Freewing Su-35 Twin 70mm 12 blade

[masterssls1]

well, i got the Su-35 a week ago and i did the paint job on it with thinner spray cans ( it wasn't easy since it can eat the foam ) attached a few pictures . then i had the maiden yesterday with the following conditions :
- a wind speed of 26km/h its always windy here.
- CG at 170mm ( not that it was my intention to do so but my battery weight is 700gm and all the way forward .
- reinforced the front nose wheel
- reinforced the battery tray
- flying talerons + alirons for roll
- elevator for bitch
- flying on mid rate the full flight 80% and 50% expo
the flight : started with smooth takeoff then the plane suddenly bitched down . i over corrected up elevator and ended up going vertical , surprisingly it kept going up ! THEN I MADE A TURN AND STARTED MY TRIM JOURNEY. it was very sensitive and i was very worried , then i decided to do a landing approach throttle 25% to reduce my altitude . plane went up !!! so i tried again and again and again and every single time i reduce the throttle the plane goes up!!!! so i figured its tale heavy ,, tried to land for the first time after 4 approaches with a bit of throttle and i managed to land it but it was NOT a smooth landing !! ( i felt the plane was out of control all the time ) and i looked like an idiot who is flying for the first time in his life !!! nothing happened to the plane at all.
i have a video of the takeoff an the 4 landing attempts. i will try to post it soon

then i decided to give the plane a full check up and found out the TV nozzles was abit towards down so here is what i did before the re maiden flight :-
- adjust the TV nozzle to more centered location , rudder wise and bitch wise
- added 19gm of weight over the battery which shifted the CG from 170 AFT to 162 AFT
- reset all the trims i did from the first flight
- but the D/R on low rate 65% and 50% expo.
- wind speed between 25km/h and 20km/h
and here is the results:- started with gradually accelerating , the plane took much less runway to talk of with a very very smooth + altitude the kept going , prepared to turn right ( as usual ) and felt much smoother and began the trimming , it took 3 clicks of left trim and 5 trims of up trims and the plane was locked on ! i felt more confident with it so i went for straight up and roll. it did ( AND I'M NOT JOKING ) about 4 turns per second !! i love how it rolls !! the all what i could do in 3 minuets flight in a maiden ( i did ) also i flew about 2 rounds in half throttle which she can handle pretty well. then prepared for landing . went about 30% throttle which the plane responded by descending very steady but still fast so i reduced a bit more and a bit more and landed with about 0% of throttle and a bit of up nose , it was a very smooth landing.
did another flight after that and was even better
guys the plane was so stable and felt so light in the air that i felt it can go vertical for very long , i loved how it flies and
unfortunately i have no video for the re maiden flight but i will try to get one by next weekend .
any ideas ?
i have to thank everyone who told me there experience with this plane
@Airguardian thanks for insisting to say that i have to use expo it saved my plane life a few times during the first maiden THANK YOU
@paulrkytek thanks for the painting tips over the all private messages you took the time to write
@xviper it is a better jet then the MIG .. before flying it i thought the mig is light , but now i know better and i know why u said if u crached all of the three the freewing SU-35 is the one u will buy again
@TangoVector @ kallend @Evan D thank you guys for the tips and all of ur replies

[Airguardian]

Another old video (July 2018) I just got around to editing...

[Airguardian]

Time to show some 'Nadya' love (My 3rd Su-35 feat. FPV)... these were flights from 2019 which I just edited.
I had a crash-mishap but repaired it and kept flying. Shortly after the FC died and I still need to replace it before I can fly her again! :(

[Airguardian]

I mean... it would make perfect sense but I don't have a clue!
I don't know how the Tomcat's control logic is programmed...

[TangoVector]

Ok, this one has a few better examples...

Thanks for taking the time! Learning continues. Yeah, didn't think about aft CG during landing, that makes perfect sense.

When it comes to spoilerons, I hope we can agree on that they only work for roll control when flying with positive G?

[Airguardian]

Even more clear here at 11:08 (flaperons mimicking tailerons behavior while in extreme high alpha):

[Airguardian]

Ok, this one has a few better examples...

At 13:37, 7:00 and 12:07 you can see the flaperons/elevons mimicking the tailerons when the jet is in sustained extreme high alpha... (tailerons pitch up, flaperons deploy TE up)

But then at 7:54, 8:47 and 14:34 you have perfect counter-examples of 'pitch assist' at higher speed (tailerons pitch up, flaperons deploy TE down).
Let's call that 'turning flaps' or 'combat flaps'. :)

I guess, the point is, in one case you only care about aircraft attitude (holding an angle at extreme high alpha) and in the other you care about trajectory (flaperons drooped to help TURN faster, not just 'pitch'). ;)

[Airguardian]

I wonder about landing, with flaperons moving up, the nose will have to come up further or the landingspeed will be higher and with limited clearance at the tail, this might be something to consider, but I'm not saying don't do it, just a consideration. I feel mine is slippery and fast enough as it is on landing without adding negative flap.

I think your logic is only really valid for moderately nose heavy setups. On neutrally balanced planes you don't hold back on the elevator during landing, so the flaperons (elevons in this case) would be neutral, as would the tailerons. Actually, if you set the CG far back enough, you'd have to push the nose down a bit (typical on this jet) and then the elevons would sort of act as mild-flaperons, haha!

Could the full scale SU35 do it to minimize the wing area more than using it as elevons at extreme AoA? By doing that, the tailerons (see, I learn!) and thrust vectoring has less forces to work against or with. Just a thought.

Pretty sure not, as what I'm picturing from the videos I've seen (filmed myself in fact) and analyzed is that the flaperons mimic the movement of the stabs at extreme high angles of attack. That is, tailerons pitch-down are copied with elevons pitching down too, and tailerons pitch up, elevons pitch up. The only reason I see for that is to add a bit more 'oomph' to control authority when the jet is basically stopped in mid air. At some point they are probably only getting some airflow moving from the air being dragged around by the jet exhausts going at full burn. I'm talking extreme AoA flybys (over 70º AoA), tailslides and that kind of maneuvers.

You can see it here at 8:13 on the 30SM although it is not the best video, let me find some more...

Again, when the jet has a bit more speed, I see elevons doing the oposite, and pitch-up tailerons are accompanied with pitch-down flaperons (to increase lift for a turn). But even this is something that only happens in certain conditions, when the FBW deems that the conditions are fit. :)

The use of "turning flaps" has been around a long time. My dad used it in the SAAB J29-Tunnan back in the late fifties, but not actively the way a modern FBW system does.

That's so cool! :o

I really like learning these kind of things, great stuff! In the back of my mind I had heard that the F14 had elevons, this turned out to be wrong.

Technically, the term most commonly employed in aerospace for the all-moving tail surfaces is 'stabilators' if I am not mistaken... but I like tailerons better.
Might as well call them 'unstabilators', lol.



What the Tomcat has that is pretty different from most other fighter aircraft is that it uses spoilerons ion addition to ailerons and flaps (or maybe elevons? Hmmm...).
That is, spoilers (midwing, not trailing edge!) that go only up to produce roll.

[TangoVector]

Still, for the most part, coupling ailerons with tailerons (essentially turning ailerons into elevons) will work out well enough. The jet will likely turn less efficiently and probably feel like it carries around with more weight (which might even be desired by some).

The fullscale jet uses the ailerons as elevons in extreme maneuvers typically when flying at extreme angles of attack.

Conversely, when flying at speed it does the opposite and adds a bit of drooped-down flaperon when the pilot pitches up, kinda like the F-18 does.

I wonder about landing, with flaperons moving up, the nose will have to come up further or the landingspeed will be higher and with limited clearance at the tail, this might be something to consider, but I'm not saying don't do it, just a consideration. I feel mine is slippery and fast enough as it is on landing without adding negative flap.

Could the full scale SU35 do it to minimize the wing area more than using it as elevons at extreme AoA? By doing that, the tailerons (see, I learn!) and thrust vectoring has less forces to work against or with. Just a thought.

The use of "turning flaps" has been around a long time. My dad used it in the SAAB J29-Tunnan back in the late fifties, but not actively the way a modern FBW system does.

Further disambiguation:

Taileron - Tail that combines elevator and aileron function (Examples: Su-35, F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, F-35, Su-57...)
Elevon - Aileron that combines aileron and elevator function (example: Eurofighter, Mirage, Rafale, Gripen...)

In this regard, a jet like the Su-35 can be configured to feature both tailerons AND elevons! ;)

I really like learning these kind of things, great stuff! In the back of my mind I had heard that the F14 had elevons, this turned out to be wrong.

Happy days!

[Airguardian]

If you couple ailerons to the elevator (stabilator/tailerons) your ailerons will counter the elevator in normal pre-stalled flight. The elevators when pitching "up" (leading edge going down) makes the nose pitch up and thereby increasing the angle of attack (AoA) of the wing, resulting in more lift. When an aileron moves up it lowers the AoA on that wing and thereby decreases lift. So a flaperon moving up together with the elevator is taking away some of the effect that the elevator is supposed to achieve. With that being said, how much of the effect will be noticed on this model I have no idea, might be negligible. In post stall maneuvers it is beneficial if the flaperon moves in the same direction and lowers the wing-area.

What you say is more or less correct. Still, for the most part, coupling ailerons with tailerons (essentially turning ailerons into elevons) will work out well enough. Some pilots have done it on the Su-35 with success. Many parkjets are meant to fly like that too and it's typically not an issue. The jet will likely turn less efficiently and probably feel like it carries around with more weight (which might even be desired by some). It may also be beneficial in terms of pure post-stall authority and overall control and handling. I do not use it on mine though.

The fullscale jet uses the ailerons as elevons in extreme maneuvers typically when flying at extreme angles of attack.

Conversely, when flying at speed it does the opposite and adds a bit of drooped-down flaperon when the pilot pitches up, kinda like the F-18 does.
And that's where it'd come handy to have a FBW controller for our models, lol.

Taileron/Elevon - Flight control surface that combines elevator and aileron function

Further disambiguation:

Taileron - Tail that combines elevator and aileron function (Examples: Su-35, F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, F-35, Su-57...)
Elevon - Aileron that combines aileron and elevator function (example: Eurofighter, Mirage, Rafale, Gripen...)

In this regard, a jet like the Su-35 can be configured to feature both tailerons AND elevons! ;)

Or better yet, get an OpenTX compatible radio and a 16ch receiver and never look back. With a Radiomaster TX16s you can program any kind of setup and you don't have to change receiver in your other planes.

Amen.

[TangoVector]

did any one tried or even considered the following setup ?
1- Throttle
2- Right elevator+ Right Aleiron
3- Left elevator+ Left Aleiron
4- Rudders + Wheel Steering
5- Landing Gear
6- TV Yaw
7- Left TV
8- Right TV

the reason i'm asking is because i thought there might be any issue that related to the volt draw from both servos Y together at the same time ?
i know it might be stupid to use the aileron as elevators (but if this plane will bitch down with flaps deployed then those Ailerons will act like flaps while applying elevators
any thoughts or criticism is appreciated

I'll bite

If you couple ailerons to the elevator (stabilator/tailerons) your ailerons will counter the elevator in normal pre-stalled flight. The elevators when pitching "up" (leading edge going down) makes the nose pitch up and thereby increasing the angle of attack (AoA) of the wing, resulting in more lift. When an aileron moves up it lowers the AoA on that wing and thereby decreases lift. So a flaperon moving up together with the elevator is taking away some of the effect that the elevator is supposed to achieve. With that being said, how much of the effect will be noticed on this model I have no idea, might be negligible. In post stall maneuvers it is beneficial if the flaperon moves in the same direction and lowers the wing-area.

I know I used incorrect terminology, here are the correct definitions (if not I will surely be corrected):
Elevator - Flight control surface connected to a non-moving horizontal stabilizer controlling pitch.
Aileron - Flight control surface on the trailing edge of a wing, controlling roll
Stabilator - all-moving surface controlling pitch
Taileron/Elevon - Flight control surface that combines elevator and aileron function
Flaperon - Flight control surface that combines aileron and flap function


Get a separate BEC to make sure you're safe from brown out.

With only eight channels I would fly it with tailerons without TV to trim it in, then couple up the TV with corresponding flight control. This is what I would do, not saying it is right.


Or better yet, get an OpenTX compatible radio and a 16ch receiver and never look back. With a Radiomaster TX16s you can program any kind of setup and you don't have to change receiver in your other planes.

Yeah, I really like the versatility of OpenTX and the multimodule. But each to their own, I'm not trying to start a TX/RX thread.

[masterssls1]

did any one tried or even considered the following setup ?
1- Throttle
2- Right elevator+ Right Aleiron
3- Left elevator+ Left Aleiron
4- Rudders + Wheel Steering
5- Landing Gear
6- TV Yaw
7- Left TV
8- Right TV

the reason i'm asking is because i thought there might be any issue that related to the volt draw from both servos Y together at the same time ?
i know it might be stupid to use the aileron as elevators (but if this plane will bitch down with flaps deployed then those Ailerons will act like flaps while applying elevators
any thoughts or criticism is appreciated

[masterssls1]

I meant that you'd better not remove the yaw on the nozzles just yet and use them with the three servos as intended.



Again, you SHOULD configure tailerons because that's how the jet is meant to fly (the full scale one, that is, and the RC model benefits from it just as well).
Freewing by default sends the jet with both stabs Y-wired but that's silly if you ask me. You are missing on a lot of maneuvering capacity.

i see your point here and i will check the connections once i have it in hand

[Airguardian]

sorry i didnt get what u meant by fly with the nozzles as they come? u meant without taileron or without TV ?

I meant that you'd better not remove the yaw on the nozzles just yet and use them with the three servos as intended.

i was actually expecting freewing to release a due 80mm EPO foam version of this aircraft a year ago .. i hope that happens soon enough.
the plane that i found that it lacks in roll is the mig so i hope this will be better without tailerons

Again, you SHOULD configure tailerons because that's how the jet is meant to fly (the full scale one, that is, and the RC model benefits from it just as well).
Freewing by default sends the jet with both stabs Y-wired but that's silly if you ask me. You are missing on a lot of maneuvering capacity.

[Airguardian]

The wait is over...

[TangoVector]

I'm don't have that much experience and I bought my SU35 before I was ready for it, since I thought it was getting discontinued. So I started flying a Timber - got bored. Got myself a Rebel - got kinda bored. F16 70mm - not that fun. Mirage 2000 - suddenly I love flying! Then I felt ready for the SU and it is the most fun plane so far by a wide margin! It is a very honest plane and the TV is intuitive. I have them at low and high rates with 50 and 100%. I also have some tailerons mixed in. It rolls straight to the right, but a bit cork-screw to left, I contribute that to my engine upgrade with both engines turning the same direction, so no pilot error

I takeoff and fly with mid rates on the surfaces and low on the TV, then switch to high/high for the most fun stuff and then land with low/low since I have a tendency for PIO. When the landing gear comes out it disables the yaw on the TV, since I don't feel that I need it for landing. I haven't found my sweet spot yet with throws and expo, but I enjoy every flight. I think I will program some flaperons and rudder airbrake, since I feel it's a little slippery on final approach.

So don't overthink it, it's a blast!

[masterssls1]

I believe you are overthinking this.

Although the SU can outfly just about any other EDF out there, it is really a very well behaved and quite benign aircraft and not at all twitchy or difficult. It won't take you by surprise, it will just do what you tell it to do.

The MiG rolls very well with full span ailerons, tailerons and TV.

Kallend is 100% correct that the SU is a very benign aircraft and shouldn't surprise you (unlike the MiG which after a LOT of flights still surprises me now and then).

that is a relief to hear . trust me the day i flew the mig i almost had a heart attack .. due to some issues i wasn't flying for 4 years since 2017 , then when i came back to the hobby i saw the mig so i decided that it will be my first come back to the hobby .. i did the maiden and after 3 minutes i land it safely . the funny part is that all during the 3 minutes i thought the plane is unstable but afrer i land it , i saw my hand and it was shaking ! its been 4 months now since i started to fly again and i did about 30 flights on it and now i'm very comfortable flying it . i did some high alpha cruising with it and i can see that it can stall nose down if i'm not managing my throttle carefully . the point here is that i compare the su to the mig because the mig make me feel comfortable when i fly , even wen i do a falling leaf with it . it is still very predictable. and i like how the SU- look and i think its a keeper so i dont wanna be surprised when i fly it and end up crashing then loose interest in a plane that i care for . you know , when i reread what i wrote , i think what kallend is right . i might be overthinking this !!

[Evan D]

The MiG rolls very well with full span ailerons, tailerons and TV.

Kallend is 100% correct that the SU is a very benign aircraft and shouldn't surprise you (unlike the MiG which after a LOT of flights still surprises me now and then).

i was actually expecting freewing to release a due 80mm EPO foam version of this aircraft a year ago .. i hope that happens soon enough.
the plane that i found that it lacks in roll is the mig so i hope this will be better without tailerons

[kallend]

good point , forgot about accidents 👍 but the first flight has to be a bone stock so once i start playing with the other custom setups i will be able to tell the difference. unless the stock setup has a fatal issue that can cause crash

I believe you are overthinking this.

Although the SU can outfly just about any other EDF out there, it is really a very well behaved and quite benign aircraft and not at all twitchy or difficult. It won't take you by surprise, it will just do what you tell it to do.

[masterssls1]

Definitely not without TV, if you don`t have the tv servos active and you accidentally knock the units then you have no way of neutralizing them again. If you check through Air Guardian build video you will find a setup position for the tvs and you really need active servos to ensure you have the tv pitch, yaw and roll alignment correct to start with for normal flight. If you need to trim the rudder or pitch or roll after first flight you will need to re check tv alignment afterwards to ensure they are back to the "neutral" position . No doubt this is why Air Guardian suggests separate trim/TV switch. Basically this way you can probably take off on first flight using tv, get up high, switch tv off, trim the plane and switch it back on again. ? Tailerons are up to you, you probably dont need them for pottering about , loops, rolls, inverted, wingovers, high alpha, basic aerobatics . I guess it depends on how you want to fly, how skillful you are and how far you want to push the envelope? No doubt tailerons will give higher degree of control and maneuverability and help you out of an awkward situation if needed.
Its always worth eyeballing the tv setup anyway after the first flight as I have an inbuilt mistrust of switches and my ability to knock them on and off without realizing it

good point , forgot about accidents 👍 but the first flight has to be a bone stock so once i start playing with the other custom setups i will be able to tell the difference. unless the stock setup has a fatal issue that can cause crash