RE: Emergency safety alert: FEJ big F-18F Superhornet
[quote]ORIGINAL: Wap4life Also,  Why don't yall see or understand that statement like ''i fly over 200 mph because i can and the model allows me to do it'' hurt our hobby much worse than any jet that fej puts out. Open your eyes and think! I'm out doing with i love to do working on my jets in the garage..   [/quote] In all fairness, 200 mph only applies to the USA, but airplanes that are poorly designed can crash all over the world, not just in America, so the speed statement is really only relevant in America.
Posted on: 5/25/2013 4:35 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11522247

RE: The funny thing about jets today.....
Changed my mind, not going to feed the troll. Disco feel free to use the block button if you don't like my posts.
Posted on: 5/24/2013 11:52 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11521602

The funny thing about jets today.....
So with all the FEJ threads going on, I started going back through some old posts on different manufactures and here's what I've concluded. Modelers have become much less concerned with what they receive in an airplane, vs, what they could potentially have. Fancy paint jobs and attractive prices now outweigh the more important factor, success in the airframe. Here's what I mean.... Lets for one minute, forget about FEJ as a single entity and lets even forget about the catastrophic failures of some of these jets. As I read back through multiple threads, from primarily Chinese manufactures (although there are European ones as well, and American), you know what I see a huge huge amount of? "Well I had this problem, but it was easily fixed". And, "This this and this was missing but XXXX sent it out to me quickly". Why has that become acceptable? Why are we willing to spend money, regardless of the amount, for a product that is supposed to be install equipment and fly, and accept that we have to FIX something, or wait for parts that were supposed to be in there? We, the consumer do not set the prices of the model. That is set by the manufacture, when they set that price, and sell that airplane, it is supposed to be for a complete, and functional model. Not a model that requires fixes to be airworthy, or parts to be sent after the fact. When you buy a car, they don't tell you "we forgot to install the glove box door, we'll send it in the mail to you". You wouldn't buy that car and you sure as hell wouldn't install your glove box door yourself. In my 15 years flying jets, with 13 1/2 of those being turbines, I have bought jets from the following manufactures (read manufactures, not counting kits I bought used), BVM, JMP, Skymaster, FEJ, Comp Arf, Aviation Design, Fiberclassics, Trim Aircraft, Yellow Aircraft, Jet Hangar Hobbies. Of those companies, all except for Trim Aircraft, Comp Arf, Skymaster, and FEJ had everything in the box that was supposed to be. Now, in all fairness, every single one of those airplanes except the Skymaster and FEJ were kits, I had to build them. BUT!!!!!! Nothing will piss me off more than building a kit and having to wait because something wasn't included in the kit. Usually it's just small stuff, but it's stuff that quite often I can't get locally and have to order from somewhere or wait for the manufacture to send it to me. So ok, that's a minor issue, BUT, I still spent money to receive a product, I expect it to all be there. Lets move onto the bigger issue. Fixes...... I have read I don't know how many times in the past weeks about how wonderful an airplane is and how problem free it's been "ever since I had the flutter and fixed it" or "ever since I replaced the landing gear cylinders" or, or, or......... How does having to do repairs on an airplane that is SUPPOSED to be designed and tested make it a wonderful airplane? I'm sorry but an airplane that flutters within it's flight envelope and requires a modification to fix it is a POS!!!!! Why does it become acceptable that the $6000 you just paid out was NOT correct but since it was an easy fix it's ok? Why does it become acceptable that after you had a problem and the manufacture sent you a new part is it acceptable? Would it still have been acceptable if that flutter cost you the airplane instead of you having the opportunity to fix it? That is good luck more than good management. Why has mediocrity in the modeling world BECOME ACCEPTABLE???? I know some of you will say I'm on rah rah train for certain manufactures, but here is what I appreciate and EXPECT when I'm dropping money on these MODEL AIRCRAFT. JMP - With my Firebird, I received a complete parts list, down to the nuts and bolts, that was checked off AS THE AIRPLANE WAS PACKED with each part inpspected. EVERY SINGLE PIECE was in that kit. BVM - With the Super Bandit, While there was no checked off parts list, the manual listed all the parts and the accessory packs, every single bag of hardware was labeled for its use in the airplane, every part was in there, as with JMP, nothing was damaged. Aviation Design - My exocet had a parts list in the manual and every single part was in there, it was somewhat more frustrating as nothing in the hardware packs was labeled, but still everything was there Etc etc etc..... This is what a model should be, whether it's a KIT, or an ARF. Every jet I have flown, I have flown hard, and I have never had flutter on a jet, I have never had a gear failure, any issue I have ever had, was because of something I did wrong myself. (it is worth noting that of all those jets, I sold the chinese ones before I ever flew them) We are paying a large sum of money for these airplanes, I do not believe that one should settle for mediocrity. Sometimes I agree you will not know about an issue with an airplane until it happens, BUT, what boggles my mind, is people will still read about issues that "were easy fixes" and buy the same airplane after they KNOW the problems and take it upon themselves to fix them. At one time I thought to myself, some of these jets are far less expensive so I'm willing to do some extra work. WHY? Why are we willing to say "I'm willing to spend money foolishly on a product that is supposed to be one thing, but I'll expect it to be less and still send my money"??????? How f'in stupid is that? It's like saying "I know this stock is failing, but I'll buy into it because although history has proven it to do nothing but go down, there is still a 0.00000001% chance it might go up........ " There ARE some very reputable manufactures out there, and yes, their airplanes might cost more, and you might have to do more work, but they take a certain risk out of flying. Between radio links, flameouts, and our own dumb thumbs, there are enough risks taken with RC flight already. Do you really need to add questionable airframes that work fine AFTER you fix them? The modeler keeps demanding bigger airplanes, but where is the better? Where is the logic to say that a jet that comes out that is 10 feet long and is an ARF, costs the same as the KIT that is 7 feet long from another manufacture, but the quality is far less. Where is the logic to say, has this manufacture proven themselves? Where is the logic that says "Am I really willing to spend thousands of dollars on an airframe where structural integrity MUST be designed and thought much differently than our old 90 size ducted fan days, and this manufacture doesn't really have the knowledge to do this?" I am not pointing fingers at any one manufacture, but there are smart(er) places to spend your money. I will say it again, airplanes that REQUIRE FIXES are NOT wonderful models, they are crap. If your skill set is enough to repair and modify some POS ARF so that it is safe, then buy a kit and build it, or scratch build something. The sad part is, these manufactures can continue to make claims that they are listening and changing things, but at the end of the day, the problems are getting worse and the average modeler is allowing it to happen by continuing to buy this crap and accept that the will have to FIX something. To be blunt, you are allowing yourselves to get screwed by buying this crap. You are buying an ARF model, ARF means almost ready to FLY, not ALWAYS REQUIRES a FIX!!! The writing is on the wall guys, continuing to buy airplanes that have a more attractive price point and continuing to demand that manufactures sell at the lowest possible price is going to devestate this hobby. Spend your money wisely. Remember that even the biggest jet manufactures are basically a cottage industry. Everyone talks about how expensive these airplanes are and asks why they aren't priced more in line with say something from Hangar 9. Simple, quantity. If you sell 10,000 Extra 300's at $1000 each, that is $10,000,000, it is pretty conceivable that a manufacture could sell 10,000 models that any modeler is capable of outfitting with a gas engine and servo's and fly. But move to jets where the number of modelers is but a tiny percentage of the RC fraternity, So when you consider that no manufacture is likely to ever sell 10,000 of any one particular model, the prices are going to be higher. The typical jet manufacture isn't set up with tons of automation, they aren't selling tens of thousands of kits per year, and they aren't selling an airplane that has an 11oz wing loading and will never exceed 80mph. Stop telling the manufactures to produce better for less. You can have cheap, or you can have good, you don't get both, it's that simple. Ok, rant over, guys, seriously, it's foolish to continue this hobby with the attitude that "yes, it will have problems, but I can fix them". It's time to have the attitude that "this is MY money that I worked for, and these jets are a product that I have earned, I expect it to be right the first time". BUT, at the same time, remember, the people manufacturing these jets are doing so to support THEIR families. Why should they work for any less than you do just so you can have a toy? Be willing to pay for a properly done model. I highly doubt that there are many of you that would give up your current hourly wage to manufacture jet kits for the same price you want to pay for them.
Posted on: 5/24/2013 9:17 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11521425

RE: The funny thing about jets today.....
[quote]ORIGINAL: DiscoWings Why do you come out with your Own line of jets and fix all these issues, obviously there is a demand and you seem to have all the problems documented. I'm not being sarcastic, come out with a line that's acceptably priced. [/quote] Why would I? I'm not in the model business, why you turn this into an attack on me I don't know. As far as I'm concerned there are lines out there that are acceptably priced with no issues. But jets without issues are not cheap. IF I ever were to design and manufacture a jet, you can bet your ass it wouldn't have issues, but you can also bet your ass it would be priced to where I know I could survive AND sell a proper jet. Why don't YOU Come out with a line, you seem to know how to do it better and cheaper than everyone else anyway.
Posted on: 5/24/2013 9:08 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11521448

RE: Emergency safety alert: FEJ big F-18F Superhornet
[quote]ORIGINAL: FLY EAGLE JET Now, if you need complete   Stuff to repair and change, we can send stuffs to you by emailing us. Thanks [/quote] These are the statements that drive me nuts......... If you need complete stuff to repair and change.......... is that not a backhanded admission that there is a problem but it's up to the customer to fix it IF they ask for new parts? I don't get it, why is it acceptable for an airframe to need fixes to be safe, why are they not safe right from the start?
Posted on: 5/24/2013 9:03 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11521439

RE: My Maiden Flight: FEJ Viper M
[quote]ORIGINAL: EmericChou I am a translator. FEJ will call me when the foreigner visit the factory. The passage above is from clients who asked me to translate what they felt into English and helped them to post this into the RCU. In the photos, you will see clients from photos. [/quote] So you are an employee of fej by your own admission, either by contract or directly employed but you removed your signature anyway. By RCU rules you should probably be banned. At least with your position as a translator you can't really claim you didn't understand due to a language barrier.....
Posted on: 5/22/2013 8:29 PM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11519848

RE: Fly Eagle Jet F-14 Crash (video)
[quote]ORIGINAL: rwwinter Jeremy, there are companies in the market which are able to work with the newest and lightest material available. Have a look at PARItech or Tomahawk. My Viper XXL has even the main spar made out of Herex and this plane succeded on the load test in contrary to my FEJ F14... As long as we request bigger and bigger planes there is a need to use these materials. But using them correctly becomes more and more difficult  coming to the edge of what is possible. FEJ simpley wants to much to fast. They are promising things they can't provide. It takes years of experience to switch from simple hand laminating to the newest technologies available and they simply don'T take there time. [/quote] Rwwinter, Yes, There are companies using the newest lightest materials with success, CAI used Honeycomb 15 years ago and built some of the strongest jets out there. ZN line has used honeycomb in pattern aircraft for years as well. So I don't disagree with you at all. However, correct use requires time and smarts, that equals cost. However, when you look at those models, their SMALL (by comparison) airplanes cost more than the FEJ stuff. As I said, it is this material (that is far from new) that appears to be the cutting edge glitzy flashy crap that modellers want. Sadly, the manufactures are jumping on this bandwagon without knowledge of how to use it (as I said, not all manufactures) and simply putting it in an airplane does not make it worthwhile. Used correctly, these materials are great, they are also not as light as FEJ likes to think it is. They are far lighter for the strength than other materials, but that does not mean you can use it haphazardly. And again, even with larger airplanes, there is not a need to use THESE materials, there is a need to use CORRECT materials. We are building RC models now that are getting scarily close to the size of some full scale homebuilt aircraft. Funny thing is, a full scale homebuilt will still weigh a few hundred pounds while our models are weighing 60lbs. Perhaps we should be demanding the manufactures to build these aircraft at this size as though a human being is going to ride in them. That's not to say heavy is better, not at all, but simply stated, structure needs to weigh a certain amount. If my jet weighs 50lbs instead of 45lbs and I know it can take a 20G turn at 250mph I'm happier to have that than I am to have one that I'm afraid to pull on the sticks. The bottom line is, whether I'm in an airplane, or standing on the flight line next to the flight path of one, I don't want it coming apart in mid air. Structure that will keep these airplanes together at speed should never be a concern for the modeler. The manufactures just need to make sure it's done right. Probably what the chinese should do is create their pretty shell, and then send that shell over as a prototype to a modeler who understands structure and what is needed to build the internal structure (this would mean of course that fuse sides and wing halves etc would not yet be joined). Even if they had to pay somebody who KNEW what they were doing $50,000, would that not be money well spent to ensure models that didn't explode in flight?
Posted on: 5/22/2013 8:56 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11519278

RE: Fly Eagle Jet F-14 Crash (video)
People can speculate all they want over this, but at the end of the day, the bottom line is, the modeler (aka the CUSTOMER) needs to feel good about how their airplane is built. The area that the pivot shaft goes into the stab itself should be NOTHING less than a solid block of hardwood like maple, with a decent size anti-rotation pin. Not something that can compress and wiggle around. Sure, there would be even better ways to do it, but from years of modeling we KNOW that a hard maple block would never have failed, would take LESS time to put in there than all that honeycomb crap with a bolt, and would cost about $0.03 per part for them to make! Yeah, ok, it would weight a few grams more, but at the end of the day, a jet that is a little heavier but will survive beats light and broken. Building these things isn't rocket science, but the fact remains that the jet modeling fraternity wants to be on the leading edge of so called technology and as such, the manufactures that are trying for their bigger slice of the pie attempt to make it appear like they are leading the way. They aren't, smoke and mirrors blind a lot of people and sell them on a product, right up until it all fails. Honey Comb has been used successfully for years in RC models, FEJ has done NOTHING innovative, and what they have done they have done wrong. Use Honeycomb where it makes sense, but common sense in their design would have saved all of this. At the end of the day, we as modelers need to step back and think about what we really want in our airplanes as well. Strength, structure, and the ability to fly over and over and over again. If we stop getting dazzled by the hyped up bullshit that some of these companies are using, we'd have that. Look at JMP and BVM. Realistically, these guys are using OLD SCHOOL technology in their jets. Yes, they are a little heavier, but they are capable of their intended flight envelope and beyond. They aren't using some magical material that will wow the masses, they are manufacturing jets that work. I don't blame the customer for the issues with FEJ's, it is 100% their fault. We as customers SHOULD be able to have confidence in the product we buy. However, all these airplanes are is a pretty paint job on a shell. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig right? Skymaster has been working on their F14 for years, Tom Cook worked on an F14 many many many years ago, there have been successful F14's but they were much smaller than the FEJ one. When these arfs are coming out for less money than the kits used to cost, red flags go up, how can they build an ARF for half the money? Simple, they use crap materials and unskilled labor. If BVM or JMP put out an F14 you can bet your ass it would be capable of flying like an F14 SHOULD fly, and it would do so for many many years, it would also probably cost $20,000. So in the instance of Dantley's F14, it would seem like a crazy amount of money, as by the end of it, it would probably cost $32,000, but I bet he'd be a lot happier having spent 32K on an F14 that lasted for thousands of flights and didn't put his equipment at risk than a jet that cost him about $1000 per flight...... I asked once before, how big is to big, the answer is right here, airplanes are to big when manufactures begin using materials they don't know how to work with in order to try to meet a goal weight limit. The weight in an airplane should be what it NEEDS to be, not what will give the modeler a happy feeling. These jets are being manufactured for champagne tastes in a factory with a beer budget, plain and simple, and regardless of FEJ says they might do now, they've made the same promises before and it will only be a matter of time before another honeycomb disaster fireballs somewhere.
Posted on: 5/21/2013 9:51 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11518283

RE: F-5/F-20 Skymaster x Feibao x Jetleng
[quote]ORIGINAL: Dig it I would suggest the english language stipulates differently. [/quote] Well, I excelled at English and there is no part in what he said that infers in any way that the flash is a scale jet. Calling something a great stepping stone between a boomerang and a scale jet doesn't say at all that it is a scale jet anymore than it being another boomerang. Be like saying a donut is a good stepping stone between a timbit and a cake. It doesn't mean it is a cake or timbit, just all delicious. (inside joke lol)
Posted on: 5/20/2013 7:28 PM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11517743

RE: F-5/F-20 Skymaster x Feibao x Jetleng
He never said the flash was a scale jet, he said it was a nice stepping stone between a boomer and a scale jet.
Posted on: 5/20/2013 8:06 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11517072

RE: Kudos Kingtech service!
[quote]ORIGINAL: dubd You can not pay for customer service like this. Barry and Kingtech deserve all the success they are getting because they work exceptionally hard to earn every dollar we give them. [/quote] Actually I slightly disagree with this statement Dantley. I believe we are paying for this service from every manufacture. We pay good money for these little engines and part of that is the promised service we should receive. The difference is guys like Barry realize that we, the customer, have paid for that service and he doesn't forget it. He treats his customers as they should be treated and nothing less. Barry is a nice guy no question, but further to that he is a smart business man. He is smart enough to see beyond the sale and continue to provide the service as advertised. This is how all companies should operate, but very few do. I am very happy that Barry remembers what he has sold to the customer, not just at the point of sale but afterwards. On top of that, you are paying less for this great service with kingtech than with many other brands. So do I feel that Barry is going above and beyond? Well, yes and no I suppose. What I do believe is that Barry understands how to be successful, and that is by having happy customers because you provide the service you advertise. You know what impresses me about kingtech far more than threads like these? The lack of threads like these. I've said it before, I don't really care what the warranty is on an engine, I want the engine that doesn't need to go back for warranty work, kingtech is providing that kind of engine. A great warranty on an engine that is continually back for warranty repairs is still a crappy engine. I'm thrilled with what kingtech has accomplished and while I don't own one currently, I have owned one and have seen quite a few run consistently every time. And Barry, I will give you kudos for the way you run your business and the product you provide. Nicely done.
Posted on: 5/19/2013 8:49 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11516027

RE: RCU member and jet modeler in a serious accident
[quote]ORIGINAL: erbroens Motorcycles seem great, we love them, but the truth is they suck... A very bad 19th century idea. Wish a quick and complete recovery to DCM. [/quote] I disagree, motorcycles aren't the issue, it's morons in cars that don't pay attention because they feel invincible. They are the same danger to pedestrians, bicyclists, other motorists as well as motorcyclists. Hope David makes a full and fast recovery, he's one of the good ones!!!!
Posted on: 5/17/2013 8:02 PM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11514832

RE: Why do people keep calling it TURBIN as in trashbin instead of BINE?
The funny thing is, with the self declared expert that disco makes himself out to be in regards to rc jets and his ability to build them for mere pocket change, one would think he would already know the answer to his question.
Posted on: 5/16/2013 7:59 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11513144

RE: KINGTECH X JETCAT X JETCENTRAL X WREN
[quote]ORIGINAL: luv2flyrc [quote]ORIGINAL: LGM Graphix [quote]ORIGINAL: luv2flyrc [quote]ORIGINAL: proline8000 What Meesh said. But look at the lifetime warrantee closely and you will see it is not what all of you think it is. I just had a friend send his K80 in for a check-up. It was 3 years old and had only 8 hours on it. It needed new bearings and a starter, 400 dollars later the lifetime
Posted on: 9/18/2012 12:46 PM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11232645

RE: KINGTECH X JETCAT X JETCENTRAL X WREN
[quote]ORIGINAL: luv2flyrc [quote]ORIGINAL: proline8000 What Meesh said. But look at the lifetime warrantee closely and you will see it is not what all of you think it is. I just had a friend send his K80 in for a check-up. It was 3 years old and had only 8 hours on it. It needed new bearings and a starter, 400 dollars later the lifetime warrantee was usless. I will hole off purchasing a K140 till Brian has 25 hours and it goes thru its first service. [/quote] Yes, anybody read the Kingtech  Lifetime warranty? It's nothing like the Jet Central Lifetime warranty. It only covers limited parts of the engine, not everything like JC's Look at this disclaimer from part 7- what a joke! ''7. KingTech reserves the right to void warranty and/or terminate future relations to an individual if one chooses to make a negative public announcement before contacting us and allowing us opportunity to assist or correct.'' Mike [/quote] Why is it a joke? In my business, I have had one customer ONCE that decided to start beaking off about something she was unhappy with before ever telling me. It was a pretty minor thing that I'd have been happy to correct, but after she had slandered my name, caused me lost revenue, and a bunch of other issues, why would I want to help her out? Truthfully she's lucky I didn't slap her with a slander suit in the end. Anytime I see threads about some company where the customer is unhappy with their product, I wonder if they've contacted the manufacture first. IMO, the instant you decide to air dirty laundry without first giving the seller the opportunity to correct it, you should not expect to have it fixed in the end. Customer service cannot exist if you don't give the seller the chance to deal with it. I think that it's very sad when people purchase a product, it fails, and they come online to bully the manfacture into sending out a replacement. Especially in this hobby where the end user can have so much to do with the success of a product. I would never want to be a manufacture in this industry, especially with the internet making it so easy for people to spout off without real justification. Just my opinion.
Posted on: 9/18/2012 10:13 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11232487

RE: Boomerang XL ?
[quote]ORIGINAL: highhorse [quote]ORIGINAL: BaldEagel Yes they are the same breakup, just put them in the wrong order on the post, second pic should be first. Note the rear ali incidence pin seems to be coming out of the bottom on the first pic (second on the post) and then out of the top of the wing in the second shot (first on the post) well it looks like the covering has popped at the least, seems to indicate either a spar fault or the spar was not put in, if I remember correctly [b]when it was first posted the owner said the spar was bent [/b]when recovered indicating that it was in place during the flight, if you can call it that. LOL Mike [/quote] I have been very critical of the quality of my particular Boomer XLII kit, as the quality was just terrible and there were several issues to be worked thru, BUT: I've gotta call it like it is and defend the Mfr in the above case with the pics. The failure mode in the photos plus the fact that [b]CARBON SPARS DO NOT BEND[/b] indicates to me that the owner (IF he made the claim of a bent spar) didnt even install the spars. IF he said they bent, I suspect he doesn't know a spar from the hole in the ground made by whatever was left of his airplane. Although my kit had issues (including missing spars which Patricia replaced for me), it's proven to be very strong. I'm feelin for the original poster of this thread though, it's gotta really sting to have the stab come apart. Really sorry for his loss. [/quote] Have they always been carbon spars? I'm sure, in fact I'd bet money, that I've seen primarily aluminum tube spars on boomerang's. Aluminum spars can bend for sure. I don't believe I have ever seen a carbon one in a boomer, I could be wrong, I've seen a lot of airplanes and spars over the years, but I'm sure all the boomers I've seen have been aluminum spars.
Posted on: 9/8/2012 8:50 PM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11222376

RE: The New Modellbau USA F-16
[quote]ORIGINAL: ModellbauUK Let's wait and see what happens. If the project doesn't come to fruition so what? It's good to actually try and achieve something and fail trying than not to actually make any effort in the first place. It's called putting yourself at risk. Risk takers make something of their lives and achieve great things. They don't need to prove anything to anybody other than to themselves and live proud of what they have made of their lives. [/quote] In the case of an individual I agree, but in the case of a manufacturer, I feel that showing any project before it is ready for release is foolish. This goes for any manufacture with any product. It does not do your potential customers any favors to show a product to get them excited and then let it die. Why any manufacture would want to show something that is not ready for sale with vigorous testing is beyond me. It only adds pressure to meet deadlines and expectations of those you've shown it to. Like I say, an individual's project is different, but when you are trying to gain customer base and faith in a product, this is counter productive. This is not a slam at modellbau but simply the opinion of a potential customer.
Posted on: 9/8/2012 10:01 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11221800

RE: Need to find a builder for A 2011 Comp ARF Mig15 kit
I can tell you from experience, staying in Canada will save you hundreds if not thousands on shipping. I learned the hard way this year that if you want to ship it into the USA and the value is over four thousand it will require a formal entry into the USA via a broker. Your shipping company may or may not provide this. I had to send an airworld f5 still in kit for to Colorado and tried to drive it across the border to ship. USA customs denied me entry until I had a broker complete a formal entry. We have many very talented builders in Canada, I would look for one here first. If the mig 15 is anything like the mig29 be prepared to have a large budget for the build. The mig29, while a work of art when finished was the biggest headache of my building career ever. As far as I know the 15 is much better, but I'm sure it will still be a ton of work. The rules for exporting to the USA have changed significantly in the past year (become more expensive) not to mention shipping from Canada to anywhere has gotten absolutely ridiculous cost wise.
Posted on: 9/8/2012 9:26 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11221783

RE: Fly Eagle F-16 1:4.6 Advance, wow
Crap, you know what this means right? Some poor worker at FEJ's can't find his lunch!!!!!!!! [quote]ORIGINAL: Pinnacle Aviation Hi dave, We fitted the all new Jetcat P200 SX [image]http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j349/philipnoel1/FEJ%20large%20F16/e07eb1b7df68ffe11683acaf627a98c1.jpg[/image] [/quote]
Posted on: 9/5/2012 9:12 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11218308

RE: Honeycomb
It comes down to the product being used correctly in the layup. Honey comb used correctly will not be lighter than conventional carbon or fiberglass layup, but is ridiculously strong. My CAI raptor is an all honey comb fuselage, none of the honeycomb shows through even on a 13 year old airplane. I've had pattern airplanes that were made of a very light honeycomb as well with none of hte honeycomb showing through the paint but they were quite fragile. The Raptor feels like it is made of 1/4 plywood it's so strong, but it doesn't weigh anymore than a conventional layup does.
Posted on: 9/1/2012 4:16 PM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11213800

RE: 2012 Jets Over Whidbey - Coupeville, WA - Who's In!
Sorry to not make it guys, haven't flown in almost 2 years and didn't think Whidbey at an event would be an appropriate place to work the bugs out of my fingers. Stayed home and built a deck instead. Hopefully I'll make Princeton!
Posted on: 8/27/2012 9:21 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11207668

RE: Good sport jet for a fair price ?
[quote]ORIGINAL: rcpete347 HI, resale valve is not rocket science, most guys know what used aircraft sell for, just check the sold items in the market place. Also just ask the question, most guys are more than willing to give a value. Rcpete [/quote] When I look at cost to purchase vs resale value I sure wouldn't put bvm at the top anymore. The flashes sell for a higher percentage of new than any bvm jet does anymore. I took a bigger beating on my super bandit and kingcat than any other jet I've owned. I loved my kingcat, I don't like bandits, after building the super bandit, flying it, and flying numerous others, I'd never buy another bandit. I think the flash looks better, flys better, and is a far better value than a bandit. When you do check the jets that have sold, not just what people are asking, I think you'd find the resale on bvm products is nowhere near what it used to be. The simple fact is, there are products out there today that are just as good or better than bvm for far less money.
Posted on: 8/26/2012 9:24 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11206471

RE: Good sport jet for a fair price ?
There is a ready for paint CAI Raptor in the classifieds for a good price. If I had the money I'd grab it. Has the strength and durability of the flash with better speed and precision than a bandit. My Raptor is equaled only by my firebird. I've had a bandit, had a flash, had lots of sport jets, and the raptor outshines all but my firebird. It's truly a shame cai is out of business.
Posted on: 8/25/2012 6:31 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11205372

RE: Kingcat-Like Design and Build
So with no response, is one to assume this project is dead in the water?
Posted on: 8/21/2012 8:58 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "Extreme Speed Prop Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11200898

RE: .
[quote]ORIGINAL: airraptor how come the mods havent come in and cleaned them up? [/quote] Nothing happens fast in a speed forum ;) LOL
Posted on: 8/21/2012 8:57 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "Extreme Speed Prop Planes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11200897

RE: help with servo mount
Just looked in my Raptor manual and those look like the servo mounts for the flap servo's, I'll see if I have any tops left when I get to the shop.
Posted on: 8/21/2012 8:54 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11200893

RE: help with servo mount
Looks like the old CAI mounts I think, I have a box full of spare parts from CAI, I can check to see if that is one of them and if I have a top.
Posted on: 8/21/2012 8:52 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11200891

RE: Llow time turbines for sale - Beware
I've heard of Rust in turbines before, but now I'm thinking it might have been in another P70, does the P70 use a standard steel in it somewhere that the others don't? I've never seen rust in any of my turbines and my old Pegasus is pushing 13 years old now.
Posted on: 8/15/2012 8:40 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11194337

RE: Llow time turbines for sale - Beware
Well the hybrid bearings were typically stainless steel races with ceramic balls if I recall correctly
Posted on: 8/15/2012 7:55 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11194294

RE: Llow time turbines for sale - Beware
Maybe this is a dumb question, but with turbines being primarily constructed of stainless steel, inconclusive, aluminum and (most if not all) using hybrid (stainless and ceramic) bearings, what exactly is rusting in them?
Posted on: 8/15/2012 7:37 AM by Author "LGM Graphix" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11194274