PDA

View Full Version : RichModel's GeeBee


donjiskra
01-07-2007, 02:04 PM
This company: http://www.richmodelusa.com/Products/EP-GEEBEE-25.html has a beautiful GeeBee for sale at $139 with free shipping.
Anyone know of a review or video of it?
I'm interested how it will ROG from grass.
Thanks for your comments.
Don

Grasshopper
01-07-2007, 02:56 PM
Hi Don,

I don't know about the GeeBee specifically, but I do have a number of Richmodels planes and they are great. I feel the quality is very good and they fly like they are on rails. The instructions are a little left to be desired but they go together nicely. If you do get one, I would be interested in seeing a build thread. I've been eyeing that one myself.

Tom

Greg Lewis
01-12-2007, 05:12 PM
http://www.adrianpage.com/Rr2.html

donjiskra
01-14-2007, 05:14 PM
Thanks Greg, I'm aware of Adrian's model but I'm really interested in the Rich Model version
Don

Grasshopper
01-14-2007, 05:33 PM
Hi Don, I just ordered the Richmodel Gee Bee. Do you think you'll do a build thread on it?

Tom

donjiskra
01-14-2007, 07:41 PM
Thanks Tom,
No I haven't decided yet. Will look forward to your experience. Keep us posted.
Don

shlaes
04-02-2007, 12:10 AM
I'm also considering one - it's a perfect match for a power setup I have on my bench. How was the kit? Flown it yet?

Grasshopper
04-02-2007, 01:37 AM
I'm going to have one for sale here in a couple of weeks. It should arrive about the middle of April. I decided I don't need it and will put it on the auction block.

shlaes
05-09-2007, 03:05 AM
Bought one, and I have to say I have mixed feelings. On the plus side, it's a really nicely made kit, with a lot of detail in the fiberglass, and they shipped it fast. Arrived with no damage.

But it's just barely an electric kit - more of a quick conversion of a .25-sized fuel kit. It includes a motor mount, but the mount would have half of an outrunner sticking out in front of the cowl. There's no battery tray, and I'll have to figure out something to house the battery once I find out where to put it to balance this extremely short-coupled plane.

Also, there's no easy way to replace a battery without removing the wing - so it's a lot less convenient that other electrics I have. And its wing loading is pretty high, so I'll avoid my usual temptation to put a bigger pack in and get a longer flight.

Last, there's no way for air to flow through the fuselage.

I'll let you know how it goes, but this looks like a labor-intense electric conversion, rather than a true electric kit.

burkefj
10-10-2007, 01:13 AM
I'm just finishing up mine tonight. I thought the hardware was very good, and the fiberglass and wood work is very nice also. Instructions are minimal, I was missing a few blind nuts and the wing mounting dowels. No markings for drilling the front dowel holes in the fuse, this took two tries to get right. Drill-plug, re-drill:)

I decided to use an e-flite 25 outrunner, and used carbon fiber tubes as 1" standoffs to get the right distance so the prop just clears the cowell, and didn't use the motor mount that came with the kit. this also weighs a bit more, 6 oz I think that gives some nose weight. I also used some strong magnets inset into the cowl mount and the firewall to hold it in place, it will give if I have a hard nose-over and hopefully not break.

I have mine assembled with tbird 54 on the firewall and an 11x8 prop which is all that will safely clear the ground, the motor will handle a 12x8 but it was just too big.

Without the hs-85 servos and no battery mounted my AUW so far is 40 oz, and the CG is spot on as it stands, so with the servos mounted slightly aft, I should have no problem getting the CG correct. I'm torn between using two 1320 packs in parallel(6 oz) or two 2100's,(10 oz) tradeoff between capacity and weight. I also have a 4200 evo 3S pack(10.5 oz),
Full throttle is giving 300 watts, so this won't be overpowered, but should be ok, at right around 100 watts per pound. If I use 2100's or 1320's I'll just velcro them to the sides of the fuse or the top of the wing, as I won't be doing wild things with the plane, if I use the 4200 I'll have to probably mount it crossways and use some play accross the front former to attach the battery with a strap, but I don't think the battery will need to go any more forward than the front of the wing leading edge. I may be able to maiden tomorrow or Thurs, the wing loading should be around 25 oz/sq ft, which is more back to my Gas days than what I normally have been flying for the last year or so:) I did fabricate a curb feeler mounted to the bottom of the front fuse just behind the cowl that sticks straight down in case I have a nose over, to prevent the cowl or wheel pants from grinding on the pavement since these will hit first. I think the gear mount is right around the CG so I'll have to watch that, but the stance on the ground with the tall tail wheel is almost horizontal so I don't think I'll need to worry about flaring too much or tip stall on takeoff. The plane looks really nice with the decals on. This is my second richmodel kit, I just finished and flew the 380 size long EZ with a little Screamer De Nuovo.

There is plenty of airflow through the cowl for the motor and speed control and the power level I'm using I don't need battery cooling. Even though it is a gas design, I think it is a trivial electric conversion so far.

You will need to pull the wing off to change battery though if that bothers some people.

Frank


Bought one, and I have to say I have mixed feelings. On the plus side, it's a really nicely made kit, with a lot of detail in the fiberglass, and they shipped it fast. Arrived with no damage.

But it's just barely an electric kit - more of a quick conversion of a .25-sized fuel kit. It includes a motor mount, but the mount would have half of an outrunner sticking out in front of the cowl. There's no battery tray, and I'll have to figure out something to house the battery once I find out where to put it to balance this extremely short-coupled plane.

Also, there's no easy way to replace a battery without removing the wing - so it's a lot less convenient that other electrics I have. And its wing loading is pretty high, so I'll avoid my usual temptation to put a bigger pack in and get a longer flight.

Last, there's no way for air to flow through the fuselage.

I'll let you know how it goes, but this looks like a labor-intense electric conversion, rather than a true electric kit.

shlaes
10-10-2007, 02:51 AM
Glad to hear it. If you go with the two 2100s, let me know - I've got some 4S 4000s lying around, that I use in my Sportster EP. Yes, I know it's overkill, but I picked them 'cause they weigh the same as the cells that came with the Sporster. I get 20+ minute flights with them using the same motor you're referring to.

I fly off grass, so no need for curb feelers, but much greater need for nose-over protection. I love the magnet-mounted cowl idea. Keep me posted.

-Noah

burkefj
10-10-2007, 06:11 AM
Noah, will do, I just finished the plane a few minutes ago, setting the CG required that I velcro the two 1320 packs to the back of the firewall, and added 1/4 ounce to the very front inside of the cowl. AUW came out at 50 oz, a little heavier than I'd like so I think I'm going to try it with the parallel 1320's, a quick run showed around 25 amps and 300 watts, which should be an ok load for the 1320's in parallel. I'll see how it flies and lands at that weight before I add more. I think I can put the 2100's also crossways against the firewall.

Frank


Glad to hear it. If you go with the two 2100s, let me know - I've got some 4S 4000s lying around, that I use in my Sportster EP. Yes, I know it's overkill, but I picked them 'cause they weigh the same as the cells that came with the Sporster. I get 20+ minute flights with them using the same motor you're referring to.

I fly off grass, so no need for curb feelers, but much greater need for nose-over protection. I love the magnet-mounted cowl idea. Keep me posted.

-Noah

burkefj
10-10-2007, 09:39 PM
Got out this morning and maidened the Gee Bee. had a little headwind, and it actually took off before I was expecting it too, a little right trim, and some up was needed. Roll rate was surprisingly good on the max I could get out of the torque rod setup. Rudder was a bit overkill so I toned that down to 50% of max throw. Max throw was about 1/4" before the rudder would hit the elevator when deflected, cut that in half, mostly for ground handling.

The elevator I had to tone down a lot, I had about 3/4 to 1" of throw and that was way too much, I had to tone it down to about 3/8 or 1/4" up and down, it was really sensitive.

I first tried the 1320 packs in parallel up on the inside of the firewall, but it seemed a bit tail heavy, and you had to be really careful in loops or it would snap out(I thought) So I put in the two 2100 packs, one on the firewall and the other right behind it, it flew fine like that, but still had the roll out in a tight loop, I tried doing some snaps and it would do big barrel rolls, so I don't think it was snapping out of the loop. I think with the large prop, as you get slow in the loop that is causing the roll out, if you take the loop entry with lots of speed and keep it big and fast it tracks just fine.

Inverted needed just a bit of down. Knife edge wanted to come toward the canopy quite a bit. I found that in a tight turn, the nose wanted to drop a lot, so you had to use quite a bit of opposite rudder to keep the nose high in a sharp banked turn, actually since in knife edge it wants to go toward the nose, I found that once I had banked with ailerons, i then kicked in opposite rudder and it would keep the nose high and help the plane come around in the turn along with a little elevator. I remember Delmar Benjamins Gee bee looking the same in a turn, a little nose high.

Landings were quite a bit faster than I have been used to due to the wing loading(28oz/sq ft), you have to watch the drop during turn to final, make the turn gentle, then modulate power, don't cut the throttle, it drops quickly, and flare gently, as soon as it's down hold full elevator to keep the nose from going over. A few times I landed a bit fast and it popped back up in the air, then settled again, didn't seem to want to drop a wing.

My nose protecting wire did the trick, on one nose over. I'm going to bend the main gear forward to help prevent nose over too, as I dinged both props I had, one even on takeoff when I had a cross wind it popped the tail up slightly and that was all it needed. The speed was good, and with the two 2100's, I got at least 12 minutes.

Takeoffs with full elevator to hold the tail down weren't bad, the rudder responds pretty well.

Unfortunately with my last landing I ran off the edge of the runway during rollout and into some mud, that gave it a sudden stop and the motor pushed in on the front of the plane and popped the firewall loose from the inside of the fuse, along with a couple of dings in the fiberglass, so I'll need to put a good epoxy fillet behind the firewall and touch up the paint.

All in all it looks great in the air, you have to make sure you have some room for landing rollout, and watch the drop in turns with opposite rudder. I think I like the two 2100's in parallel or a 4200 pack and keep it a bit more nose heavy than the CG location specified.

Frank

burkefj
10-11-2007, 09:36 PM
Made some more minor repairs and changes and flew twice more today.

I bent the landing gear forward as much as I could without affecting the ground clearance, this helped the nose over issue a lot, especially during taxi.

I put on the largest wheels I could find, the wheel pants can handle them fine, and that give another 1/2" ground clearance, and prevents the wheel pants bottom from getting scraped if you have a hard landing.

I clearanced the inside of the wheel pants a lot so that there is no way when the gear takes a load that the gear wire or wheels can contact the pants, I just used hinge tape to secure the wheel pants and from the outside they look exactly as designed. I also reinforced the firewall/fuse joint from the inside.

Got two good flights today, one 7.5 minute flight with two parallel 1320 packs, leaving 2 minutes of go-around time, and 15 minutes on the two 2100's in parallel with 2 minutes of go-around time.

Overall, I don't think the plane is tail heavy, and I'm preferring the two 1320 packs just for a lighter wing loading.

I played some more and I found that part of the problem with rolling out in loops and tracking when going vertical required a lot of right rudder trim. It wasn't obvious when flying in the wind yesterday, but due to the torque and short coupling, I needed a lot of right rudder trim, this allowed me to remove the aileron trim completely. the plan is now flying and tracking pretty well, inverted and roll rate are great, loops still need speed and to be kept large.

Takeoff is easy now, the rudder responds quite well.

Landing, well, it lands like a Gee Bee, it has a high wing loading, if you chop the throttle it decents rapidly, and you just have to come in as low as you can, get a gentle decent and flare, it doesn't have bad habits, just comes in fast and you have to get lined up right or go around, if you try to chop the throttle and flare at the end, there isn't enough authority in the elevator to stop the decent, you really need to modulate it with throttle.

It's a plane I always wanted to build and fly, and is a challenge to land well, but looks great.

Frank

E-Challenged
11-08-2007, 07:59 PM
Especially rolling out of loops. Don't try looping unless you have altitude enough for recovery and your battery pack is "fully up". I just got the Peashooter's right wing and fuselage repaired and it flies as before. Tried a loop again and it rolled out and headed downward, but had enough altitude for recovery. I'm using an 11x7 prop with a Scorpion 3008/32 (100+ watts per pound) to overcome prop blanking from the 6" diameter dummy radial and speed ring. I have done a number of loops successfully but need to dive to gain sufficient speed with full up battery pack and keep the diameter of loops large. I'm quite sure that the torque takes over near the top of the loop so it might help to cut back on throttle near top of the loop. I'll try right rudder trim too. My .40 glow Coverite Gee Bee Model "E" flew much the same way. I notice that the Hobby Lobby ARF Gee Bee Y models have much smaller than scale cowl rings probably to eliminate roll outs in loops, etc.
I can usually grease my Peashooter in landing like a P-51 but need up elevator to prevent nose overs

shlaes
11-08-2007, 08:51 PM
Sounds like you might need a little more right thrust in the motor line - could cure the rudder trim problem. Especially if the roll in the top of the loop is a left roll. Just thinking out loud here.

How much do your twin 2100s weigh? I've got a 4-cell 4000 pack I''m considering, but wonder if it outweighs your two packs. If not, I'll try it.

Thanks for the update in general. Maybe I'll set this plane up instead of repairing my sportster this weekend.

-Noah

burkefj
11-09-2007, 12:21 AM
Thanks for the comments/confirmations, btw, I've always liked the p-26 is yours a kit and where did you get it?

Frank


Especially rolling out of loops. Don't try looping unless you have altitude enough for recovery and your battery pack is "fully up". I just got the Peashooter's right wing and fuselage repaired and it flies as before. Tried a loop again and it rolled out and headed downward, but had enough altitude for recovery. I'm using an 11x7 prop with a Scorpion 3008/32 (100+ watts per pound) to overcome prop blanking from the 6" diameter dummy radial and speed ring. I have done a number of loops successfully but need to dive to gain sufficient speed with full up battery pack and keep the diameter of loops large. I'm quite sure that the torque takes over near the top of the loop so it might help to cut back on throttle near top of the loop. I'll try right rudder trim too. My .40 glow Coverite Gee Bee Model "E" flew much the same way. I notice that the Hobby Lobby ARF Gee Bee Y models have much smaller than scale cowl rings probably to eliminate roll outs in loops, etc.
I can usually grease my Peashooter in landing like a P-51 but need up elevator to prevent nose overs

burkefj
11-09-2007, 01:12 AM
Hi, I'll have to play with that, although I'm not sure it is just torque, but a combination of that and the blanking due to the large cowl.

My twin 1320 packs weigh 6 oz total , the 2100's are 5 oz each, so 10 oz.
I've got an evo 4250 pack that weighs 10.5 oz, but it is too wide to go forward enough inside the front of the fuse to make CG correct.

Frank

Sounds like you might need a little more right thrust in the motor line - could cure the rudder trim problem. Especially if the roll in the top of the loop is a left roll. Just thinking out loud here.

How much do your twin 2100s weigh? I've got a 4-cell 4000 pack I''m considering, but wonder if it outweighs your two packs. If not, I'll try it.

Thanks for the update in general. Maybe I'll set this plane up instead of repairing my sportster this weekend.

-Noah

E-Challenged
11-13-2007, 09:26 PM
It was my first own-design project. 40" wingspan, 2.5 lbs, slightly enlarged ailerons, 6" cowl ring and 5 7/8" Dare dummy radial engine. Using Scorpion 3008/32 motor and 11x7 GWS direct drive props, 2200mah 3S 20C lipo pack, gives 100+ watts per pound, just enough thrust and speed, around 8 minutes duration high speed and cruise until power slacks off.

(See other thread).

eric01
02-21-2008, 11:52 PM
Has anyone tried a power 32 w/ a 4s lipo on this gee bee? I have one on the way and had full intentions on using my 25 w/ 3s2p 4200, but it seems it could use a little more kick.

FlyingMonkey
02-22-2008, 12:36 AM
Hi, I'll have to play with that, although I'm not sure it is just torque, but a combination of that and the blanking due to the large cowl.

Not to be a wet blanket, we all love to make our models do things they weren't supposed to in full scale, but...

Wasn't the original GEE BEE designed to go fast, in a straight line? Might be the aerodynamics of it is what keeps it from being as acrobatic as one might wish.

aviatordave
02-22-2008, 06:25 PM
Not to be a wet blanket, we all love to make our models do things they weren't supposed to in full scale, but...

Wasn't the original GEE BEE designed to go fast, in a straight line? Might be the aerodynamics of it is what keeps it from being as acrobatic as one might wish.

Yes and no.

The original was designed to go fast, but they underestimated its potential. After all it was the 1930's and there was no such thing as knife edge flight. [yet]

Delmar Benjamin proved what the plane is capable of when he toured the country with his R2. I was fortunate enough to see him and the Gee Bee R2 fly way back in 1993 near Des Moines IA. He put that plane thru the wringer....knife edge, 4 point rolls, stall turns, etc. It is too fast for extreme aerobatics, but very cool.

Here is a pic from Oshkosh, the plane is retired now....still in one piece.

http://www.aafo.com/gallery/07-30-01.htm

donjiskra
02-22-2008, 08:18 PM
Guys,
I also saw Delmar perform unbelievable aerobatics with his Gee Bee replica at "AirVenture", I looked forward to seeing it, it was AWESOME, but the FAA stepped in an forbid it. Rumor is, the FAA said rhe Gee Bee was not designed for such maneuvers.
Whether it was or wasn't, forgoes us from doing such crazy things with our models.

Granted there is nothing more realistic than "scale" flight, but then there isn't anything more exciting than to have seen Jimmy Franklin's WACO biplane with a jet engine mounted between the landing gear, going straight up!!!!

Fun is fun,
"Happy Flying", means just that.
Don

aviatordave
02-22-2008, 10:18 PM
I guess that explained why he did shows in Europe with it. I dont remember if we have video of his flying or not. I'll have to do some digging this weekend and see.

FlyingMonkey
02-23-2008, 12:11 AM
Here is a pic from Oshkosh, the plane is retired now....still in one piece.

http://www.aafo.com/gallery/07-30-01.htm

I know the original was supposed to be a bit of a death trap...

aviatordave
02-23-2008, 07:11 PM
I know the original was supposed to be a bit of a death trap...

It still is. But the pilots have more experience now. Delmar almost crashed his on landing once, scuffed the outer wing. He left the scuff mark in the wing to remind him what a deathtrap the plane was.

I have a 46 size Gee Bee Z that I scratchbuilt. Fun to fly but landings scared the heck out of me. It hangs on the wall now, I'd of crashed it eventually. (still thinking of electrifing it tho -)

donjiskra
02-23-2008, 07:30 PM
Guys,
When I spoke to Delmar, several years ago, he said he learned that he had to keep the speed up when landing, otherwise it was "difficult" to handle. He suspected that's what the problem was in those early flights.
He found it to be very responsive to aerobatics, not dangerous at all, and fun to fly.
Don