After making the adjustment, it flies great. Did you try it?

Thanks. With a tiny little adjustment, this plane turned into a winner.

When it's flying right, it's an awesome little plane. Glad your maiden went well. Have a great time with it!

Right on!

I'm also a licensed pilot, so I struggled with this too especially given in stabilize mode the plane flew fine, although if I'm being honest, it was not able to recover on the third attempt at manual mode on the maiden and the plane did crash. Let's evaluate the information in front of us: Here are the facts: 1) It's not a weight issue. There is plenty of wing area to carry the plane and contents. 2) It's not an aerodynamic/lift generation issue. In both of my scenarios, the plane flew with the stabilizer like a little bird. So we know the plane flies. Yours flew, mine flew, others fly. 3) The plane exhibits a tendency to spiral under some set of circumstances. I've seen first hand, and I've witnessed reports and seen other video evidence of the issue. 4) The stabilizer can manage it in some cases, but not others. 5) The book warns to not exceed 31mph/50km/h. Pawel attributed his spiral crash to exceeding this speed and generating wing flex which manifested itself in a death spiral. 6) I made very specific mention of wingtip flex in my first look video kzfaq.info/get/bejne/m-CVdL18t8-RlKc.html before I ever flew the plane. Assumptions: 1) Let's assume the people flying these things understand what a CG marker is and how to balance a plane to use the factory CG marker. 2) Let's assume people know not to turn this little plane into a bowling ball excessive equipment. Here are the variables: 1) Wingtips flex 2) Manufacturer warns against speeds greater than 30mph 3) Balance on factory marks appears aggressive and the MAC calculation does not conclude with those marks. 25-33% of the chord for conventional airframes is conventional wisdom and the MAC calculation places it in that range. If we accept the truths and examine the variables, we can zero in on the answer. I already know what I think. I'm interested to hear what others think given this summarized collection of information.

The camera has been replaced and I have an Immersion Powerplay on the way. That should yield decent OSD footage finally.

G-R-E-A-T question ;) I will definitely check that out next time I'm out. Given the comments, I will probably also try slowly moving that CG back to see what happens. I'm just glad it flies now.

Mine was a disaster on the stock markers. On the servo wires it was perfect.

@@RCVideoReviews I will try it for sure, I just thought it flew well. I am still a rookie! lol

@@jayss1966 There's an old saying: CG forward flies poorly, CG aft flies once. You don't want to be crazy about it, but CG a little forward will normally ensure the plane comes back without crashing. It may want to land a little hot though so be ready for that.

Lot of that going around. It's a mixed bag though. I pushed my CG forward and it flies fine after that.

I don't think it mattered much. The original location was fairly well marked on the boom and it was reinstalled in the same place. The control rods also helped. While the clevis was adjustable, after re-indexing, both pins were in virtually identical positions. The tail moment doesn't impact center of lift, just the effect of the control surface. COL remained constant and CG was on the factory marks, so I don't think reindexing the tailboom changed anything aerodynamically. Today I flew it with the CG about 2mm aft of the servo wires and it was stable but I wouldn't move it back any further. I could feel it getting a little froggy at times.

It did. I released the binding ring and re-indexed it so the vertical stabilizer stands straight up. I did it by using locking pliers around the tail boom and set the grip enough to clear the shaft, but not the locking ring. Then I gradually tapped on the locking pliers to release the glue and move the ring. It didn't take much and I got it loose.

This is an awesome little plane when the balance is right. I liked it so much I gave it to one of my long-time channel subscribers and patrons as a gift to enjoy.

Yeah, I flew it today for a long time. Not a whole lot of it in manual mode, but manual mode is definitely sorted out now.

On the maiden I enabled manual mode three times. All three times the plane went out of control. Twice RTH saved it. The third time is the OSD footage in this video. For the maiden, CG was dead-on the factory markers.

@@RCVideoReviews I wasn't challenging what you saw. The video is convincing. I was just wondering if the battery size may have contributed to the issue, since I didn't have an issue. FWIW I did find that getting a good manual trim was important for manual mode as well.

@@richardjohnson2331 Again not disputing how this 1 reacted but we also started off on our maiden last weekend with the CoG at the normal 1/3 and no way we could get a decent unpowered glide or launch in Stabilized. (Manual is only for the very rare high altitude adventure with us doddering Old Farts!) Put it back on those very wrong looking marks and away she goes. Same for the Dart250. (Both on Kopilot.) Strange things happen. A lot of very respected reviewers had trouble with the Volantex Ranger 750. Mine flew quite happily out of the box for quite some time - until rough landings and encounters with the local arboreal obstacles rendered some repairs necessary. ;-)

Oh I know, I get it. I was just reporting the details. The battery size is immaterial if the CG is achieved and isn't grossly overweight. The CG was dead on, and that same battery pack flew it successfully on the 2nd flight--so it wasn't a weight issue. I would have happily trimmed the plane if it didn't immediately try to crash. I can fly a stable but out of trim plane though and it turns out with the CG forward, I didn't use any trim. It flew straight. I have other comments on the Livestream where I first showed this issue reporting the same exact problem. Another KZfaq showed video of the same problem but he attributed his to wing flex and speed. I didn't have an OSD on, so I don't know how fast I was going, but I know it wasn't full throttle.

I fly mine without any FC, using the same 3s 850mah lipo, and stock CG. It flies great. When adjusting the CG, I make sure the tailboom is horizontal.

That's a good strategy.

Yep, always surprised how few reviewers do a glide test before they do the real launch. I go right back to balsa kits form many years ago, always a glide test. I guess people don't bother now because planes are so easy to build and so robust built of foam.

Thanks, going to try that next.... Just been out, flicked into manual and death spiral.... Stab mode saved it just about a meter from certain death! ☠️😂

Yes.

I've seen comments both ways. This is from a conversation on the Livestream where I first showed the issue: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/fJeRhahkyZ2Vk5s.html "Tom Fields • 3 days ago @RC Video Reviews I found my best hand tossed glide C/G was the front edge of the foam bezel molded around the aileron servos. I did an auto launch with a nice climb to altitude until the Drift started to circle. Changed to stability mode and the Drift flew well. I climbed again to a higher altitude, cut throttle for a nice glide and then switched into manual. The drift immediately dipped the left wing and started straight down. Switching back to stability made the Drift recover. " "Tom Fields • 5 days ago My Drift has the same behavior as yours. I'm going to the field this morning and try a glide test over grass with the C/G, +/- on the wing servo wires." Lynn did a MAC calculation and it shows the CG on the spar. I was a few mm aft of that location for my 2nd flight. You might want to try moving your CG forward of the marks slightly for your maiden. If it proves stable, you can always move it back.

iNav or Kopilot? I have iNav working fairly well on a Nano Talon.

@@RCVideoReviews I have 3 kopilots all working flawlessly but have tried inav twice and just get the death spiral.

Under what circumstances are you getting a death spiral? Kopilot is really good out of the box. iNav takes some work, but it is infinitely more configurable.