Revisiting paper airplanes - like we probably all started out with...

Was that with the 10% motor vector? If it was it looks just about right, Great learning curve Jon.

Actually it was a 15% mix of the aileron to the motor vector.  I looks like a 3-4 degree change in motor angle with rates off and a couple of degrees with the 60% rate.

Although I figured out how to do dual rates on the elevator & aileron my skills with OpenTx only got me to the point of telling the motor vector servo to act on 15% of whatever the aileron is doing.  I haven't figured out how the motor vector mixer detects that aileron is on the lower rates.  More research required.  

Pragmatically, as 60% rates is what I will be mostly using for a while I might just bump that 15% weighting to 20% for the motor vector.   

The vector mixer reacts to the actual aileron deflection so it doesn't need to know what rates you're on.

In an earlier post I asked if anyone had advise about flying on a sandy beach - at low tide Swansea Bay has several
stretches with hundreds of meters of packed sand.  It can be very windy and there are times when it is dead calm.
When there are gaps in the dog walkers I wondered about setting up there for some flights.

Anyone have any ideas, comments, advise?  Show I stay well away or not?

I would suggest that you re-read the BMFA rules about distances from people NOT involved with model flying - and also check with your local council in case there are any by-laws that might affect you.
Apart from that, your main problems will be the proximity of salt, and sandy grit getting into the motor bearings.

After my initial flights of the PlanePrint Paper Airplane I reprinted the cracked bits, added patches and put it back together. I found the motor was binding and swopped out for a spare motor which seemed quite happy running at full throttle.

I reviewed the Tx settings and took it out to the playing fields.  Sunny, almost calm.  I planned what I wanted to check out during a flight and then mostly followed that plan. I found it rather more responsive, smoother in changing height and able to do both tight and a lazy turns and did a reduced power landing almost getting the feather ok at the end.  

I took the flight film and added commentary with a close look at the control surfaces, linkages and the vector control for the motor.  5m video is at:



A second flight was super-twitchy and I didn't react fast enough while it was still just above head height. Damage extensive.
I think I will finish one of my other partial builds before returning to this beastie - the repair to flying overhead is just a bit extreme.... 
 

Looks to me like you have way too much roll control.

I remember I have a FX707S glider still in its box and waiting to be called to duty.  I recall there were quite a few videos out there about the conversion of this to a motor version.

And our very own Quorneng has the 707 Albatros so I will have lots of back-posts to look over. I did have a look at the video demonstrating the no-flaps, 15 & 45 degrees and goodness that is such an elegant flyer (in comparison to the rather jumpy nature of the PlanPrint Paper.

Looking earlier I see a December 2023 view inside the cockpit and then some discussions of the flap etc. And in November of 2023 some entries about the cowling and ducts.  And back in October of 2023 I was asking about such a conversion.  

Will need to look closely at the photos to figure out how much you cut out of the fuse.  Any more photos of that process?

The bending of the wing discussed in early Nov of 2023 - that I might want to know more about but perhaps just go for a larger aileron inboard of the existing tip dihedral?

Interesting stuff - clearly there as some CAD work making up bits for it. Are the STL / CAD files most good for someone wanting to do a conversion?

I do like dihedral and in other models I have created a structural block to fit where wings join fuse to allow spars to have a 2-3 degree dihedral. So I would likely look closely at the supplied wing join and see if I could work out something...
 

jon
In its "out of box" form the FX707 has a one piece full span carbon tube spar. It is a slide fit in each wing half so it can be disassembled. It follows that creating dihedral from the wing root would require the spar to be divided and a substantial centre block created to hold each carbon tube half. Could be quite a bit of work (& weight) to achieve.
I note that there are several post on other sites where wing flex with the FX707 is noted and various methods given for adding stiffness.
Both my FX707s use the original spar but the wing halves are permanently joined not for strength but to save the weight of quite a few of the supplied plastic wing join pieces.

My own view is wing flex need not be a problem. It is not necessarily a sign of structural weakness as both the carbon tube and foam will flex far more than balsa ever can. After all full size glider wings flex like mad and they have a human on board.
My FX707 wing does flex a bit doing a loop (say 4g max?) but nothing like as much as this full size Nimbus!
 
I will follow your conversion with interest.
.
      

My foamy ASW 28 had rather flappy wings, last week! It didn't like the turbulence at all!
And, if you look at the recent crop of Boeings and Airbus liners, made of 'plastic', they flap and waggle quite spectacularly at times!
The wind tomorrow is SUPPOSED to be from the North. We'll see!

This is my PP, I decided to use a 9x6 folding prop but with the nuts wound up quite tight so they won't fold in flight but will fold on landing if necessary. 411gm and 115watts on a 2S hopefully that should give me enough grunt.
 

Such a colourful beastie.

And something I didn't mention in my build process - I found that the elevons didn't have much clearance and with just a bit of flex in the wing they would bind.  I took a file to the left and right edges of these control surfaces and tried to get a 2mm gap. I also taped across the aft 'V' to limit the flex in the fuse.

I assume that if M was launching there would be no video - that was so valuable in trying to figure out what was happening in the model....

There was a video, I had my hard hat on with the GoPro bolted onto it. Mary set it up for me by looking at the screen while I looked through the aiming point, she got it wrong.
All we've got is mostly sky.

Mount your 'gun-sight' on the camera mount, then the camera has to be pointing where the sight is!
Bend the (presumably) wire sight so you can see it in front of your eye -
Then if you adjust the whole mount assembly, so that you are looking through the 'gunsight' - the model HAS to be in frame - unless it goes too far away!
And as you are looking at the model anyway, (or should be!) there is no worry about keeping it in the frame, because your head can move to track it!

Tony, my technique when I get out to the field is to do a 30 second recording of the site - say looking at the horizon or some rememberable item in the distance and then play it back to myself. GoPro's often include the option to slightly zoom in - but they need that decision prior to the start of filming.  I usually use ~1.3.

The wire-on-the-gopro-mount comment earlier is what I use.