cambrian fun fighter p51

[slopetrash]

Just bought one of these for sloping it`s originally for i/c any one tried this or got any suggestions please

[flyboy47]

Hi slopetrash, yet again sorry for the long delay in replying, seems not many people read or coment in this forum these days, do you know some one asked the same question in another forum just the other week!! could it have been you i wonder ? well the answer is yes my friend the Cambrian P51 does convert for the slope and does fly very well, a friend of mine i used to fly with a few year back had one of these great little models and it would fly perfectly in 10/15 mph winds on our local slope, this was i would think about 15 years ago, it was very aerobatic ( not really a model for a novice though) some where i have a picture of it on a low inverted pass, hope this helps you with your choice to convert it for PSS, BTW the Ripmax electric Spitfire i was converting for PSS does fly quite well, i have test flown mine at long last :-)
good luck m8 <flyboy47>

[slopetrash]

Thanks for the reply i`m now on the next question of how did he compensate for not having a i/c engine on the front and it`s effect on the cog

[flyboy47]

Hi Slopetrash,
To be honest im not sure if he did any modifications to the COG on the Cambrian P51
But i have at last flown my converted Ripmax electric Spitfire on the slope about 5 times and it was proved that the COG had to be moved forward about 3/4 of an inch to make it fly sucsessfully, this also true of a larger P51at 56inch span i converted from an Aero Teck kit a few years ago,
i had a lengthy discission with Steve G at the sheffield even about this fact and he sems to think that all converted power models need a forward COG from that on the plan,
I think a good starting point would be 1/2 an inch forward and see how she performs, one point worth mentioning is the wing to tailplane incidence if possible check and make sure it is not over more than maybe 1 or 1.5 degrees
hope that helps mate
cheers flyboy

[rc-pilot]

I hope I didn't say that! What I - (a) think I said (b) should have said (c) can't think why I didn't say - was that for a given model capable of being flown as a glider or under power, the CG needs to be further back when flown as a glider. That has been my experience, which is in fact the opposite of what was related above. The likelihood is therefore that a converted power model flown as a glider will need its CG moving back from the position given in the kit or plan (always provided that it is correctly given to begin with - which you can't always rely on)

Sorry about slow reply but I rarely look on this forum these days.

[flyboy47]

ohh well he has probably flown it and crashed it now rc pilot,, i visulise him walking down a big slope with a handfull of bits wondering if it should have been further forward or rearward, or was the indicated mark on the plan correct he he he,