730 grams. Only thing I would have liked in addition would be a pushrod for the rudder but I guess you could have preferences on that. Looking forward to getting this in the air.
JJ Colorado
Very Strong User
So I have seen both in the instructions as well as some some build photos that many people make a bottom feeding shotgun load ballast tube configuration.
Other than needing to clear the rudder pushrod or possibly wiring, is there any reason why top loading ballast is not desirable?
I don't like removing material from the nose section of a sloper in case it ever lawn darts in on landing. Seems that dremeling out the nose in that area weakens it somewaht whereas a top feeding ballast tube would only require carving the ballast tube itself which is not a structural component of the airframe.
Other than needing to clear the rudder pushrod or possibly wiring, is there any reason why top loading ballast is not desirable?
I don't like removing material from the nose section of a sloper in case it ever lawn darts in on landing. Seems that dremeling out the nose in that area weakens it somewaht whereas a top feeding ballast tube would only require carving the ballast tube itself which is not a structural component of the airframe.
Typically the servo pushrods are in the way of using the top loaded ballast tube.
You are not weakening the fuselage as the addition of a ballast tube adds a lot of structure to the fuselage when it is glued in. A LOT. You do want to use radius cuts, avoiding all hard corners on the opening.
This is the thread I was suggesting to page through:
Here is a build thread where I installed a shotgun ballast tube, as I recall I showed a lot of detail on that build.
You are not weakening the fuselage as the addition of a ballast tube adds a lot of structure to the fuselage when it is glued in. A LOT. You do want to use radius cuts, avoiding all hard corners on the opening.
This is the thread I was suggesting to page through:
Hill Hobbit
Very Strong User
Hi JJ, I’m with Wayne here. Look upon the bottom feeding ballast tube as a structural component, as it crosses from what you could call the ‘main’ fuz line into the inner nose/radio area. The tube/fuz join can be strengthened with glass/carbon or Kevlar if you want, but it really isn’t necessary IMHO. The servo tray is then bonded to the top of the ballast tube, and the whole thing ends up good.
The tube does need a tapered infill bonding to it to take into account the change in shape of the fuz bottom, no doubt you’ve already realised this. I didn’t use epoxy to bond my tube in, I used a good amount of a fancy industrial adhesive from a hardware store, then more of it to create decent fillets to the fuz bottom.
Nearly 3 years old now without a problem (but I do have grassy landing areas!), the only thing you might want to do other than just fitting it out, would be to sand back the flap roots a little to give more clearance between them and the wing root area on the fuz. CG at 102 is perfect!
The tube does need a tapered infill bonding to it to take into account the change in shape of the fuz bottom, no doubt you’ve already realised this. I didn’t use epoxy to bond my tube in, I used a good amount of a fancy industrial adhesive from a hardware store, then more of it to create decent fillets to the fuz bottom.
Nearly 3 years old now without a problem (but I do have grassy landing areas!), the only thing you might want to do other than just fitting it out, would be to sand back the flap roots a little to give more clearance between them and the wing root area on the fuz. CG at 102 is perfect!
Attachments
Doc J
Very Strong User
I think most people just prefer to put ballast in the wings, JJ. Some say its faster to change, others are afraid of compromising the fuselage.
I put ballast tube in the fuselages of most of my models in the 'old' days and that's probably a hangover from MOM racing in the early '80's.
Cons:
With a fuse-mounted tube, there is always the possibility of getting the ballast slug distribution wrong - with inevitable results. Also, I suppose that if you have a "freight train' of heavy slugs in one orientation down the fuselage, then in the case of a 'lawn dart' thats a pretty concentrated potential kinetic force.
Pros:
But as Wayne and Jonty comment, the ballast tube if done right actually adds to the strength of the fuselage - especially behind the wing. BTW on the strength aspect, Jonty also mentioned industrial adhesive. This is really good stuff, a bit spendy but far better than epoxy/cabosil, and millions of times better than epoxy *microballoons. You don't need much to do a great job.
I have found it (SYSTEMTHREE T-88) to be at least twices as strong in shear as Epoxyfiller blends and probably thats an underestimate, as the surfaces tested were clean but otherwise unprepared.
* Unless you are using microballons as a sandable casting filler, my advice if you have any, is to find someone you really dont like and give them to them. As an experienced modeller I'm sure you know this, but for anyone reading here:
Please don't ever use microballoons in any situation where the bond would require tensile or compression strength.
Cheers,
Doc.
Last edited:
JJ Colorado
Very Strong User
Hmm, the term shotgun loading makes me envision an over-under breech loader, and I certainly don't want to see the nose of my glider in that configuration.
It doesn't seem like Jonty's rudder pushrod would get in the way of ballast slugs, and a top load configuraiton would make the fuse even that much stronger (moving any destructive forces to another part of the airframe).
Just picked up some System Three T-88 yesterday at a local hardwood shop and have a pound of milled glass fibers to mix it with, so once that tube gets installed it isn't going to be moving. Perhaps I'll just install it and leave the dremel work until later. Thanks for the reference links.
It doesn't seem like Jonty's rudder pushrod would get in the way of ballast slugs, and a top load configuraiton would make the fuse even that much stronger (moving any destructive forces to another part of the airframe).
Just picked up some System Three T-88 yesterday at a local hardwood shop and have a pound of milled glass fibers to mix it with, so once that tube gets installed it isn't going to be moving. Perhaps I'll just install it and leave the dremel work until later. Thanks for the reference links.
Last edited:
