JimRoss

You know, you logical, straight thinking, patient people really make me feel like crap. Here I was all ready to throw a conniption fit and just have a viking funeral for the dang thing and you just jump in there and make me stop and think. I hate it when that happens. Alright, if you insist, I woke stomp on it just yet.
I am, however, going to take that OS 160 FX Ringed engine off of it and put a respectable 25 cc gasser on it. That should make enough weight shift toward the nose that I can play with it. Yeah, Yeah, I'll check the incidence too. Hah! I've got a laser level that should tell the tale.

BTW, I'm just joking with all the sarcasm. I knew I could get the right info out of you guys if I acted pitiful enough. Thanks for all the advice(serious this time).

JimRoss

Xantos

Hi Jim
Ive have two of these H9 Edge 540s and both fly horrible, I have nothing nice to say about this airplane.
one Edge is set up with a Saito 150 and one with a Moki1.8 .
The Saito 150 set up is tail heavy and reqd nose weight and was still porpoising around , unstable on the pitch axis with constant trim changes with power changes.
The Moki 1.8 setup increased the overall weight of the airplane , didnt require any nose weight and therefore the performance suffers.
Ive tried expos , mixing and everything in between it still flies like a piece of@#%$&.
The Viking option is the BEST !
Xantos

JimRoss

Man, I thought I was hard headed. You did it twice.
They won't get the second chance with me. I'm gonna keep trying with thisone until I get something decent out of it or I go completely nuts.

DGrant

My Feedback: (4)

Jim....be sure to check the book on that expo....it's very clear on starting values there. I overlooked that part myself the first few times out. Really once I got that dialed they flew with the best of 'em. I set mine up with Moki 1.80 and that's a very nice combo. I built the one for shortman(RCU screen-name), and that's the one that had all digital equipment. His also has a very fresh Moki 1.80, and Ive never handled a better flying plane. It flew very very well, with all the power to spare....much like flying a simulator that had all the power settings turned up. It's unreal. I wish I had the bucks to put digitals in mine. I'm hoping to have my engine dialed in lile his very soon too.
The manual is very clear on alot of the set-up, and the stuff in there works. There was alot of time invested in design, by a top-level TOC competitor. Matter of fact....same guy(McConville) has designed several, to and include the Midwest Extra(my favorite). So, yes Jim, we all know what your going through, your not alone...hehe. Take a bit of time, enjoy some other plane thats very fun for you. At some point you'll want another challenge, as the H9 Edge can be somewhat of that to get everything out of it. The possibilities are endless with it.

Jemo

My Feedback: (5)

I talked to Mike McConville about this plane His main remark was "If only they would read the book"

JimRoss

Alrighty now,
Everybody in the world, at least us men, know that you only read the book as an absolute last resort. I did read it but I guess some part of it didn't sink in. Let me clean my reading glasses and go get it.

Jemo

My Feedback: (5)

Grunt !, Grunt !, We don't need no stinking directions..........

Bass1

I had a similar problem with an Aeroworks Edge 540 60/90. They recommended dual elevator servos( Hitec 225's). These servos would never center the same way twice and you know that ain't good. I got rid of those and installed a couple of JR digital 3421's and BINGO,[sm=lol.gif] no more centering problems and a very predictable flyin' airplane.

NM_Mark

My Feedback: (8)

I too, have been flying an Edge, the Aeroworks Edge 60/90...and when I first started flying it, it was the worst flying plane I ever had. It snapped way too #@!$'ing easy, was way too sensitive, and was no fun to fly. Then I started looking at things. I found my travel on both elevators was not the same...one was traveling more than the other. I fixed that, and it wasn't so snap happy...but still far from perfect. Then I saw another member in our club fly the Dave Patrick Edge...and his flew like crap until he made it nose heavy. Sooooo, I moved my battery forward, made it way nose heavy according to the book, and BAMM!!! What a sweet flying little plane. I did have to get used to it's little bad habits:

1. Chop the throttle, and the nose points up
2. Don't try to float it in on landing...carrry a little power and fly it to the ground.
3. Keep the elevator travel low...I have 1/2" travel, and it still wants to snap if I cram it all the way to loop. It does a great inverted flat spin on low rate elevator.
4. Practice - the more I flew the plane, the more I liked it.

After I added weight to the nose...Aeroworks came out on the website and said the CG in the bnook was wrong...and to move it forward until you get used to the plane. I seem to remember readin something about the H9 Edge CG being wrong in the book as well.

I also got tired of not having enough motor (4400' altitude - kills the power, and nitro kills the checkbook!), so I took my Saito 100 off the nose, and put my Saito 180 on it...now it's insanely vertically inclined.

RysiuM

My Feedback: (1)

Three things to look at in H9 Edge. How I know? - I had to change my pans after the first flight

- In the book CG range is very aggresive. On the rear end it is impossible to fly when plane has 12+ pounds - 5.25 inch = 39%MAC. Even middle CG point (4.75 inch) is 35% MAC. For first flights set CG at very front recommended range: 4.25 - 4.50 inches makes about 32%MAC.

- Very little elevator throw. Keep it at recommended low rates, and for sure use expo. Hi rates are not for flying (unless you are very good in thumbs).

- Use digital for elevator. Whatever the servo you put in, it will not center right. You elevator will be sloppy. Even coreles are not good enough. Only good digital can keep the position with required accuracy.

See the following video clip, I have made There are three parts of that video:
First part is hi rate end-to-end movement - that would be the equivalent of 3 inch up and 3 inch down on elevator.
Second part is end-to-end low rate movement - that would be the equivalent of 6/16 inch up and 9/16 inch down on elevator.
And the last part is when elevator is moved to the end on low rates and then I pushed elevator to it's center. You can see how the servo gives up under the force. You can hear the servo humming. Servo is giving up almost all the way to the center point.

[link=http://rysium.home.comcast.net/servo.wmv]http://rysium.home.comcast.net/servo.wmv[/link]

With all that the plane flies great - even glides well. How do I know? 3 seconds after take off I got dead stick. I landad in the weeds breaking only nylon screws of landing gear (and prop, of course).

RysiuM

P.S. After waiting for over 6 weeks It looks like finally Brison shipped me a new motor for my Edge (2.4).

RysiuM

My Feedback: (1)

It's been a while since I put Brison 2.4 on my Edge. Aftter a couple flights with 3 oz on the tail (to balance it at 4-1/4 inch) I moved both tail servos (Hitec Digital) under the stab on both sides of the fuse. I saved 5 oz just like that by getting rid of lead and long heavy pushrods. Stil balance is at 4-1/4. Plane flies very well however is a little geavy (14.5 lb). Brison 2.4 has enough power to fly vertical buy with that wingloadning it's not a 3D machine.

All you know that H9 discontinued this plane some time ago. I suspect why. After going through the structure of this plane I see a couple poor design points.

1. Landing gear block - tear down the entire bottom on hard landing. It's because metal screws hold LG to the block that is very weak. I put the new block enforced with thin plywood plate that binds to boths sides of the fuselage and the triangle connecting with front former. 5 Nylon screws hold LG. Now it is solid soluton - no more teared bottom on hard landing

2. Fuselage at the back of the canopy is very weak. It breaks just from looking at it. Thin light ply has holes on the top for canopy mount. Every tail toutch results broken fuselage in half. I laminated fuselage sides and bottom balsa squares with thin carbon fiber tape. The tup part laminated with fiberglas. Not the best solution but much better now.

3. The main problem with the weak fuselage is that the wing goes through it. The design would be muchg improved it H9 used two wing halves mounted on the side with wing tube - like most big scale planes do. I don't know where they did get the idea of 78" one piece wing.[:@]

4. Firewall is rather a joke. I ended up with replacing entire firewall to secure Brison 2.4 to it. Even with BGX the whole front end was falling appart.

5. The wing is very strong - it can survive a lot of abuse, however is very heavy for it's size. Mine is a little over 3 lb. I have a spare set (brand new) and it is also 3lb. For the comparison I bought Powerline Hobbies Edge 23% (72 in span) and each half is 12 oz. Including CF tube wing weights less then 27 oz - it is almost wtice lighter for just a little bit smaller wing.

I don't think I will ever buy buy other H9 ARF any more. It is just not designed well (I heared horrible stories about their 40% biplane). I would rather go with SIG - all their planes I know are thought through. They have designed weak spots that will give up on crashes but then the plane is very easy to repair. Unlike th H9 Edge that every mishap is a disaster.

RysiuM

bh307

My Feedback: (143)

This is a great Flying plane if you got it setup right. here is my with a sach 3.2 added on weight with this 50cc motor . cg set at 4 3/4 motor swing a 22x8 @7200. as you my have guess unlimited power