do not use ailerons question

[hghost]

Now this is just a wonder and something to start a discussion .

What if you have a plane ( lets stay with a high wing design like the Cub ) and it has ailerons, but you do not want to use them ?

You want to just use the 3 channel Motor-Elevator-Rudder set up...and have the rudder set on the same stick with the elevator and have the motor and aileron on the other, but the ailerons not used ? ( yes the plane has ailerons ) but lets say the wire is left unhooked from the servo to the receiver OR still hooked up just in case but simply not used while flying.....

in a situation such as that what are the chances the plane will crash ? Aileron moves while in flight perhaps causing plane to roll for example ? etc etc etc....

Why have ailerons and not use them ? Is it necessary to use them all the time anyway ?

I am not talking low wing designed planes, just our simple high wing design planes like the Cub or Cessna etc etc....

any thoughts or wisdom on such a scenario ?

sure one could tape the ailerons so they would not move, but lets say leave plane as designed and while flying simply not use the ailerons while in flight ? What issues might arise in that sort of flight ? Any thoughts ?

[flydiver]

A lot of flat wing (no dihedral) planes fly (turn actually) wretchedly on rudder alone. They bank over and dive in a most pronounced way. 3D types generally don't, but a lot of trainer and sport planes do.
So, assuming that someone would do this since ailerons are new, scary, or thought to be difficult they probably would not have the skill to actually fly the plane.

[hghost]

Just wondered if any one actually had the ailerons on their Cub or whatever and still did not use them and or was use to the Rudder and forget to use them? Just how would these flights be with ailerons never being used ? Some planes are very stiff ailerons, but I have seen a few and actually have a couple whose ailerons are very easily moved.Figured the wind would move them around allot at times and what effect that would be in flight, if they were left unhooked and or simply not used in such cases.

I have actually not had very good luck with ailerons ( war planes I tried ) for some odd reason always wants to go inverted,( both slow speed and high speed ) turns .
Have much better TX and can be adjusted better ( have not tried it yet ) but should solve part of the problem. Just wondered what it would be on a high wing and not use the ailerons , what effect would that have on the plane and if anyone has done that ?

[hghost]

Believe it or not there is a method to my madness questions and posts.

[toff]

HG...I have a plane called the 'topgun' stratus...basically a clone of the EZhawk 4channel glider....even with maximum deflection on the ailerons, it's very lazy in turning...however...once I dial in some rudder, it comes to life. I now usually fly it as a 3 channel trainer as it's a) quite slow ( even with a 2200kv motor and a 6x4 prop!), B) made of concrete and is very easy to fix, and C) cost peanuts to buy ( 2nd hand!) and can stay in the air for 30 minutes with thermals and good throttle management.
It actually has the same wing design as my parkzone radian 3ch thermal glider, with tip curves. Just because it has ailerons, doesn't mean it's a happy aerobat!

[pug205]

hghost. I think I know where your coming from. I have all I need to carry out the mod, y lead, servo's, push rods and the horns. In relation to your question, do I carry out this mod,and will it interfere with flight if not connected to RX? I don't know either, but I might carry on and use some packing tape to hold aileron in neutral until I think I'm ready to try to fly with them. I'd be very interested to have others thoughts on this.

[flydiver]

Read post 2 again.
Keep the dihedral and it compromises the ailerons if you use them.
Remove the dihedral and not use the ailerons.....you will not like the result.

[pug205]

Dec 24, 2014 7:37:35 GMT 1 flydiver said:

Read post 2 again.
Keep the dihedral and it compromises the ailerons if you use them.
Remove the dihedral and not use the ailerons.....you will not like the result.

So what your saying is Ailerons don't work with Dihedral ? I can understand that, I'm a newbie, that's why I asked. I had no intention of removing the dihedral. 

[sham]

They work, but not well because the dihedral will try to self right the plane.
Without dihedral, the plane will respond oddly to rudder. Although AS3X helps this issue a lot, I can turn ok on the SportCub with just rudder - and that has virtually no dihedral - because the AS3X tries to correct the weird bank/catastrophic dive effect.

[pug205]

Thank you for your input sham.

[sham]

No problem.
I've said before that I don't understand why people modify the Supercub, and its true. I love mine, but it is what it is. A simple, cheap, three channel trainer.

If you want to move onto four or more channels or go faster, then the Supercub starts to show it's limitations in strength. By the time you've sorted that out it's cheaper to buy a new plane.. And then you have two to play with. Personally I love to fly the Supercub to get the thumbs warmed up before the five channel plane comes out to play.
My Supercub has some minor changes (bigger wheels and a homemade drop module), but control and strength is standard - that's how it was meant to be.

If modifying is your thing, go for it.

[flydiver]

+1 on what sham said.

Watch this short video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4fnZwSYpmQ

[Wing Dihedral is the upward angle of an aircraft's wing, from the wing root to the wing tip. The amount of dihedral determines the amount of inherent stability along the roll axis. Although an increase of dihedral will increase inherent stability, it will also decrease lift, increase drag, and decreased the axial roll rate. As roll stability is increased, an aircraft will naturally return to its original position if it is subject to a brief or slight roll displacement. Most large airliner wings are designed with dihedral.]

Dihedral > increases stability (that's why this is a trainer....eh?)
Ailerons > their purpose is to deliberately roll the aircraft to some degree (not just barrel rolls), thus increasing maneuverability but inherently decreasing stability. Flying with ailerons is much more hands on and active. The plane tends to go where you point it and will NOT return to a stable position, you have to do that. This is (mainly) why go-it-alone newbies are better off with a 3-ch, high wing, dihedral plane. Folks that go with an instructor and buddy box system can learn successfully on a decent 4-ch plane, saving time, money and grief.

This is pretty useful for flying aerodynamic basics:
www.rc-airplane-world.com/how-airplanes-fly.html

Don't get caught up in the "cool" factor of ailerons. They are a flying tool and serve a purpose like dihedral. You need to determine what the plane IS, what it will be USED for, and what you want to do with it. If you can't take your Cub out 10-20x in a row without some breakage (ignoring bent landing gear...unless you pancake it) you probably aren't ready for ailerons yet. If you want to cut them in but not use them, you aren't ready either.

[hghost]

I have One issue with the Dihedral and Ailerons

It is called the Durafly Junior

A plane with extreme dihedral and ailerons

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJKzGRlRdv0


Have spoke to many with this plane. Some complain about it having ailerons, many fly it with rudder alone
The majority fly it with aileron and have a blast

many fly with a aileron -Rudder mix. That is what seems to be the best way with this plane

I own one, it's still in it's box . Appears it would be a very good plane to learn to use ailerons, but also and especially learning to use the left stick ( Mode 2 TX version) as Rudder.
I have issue with rudder use with the throttle. Seems I either tend to throttle up or down when using the Rudder allot...has caused some mishaps a few times.
( Mixing on the TX works way better-for me anyway )

Thought I would throw that in the conversation

[pug205]

Thank you hghost! More food for thought? Nice hear both sides of the story.

[sham]

Sorry, but that plane looks simply horrible in the air.

Instead of an argument for dihedral and ailerons, it looks like a further "you can, but is it worth it" argument.