IN THEORY, spreading the ballast out span-wise in the wing will increase the
roll inertia, and thus require more aileron to get the same reaction. In
practice, if the ballast is within 0-18 inches of the centerline on a 10 ft
wing, not much will change.
IN THEORY, making a long ballast tube
*
-Original Message-
From: Jim Laurel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 29 June 2005 3:45 PM
To: D Hauch
Cc: soaring@airage.com
Subject: Re: [RCSE] ballast ? wing/fuse
I just don't understand the concept of wing ballast. It would seem
to me that it assumes a particular CG, right
: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 10:31:37 +1000
To: Jim Laurel [EMAIL PROTECTED], D Hauch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: soaring@airage.com
Subject: RE: [RCSE] ballast ? wing/fuse
Hi Jim,
If you do the calculations, or a practical test, you will see that a minor
error in placement of the ballast has
IMO It's actually better to load the wing if possible. It takes some of
the load off of the joiner or center panel whichever type of wing you
have. As long as you don't go too far out on the panels it shouldn't
take too much away from roll control. It also depends on what type of
flying you are
Dave,
Roll rate will suffer. Closer to the centerline of the fuse is better! My
Viper uses wing ballast and it is like throwing an oil filled damper on the
plane when the wing is filled although in a 55mph wind like I last flew it
in fully ballasted it may not be a bad thing!
Same thing happens
I just don't understand the concept of wing ballast. It would seem
to me that it assumes a particular CG, right? If the ballast in the
wing isn't right on the CG, doesn't it mean that the cg actually
changes depending on how much ballast is put in there? Seems a
dubious solution to me.
6 matches
Mail list logo
