3D CAP 232-ST design / build / prototype

[Daytonarc]

Winter isn't lookin' so hot this year so far for mid-season flying. I'm hoping to have this ready to cover by mid-Jan or so, we'll see how the work schedule goes first though. I was browsing through pics of Matts plane looking that the cowl and now I have the urge to cover this thing yellow and blue I'll have to figure out a scheme for sure but it will be something kinda scale.

Embry Riddle scheme would be awsome! I also like the "inney" better than the snout. Looking good Terry.

 

[Pistolera]

I always liked that version of the CAP cowl... Made it much easier to design a flowing paint design, unlike the cheeked version that all CAPs left the factory with. It was made by a fellow in Texas...not sure how many he sold... Figured I'd share a couple pix of the air inlet on my cowl for reference.

....AND they're scale bugs too!!! Good to see you here Matt

 

[Terryscustom]

LOL, Earl always thinking scale.

Well I've got enough numbers and things rolling round in my head that it's about time I start putting some of it down on paper......well, err, CAD paper.

I'll have to fine tune the F-1 after the first cowl is made but I'm pretty close from the plug dimensions. Super easy to grid it out in CAD an the rest of the plane will be designed from that back.

 

[Pistolera]

Terry...you can grid out a scale pilot and friend....just take a few pounds off the mid-sections

 

[Terryscustom]

At lunch I was playing around with the scale cap drawing and it looks like when you scale it down to 105" wingspan it is only 88" long from rudder tip to front of cowl. RC rudder will be a little larger but still seems a little short. Thoughts on this?

 

[Bossana85]

At lunch I was playing around with the scale cap drawing and it looks like when you scale it down to 105" wingspan it is only 88" long from rudder tip to front of cowl. RC rudder will be a little larger but still seems a little short. Thoughts on this?

If the above dimensions are derived from a scale 3 view drawing of a cap I would take advantage of the 10% IMAC rule and stretch it out to 96" long (88"+10%) if you want it to be an IMAC plane. If you are looking for a 3D plane the shorter fuse would be ideal. Possibly include a builders choice option if you decide to kit it ! ?

 

[Terryscustom]

If the above dimensions are derived from a scale 3 view drawing of a cap I would take advantage of the 10% IMAC rule and stretch it out to 96" long (88"+10%) if you want it to be an IMAC plane. If you are looking for a 3D plane the shorter fuse would be ideal. Possibly include a builders choice option if you decide to kit it ! ?

The main goal is 3D, but I want it to track well but also tuble well. I'm honestly been doing some calculating and am thinking about 92" long from tip to hub. What does the 10% rule say about wing placement? My wing will be up slightly. Just curious in case someone wanted to build one for IMAC. I honestly don't know what all applies to the 10% rule with regards to location of parts.

 

[Bossana85]

The main goal is 3D, but I want it to track well but also tuble well. I'm honestly been doing some calculating and am thinking about 92" long from tip to hub. What does the 10% rule say about wing placement? My wing will be up slightly. Just curious in case someone wanted to build one for IMAC. I honestly don't know what all applies to the 10% rule with regards to location of parts.

From the rule book, leaves some interpretation to the imagination:

1. Scale shall be determined by the wingspan. A change in wingspan will become a change in overall Scale. Fuselage width, height and aircraft planform or any other variations shall not exceed 10% of scale, with the exception of airfoils and size/shape of control surface within the scale outline rule.
   
   
   

 

[shadow1100]

The dreaded 10% rule. The rule that has turned good looking full scale aerobatic planes into large scale gas pattern planes that barely resemble their full scale counterpart built for a really small group of flyers that want their planes to fly themselves. I am not referring to you Earle. Hehe

Steve

 

[Pistolera]

Hah! .....but you are absolutely correct Steve. Hard to see the real plane when you look at a Carden, Dalton, etc.

Please don't anyone misinterpret me as bad-mouthing them. They are excellent designs and fly very well....but have been tweeked to the Nth degree as far as the 10% rule allows (and maybe even more) to achieve a balanced and neutral flying aerobatic plane.