chip hyde cap x and the cg that wasent

[arfwrecker]

any one out thier with a hyde cap x. I balenced mine to the spec sheet with the plane 3.5 from the tip used cg machine it was perfect till i flew low rate high (snap stall) almost lost it engine in break in mode barely got it home thank you fs one if you have one do not use the balance point given BAD VERY BAD. MOVED CG TO 3 inches from the root and removed that damn lead very nice plane. bme 44 20.8 zinger pro jumps off the ground lands like a kitten everything inbetween is great. great plane just use caution on cg

[Cobra1]

That is why I will go to this web site to validate the CG. If the recommended and the CG calculator come very close then I know I am good to go. If they are a lot different I will use the calculated CG. It has been very close every time.

http://www.nasascale.org/howtos/cg-calculator.htm

[Mr.Pickle]

Very nice reference! I like to use this method for larger planes, works quite well!

[Cobra1]

Thanks. By the way, if anyone really wants go indepth try this site. It includes the tail moment and surface are into the CG calculation. I have never used it but it does seem noteworthy.
http://www.geistware.com/rcmodeling/cg_super_calc.htm

[Highlights]

I used the recommended CG and thought the plane was extremely stable. Very good at high alpha and slow speed approaches seemed to track very nicely with no tendancy to drop a wing at stall. Don't know what to say, other than move it around until you are comfortable.



I am confused. If at 3.5" you needed lead then at 3" you should need even more????????? That is not making any sense.

[Boulder]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Highlights
	I used the recommended CG and thought the plane was extremely stable. Very good at high alpha and slow speed approaches seemed to track very nicely with no tendancy to drop a wing at stall. Don't know what to say, other than move it around until you are comfortable. I am confused. If at 3.5" you needed lead then at 3" you should need even more????????? That is not making any sense.

It depends on where the lead was

[ec121]

My Cap-x was the same way. It flew a little tail heavy. When I landed it, it took a little down elevator to get it down. I didn't like that so I put some lead in the nose. Now it is about neutral but much better behaved on landing. Also passes the inverted 45deg upline test. Not sure what the CG is. I just moved it til it flew the way I wanted it to. That is what matters. I only have about an inch of elevator throw on low rates and that is plenty. I can snap it at will on high rates.

[arfwrecker]

the difference is from the root not the tip and it was a approximation going to sort it out in the morning and dig the rest of the lead out. still very touchy very little elevater still very responsive. I must be doing somthing wrong thx all for input I will fix it or kit it trying.