Chiribiri No. 5

[TheLurker]

The end is in sight...

Going to be busy for the next few days so, perhaps done by middle of next week.

[OZPAF]

Very impressive - like your neat covering.

John

[TheLurker]

Very impressive - like your neat covering.

Thanks John, but the camera isn't as good as the MK I eyeball at picking up the wrinkles of which there are an multitude.

Rollout

[Tim Horne]

Wonderful!

[TheLurker]

I wouldn't go quite that far, but thank you.

[ramses]

Beautiful model!!
Love how you made the letterings, great outcome!

Cheers, Ramses

[TheLurker]

Brief notes on test flights. Don't get excited.

[TheLurker]

The traditional sticky end.  No bad joke left unused.

Some bits will be salvaged, the wheels especially, and a wing will be kept as a reminder to me not to be so silly as to attempt another Chiribiri No. 5.

It's a shame, if you can get it past the trimming stage in one piece the design will fly and fly well.  But... it requires so much nose weight, some 2/3 of the built weight for mine, that any landing on an unforgiving surface is almost certain to end in bits of airframe being scattered to the four winds. 

Electric RC may be the way to go.

[Prosper]

Sorry to read that, Lurk.

Oft I've carried the sorry remains of a model indoors, wondering what to salvage - and end up repairing/rebuilding the model. Is yours really a hopeless case?

Stephen.

[TheLurker]

Thanks for the sympathy, but it's FF aeromodelling.  Such things go with the territory.  Anyway gravity always wins in the end and I did get a few half way decent flights out of it so I'm reasonably content.

Hopeless case?  No, no at all. It's the ratio of workshop time to flying time that clinches it. What with work and domestic duties I can't afford to spend most of a day fixing a model - which is how long yesterday's patching up and re-rigging took, for the sake of 5 minutes flying time.  I'd never get anything new built or any of my other models patched up.

I do like the design and one reason for making the larger version was to see if it was possible to make one that wasn't as fragile as my Mooney Peanut version so that I could spend more time flying it than repairing it.

[OZPAF]

Definitely sad news for your lurk.

It's a pity that it wasn't a pusher canard design - you would have had a fighting chance.

John

[Squirrelnet]

That is a real shame Lurk.

It sounds like it did show promise at least even if briefly so can ultimately go in the Lurker Aviation hall of victories.

a wing will be kept as a reminder to me not to be so silly as to attempt another Chiribiri No. 5.

Never say never electric power could get it out of the rubber power doom loop of more power = more weight = more power.... and well you still have the wing

[Pete Fardell]

Yes, a real shame, but also somewhat of a success too, so please accept my heartfelt com/n/miser/ratul/ations!


(Also, if it's any consolation, I now kind of want to do a Chiribiri myself.)

[THB]

I have a wonderful book called French aircraft before WWI by Opdyke. Not sure but think that pretty much half of the aircraft featured never achieved flight... and most of those that did ended up as matchwood soon after. So your flying model of a pre-WWI aircraft is surely batting above its average! Not to mention we get the benefit of members stand front row seats to watch the action 
Tim

[TheLurker]

Thanks for the sympathy and commiserations chaps, it's appreciated but not necessary.  I went into this project knowing it might not survive trimming.

...get it out of the rubber power doom loop of more power = more weight = more power.... and well you still have the wing

Power isn't the issue. It's fragility.  I was getting 13-15" from 800-900 turns of the motor and the 80% limit for the motor is 1300 which, all being well, I'd hope would give somewhere around 25-30".

Also, if it's any consolation, I now kind of want to do a Chiribiri myself.

If you're serious about that I'll update my plan and you can have copy.  I had intended to alter the wing root mounting points to deal with the issue that terminated this one.  As for the undercarriage, I can't see a good way of making that more robust without sacrificing scale dimensions or weighing it down with shedloads of wire, but...

... what you can do is trim it without the undercarriage (as I was doing) and only fit it when all's well.  You can get away without the underwing rigging for this, but it might be better to run some temporary rigging tacked to the fuselage.

Not to mention we get the benefit of members stand front row seats to watch the action 
Tim

We aim to amuse.