One Sheet and Two Sheet No-Waste Flying Wings

by dharkless | January 9, 2014 | (36) Posted in Projects

 

Hello again out there...

Some people would say I dont have a life, always off by myself playing with airplanes.  But I say "That is a pretty good life".  Anyone else out there feel that way?

Anyway, here is what I am playing with now.

I thought it would be interesting to try to design a foam plane that was made with one full sheet, no other foam board and no scrap. The thuoght came to me as I was preparing to build the FT Delta and I thought "This could be made a little bigger and still fit on one sheet.  What if?..." Well, it went here from there.  This is what I came up with:

The span is 40".  Average chord is about 9".  Area about 2.5 FS.  I don't have a small enough motor yet but if the one I am considerring is really 19 grams I should be under 350 g. or about 13 OZ.  At 5.2 oz wing loading it should fly on a whisper.

One thing I am not sure about.  This has a serious amount of under camber.  It should be great on lift but will that be an issue for stability?

This is the prototype.  It will be restricted to a max 5" prop.  The plan is now drawn with a wider propeller gap.  There was not enough material to make the power pod so I cheated and made it from scraps for this one.  The second one will allow for an 8" prop. the tail fins will obviouusly be further apart and the ailerons will be 1.5 " shorter.  The extra material makes the pod.

I fell short of my no scrap / no extra foam goal in a couple of places. There is a wedge cut-out for the aileron clearance at the fins.  There are two of them 1/2  to 1/8 by 2" long that I could not find a purpose for. I should just glue it in for principal's sake.  The other one is the structure that wraps and anchors the front of the power pod.  It was made from an extra piece 3" x 6" but it looks really cool and works well so I forgive myself on that one.

Here are some other pix:

One wing made.  The other half sheet will make the second.

Bat or stingray nose.  That was an accident of the construction but I like it. The "head" makes a socket for the small power pod to insert into.

The business end.  I fitted it with a 2212 1000 KV motor and a 1800 three cell on the nose.  It weighs in right at 400g. so a little heavier than I first thought.  But then I also have more motor so it should work out. The CG now is about where I think it should be.

The wing halves were joined without any trimming of factory edges,  The way it came together with the camber gave about 1/2" of dihedral.  It only has the top surface at the joint but the camber gives it a lot of strength,  The nose box also helps but would probably not have been needed for strength.  On the other hand, more is always better.

 

A better picture of the "plans ".  I think you can make out all of the dimensions. Most are running numbers from the corner of the sheet.   Lower left is 3/8, 1 5/8, 5, 5 1/4, 6 1/2 7 8.  Remainder is 22.  There is 1' left in between the aileron and the pod cut-out to support the tail. The inboard end of the aileron is 2" wide.  I have to look into getting some design software.

Well that is it.

If anyone has experience with under camber on a flying wing please drop me a line. 

 

Update:

I have also put together a two sheet no-waste version.

It has a 60" wing span.  It uses a standard swappable core.  There are two swappable tabs that center it in the wing.  The canopy wraps the front of the wing and secures the front of the swappable core with a skewer.

I think the tail fins are bigger than what is needed.  It is just what was left after making the wing work.  I could add some area to the wing botton panel and reduce the tail but I would have to rework the whole wing geometry.  I will try this first.  

The propeller area with the swappable core reversed.  It will take a 9" prop with 3/4" clear each side.

The wrap-around cowl slips snugly over what would normally be the back end of the swappable pod with a pin through the normal hole location.  In combination with skewers in the back and one set of tabs cut into the lower wing it is very secure.

The wing joint is made without any trimming on the factory edges and makes about 1" of camber on each wing.  The back edges of the wing is almost straight. I just took enough off to make the single spar.the only scrap is what is left after cutting both sides of the canopy out of one of the 5" X 5 /1/2" motor area cut-outs.  The top and bottom come out of the other with no scraps.  I also nipped a 1" X 2" triangle off the lower front corners of the tail to make  skids.   The bottoms of the tails are equal with the bottom of the swappable so it should land without the wing on the ground (in a perfect world).  

 I am thinking to add wire loops for landing gear (skids).

Here is the plan.  Make 2. The second is reversed of course..  The 5 X 5 1/2" cut out from the second sheet was used to make the curved top and bottom panels for the canopy.  They are first cut to 2 1/2 X 5 1/2".  The 5 1/2" edges are half cut at 3/16 wide and the edge material is removed.  The paper backing is removed so they will wrap around the sides readily.  Then you have to trim ends to fit.

The airframe weighs 290 g.  with gear including a 2200 battery weight will be about 590 g.  Wing area is about 4.3 SF.  Wing loading 140 g / SF.  That is less than 5oz wing loading. 

 

Latest development:

Modified tail fins!  I thought the original ones were too dominant but wanted to stay as close as possible to the no waste concept.  This approach seems to soften the appearance without sacrificing the concept.  I debated between 30% & 45%, settling on 45.  The bends are 1" above and parallel to the top wing surface.  I think this will also allow a more natural airflow pattern around the propeller.

Update:

I revised the two sheet version to a more true flying wing.  I eliminated the canopy nose that is shown in the photos above and constructed a socket from one of the propeller area cut-outs.   It uses a modified swappable pod.

 

The sides of the swappable pod had to be cut down to 9" long and the bottom panel to 6 1/2 ". I then used a piece 1 5/8 X 3" foam to add a bottom 5/16 " higher in the front part to hold the battery.  It glues in between the sides after cutting the bottom out.  The skewer fits into a knotch at the top edge of the pod to allow room for the battery in the same area.  It just keeps it from sliding out.  The 1800 or 2200 battery cear up in the nose makes it balance just forward of the servo horns which I think is about right.

 

I also made a swappable version of the one-sheet design:

 

Three flying wings and the original inspiration:

  

All three are ready to fly.  They all three have the same motor, 2212 1000KV.  The 60" one weighs 598g. The thrust with a 2200 - 3 cell is 650g. so I think I will have good vertical.  The other two will probably do well on 2200 - 2 cell or 1800 - 3 cell.  I think I will be able to do aerobatics for 10 min. plus or slow and easy for 20 min. or so.

All I need now is a break in the weather! 

 

UPDATE:

I was having trouble getting a satisfactory CG pint on the one-sheet version without a nose so I made some mods: 

 

I revised the motor cut-out area and moved the modified swappable core forward 1 1/2".  I created a separate battery copartment to hold a 1800 3 cell crossways right under the nose, cutting out the lower wing surface in the process.  The swappable core is cut to hold the battery firmly in place.  This got me to a CG result of 20% of the MAC which is OK for moderate flyers (like me).

I will probably have to do something similar to the two sheet version.

I am planning to get a higher kv motor.  The one I have is 1000 kv and the thrust is about 100 g lower than the weight. I want it to be at least equal.  In the process I will look for something lighter as well.   That will also help my CG.

 

SECOND UPDATE:

I have put together another one  sheet design thar has more sweep:

 Wirthout the motor I had to put the battery clear to the back of the modified swappable to get a rough balance at the 15% of MAC.  I think I could have used less depth in the motor cut-out area.  

 

The bottom:

I used a generous motor cut-out because I had trouble balancing the first two designs.  I could probably have left it all in on this one.  The cut-out does give it a more dramtic look but at the loss of wing area.  I am going to try it the other way also.

I am also going to try a two sheet design along the same lines.  It will be hard to get as much sweep because of the shape of the board but I will get as much as I can.  I may have to make the bottom panel from two pieces.

The long tapered piece that is cut off the back or the elevon is the spar.  It just goes centered  between the two score cuts on the upper wing panel.  I also used 4 small scraps cut to match  the thick and thin ends to keep the center panel of the top flat.  So when I assembled the wing there were two extra blocks on each end of the spar to keep the top center panel parallel to the bottom panel.

Again on this one there is some dihedral (about 1") that is produced by the way the top panel edge warps as the wing top surface is formed.  The deeper the spar the more dihedral.  No trimming was needed on any factory edges to build the plane.  

 

UPDATE #3:

Here is one of my wings ready to fold.  I add 4 pieces of scrap matching the spar height to control the wing fold angles.  I glue the front joint and all spars but not the rear joint,  Once that is set I do the back joint squeezing some inside before holding it firm.  The camber is controlled pretty well with this method. 

 

Here is a version of the second one-sheet design without the motor area cut out.  I just eliminated the cut-out shown on the plan with the 2 3/4" dimension.

 

Here is the bottom side:

 

Front view showing dihedral of about 1".  The top wing joints are factory edges.  The bottom joint is made with knife cuts.

I have not installed the swappable pod yet.  It should be able to be tucked well back from the leading edge leaving a clean "wing" appearance.  I will probably do a small cut-out for the back of the pod so just the motor in inset in the back of the wing.  That will also let the pod run flatter with the bottom of the wing.

 

The rear part of the wing not being cut out for the motor produces a condsiderable amount of under camber between the tails.  I am not sure what I will do with that, if anything.

 

My wing collection to date (updated photo):

All them wings!

UPDATE #4:  

I have completed the 4th design which is a two-sheet version with more sweep.  It is the one with the green propeller standing in the corner above.  Actually I have made a small mod to the original 60" one on the left as well since that picture.  I had trouble balancing so I moved the pod forward and cut the motor into the back of the wing.  I had to relocate the nose socket forward the same amount.  I will be able to get the CG to beween 20% and 25% of MAC and will be able to get to 15% by temporarily adding $2 in quarters to the tip of the nose.  After initial testing I hope to be able to eliminate them.

Here are some more pictures of the fourth design:

 

This has the most sweep I could get and keep a reasonable tip cord with a one piece top wing surface.  I will be able to get to 20% of MAC with just batteries on this one.  This wing has a thicker cord and the wing bottom is prettyflat as compared to the other 3. 

I used a standard swappable core and just added a panel to close the angled (front) end.

I had to move the skewer up about half way toward the top to get the battery in.  I am using an 1800 3 cell.

I am doing a separate article on the landing gear.  It is made from one wire hanger.  The nose gear is very stable and has light spring action.  The hanger wire is pretty soft and will probably need frequent straightening.  The goal is wheeled take-offs. I am sure it will work for that on hard surfaces.

I think this one will work (the best)! 

 

Here is the plan:

 

Update #6: 10-26-15:

I have replaced the original photo of a rough drawing on foamboard with this better pdf pencil drawing.  The dimensions are more complete.

I have also made a few updates to the design, includung:

Adding a second spar to each wing.

Revising the tail fin to be slotted around the wing with landing skids below.

Making the motor cut-out sized to make half of a standard FT power pod.

Added fin/skid location.

Added power pod location.

 

This is a pdf file.  Click anywhere on the drawing to print.

(End of Update) 

 

 

UPDATE #5:

Design #4 now has retracts:

Up:

 

Down:

I am working on a  how-to article that should be out by 2-20-14.  Please look for it.

 

COMMENTS

sailorJohn on February 4, 2014
Slick!
Log In to reply
spencer on February 4, 2014
Great idea, and some really good designs too. Looks nice.
Log In to reply
mark d on February 4, 2014
Have you tested it?

Log In to reply
dharkless on February 4, 2014
I tried a short flight hand launching in the local HS Gym was not able to get going very. I think I had my CG too far back and was tending to loop. I did some short flights with another design and decided the space is just too small for my rusty reaction time. I will have to wait for good weather. I have been able to balance the smaller one with the extended nose to my satisfaction and have added landing gear to it but have not flown it yet. I am reworking the smaller nose-less one to try to get the CG at somewhere near 15% of the average cord and that is a challenge without a nose. I may have to increase the depth of the motor cut-out to move the motor forward. Currently with an 1800 3 cell running sideways right under the nose I am between 20% and 25%. From what I have read that is suitable for an expert pilot with an established design. I am afraid I fall short on both accounts. The two-sheet design will be easier to balance since the motor is proportionally lighter but it will still be a challenge.

I am also planning to do a second design using the same concept but using the front edge of the long angle cut between the two wing halves as the leading edge of the wing and taking the lower wing surface from the back. That would result in more sweep which should help with balance and stability issues.

We are getting 8 to 10 inches of the white stuff here in western PA overnight. I am so ready for spring!
Log In to reply
FlyingSloth on February 5, 2014
If you need a better guide for the CG, check out some Flying Wing CG calculators such as: http://fwcg.3dzone.dk/

Takes a lot of the guess work out
Log In to reply
FlyingSloth on February 5, 2014
Also Awesome stuff :) I may give these a try, and maybe make a slope glider version.
Log In to reply
dharkless on February 5, 2014
Let me know if you try them. I am weather locked for now and am very eager for some performance results. Everything I have designed has worked pretty well in the past but it has been a while and I never did flying wings before. It "feels" like they will fly well but the proof is in the pudding.
Log In to reply
dharkless on February 5, 2014
I saw that. It is where I got the 15% for novices. The calculations from there are real close to what I used from basic geometry. There is still some guesswork because of my motor cut out area. I am right at 20% after moving my motor forward 1.5" and I think I could probably get by as a moderate flyer. I will post an update with the motor location changed.
Log In to reply
rcrich on February 4, 2014
Get a video of flight for us. Looks great !
Log In to reply
augernaught on February 4, 2014
Now those are some wicked looking wings! Great pics and write-ups too.
I haven't even thought about flying wings yet because they intimidate me a bit for
my limited fixed wing experience, and I don't even know how to set the mixes on my new radio
to get them to fly yet. But you made them look so cool, reasonably simple, and very frugal.
I might have to build them just for the pleasure of looking at them when I am done.
Especially that big one, WOW! If it started to rain out at the field, me and two buddies could
just stand under it and stay dry...
Hope you don't get too much of the white stuff tonight. I am north of you in the Buffalo, NY
area and we are expecting a bit here also, but not near what they say you folks are in for.

I don't suppose you are anywhere near Newell are you? My grandpa and great grandma lived
there and when I visited we used to fish for bullhead in the Mon, just about right off of the back
porch with nothing but a can of sweet corn to load our hooks. Could catch enough in 15 minutes
to feed the whole family! On those rare spring mornings when it was too cold for the fish to bite,
we would just munch on the corn and watch the fog roll in over the river....

Log In to reply
dharkless on February 5, 2014
Thanks for the kind comments...
We are about an hour and a half NW of Pittsburgh, half way to Cleveland on the Turnpike. Sounds like you had a great time time with your GGM. I envy you that. 3 of my grandparents were gone before I was old enough to remember.
Log In to reply
augernaught on February 5, 2014
Wow... Newell is only 30 driving miles SSE of Pittsburgh, so maybe 75-80 miles
SE of you, and you are about 180 road miles SW of me, which would have you just 60 or so miles East of Flitetest HQ. As far as the internet goes, we are almost next door neighbors... We need a North East Flitetest fun fly event !! You listening Chad?


Log In to reply
dharkless on February 5, 2014
MapQuest says 116 to Newel. I think 60 is pretty close for Flite Test.

Aren't these guys doing a heck of a job? I hope they are making a nice living out of it. I am trying to get an aviation / RC module added to our local HS physics class in which case they would get a bunch of the 3-plane kits. That is a very good value. I am really optimistic about the level of interest and the educational benefits. Besides, I would get to play "airplane"with a bunch of kids. What could be better than that?
Log In to reply
augernaught on February 8, 2014
Oh yes, these Flitetest folks are on the right track, for sure!
I was an RC ground pounder for over 30 years, and these people
got me over my fear of "heights" LOL!?!?
I can not for the life of me figure out how they could make a living out of it tho.
They would have to sell a million SB kits a year just to break even
and still pay the people it takes to produce the brand??

I think it is more of a passion for an end to a means than it is a
long term business for profit. That's why it is better than the rest.

/

116 miles to Newell tho?? Yeah, you have to wind yourself around those crazy rivers and bridges in Western PA. I made the mistake of "as the crow flies"
in guessing the distance. My Bad!

I wish you well in your efforts to incorporate RC into your local HS programs.
Log In to reply
1959cutter on February 5, 2014
test glide some more!
I love the design,so keep working with it.
I built a 40" wing with foam rib profiles and vert stab on wingtips,covered with colored packing tape,and ironed down tight surface.you are on the right track!
i found with my wings,when i have them dialed in,i can hand launch similar to a DLG throw,with no power and glide them in for a smooth landing!
Log In to reply
Michael763 on February 5, 2014
Nice designs. I can't wait to read more of the lessons learned after the weather breaks and you dial in the CG ranges. Stay warm and safe. Thanks for sharing.
Log In to reply
808aerosquadron on February 5, 2014
dharkless -

Great designs.

For your 1-sheet flying wing, would you mind stating the line mark measurements for the wing root (top of photo) lines like you did for the wing tip (bottom of photo) lines? Some of the marks are a little difficult to read from the photo.

Keep us posted on the test flights. This looks like it has some great potential.

Thanks again,

808aerosquadron
Log In to reply
dharkless on February 5, 2014
Thanks. The numbers along the top are 4, 8 5/8, 10 5/8, 13 1/8 & 22. Numbers down for the tail are 1 1/8 & 6 3/8. Numbers down the left side are 4 1/4 and 5 1/4 based on an 8" propeller but could be adjusted.
Log In to reply
808aerosquadron on February 5, 2014
dharkless - Thanks.
Log In to reply
Bolvon72 on February 5, 2014
Great designs, I look forward to seeing them in the air. I get the same thing at work whenever I'm asked what I did on my days off. Everyone thinks it's sad that my only interest is building and flying, experimenting and testing. I can't think of any better way to spend my time. Happy flying.
Log In to reply
dharkless on February 6, 2014
I think the Wright brothers and Thomas Edison had the same problem.
Log In to reply
pintokitkat on February 6, 2014
Absolutely brilliant.

By coincidence, I was working on a design I came up with in my sleep this morning that I intent to call the CBS (couldn't be simpler) using a 3x2 ratio board with no waste. If it turns out half as nice as yours, I'll be content.

I am suffering the same weather lockdown over here in England (rain and high winds for weeks now), but I'd be really interested to see a video when you get out.
Log In to reply
NuGro on February 18, 2014
awesome design.

wondering how it's fly.
Log In to reply
dharkless on February 18, 2014
I am in western PA with a foot of snow on the ground. No flights yet. I will post an update when I do testing.
Log In to reply
rao30 on May 21, 2015
I know it has been a while since this article has been updated but just out of curiosity, are you still planning on doing a How-to guide for this amazing project? I would like to build one of these but Im struggling to understand where the wing is supposed to fold over because it says 'cut' on the plans.
Log In to reply
rao30 on May 21, 2015
I also realize that it has been more than a year since the last post here.

Log In to reply
dharkless on May 21, 2015
Thanks for commenting on my article.
This article was a kind of rambling record of my thought process through developing several related designs. I did not do detailed build articles for most of them as seen in this article. I did do a couple of flying wing build articles, one for a 4 sheet 80" version and one for a 1/2 sheet with a 31" wingspan. Neither of these appears in the original article.
The wing bottom panel does not fold with the rest of the wing from the position it comes out of the sheet. You have to cut it, rotate it 180 degrees and then reattach it to the front of the wing panel with tape. The longest side which happens to be the edge of the sheet is what matches up to the leading edge of the wing top panel. Take a look at the partly assembled wing later in the article.
Which plane are you trying to build?
I think there are 4 sets of "Plans" shown plus a bunch of variations on the theme.
The one that flies best is the 60" two-sheet version that is shown last.
Even better (for me) is the 4 sheet 80" that I did the full build article on. I built 3 of those to do the article pictures and I am still flying the first one. It is a little slower and lazier than the two sheet 60". I guess it depends on what you are looking for.
Log In to reply
dharkless on May 21, 2015
The broken lines on the drawings show the position of the bottom wing panels after they are folded. The bottom panel for the second 60" is actually made from two separate panels that have to be flat joined before attaching to the upper wing. The folded positions for both pieces is shown in broken lines on that drawing as well.
Log In to reply
Markm82 on June 18, 2015
I came across these one sheet no waste designs and decided to give them a try! I just finished and flew the 40" with extra sweep. All I can say is WOW! Definitely got my adrenaline pumping. This thing is bad to the bone. The build went very well. No trimming needed on transmitter. It can actually be quite fast. Was flying with full rates but seriously need to set some expo(will be using 65% on rates and 50% expo on a switch). Roll rate is fast and this thing looks fantastic performing aerobatics. Loops and ballistic climbs, no problem. With all this it still manages to remain quite stable in normal flight. Simply a lot of fun to fly! Quite a design. A sincere thanks for sharing this!

Some specifics on my build:

I used this program to establish my CG points. http://fwcg.3dzone.dk/
AUW is 392 grams.
The complete(minwaxed) airframe weight was 184 grams(airframe only - no hardware). My build will obviously be slightly heavier than usual due to the custom pod I built. Minwax added about 10 grams to the black adams foam board - coated both sides. Mine was 112 grams. For decoration I used black Hobbyking "wing tape". I also built my own control horns and rods from another article(click on dharkless above for more articles). Prop used was an 8x3.8 prop on a 1300kv hextronik "blue wonder". With this combo you can use beyond 1:1 power ONLY in short bursts. I.E. over 80% for no more than a few seconds to avoid motor heat buildup. There are better solutions, but this had me flying. B.T.W. this makes in excess of 565 grams thrust max(measured). A 20a Hobby King ESC/bec I had lying around. 1000mah zippy flightmax for reduced weight/aerobatics. Reflex was set using a straight edge laid on the flat bottom of the wing 3/16" total. Cg was set at 22%. OrangeRx 6 channel receiver with built in 3 axis stabilizer. Haven't used the stabilizer yet. And haven't seen a need for it. Never switched it on. Simply that stable.

Looking next at your twin tail designs! I found a couple of videos on YouTube as well. This will be fun.

Log In to reply
dharkless on June 19, 2015
Thanks for trying my designs and thanks for sharing your experience. I am happy that it worked well for you.

Good luck with the twin tails!

Take a look at the landing skids from the twin tails. They should work well on the wings as well.
Log In to reply
demonprince on October 25, 2015
I just built the 60" in update 4. I really like how easy it is to build and the crisp lines. Out of all the wings I have built this one seems to be the sturdiest and as well as remaining uniform between both wing halves. I could not figure out the measurements for the left side of the elevons and spar but I just guesstimated and it seems to have worked out.

The one problem I'm having in completing the build though is how you attached the pod to the bottom, I see the skewer but what is it attaching to in the middle? I could probably make something up and get it to work but I would like to stick to your design as much as possible.

Also thank you for the hard work and knowledge, I have learned so much from your articles and can't wait to fly this wing.
Log In to reply
dharkless on October 25, 2015
Thanks for your interest in my design.

I used a zip tie and double dowel glued to the top of the wing like in some of the early FT designs (Nutball for one). You can see the skewers in the first picture. The zip tie is hard to hook. I would use a couple of triangles of gift card or plastic cutting board slotted into the bottom of the wing with a skewer through the pod. I would reinforce the pod holes with gift card or cutting board as well.

Please send me some pictures: dhark69@gmail.com

Log In to reply
dharkless on October 25, 2015
The other thing I would do is add a wing tip dowel for discus style launching. See my article on the subject. I will add it as a reference article above.
Log In to reply
dharkless on October 25, 2015
I neglected to put dimensions on them but the combined width of inboard spar and aileron is the same as the outboard end at 2 1/4". The spar is 3/8 and the aileron is 1 7/8.
Log In to reply
dharkless on October 27, 2015
I have updated the drawing that was in Update #4 as Update #6. It is now an 8 1/2 X 11 pdf that you can click on and print for easy reference on the building table. I made a few detail changes but you can still proceed with the older version.
Log In to reply
Jeff Pearson on August 11, 2016
Thanks for the plans. Built 60" version. Was thinking Flite Test Power pack C with 8" prop?? Where should CG be for beginner
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1769124493331497&set=pcb.1769124716664808&type=3&theater
Log In to reply
dharkless on August 12, 2016
Hey Jeff,

Thanks for your interest in my design.

This is one of my older designs but it does fly well.

The power pack "C" should be fine. I used a D2826-6 on mine. It has 342 watts of power compared to 312 for the motor in "C". That will give you slightly less power (about 10%0 but that is probably a good thing for a beginner.

For a beginner I would move the CG about 3/8" forward from what is shown on the plans. That will make you a little nose heavy.

The elevons per the CG on the plans should be set with about 3/16" positive. The bottom of the elevon should be about even with the top surface of the wing instead of flush with it. If you are moving the CG forward you will need a little more. I would start with 1/4". The bottom surface of the trailing edge will be about 1/8" ABOVE the top of the wing surface. This provides "reflex" in the wing which is necessary for stability in tailless designs.

This is a perky design for a beginner. Hopefully you have had some time with a basic trainer or at least a simulator. Flying with elevons is very similar to flying a trainer with ailerons. You have to bank first then use up elevator to turn.
You should look at my articles "Flag Wire Landing Skids" and "Wing Tip Discus Throw Hand Launcher". Both are very useful for this design.
Let me know how things work out.

Here are links:
http://flitetest.com/articles/wing-tip-discus-throw-hand-launcher
http://flitetest.com/articles/flag-wire-landing-skids

Please send pictures and any additional questions to my e-mail: dhark69@gmail.com.
Good luck.

Log In to reply
Jeff Pearson on August 12, 2016
I built the older 60" version not swept one figured it would be slower/less perky. Don't see CG on those plans. I'll figure it out. It glided nice and true today with a rock in the nose, Again, thank you
Log In to reply
dharkless on August 14, 2016
Actually they are about the same speed. That is a function of wing area and weight as long as the wing section is similar, which they are. I think more sweep adds to stability. I flew the 40" version (third from bottom in the group picture) a few times but I found the more swpt 40" to be more stable and more responsive. I did have it
Log In to reply
dharkless on August 14, 2016
powered up pretty well so it was pretty fast but it would also slow down nicely for landing. I stayed with the more swept concept for my 80" version. That is the one I have the most time with, probably over 50 flights over two years. I also did a twin version with differential thrust. It works like the FT Kraken. I only have a couple of flights on it but it also works pretty well.
Log In to reply
dharkless on August 14, 2016
This series was developed over the winter and I never actually flew this version so you will have the design's maiden flight.
Log In to reply
Iktomi on April 10, 2017
Looks like a great plan. I intend to build the 60" version, but I'm not clear on the methods used to join the top and bottom panel leading edge or the proper method for joining the wing roots. If you could point me in the right direction that would be much appreciated.
Log In to reply
dharkless on April 10, 2017
Hi lktomi,

Thanks for the interest in my design.

The leadingedges are joined by placing the top and bottom panels edge to edge with the outside side up. Be very careful to align the two corners as closely as possible. Put small pieces of tape at each end to control then a full length piece of packing tape the length of the joint. Next fold it completely back on itself and taper the edges of both pieces about 45% being careful not to cut the tape. Then fold it back the other way to form the leading edge.

After you have both wings made you shoud be able to butt the two together without trimming either to make the natural dihedral. The top camber of the wing automatically creates the proper angle. First lay the two wings down on a table top side up and check the fit. You should be able to make the top joint close by lifting one tip about 2". If that looks good turn them over and tape the bottom joint. Then fold it open to about 90% and apply hot glue to both edges. Close the joint again. Carefully align the trailing edges and the top surfaces as well as you can. Squeegee the excess. Then apply tape . I like to double both top and bottom.

You can also look at my 80" wing in a separate artocle for detailed construction instructions.
Log In to reply
Iktomi on April 10, 2017
Perfectly clear instructions....thanks for that. I have your cut diagram printed and will lay it all out this evening :-)
Log In to reply
dharkless on April 10, 2017
Good luck with it. By the way, the 80" version is the best flyer of all of my wing designs.

Please send me some pictures and keep me advised of your progress.

e-mail: dhark69@gmail.com
Log In to reply
Iktomi on April 10, 2017
Yeah, I'd like an 80", but transport would be problematic.

Log In to reply
dharkless on April 11, 2017
I have thought about making removable wings but have not done so yet. It barely fits in my Dakota pickup. I would have to rework elevons too.
Log In to reply
Iktomi on April 11, 2017
One last question: In an image up page you show a wing with a spar and additional blocks glued alongside. In your revised plans, you spec two spars per wing. Do those follow the same assembly as detailed on your 80" wing?
Log In to reply
dharkless on April 11, 2017
I redid this because I had some bad auto correct...
I would use the two spars like in the 80.
Log In to reply
Iktomi on April 11, 2017
Thanks again. Everything is cut, will be starting assembly this evening.

Log In to reply
dharkless on April 20, 2017
How did you make out?

Log In to reply

You need to log-in to comment on articles.


One Sheet and Two Sheet No-Waste Flying Wings