RE: Build your own PBF (Pizza Box Flyer, Flying Pizza Box)
Nice flight report! Glad to hear you were able to finally wring out the PBF in fairly calm winds. Sounds like you had a blast!
Posted on: 10/31/2009 7:28 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Profile and Fun Flying Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9218437

RE: Build your own PBF (Pizza Box Flyer, Flying Pizza Box)
Sounds like you had fun with your PBF, even in the wind. You'll like it even better in calm winds. Upright and inverted spin recovery techniques are explained in detail on my PBF webpage. http://mypage.yhti.net/~dmcdnld/pizzabox.htm If you intend to wring out the PBF in inverted maneuvers, I'd suggest enlarging the fin/rudder to 8"x8" with a 4" rudder.
Posted on: 10/29/2009 1:00 AM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Profile and Fun Flying Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9211378

RE: Build your own PBF (Pizza Box Flyer, Flying Pizza Box)
Looks good! Waiting for a flight report!
Posted on: 10/26/2009 9:20 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Profile and Fun Flying Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9204538

12FGA with light gimbal springs?
[quote] BAX POSTED on 9/25/09 If you have the 12FGA transmitter (airplane version), you already have Futaba's heavy springs. If you have the 12FGH (heli version), then you'll need to purchase: HSP79241 8M00F01702 ST-52 SPRING HD US$0.85 [/quote] I'm interested in getting a 12FGA. I want the airplane version because of the location of the spring loaded toggle switch on the top/back/left, but I don't want the stiffer gimbal springs that come standard with the airplane version. I want the lighter gimbal springs that come standard in the heli version. If I order a 12FGA from Tower, what do I need to do to get the lighter gimbal springs? Are there any gimbal springs available that are even lighter than the heli version?
Posted on: 10/22/2009 5:07 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Futaba Radios Direct support forum"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9194109

RE: 12FG trainer switch heli vs. airplane
Thanks Bax! That's exactly what I wanted to know!
Posted on: 10/22/2009 4:39 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Futaba Radios Direct support forum"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9194044

12FG trainer switch heli vs. airplane
I'm reading conflicting information about the trainer switch location on the airplane and heli versions of the 12FG. The manual only shows the spring loaded trainer switch on the top/back/right, no matter if it's the airplane or heli version. Some posts from 12FG owners are saying that the spring loaded trainer is on the left for the airplane version, and the right for the heli version. Does the 12FG airplane version have the spring loaded trainer switch on the top/back/left side? Does the 12FG heli version have the spring loaded trainer switch on the top/back/right side?
Posted on: 10/20/2009 10:59 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Futaba Radios Direct support forum"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9189740

RE: Right Thrust Needed?
Mike, leave the downthrust alone, but cut the right thrust in half. I think you'll be pleased with the results. Even after 40 years of flying RC, the Eagle 2 is still one of my favorite knock-around planes.
Posted on: 10/16/2009 10:15 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9179325

RE: Using 6V AAA NiMh Packs ?
All of my AAA NiMH packs are built from either Energizer or Rayovac batteries that came from Walmart. I have no idea how they compare to the Sanyos. After reading Richtea's post, I ran some experiments with a Triton 2 on several of my 5 cell AAA NiMH packs, and one 5 cell AA NiCd. The Triton 2 was set to the DISCHARGE mode with a low voltage cutoff of 4.0 volts. The maximum discharge current setting is 3.0 amps. When discharging at 3.0 amps, the 5 cell AAA NiMH packs in my Primo 40 and Chinn Yak were both able to hold about 4.4 volts for an extended period. The Chinn Yak uses 4 digital servos and one normal analog servo. The Primo uses 4 coreless analog servos and one normal analog servo. I have never seen any hint of an undersized battery while flying either of these planes. When discharging at 3.0 amps, the 5 cell AA NiCd pack in my CG Ultimate was able to hold 5.1 volts for an extended period. This plane has 3 coreless analog servos, and 3 normal analog servos. Again, never a hint of an undersized battery while flying this plane. Then I tested an old 5 cell AAA NiMH pack in a 3D spad plane. The discharge current had to be backed down to 1.5 amps in order to stay above the 4.0 volt mark. Obviously this battery pack has a problem, and needs to be thrown away. So thanks guys for sucking me into this thread! It probably saved my 3D spad from a mysterious crash!
Posted on: 10/14/2009 11:49 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Profile and Fun Flying Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9174356

RE: Using 6V AAA NiMh Packs ?
I hope my 3D profile planes don't read this thread. Several of them are running 9252 digital servos on all the control surfaces, plus a cheap analog servo on the throttle.......all on 5 cell AAA NiMH battery packs.......with zero problems for a couple of years. They get field charged after about 3 flights, but the weight savings has been worth it.
Posted on: 10/13/2009 5:11 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Profile and Fun Flying Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9170436

RE: Good Foamy 3D electric
Add another vote for the Light RC Magnum http://www.lightrc.com/Products/Magnum.html [quote]I was told flat wing planes do not do well in any amount of wind. I will need it to fly in 3+ mph wind. Is this a fact or does this plane do well in wind. [/quote] There are a lot of flat foam planes that can't take much wind, but the Magnum definitely doesn't fall into that class. At the Columbia MO Probro event earlier this year, we were flying the Light RC Yaks and Magnums in over 20 mph winds with no problems. A Magnum or Yak won't even notice a 3 mph wind.
Posted on: 10/11/2009 11:04 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Profile and Fun Flying Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9165389

RE: JR8103 Dual Elevator Servos with AR6200
Everything looks OK, except the Offset on the Elevator to Gear mix. The -171% definitely isn't right. Once you're in the Mix screen, pushing the Select button should allow you to highlight the Offset. Then the "+ and -" button on the right should allow you to change the values. Is the elevator trim tab centered? Is there any Sub Trim in the elevator or gear channels? Once you have the radio programmed, THEN make the mechanical adjustments to the servo linkages for the neutral settings for each of the elevator halves.
Posted on: 10/2/2009 7:59 AM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9140712

RE: JR8103 Dual Elevator Servos with AR6200
I'm not a JR Guru.....but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express once. I recently set up dual elevators on a DX7 using the Gear channel for the second elevator. The DX7 appears to be very similar to a buddy's 8103 transmitter, so maybe this will help you out. It sounds like you setup the Elevator to Gear on mix 5 correctly. It also sounds like you are on the right track with mixing the Gear channel back into itself to disable the gear switch. Make sure you are using negative numbers for the mix in both positions. The Offset should be at zero, or close to it. I think the purpose is to make a fine adjustment of the neutral setting for the second elevator servo. Once your Offset is back to zero, play with the negative numbers on the Gear to Gear mix until flipping the switch has no effect. Here are my settings: Travel Adjustment: Elevator 150%, 150%..............Gear 125%, 125% Mix 1: Gear to Gear......Rate = -125%, -125%......SW = ON.....Offset = 0 Mix 6 (or 5): Elevator to Gear......Rate = +100%, +100%......SW = ON.......Offset = 0
Posted on: 10/1/2009 11:18 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9140259

RE: Which brand of plane makes the best 3d er's
[quote]Just wondering what you guys think is the brand of plane that makes the best performing 3D planes across their whole product size line? [/quote] Swanyshouse would definitely make the short list. I don't think Paul even makes a kit that isn't a 3D plane. Here's my Primo with an OS 55AX: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euTDSG42IW4
Posted on: 9/27/2009 11:58 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9128925

RE: Don Muddiman Flying Machine
Hellllloooooooo! Anybody there? Is the Flying Machine ARF project still underway? Or did it get cancelled? (I still want one!)
Posted on: 9/26/2009 1:09 AM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9124742

RE: Which brand of plane makes the best 3d er's
[quote]Wondering if someone could pick one from those available on Tower?[/quote] hmmm.......where's that "chirping crickets" emoticon?
Posted on: 9/20/2009 11:41 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9111220

RE: Sig ultimate biplane
[quote]ORIGINAL: Smashmaster Does anyone know anything about the Sig ultimate biplane? (the profile one). I know the fazer isn't too popular. I have googled and searched and havn't really found anything. I have an OS .46 AX that needs a home. Will this plane hover? The Sig websight says it will. TIA Fred [/quote] The Sig Ultimate is a good sport fun-fly plane that will indeed hover with a 46AX, as long as you use the right prop, and you already have the skills to hover a plane. A 12x4 or 12.25x3.75 will work fine. But if you're trying to learn to hover, the Sig Ultimate might not be the best choice.
Posted on: 9/19/2009 7:06 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Profile and Fun Flying Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9108370

RE: Don Muddiman Flying Machine
Any word on the release date yet?
Posted on: 9/18/2009 3:35 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9105970

RE: 55AX or Magnum 70 4 stroke for OMP Edge 540??
I'd go for the 55AX. Great power, and great throttling. The increase in power over the 46 is very noticable. Here's an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euTDSG42IW4
Posted on: 9/16/2009 10:52 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9102065

RE: os.55ax 3d plane ?
I like the APC 13x4 prop. Here's a video of my Primo 40 with a 55AX and an APC 13x4 prop. Lots of fun! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euTDSG42IW4
Posted on: 8/26/2009 11:22 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9048308

RE: First 3D Plane
Before you rule out a profile plane, here's an example of what you'll be missing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euTDSG42IW4
Posted on: 8/21/2009 7:50 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9034475

RE: What engine for bad boy v2
I've got a Bad Boy V2. Originally it had a Webra 50, now it has a 55 AX. Of the choices you gave, the Saito 82 would be best. The TT 46 is a good engine, but not really enough power for a BB V2 without a mousse can pipe. Haven't seen a Saito 62 yet, so I won't comment on it.
Posted on: 8/12/2009 10:32 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Profile and Fun Flying Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9012061

RE: Best Plane for 3d with Evolution 1.00nx engine...??
Here's a short video of the Evo 100 in a Katana 70. Not much, but it proves the Evo 100 can pull a Kat 70 around. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RYpiBYQgyw
Posted on: 8/10/2009 3:50 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9005374

RE: Best Plane for 3d with Evolution 1.00nx engine...??
Now you're looking at some good 3D planes for an Evo 100. Don't forget there is an option for removable wings with the Mojo/MoAss 60 kits if that's absolutely required.
Posted on: 8/10/2009 2:03 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9005112

RE: Best Plane for 3d with Evolution 1.00nx engine...??
The Katana 70 has 930 sq. in. of wing area and weighs 6.5 pounds, which is 143 sq.in. per pound. An Evo 100 yanks it around just fine, and the wing loading is light enough for good 3D performance. The Aeroworks Edge 540T claims a 6.5 pound weight, but only has 690 sq. in. of wing area. The wing loading is 106 sq. in. per pound. The Evo 100 won't have any problem with the 6.5 pound weight, but the high wing loading won't fly 3D as well as the Katana 70. The Funtana 100 has 1108 sq. in. of wing area with a claimed weight of 8.5 pounds. The wing loading of 130 sq. in per pound is acceptable, but the weight is simply too heavy for an Evo 100. The last Funtana 100 I test flew had an OS 120AX and it didn't have the power to weight performance of the Katana 70 with an Evo 100. I also suspect it weighed more than 8.5 pounds. The Mojo/MoAss 60 has 1000 sq. in. and will weigh no more than 6 pounds with an Evo 100. The wing loading at 6 pounds is only 166 sq. in per pound......which is better than the Katana 70......and it weighs less to boot. At 5.5 pounds the wing loading becomes 182 sq. in. per pound, which is even better........especially for learning 3D. And now you know why profiles consistantly outperform "fatties" when it comes to 3D flying. Once you have experienced the performance of a 3D profile, flat planes start looking beautiful.
Posted on: 8/10/2009 1:20 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9005004

RE: Best Plane for 3d with Evolution 1.00nx engine...??
[quote]I need some help decidign on what plane to buy for my evo 1.00nx 2 stroke engine.... what do you guys think is my best option on airframe to practice 3d with this engine...[/quote] I've been flying 3D with an Evo 100 for several years. It's a great running engine with excellent power and throttling. The only catch is that the Evo 100 needs a ST 90 carb and an OS F plug to run good enough for 3D flying. With the ST 90 carb and the OS F plug I've been extremely pleased with the Evo 100 in my Katana 70. [quote]Without having to get a profile plane..[/quote] Oh oh........you just severely limited your choices to nearly zero options. I was going to suggest a Mojo or MoAss 60 as the first choice. The Katana 70 also flys very well, but isn't really rugged enough to withstand learning 3D. The Funtana 90 really needs a more powerful engine than the Evo 100 for 3D flying, especially if you're just beginning to learn 3D. [quote]how heavy an airframe could I go to 3d...[/quote] My Kat 70/Evo 100 weighs 6.5 pounds. I'd consider about 8 pounds to be the maximum for acceptable 3D performance. Unless you open your mind to a profile, the problem you're going to have is finding a full fuselage plane that is light enough for an Evo 100.........AND has enough wing area to make a good 3D trainer.
Posted on: 8/10/2009 3:00 AM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9004032

RE: mojo .60 with magnum .91 4 stroke.
Visit the Northern Knights club in North KC, which isn't too far from you. Look up a guy who goes by "Fishman". He flys a Mojo 60 with a Mag 91 four stroke and you can see for yourself how well it performs. I think you will be impressed. If you let Fishman know that you're already flying profiles, he will probably let you fly it. The MoAss version has enlarged control surfaces and a stretched fuselage that is slightly taller. Both the Mojo 40 and Mojo 60 can be converted to the MoAss version. The result is a more responsive 3D plane. The South KC Probro event is scheduled for August 28 and 29 in Wellsville, Kansas. If you like flying 3D profiles, you'll be in heaven at this event!
Posted on: 8/10/2009 2:00 AM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Profile and Fun Flying Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9003968

RE: Profiles: which receiver do you like?
Add another vote for a Berg receiver.
Posted on: 7/26/2009 11:19 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "Profile and Fun Flying Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8966594

RE: os.55ax 3d plane ?
[quote]ORIGINAL: nitrofevr omp yak or edge, swanyshouse Mojo 40 or Primo 40, EF Chinn Yak, value hobbies Sabre 47. For real 40 size 3d i would stay away from the ucantdo or pretty much any other full fuse birds. They have to high of wing loading to fly well and they are pretty much one dumb thumbs away from bringing it home in a trash bag. Alot of ppl cant get over the looks of profiles but i know im flying for fun and i dont thing it gets any better than a good slab.[/quote] DING! DING! DING! Nitrofevr's advice is right on the mark. I've got four 55AX engines in 3D profiles and they work great! Primo 40 EF Chinn Yak OMP Katana 46 PA Bad Boy Note: All of my 55AX engines needed an OS F plug to make them 100% reliable for 3D on the deck.
Posted on: 7/19/2009 11:21 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8947546

RE: 2nd 3D Plane
[quote]What is your idea of a good plane in view of the above, Dave?[/quote] Again, none of the planes you listed will make a good 3D trainer, and will even be marginal 3D performers in the hands of an experienced 3D pilot. They are simply too heavy for their wing size, underpowered for their weight, and too fragile to survive the learning process. The planes you keep choosing are all sport
Posted on: 7/13/2009 6:14 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8930053

RE: 2nd 3D Plane
You wanted advice selecting a 2nd 3D plane, but the choices you listed aren't really 3D planes at all. So if restricted to those choices, then you might as well choose one by flipping a coin. The Harrier 90 that I flew had a Saito 100 in the nose. Even with that engine it was marginally powered for 3D. I would suspect the 75AX would barely be able to 3D a Harrier. Plus IMHO the Harrier 90 is too fragile to make a good 3D trainer. If you truly want a second 3D plane, you should be looking at a profile......and in particular a Mojo 60. That 75AX in a Mojo 60 would make a great second 3D plane. Later on as your skills improved you could simply replace the 75AX with a stronger engine.
Posted on: 7/11/2009 10:50 PM by Author "Dave McDonald" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8925369