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!
Redshift; Used Purchase
- Thread starter Konrad
- Start date
-
- Tags
- aeroic f3f redshift slope racing
- Status
Konrad
Very Strong User
It looks like this is still in the design stages. As a potential customer I'm giving feedback, based on actually having used the original RedShift.
My input is just one data point. I'm not aware of what are the design goals. Is this to be a contender for F3F titles? Is this aimed at the F5B class of ship? Is this aimed as a sport glider with the aim of delivering good performance and high sales.
I don't know what Doc. is trying to do with this design. I'm just pointing out what I'd like to see different (improved) over the original RedShift and what I liked about the original RedShift.
Like I said most of this is personal preference. The one real flaw I noticed in the original RedShift design was the use of V-Tail control arms that where far too short. I'm comfortable in that this will be addressed in the new design.
What other things come out of Doc's fertile mind we will have to wait and see.
All the best,
Konrad
My input is just one data point. I'm not aware of what are the design goals. Is this to be a contender for F3F titles? Is this aimed at the F5B class of ship? Is this aimed as a sport glider with the aim of delivering good performance and high sales.
I don't know what Doc. is trying to do with this design. I'm just pointing out what I'd like to see different (improved) over the original RedShift and what I liked about the original RedShift.
Like I said most of this is personal preference. The one real flaw I noticed in the original RedShift design was the use of V-Tail control arms that where far too short. I'm comfortable in that this will be addressed in the new design.
What other things come out of Doc's fertile mind we will have to wait and see.
All the best,
Konrad
Doc James Hammond
Very Strong User
Sorry a bit older drawings here: Now - nose cone join is 15 degrees angled, front wing stubs faired in with a nice gentle but strong fillet, front nose top shape more optimised and the back end control rod area is deeper now. I'll send the latest drawing when I have time.
Too busy making furniture lately.
Doc.
Too busy making furniture lately.
Doc.
Doc James Hammond
Very Strong User
I think this is good honest input and needs it own reply. soooo...
It looks like this is still in the design stages. As a potential customer I'm giving feedback, based on actually having used the original RedShift.
Which feedback I can tell you is constructive and highly valued.
As an actual flyer, many of your practical points have gone into the new design, Konrad. As to "still in the design stages", I need to admit that my original (money saving) idea was to make a suitable plug by hand - I'm actually a pretty good, accurate woodworker - and use that for the 'Spada.
Later, I relented and decided that I really do like the design, and I think it has potential, so the investment in a fully machined set of positives was worth it. This is where its going now.
My input is just one data point. I'm not aware of what are the design goals. Is this to be a contender for F3F titles? Is this aimed at the F5B class of ship? Is this aimed as a sport glider with the aim of delivering good performance and high sales.
OK, all good points.
In my rather long experience, if you set out to make a model to competition level, and thats what you state in its description, then you automatically put yourself on a pedestal from which the other designers and manufacturers will immediately try to knock you down - especially our Gothic buddies. For reasons I have yet to unravel, they are afraid of me - probably because I make scary, advanced design models that they perceive as threats. Worse still, I can, and am happy to explain why I have done everything...
Added to that, I have an inbuilt stigma. I make my models in China which automatically turns them into hund scheiße in the eyes of many prejudiced (Bigoted) people - despite the fact that I have fought tooth and nail for this, and they are now as good quality as the Euros.
Fact of the matter is that in competition F3f its getting like F3j, too many designers, and too many models, and frankly too much "fashion".
People still think that they will go faster if they buy the latest model from Rainer von Gefingerpoken, completely failing to realise that its the pilot that wins - NOT the model. I mean, after all, they are all top pilots...aren't they?
So in answer to the question, the Redshift Spada is intended to be a "fast, top level SPORTS model that is relatively inexpensive, and is fully capable of competing with top level F3f models".
If you want to look at it strategically, its all a Machiavellian plot - I'm not putting the 'Spada on a pedestal, I'm using a completely different roundabout approach: Hopefully a good design, good performance, good quality, and reasonable price will win through - to attract some followers who will try it.
I don't know what Doc. is trying to do with this design. I'm just pointing out what I'd like to see different (improved) over the original RedShift and what I liked about the original RedShift.
Our goals are identical, which is why I so appreciate all the constructive criticism, Konrad.
Like I said most of this is personal preference. The one real flaw I noticed in the original RedShift design was the use of V-Tail control arms that where far too short. I'm comfortable in that this will be addressed in the new design.
Done.
What other things come out of Doc's fertile mind we will have to wait and see.
I have been doing some pretty advanced research in the "day job" which will be leaking into the Spada design...ISOBAR TRICKERY I TELL YOU!
Just one more point:
"watch the process till the customer is happy"
OK thats easy, I need a V-tail that is variable between 138 and 145 degrees, a nose that is somehow extendable retractable by at least 50mm, a fuselage that can be thin after the wing for less drag (Not true by the way), or somehow change to thick (to take care of those pesky not so good "landings") wings that can magically change from low to high aspect ratio, Ballast tubes in the wing roots, ballast in the wing tips (In case you want to do DS) and a nice big lead tube in the fuselage.
The list goes on - but don't worry - this is the F3f model of the future!...and...always will be.
Cheers, Doc.
All the best,
Konrad
It looks like this is still in the design stages. As a potential customer I'm giving feedback, based on actually having used the original RedShift.
Which feedback I can tell you is constructive and highly valued.
As an actual flyer, many of your practical points have gone into the new design, Konrad. As to "still in the design stages", I need to admit that my original (money saving) idea was to make a suitable plug by hand - I'm actually a pretty good, accurate woodworker - and use that for the 'Spada.
Later, I relented and decided that I really do like the design, and I think it has potential, so the investment in a fully machined set of positives was worth it. This is where its going now.
My input is just one data point. I'm not aware of what are the design goals. Is this to be a contender for F3F titles? Is this aimed at the F5B class of ship? Is this aimed as a sport glider with the aim of delivering good performance and high sales.
OK, all good points.
In my rather long experience, if you set out to make a model to competition level, and thats what you state in its description, then you automatically put yourself on a pedestal from which the other designers and manufacturers will immediately try to knock you down - especially our Gothic buddies. For reasons I have yet to unravel, they are afraid of me - probably because I make scary, advanced design models that they perceive as threats. Worse still, I can, and am happy to explain why I have done everything...
Added to that, I have an inbuilt stigma. I make my models in China which automatically turns them into hund scheiße in the eyes of many prejudiced (Bigoted) people - despite the fact that I have fought tooth and nail for this, and they are now as good quality as the Euros.
Fact of the matter is that in competition F3f its getting like F3j, too many designers, and too many models, and frankly too much "fashion".
People still think that they will go faster if they buy the latest model from Rainer von Gefingerpoken, completely failing to realise that its the pilot that wins - NOT the model. I mean, after all, they are all top pilots...aren't they?
So in answer to the question, the Redshift Spada is intended to be a "fast, top level SPORTS model that is relatively inexpensive, and is fully capable of competing with top level F3f models".
If you want to look at it strategically, its all a Machiavellian plot - I'm not putting the 'Spada on a pedestal, I'm using a completely different roundabout approach: Hopefully a good design, good performance, good quality, and reasonable price will win through - to attract some followers who will try it.
I don't know what Doc. is trying to do with this design. I'm just pointing out what I'd like to see different (improved) over the original RedShift and what I liked about the original RedShift.
Our goals are identical, which is why I so appreciate all the constructive criticism, Konrad.
Like I said most of this is personal preference. The one real flaw I noticed in the original RedShift design was the use of V-Tail control arms that where far too short. I'm comfortable in that this will be addressed in the new design.
Done.
What other things come out of Doc's fertile mind we will have to wait and see.
I have been doing some pretty advanced research in the "day job" which will be leaking into the Spada design...ISOBAR TRICKERY I TELL YOU!
Just one more point:
"watch the process till the customer is happy"
OK thats easy, I need a V-tail that is variable between 138 and 145 degrees, a nose that is somehow extendable retractable by at least 50mm, a fuselage that can be thin after the wing for less drag (Not true by the way), or somehow change to thick (to take care of those pesky not so good "landings") wings that can magically change from low to high aspect ratio, Ballast tubes in the wing roots, ballast in the wing tips (In case you want to do DS) and a nice big lead tube in the fuselage.
The list goes on - but don't worry - this is the F3f model of the future!...and...always will be.
Cheers, Doc.
All the best,
Konrad
Last edited:
Konrad
Very Strong User
It's all good.
This particular ship had some issues that we went over in detail. Some of these were as a result of the rush build from the original owner. There were also some quality issues with the manufacture. I hope I made it clear what these were.
When talking design many folks have difficulties separating these kind of issues from that of the fundamental design.
The use of snakes is one of those items that is in the gray area of design, manufacture and personal preference. The wing control horns are another item that is highly dependent of personal preference. It also is a "fashion" issue. The only real fundamental design issue I had was the short V-Tail arms. After finding this issue it really wasn't too difficult for a real modeler to correct this. (It proved to be such an effective fix that I felt comfortable acquiring a second RedShift airframe).
With this ship I tore out a lot of what I thought needed changing to make this Redshift suitable for me. This is the joy of building ones own ship. One can often change things to meet your own requirement (right or wrong). Now because of a few errors on my part I'm sorry to say that I didn't get enough time on the first Redshift to tune it to fly the best in my hands. But It did show that it (I) was about 10 seconds faster with the RedShift than I was with the Strega. I can say that it didn't tip stall as so many claimed it would. And when stalled it was honest. So as a design I can say, in my hands it was much better than the Strega. And at my skill level I did not see any limitations that were holding my speed down. (Folks also often have an issue separating their skill level limitation from that of the airframe limitations)
Are the higher priced ships better, I can't say? I can say that for a $1K less than many higher end ships, I'm NOT equipment limited flying a RedShift. That is to say the design is not holding me back.
I can only think, that the new RedShift Spada will be a better design and a better ship. I look forward to seeing one in the wild.
All the best,
Konrad
P.S.
As the first F3F race of the season has been postponed a week I might be able to finish the repair of this first RedShift. (But that might be a bit too much like work. I have to remember that this is suppose to be a hobby not a chore)!
This particular ship had some issues that we went over in detail. Some of these were as a result of the rush build from the original owner. There were also some quality issues with the manufacture. I hope I made it clear what these were.
When talking design many folks have difficulties separating these kind of issues from that of the fundamental design.
The use of snakes is one of those items that is in the gray area of design, manufacture and personal preference. The wing control horns are another item that is highly dependent of personal preference. It also is a "fashion" issue. The only real fundamental design issue I had was the short V-Tail arms. After finding this issue it really wasn't too difficult for a real modeler to correct this. (It proved to be such an effective fix that I felt comfortable acquiring a second RedShift airframe).
With this ship I tore out a lot of what I thought needed changing to make this Redshift suitable for me. This is the joy of building ones own ship. One can often change things to meet your own requirement (right or wrong). Now because of a few errors on my part I'm sorry to say that I didn't get enough time on the first Redshift to tune it to fly the best in my hands. But It did show that it (I) was about 10 seconds faster with the RedShift than I was with the Strega. I can say that it didn't tip stall as so many claimed it would. And when stalled it was honest. So as a design I can say, in my hands it was much better than the Strega. And at my skill level I did not see any limitations that were holding my speed down. (Folks also often have an issue separating their skill level limitation from that of the airframe limitations)
Are the higher priced ships better, I can't say? I can say that for a $1K less than many higher end ships, I'm NOT equipment limited flying a RedShift. That is to say the design is not holding me back.
I can only think, that the new RedShift Spada will be a better design and a better ship. I look forward to seeing one in the wild.
All the best,
Konrad
P.S.
As the first F3F race of the season has been postponed a week I might be able to finish the repair of this first RedShift. (But that might be a bit too much like work. I have to remember that this is suppose to be a hobby not a chore)!
Konrad
Very Strong User
Process failures.
Here I've tried to re-hinge a torn off flap. The problem is that the Kevlar cloth has risen above the surface along the hinge line. This allows the surface to float up and down. The styrofoam pushers have done a good job of allowing the Kevlar to adhere to the flap and wing. But I've lost a lot of control in keeping the flap in position on the TF of the wing.
My process works some of the time. I'm wondering if there is a process that results in a more consistent repair.
Here I've tried to re-hinge a torn off flap. The problem is that the Kevlar cloth has risen above the surface along the hinge line. This allows the surface to float up and down. The styrofoam pushers have done a good job of allowing the Kevlar to adhere to the flap and wing. But I've lost a lot of control in keeping the flap in position on the TF of the wing.
My process works some of the time. I'm wondering if there is a process that results in a more consistent repair.
Konrad
Very Strong User
Yikes, when I Google Kevlar hinge repair I get mostly my posts!
I think much of my problem might be with how I store the wing waiting for the epoxy to cure. I open up the flap to stuff in the styrofoam pushers. So far so good. But then I bring back the flap to the up position. I do this to make sure everything is aligned. This might be where the Kevlar is lifting. My next set of repairs will be to leave the surface as I pushed in the styrofoam pushers. I will rely on the masking tape I first used to align the surfaces.
I think much of my problem might be with how I store the wing waiting for the epoxy to cure. I open up the flap to stuff in the styrofoam pushers. So far so good. But then I bring back the flap to the up position. I do this to make sure everything is aligned. This might be where the Kevlar is lifting. My next set of repairs will be to leave the surface as I pushed in the styrofoam pushers. I will rely on the masking tape I first used to align the surfaces.
Doc James Hammond
Very Strong User
Just as a matter of interest, I did a simple google survey:
At this point there are (so far as I can find) 39 different commercial avowed F3f Models available, then 5 amateur but still commercially available or will be available efforts, followed by a multitude of non commercials.
Crikey!
I think my approach might be the right one.
Doc.
At this point there are (so far as I can find) 39 different commercial avowed F3f Models available, then 5 amateur but still commercially available or will be available efforts, followed by a multitude of non commercials.
Crikey!
I think my approach might be the right one.
Doc.
gp49
Very Strong User
Konrad,
On your hinge repair, can you prepare a replacement hinge piece first so you can control the gap, lets say lay the kevlar on two thin pieces of balsa stock side by side? Then position the prefabed hinge in your wing? If done right it will work for short repairs and if need to you can remove/grind off the wood.
I was repairing a thorn off flap and was going to use this idea, but mine was 21" long. In the end i used a silicon hinge instead.
On your hinge repair, can you prepare a replacement hinge piece first so you can control the gap, lets say lay the kevlar on two thin pieces of balsa stock side by side? Then position the prefabed hinge in your wing? If done right it will work for short repairs and if need to you can remove/grind off the wood.
I was repairing a thorn off flap and was going to use this idea, but mine was 21" long. In the end i used a silicon hinge instead.
Attachments
Konrad
Very Strong User
Thank you I'll have to give that a try. With my process I had good results with 4 partially torn off elevators. I had good luck with reattaching one flap.
I've had the process (mine) fail with one fully torn off flap and aileron, and it failed with a partially torn off aileron.
I have to ask, do you remove the epoxy wiper prior to installing the hinge? Then reinstall a wipers at a latter time?
I've had the process (mine) fail with one fully torn off flap and aileron, and it failed with a partially torn off aileron.
I have to ask, do you remove the epoxy wiper prior to installing the hinge? Then reinstall a wipers at a latter time?
Last edited:
gp49
Very Strong User
I think removing the wiper depends on the room you have, or don't have, to work with. In my case since i was doing the silicone hinge there was plenty of room for the syringe tip. My wiper is very small, old school, shaped balsa stock...? I'm rehabbing an old Maple Leaf Image.
As you know prep work is the most important part of any repair.
As you know prep work is the most important part of any repair.
Doc James Hammond
Very Strong User
Updated photos. Phil is a CAD Genius.
Henchoy!
El Doc.
Henchoy!
El Doc.
Doc James Hammond
Very Strong User
Its actually 15 degrees Konrad.
Doc.
Doc.
Konrad
Very Strong User
I recall you saying that you used 15°. Most of those that I've seen are closer to vertical, like 7°. Now I have no data to support ether value. Particularly when there is no such thing as a typical landing. Let alone a typical bad landing. All I know was that the vertical part line didn't align with any landing profile.
Yes, I'm happy to see the forward slanted part line.
I'm also happy to see the trapezoidal (actually triangular) cross section of the fuselage with the wider base to allow for the servo arms and push rods heading towards the tail.
Yes, I'm happy to see the forward slanted part line.
I'm also happy to see the trapezoidal (actually triangular) cross section of the fuselage with the wider base to allow for the servo arms and push rods heading towards the tail.
purview
Very Strong User
Just in time, nice ?
Doc James Hammond
Very Strong User
With the bottom loading they really have to be push for up. Bt with the advent of teeny servos I'm kind of considering putting them directly in the tailplanes as an alternative. I did that with the big Aresti.
Doc.
- Status
Similar threads
