XC-1 (oz7734)

About this Plan

XC-1. Experimental Canard. RC sport model by Robert Kendall, from AAM October 1967. Canard pusher layout.

Quote: "Ever had the feeling that design is in a rut, and wished you could build something just a little bit different? Here's your chance!

You probably will agree that most planes today look like a modified Taurus (oz612), Kwik Fli (oz6526), Esquire (oz384), etc. This is how I felt when I started looking fin a different design. Going through old magazines I came across a picture of a canard - the Japanese Shinden - and later the US Curtiss Ascender. They intrigued me very much and I thought, why not? This was about as different as one can get - with everything backwards, wing and motor in the rear and elevator in the front.

I started doing research on canard design but couldn't find much on the center of gravity, thrust line, decalage and such. So along with what I could find, and what I could figure out for myself, I started drawing and building.

I found out there are several advantages to the canard. First and mast obvious is the elimination of oil and dirt front the plane. The protection to the motor itself was one of the first things I noted - especially on the first flight! Due to insufficient fin area I would get a snap roll at lower speeds and was not able to get back to the field, I had to land in a bean field adjoin-ing our flying site.

The beans were about 2 ft high and even after passing through about 6 ft of them the motor was still running, This alone could be worth the effort of building a canard if you fly like I do and quite often land in chin-high weeds, corn, beans, etc. With the motor still running it is munch easier finding the model.

Also, The canard is the easiest on stalls of any plane you will ever see. When pulled up into a stall, instead of dropping off sharply and going into a dive, the nose just sort of mushes down to level, and off it goes again. This is due to the extreme decalage between the elevator and wing, causing the elevator to stall out first while you still have lift with the wing - which is the main lifting force on the plane. The canard is smoother flying and much easier in the maneuvers. It doesn't zip around, clipping, diving, and looking more or less like a controlled crash about to happen.

There are several possibilities with the canard design. With a swept, constant-chord wing the model will be more stable, but not nearly as pretty, Also a delta configuration, such as the B-70, would work very well. This will be my next project. True, the canard will never be a contest ship, but will fly more like a real plane. I have put mine through an the maneuvers except the spin.

After reading that the United States gave up work on the Ascender because it was impossible to recover from a spin, I didn't have nerve enough to try it with mine! As long as I was going this far, I decided I would try some other ideas. The torsion rod principle on the ailerons, using brass tubing instead of wire, worked out better than expected. I had tried music wire before..."

Update 13/3/2025: Replaced this plan with a clearer copy, thanks to theshadow.

Direct submission to Outerzone.

Supplementary file notes

Article.
Previous scan version.

Corrections?

Did we get something wrong with these details about this plan (especially the datafile)? That happens sometimes. You can help us fix it.
Add a correction