Now accepting Canard plans

[Meniscus]

Yes I said it. I figure, if I start thinking about and building a Canard, I may have something that runs decent in 2010.

All contributions welcome. To answer some of the questions: No, I haven't ever run a Canard, Yes I know I don't have the experience, No I do not need criticism, etc. etc. LOL

I hoping that, mixed in with my other builds, I won't get as discouraged as I do the slow build and testing.

Thanks for the input ahead of time.

[Simon.O.]

Go for it Ben !!
A canard is a far harder beast than a rigger for me, my rigger screams and with the same power and similar size hull I can not get my canard as fast.
There are a few reasons for this. My design may be flawed or my etup is all off, lastly a Canard may not be as fast as a rigger.
I am still working on it, and a few other mad ideas, because I agree with Rembrand over at RRR that a rigger may not be the fastest hull out there. It is at the moment but some people ar keen to try new ideas.

I will help you in any way that I can and look forward to seeing what other input is fed in here.

[Apples1]

GIve it a crack... i will try and did up some Stuff from a member that is running one with great success against all the other EA and EB riggers. Might be tough though

[Meniscus]

Thanks for the encouragement guys and Simon, I've been watching your builds even though I don't post there often.

I know someone has plans I can make my own LOL => that is, make my own mistakes!!!

[Apples1]

good luck, you have bigger Balls than me...... ( figurativly speaking )

[Meniscus]

The answer is, no I do not have any medical issues!

You did see my timeline right? LOL!

[785boats]

I've searched for plans but can't find any. I've got some sketches I drew up to build the X-WING but that's all.I based it on some photos of an Aeromarine Canard.
Here's one in action. My avitar is the X-WING
I used it as a guide to proportions.
The video is the X-WING running on 4s lipo.
http://s297.photobucket.com/albums/m...ent=X-Wing.flv

Cheers.
Paul.

[Meniscus]

Paul, I was hoping you might post a response here. Thanks!

Do you have pictures of the back and bottom of your build and/or the Aeromarine?

I'm also hoping someone has pictures of the H&M canards as well.

[Meniscus]

Now accepting Canard plans...Now accepting all pictures.

Do you run turn fins with Canards? I'm wondering how you get them to turn at all!

[J Solinger]

Here are a few canard photos. I honestly don't know much about them but they where heavily tested in the late 80's early 90's with succes. Ed Fischer was someone that did alot of work with them. They don't use any turn fins on them, they work simularly to tunnel hulls. You will note the dihedral angle on the sponsons is pretty steep. I think it's worth playing with, for something different but effective.

[Meniscus]

Joe, what other pictures do you have up your sleeve? Do you have any pictures of the bottom of these types of hulls?

Thanks for the info regarding turn fins!

[Meniscus]

Oh and BTW, SWEET twin drive!!!

[ED66677]

Meniscus,
I did some clean draft from Simon's canard sketches, check out my web page for pdf or dxf file..

[Meniscus]

Cool! Thanks!

Are the ride pads typical angles? What other info have you gathered regarding the shape of the sponson bottoms?

[ED66677]

Are the ride pads typical angles?

what do you mean here?

[Meniscus]

Do they differ or are they the same as riggers? => I'm trying to understand Joe's post about "dihedral angle"

[ED66677]

the more dihedral you put the less fin you need but the deeper sponson will ride!

[785boats]

I took a few pics of the underside of mine for you.
With regards to turn fins I run a small one on the rear of the front sponson.
The dihedral angle & the angle of attack on the wings & sponsons were completely arbitrary on my part. They just looked about right on paper.
As you can see she's got a few battle scars & needs a repaint. One day.

Love those canards Joe. Great pics.

All the best.
Paul.

[AndyKunz]

Have you tried talking to Ken Joye in Michigan yet? He likes canards and might be able to help.

Andy

[Meniscus]

Paul, Great pictures, this helps a lot. Could you post a picture with a profile view? I am interested in seeing the orientation of the strut in comparison with the ride surfaces in the back.

Andy, No I haven't talked to him yet. Send me his contact info please! Thanks.

[Meniscus]

Also, what is the relationship regarding the width of the step in the front and the ride pads in the back?

Is there a general calculation related to the distance of the front step and the distance between the sponsons in the back? Or is it just what looks good? LOL!

Last, I'm thinking that, due to the difficulty setting up a Canard, I may consider making the three wet surfaces adjustable for angle. Has anyone done this already?

Keep the information coming guys! Before long, we'll have H&M making a fully adjustable one LMAO! => as if the demand was there for fully adjustable Canards!

[J Solinger]

I didn't see any canard hull bottom photos. I don't think its terribly complicated but a hull that you can change sponsons easily would be the ticket. The angle of attack looks to be in the 3 to 5 degree range and the dihedral looks around 15+ degrees.

[teach]

http://www.newtonmarine.com/plan_det...307&category=0

Not sure if that would help you any. It just looked awsome when I was digging through looking for plans.

[Simon.O.]

Now that I have got mine going a lot better with advice from ED and others.
I will take a few pics and then draw some dimensions on them too.
A big difference that my Canard has is a narrow nose, if you have seen my build and run thread then you will see this. I don't really know if it is good or bad as I have only ever seen my Canard run. I have seen a few on the tube and the smallest is a 12cell or 4S beast that is Pauls. (785boats). Mine is a 6-cell or 2S size.

Give me a few days to get the pics up and I will get them "painted on" and then post them here. I can e-mail the hi-res ones to whoever wants them.

PM me if you want them so we don't cloud up this thread.

Ben , you automatically get them sent to you.

[Meniscus]

Joe, that's why I'm thinking adjustable. This way, some determinations can be made regarding what does or doesn't work, without going through build after build.

Teach, thanks for the link. Wow, there are a lot of plans there...more than I know what to do with, LOL.

Simon, I'd say post the pics, it may help someone browsing later.

[Meniscus]

Next question for pondering:

Steps? Since it has been explained that the Canard works on principles similar to a tunnel, does/has anyone used steps on the ride surfaces? Good idea/bad idea?

[785boats]

Hi there.
Here's a side view of the ol' girl. Also one taken slightly above & one from slightly below side on.
There's also a top view. I managed to find the original sketches & took a photo of them. Not very clear I'm afraid but it may help with some proportions.
As I said before I based the thing on a photo of the Aeromarine canard & all dimensions, angles & proportions were just what looked aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Well, my eye that is. So There are probably many design rules broken or ignored in this model.
The only thing that I feel is important is to get the COG as close as possible to the center of lift. My previous experience with building model planes convinced me of this.
Regarding the ride pad of the front sponson, you'll see that mine tapers to a section of about 30mm wide where the small turn fin is attached ( see previous photos )
Once the boat is set up The front sponson barely kisses the water at full noise so I don't think its size is much of an issue. But for sure, the smaller the better is always a good target.
If steps make Hydros, Tunnels, Monos & Cats go faster I don't see why they wouldn't make a canard go faster too.
I don't have a clue about what it will do to the handling though.
Here's the dimensions of mine if it's any help.

Length: 700mm (27-1/2")
Width: 440mm (17-1/4")
Rear sponson length: 300mm (11-3/4")
Rear sponson width: 70mm (2-3/4")
Front sponson length: 200mm (8")
Tub width overall: 110mm (4-1/4")
Tub width internal: 75mm (3")

Hope this helps a bit
Paul.

[Meniscus]

Great pics Paul! These pictures are some of the most useful thus far, especially for setup. Great info as well regarding dimensions.

I guess I may have to be the guinea pig for steps. In any case, I'll make the sponsons removable and have two different versions, courtesy of Joe's input.

Say, is that a full book of plans you have drafted? Perhaps we may have to talk about making me a xerox copy LMAO!

[Simon.O.]

Great pics Paul! These pictures are some of the most useful thus far, especially for setup. Great info as well regarding dimensions.

Too true. Now I'll have to make a real effort on my pics.

I guess I may have to be the guinea pig for steps. In any case, I'll make the sponsons removable and have two different versions, courtesy of Joe's input.

My call would be go for "plain" sponsons first and then if as you suggest they are easy to modify then throw on the steps later.

Say, is that a full book of plans you have drafted? Perhaps we may have to talk about making me a xerox copy LMAO!

That looks like the last page there Ben, I think Paul is a bit like me and has 90% of the build in his head and the rest is scribbled on a piece of paper.

In my workshop at the moment I have a lot of pics of a Xcess-3 rigger

[Meniscus]

My call would be go for "plain" sponsons first and then if as you suggest they are easy to modify then throw on the steps later.

Yes, I was planning to start with plain and go from there. I like lessons-learned in stages, LOL!