Rudderless DLG's are getting a lot of hype at the moment and for good reason. They offer several advantages over DLG models that employ a movable surface on the rudder.

- Stiffness
     A rudderless fin will always be stronger and stiffer than one with a movable surface.
- Ease of installation
     No rudder servo & associated linkages need to be installed in the model.
- Durability
     The vertical tail surface of a DLG takes more abuse than any other part of the model.
     Due to their one piece design, a rudderless fin will outlast a similar design with a movable surface
- Weight
     With no rudder servo needed, no linkages, pushrods etc, savings of as much as 20grams can be made.
- Drag
     No rudder linkage = no associated drag.
- Improved launch height.
     All the above combine to give a noticable improvement in overall launch height.

Rudderless designs are now beginning to prove their status, with many national and internations competitons being won using using this technique

- Poway 2009
- German Open 2008
- World Air Games 2009 warm up event, preliminary and semi-final rounds won with a rudderless model.

I have now completed all the design, tooling to be able to produce a fin design that will offer all the above advantages, along with ...

- Computer modeled design
- CNC milled Rohacell core
- Spread tow technology
- Fully molded surfaces
- Razor sharp and stiff trailing edge
- asymetrical section (modified HT23)

I have now replaced the manufacturers rudder on all my models (tabooGT, Sal-Peter and Aspirin), and the increase in performance is clearly noticable. Launch height and cruise is improved along with more stable turns due to the small increase in area.

The rudders are now available for £25 + p&p. I will be building enough stock to be able to hopefully fulfull all orders immediately

Pictures attached 

1. CNC - Milling the rohacell core
2. Polished PW920 negative molds
3. The asymmetric section
4. Sal-Peter with rudderless upgrade kit.

Hi Rich,

What is the weight?

Paul

Very nice Richard!  Looks symmetrical so you can just flip it for a lefty?

Bruce

Hi Richard

As it turns out I'm looking for a rudderless fin for the Blaster 2 kit that managed to follow me home from the WAG. Any idea what shipping to South Africa will cost? Please work on shipping for 4, Alan wants 2 as well.

TIA

Mark

Put me down for a couple too please Richard

Tony

The most important thing is getting a box which will offer 100% protection from damage during transit. I know from experience how dissapointing it is to have items damaged in the post. I also know how well some vendors package their items, I swear you could have driven a car over the box that my sal-peter arrived in!

I plan on shipping the rudders in triple walled boxes which will add approx £1 to the cost of the postage. I will ship using the cheapest method which also requires a signature on delivery.

I am producing 2x rudders a day, but am just waiting on a new batch of texero spread-tow tape as I will run out after tomorrow.

Within a month or two stab/elevators will also be available to order

I have to admit I though Jef was barking up the wrong tree using rudderless models. Time for me to eat some humble pie!

The reason I first used them was when I was teaching liam to fly. He was not ready to start learning about coordinated turns and bust the fin/rudder on the taboo I handed down to him. This was at the same time that I was pulling the first prototype fins from the molds, so I just stuck one on the taboo without bothering to cut out the rudder and connect up the linkages.

With a little trimming the model flew great, Liam managed to go through 3 of the prototypes which drove the development of the construction techniques to make it light and strong enough for serious abuse.

The prototypes were :

1. Hollow molded - Time consuming construction, heavy (7.5grams), poor junction with boom.
2. Orange foam, - Not strong enough in compression, folded easily on sideways landing
3. Blue foam - ditto

Finally Rohacell was used.. which is fantastic in compression and really easy to mill without melting. As it is also resistant to CA, I wick in a reasonable amount of thin CA at the junction with the boom. This makes it massively strong in this area.

I then put one on my 3 year old Aspirin, again not bothering to connect up a rudder as I was seeing more and more pilots getting good results without them. This model won on it's first outing and I was beginning to get used to flying without the rudder.

My carbon-d-box sal-peter was the next model to get tested. It had a huge fin/rudder from the Slovenian FF team, which certainly gave it incredible launch height... but I always found that it struggled when trying to return from downwind.  Again I could not be bothered to cut & connect a rudder so the new "rudderless" fin was installed. I thought I would add the rudder & linkages when I got round to it. But without the rudder, it kept the same launch height but transformed the handling to a taboo-like model. The model was now able to range further too. I think this is simply down to an more aerodynamic shape (same chord as an elipse, but modified LE & TE plan-form) and a very accurate thinned HT23

After the WAG final, where I had to fly my new spread tow sal-peter, I found that although the model was launching to the moon, I was strugling with the model not tracking well in a turn. Once I returned home, on goes a rudderless fin (with slightly more area than the sal-peter originals) and again the handling is transformed in the turn, with great launch height and cruise too.

After flying so much rudderless, I got to the point where I did not miss it. It is true that a rudderless model will never be able to turn as efficiently as identical model with a movable vertical surface.... but it can get pretty close with some trim changes and adaptaion of flying style. All the other benefits out weigh this small disadvantage for me. It does take some getting used to though, and a bit of experimenting with aileron differential.

I just wish I had listened to Jef earlier