R/C gas powered 300 series

specops1691 · Post by **specops1691** » Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:35 pm

I am brand new to this whole R/C plane thing and have noticed the little 300 series planes. I noticed that it said they could be gas powered but I was wondering is if they too can be converted to R/C?

supercruiser · Post by **supercruiser** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:15 am

Yes, they can. Have not done it myself but, have seen it done with micro servos and receivers. Works well.

Flyguy172 · Post by **Flyguy172** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 10:57 pm

You can convert the 300 series to R/C but Guillows dos not supply instructions on how to, they just give instructions on how to put a .020 gas engine in it. Although if you have made an R/C plane before I'd bet you could do it. Please take note that I have not built an R/C plane before but have done some research about them, and also I only have kit #309.

Hope this helped

jamesgood72 · Post by **jamesgood72** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:50 pm

specops1691, as Supercruiser and flyguy have stated, it should be possible. I've done the 25" 700 series Fairchild 24 as electric r/c.

Some pictures of what went into it here :

[url]http://www.virtualaerodrome.com/image_browser.html?l=1&p_aircraft_id=32&p_user_id=1&offset=60
[/url]

Keep us informed if you try it!

-James.

specops1691 · Post by **specops1691** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:48 pm

I did a little more research since last post and I have decided to try and convert a Mustang to electric power because I have experience with electric r/c vehicles and no experience with such small gas engines. Its coming together well so far but I'm having to stop and do a lot of research and thinking to figure out how to get the rudder and ailerons to work.

Does anybody know if on such a small plane (about 16 inch wing span) I need to bother with the flaps on the tail or just with the main aeilrons on the wings.

Any tips or ideas would be welcome

Flyguy172 · Post by **Flyguy172** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:26 pm

I'm guessing it's kit #905 since you say it has about a 16 inch wing span. I’ve always though that on the smaller models you didn't need ailerons, just rudder, elevator, and speed control. As an example, jamesgood72's Fairchild 24 only uses rudder, elevator, and speed control. Although without ailerons you will not be able to do aileron rolls or barrel rolls. But once again, I have not built an R/C plane before but have done some research about them and I also know allot about real airplanes and the aerodynamics that make them fly.
Hope this helped

.

fychan · Post by **fychan** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 2:55 am

specops1691 wrote:Does anybody know if on such a small plane (about 16 inch wing span) I need to bother with the flaps on the tail or just with the main aeilrons on the wings.

I'm in the middle of converting the 400 series Spitfire to gas R/C... For the aelerons etc I've just used the lines marked on the plans for the "real" control surfaces, cut them out of the wings & used shaped solid balsa to create the surface.

If you don't want to bother with the tail flaps you could always create elevons instead of the (more usual) aerlerons on the wings & elevators on the tail. It would require more work (I think) to make the wing surfaces act as both elevators and aelerons - setting up the servos correctly I imagine would be hard... Which is why I went for rudder / elevators / aelerons.

specops1691 · Post by **specops1691** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:43 am

Ok thanks to all.
But after reading your posts I was wondering can't the ailerons on the wings also control elevation like the tail flaps would if they are controlled independently?

supercruiser · Post by **supercruiser** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:07 pm

The tail flaps or "elevators" would give the best UP and DOWN control.
You could use the ailerons (working together). For instance: if you wanted to the plane to climb, you could deflect BOTH ailerons DOWN , thus creating more lift, and the plane would climb. But, it would be a slow response on such a small airplane. (Because the difference in lift would be miniscule.)
What you are intending is similar in configuration as the B-2 Stealth bomber.
No tail.

I agree with the rudder and elevator working on the tail. This should be relatively simple to install and get working. Running a small diameter control rod from the servo back to the tail surfaces should be easy. Because of several factors, ailerons on the wings might be an added benefit for better roll response.
By the way, going electric sounds like a good idea. Gas power is a bit strong for a 16 inch span model if you ask me. And less messy.

freefall · Post by **freefall** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 2:04 pm

the guys in my club have been building and flying Guillows 400-500 series of kits and flying them electric with the following equipment from FMA direct,,,brushless power system150 part #BLPS15-150 andthat includes a brushless outrunner,speedcontrol,prop,mnt. for 3 lipo cells.FMA encore sub micro reciever 72 mhz.and 4 hitech hs-55 submicro servos.for less than a hundred bucks.not including transmitter.light weight equipment and dependable.plenty of power and flying times of around 15 MINUTES at cruising speed,and these warbirds can really be wrung out,,,The equipment is available from www.fmadirect.com any questions you have i can help you out if you like...Ron

specops1691 · Post by **specops1691** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:22 pm

I have decided for weight purposes to go with only elevons/flaps on the tail but on that note is there a magic wing area to weight ratio that I should stay under or just as low as I can go?

supercruiser · Post by **supercruiser** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:54 pm

Typically, .5 grams/sq. in. is the target wing loading for RUBBER BAND powered. With electric you should be able to go a little heavier and still have decent performance. But low as you can go works, too!

specops1691 · Post by **specops1691** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:49 am

Thanks supercruiser for the info I have done research on the internet and have found so many different ratio numbers and was confused but what you said seems to make the most since for an airplane of this size.

Also the only place I can fit the servos for the tail flaps is actually under the the tail itself. They measure about 1inch by .5inches does anybody know if that would create to much drag or not?

supercruiser · Post by **supercruiser** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:44 am

I'm currently building the 905 Mustang, too. The problem I see with putting the servos under the tail is not drag but, getting the model to balance properly. Your servos (.5" by 1" )should fit side by side between formers B and E, on top of former D. Former D will probably be in the way, so cut former D down to half it's original height. This will not reduce the fuselage strength. You may have to build a little shelf to hold the servos.

specops1691 · Post by **specops1691** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:08 am

That is perfect I will work on that and get back to you guys if anything happens. thanks

Guillow's Model Builders Forum