RE: Pilot RC 73
Well, rats. The OS 1.60 won't fit either. Oh, it can be done; with radical motor box surgery and hacking a BIG hole in the upper right cowl to clear the jug (for a side mount). I'm told one can get a Pitts type exhaust for an inverted mount that would solve the cowl problem... but the motor box is designed for a 30cc gas engine and simply isn't big enough for my OS aluminum mount. Guess this one goes back against the wall in the corner, until I can find someone local who wants it. Too bad... its a beautifully done kit. That inverted exhaust and nylon beam mounts MIGHT work without a lot of modifications to the motor box; so perhaps not all is lost.[sm=idea.gif] Re my other question, the guy at TBM said that "they" dropped Pilot kits in favor of Goldwing. He claimed not to know why. Not relevant, really... but curious. .
Posted on: 11/6/2011 6:32 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10799111

RE: 90 Size Seagull Yak
[quote]ORIGINAL: RCVFR raydar, we talked a bit about the CA hinges earlier in the thread... Yesterday, I flew flights #14 and 15 on my YAK, and as I was preparing to position the tail onto a restraint in preparation for the next flight, I pulled on the rudder and the hinges pulled out!! They were smooth, no evidence of bond with the wood. It did show color at the hinge line from the covering material so there is evidence that there was CA there. [/quote] Welcome to my world. That exact scenario happened to me after the first flight. The hinges were definitely installed properly; they just didn't bond to the fin balsa. I replaced them with Dubro nylon hinges, but now I'm wondering about the rest of the CA hinges. So far, no indicator of looseness, etc.; but I'm spooked. Also, after the second flight, just about every bolt on the front end was loose. Motor mounts, cowl screws, etc. I have a Laser 150 in there, so it for darn sure isn't over-powered. And there was no obvious bad vibration. If the weather cooperates, I'm going to fly it again today. The two flights I've been able to manage were okay, nothing alarming... but I don't have enough engine in it for serious aerobatic work. Seems like it would be a relaxing sport flyer; I'll give it every chance, but right now its on probation...[sm=confused.gif] .
Posted on: 11/6/2011 5:56 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10799070

RE: H9 27% Extra 260... One year later...
I don't do FaceBook... for several reasons. That said, your pilots look nice. How much, and is there any way to order OTHER than FaceBook/PayPal? .
Posted on: 11/6/2011 5:39 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10799056

RE: GP Patty Wagstaff - Building & Flying
Looks like The Empire has discontinued this old warrior. Mine still lies on the floor of the shop, un-started. Now I wonder if assembling and flying it is a smart move? No parts any more, etc.... Bummer. .
Posted on: 10/28/2011 10:39 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10786671

RE: Extra 260 27% Hangar 9er
Whew! Just spent the last three days reading EVERY post in this monster. I'm putting another one together; I killed my first one right after getting the BGX-1 sorted and running well last year. Naturally, I have misplaced most of my "build notes" from the first one, so I wanted to remember all the gremlins that await... .
Posted on: 10/27/2011 5:32 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10785781

RE: H9 27% Extra 260... One year later...
Yeah, you could probably stand to move it back a bit. With the BGX-1, which weighs only slightly less than the Brison 3.2, I had my CG at the back of the wing tube. Not sure of the exact measurement in inches. I had four different engines on my first one. Each one required a slightly different CG setting. When I went to the first gasser (BME 50), I moved the rudder servo to the tail, and left it there. I used the battery pack(s) to adjust the CG on the subsequent engines (Brison 3.2 and BGX-1). Here's a quick test that you can do. Some may protest that it isn't precise, but it worked for me over the four-year life of the model, totalling almost 200 flights and three engine changes. Fly a straight line at full throttle, then pull up to a 45 degree angle. Let it stabilize, then quickly roll inverted and watch it closely. If the nose drops, you're nose-heavy. If the TAIL drops... get it on the ground and move some weight forward. How fast it drops will be an indicator. IOW, if the nose starts slowly tucking down (while inverted), you're close and don't need much adjustment. Define "float". Do you mean the model basically lands itself? That airplane had the most docile landing characteristics of any model I've ever flown, except for a Sig Kadet Senior. But unless the CG is PERFECT, you'll still have to make some pitch inputs during final approach. I had a 'landing mode' set up on my 9Z; by flipping a switch, the ailerons reflexed slightly upward, becoming spoilerons. That kept the plane pretty much parallel to the ground, requiring only the slightest touch of elevator to maintain the attitude once I went to flight idle. But truth be told, half the time I forgot to flip that switch and just flew the airplane gently down with elevator and throttle. It was a big old puddy tat. HOWEVER... you need very low rates to accomplish this. The elevators on this model are quite powerful, and a combination of bevel-to-bevel throws and little exponential, while the desiderata of the flip-flop crowd, makes for a pitchy airplane on approach. Mine was set up for IMAC, so I had rather limited travel on the control surfaces. That made it a delightfully relaxing flier; which is why I want another one. So yes, you might want to move your CG back. But go slowly and carefully, a smidgen at a time. My new kit should be here tomorrow; I'm really looking forward to the assembly/flying. .
Posted on: 10/27/2011 2:11 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10785473

RE: H9 27% Extra 260... One year later...
Holy Thread Resurrection, Batman! To my intense annoyance, my plans for the Sbach 342 didn't work out. That model is designed specifically for an inverted 30cc gas engine; trying to shoe-horn a side mounted OS 160 under that gorgeous cowl ain't happening. Oh, you can do it; but it would require major surgery on the engine box, and butchering the cowl to clear the jug. As I was sulking last night, after making this discovery, I thought about my old H9 Extra 260 and how much I liked it. I think I'll drop by the LHS this afternoon and see if he'll order me one. I really should put the Patty together; but the memories of those great flights and beautiful landings with the Extra are compelling... One wonders if Horizon ever got that c/f main gear right???? No worries; the TNT aluminum unit I had done for my other one survived the crash. .
Posted on: 10/26/2011 5:54 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10783162

RE: Pilot RC 73
Okay, I'm ready to start mine. Has anyone used an OS 1.60? It would appear that TBM no longer carries Pilot kits. Anyone know why? .
Posted on: 10/23/2011 6:29 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10779285

RE: Looking for iPad Owners to Test Advance Issue of RC Pilot Magazine
[quote]ORIGINAL: flyingtomg I got my copy today. It looks good. Nice job. flyingtomg [/quote] Ditto. Very nicely done. .
Posted on: 10/22/2011 1:56 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10777740

RE: New Lifestyle Magazine for RC Pilots
Mr Kranitz's statement in the video about how all magazine "reviews", and other content, are the same really hit me between the eyes. He is sooooo right. I got an iPad for Father's Day this year. I was, like, "What the hell am I going to do with this thing???" Well, I now use it constantly. The versatility of the device is simply amazing. I'm signed up... looking forward to the debut. .
Posted on: 10/20/2011 6:57 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10774414

RE: Seagull Yak?
Mine is 9.4 pounds, with a Laser 150. I needed no extra weight, with the battery up against the second former (behind the tank). I have c/f mains and an Ohio Products Haigh tail wheel, otherwise all stock. I flew it Saturday, but the wind was so bad I couldn't get it trimmed properly, much less evaluate its flight characteristics. As I feared, the Laser 150 is just enough motor... IOW no unlimited vertical. However, I was flying a 17X6 wood prop (forget the make, but its one of those scimitar-bladed "custom" jobs) and I was only getting 8500 rpm. I usually run a 16X8 Graupner on that engine, which produces 8800 rpm. That prop is on it now for the next flights. Hopefully, the wind be out of here by this week-end. .
Posted on: 4/25/2011 5:45 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10483500

RE: To the old salts...
[quote]ORIGINAL: willig10 I would suggest that you dont get too wrapped up in how an airplane looks. You may have been in the RC community for awhile and a trainer is way far behind you. Your Grandson on the other hand just needs to learn how to fly on a stable, forgiving and slow airplane. [/quote] Thanks for the philosophical observations. I don't care what it LOOKS like... I'm more concerned with the flight characteristics. However... FWIW, grandson #1 learned on an LT 40, and he quickly became bored with that airplane because it wasn't "cool". His interest didn't pick up again until I built him a Sig Kougar. I was trying to avoid a re-occurrence of that with the H9 P-51 PTS. When that idea tanked, I decided to hell with the "looks", he'll learn properly or not at all. I got weary of agonizing over this decision, and, unable to find an Eagle ARF anywhere, picked up an Empire SuperStar 40 today at the LHS. With the second, "cool" plane (the H9 P-51) sitting in the wall rack where he can see it, and anticipate flying it, hopefully he won't tire of the plebian trainer too soon. Thanks again to all who responded. .
Posted on: 4/21/2011 6:47 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10477400

RE: To the old salts...
[quote]ORIGINAL: CGRetired Did I miss something or am I just dense. What is an ''Empire trainer''? CGr [/quote] A trainer sold by The Evil Empire; aka Great Planes/Tower Hobbies. That name got hung on them 10 or more years ago, after they got big enough to start buying up smaller firms and absorbing same into The Empire... usually, all but the most profitable items that firms had then simply go away. .
Posted on: 4/21/2011 10:31 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10476647

RE: To the old salts...
[quote]ORIGINAL: RCVF ... I think thrust is more what a trainer needs. [/quote] I had a 12.5X5 on it, applying that logic; no joy. It is slightly less "piggish" with the 11X7.5. I think the main problem is the airplane is heavy. I haven't weighed it yet (cannot find my scale, but I bought another one yesterday), but it feels like seven or eight pounds. .
Posted on: 4/21/2011 7:34 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10476294

RE: To the old salts...
[quote]ORIGINAL: on_your_six Why not look around and see the world is moving to electric? [/quote] Why do some of you electric guys have to assume an air of superiority? I have "been in the hobby" since 1987. Part of the fun for me is the noise and clatter of the engines. And I could not care less as to where "the world is moving to". Enjoy your flying hair dryers; I'll enjoy my "slimers"... .
Posted on: 4/21/2011 5:41 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10476135

RE: To the old salts...
[quote]ORIGINAL: TruBlu02 The Tower hobbies Trainer is probably one of the best values on the market at $79+shipping. It is rugged and well built. [/quote] I looked at one of those yesterday at the LHS... and have been thinking about it since. When you get right down to it, it makes more sense than anything else. About the only real drawback is the ChinaCote/shelf paper covering; but for less than a hundred bucks, what difference does that REALLY make? There are some decent-looking trainers out there in web land, but one wonders just how much customer service is to be had from the vendors, if it should become necessary. If I buy this one from the LHS, he will handle any problems with the kit. I have found ONE place that claims to have the Eagle ARF in stock. I'll call them in a bit here. If they don't have it, then I believe I'll go with this Tower Hobbies Special. The more I think about the Big Stik option, the more possible pitfalls come to mind. Again, thanks to all. .
Posted on: 4/21/2011 5:36 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10476130

RE: Seagull Yak?
[quote]ORIGINAL: raydar The 1.20 fs flys the plane well enough but had nothing extra and is a bit dull, not unlimited vertical  and struggles with large loops. [/quote] Hmmm... the Laser 150 in mine is about equivalent to a strong 1.20; 16X8 Graupner at 8800. I finished it yesterday (finally!), hope to maiden it Sunday. Couldn't find my scale, but it feels like maybe ten pounds, max. What you describe above is EXACTLY like a Goldberg Sukhoi at eleven pounds flew with this Laser engine. Guess we'll see... .
Posted on: 4/20/2011 3:34 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10475143

RE: To the old salts...
[quote]ORIGINAL: opjose Since you WILL be buddy boxing with him, consider something like a Big Stik. Tone down the throws and you have a very nice docile plane. [/quote] Now, THERE is an excellent idea that never occurred to me. I've got a 91 Surpass around here somewhere that would go good on the GP .60 size Stik. With the mains up front for a tail dragger, I'd probably have to stuff the battery in the tail... but yeah, that should work. If I can keep it light, that big fat wing should float like a dream. And you're right; kick up the throws and he (or I) can tear the sky up. Hmmmmm... Many thanks for all the ideas. Keep them coming if something else comes to mind... .
Posted on: 4/20/2011 3:25 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10475118

RE: To the old salts...
[quote]ORIGINAL: jetmech05 If you're flying the Mustang PTS with the 3 bladed prop...get a two blade APC...take off the speed brakes, raise the flaps and go teach him..... [/quote] Nope, have a Graupner 11X7.5 on an OS .46SF, flaps are operational (i.e., up unless I call for them), never installed the "speed brakes", and got rid of the droops after the first flight. Its still a pig below half throttle. .
Posted on: 4/20/2011 3:13 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10475093

To the old salts...
... who hang out here, helping newbies... please forgive the length of this inquiry, but you'll see why. I posted this query in the newbie/beginner forum because the veterans here will be most up-to-speed on the topic of viable trainer models. I'm in somewhat of a dilemma. Grandson #2 is showing interest in the hobby, is getting pretty good on the sim, and is about ready to start actually flying. So, being the good modeler/grand dad, I bought him a plane. After much thought and looking around, I got the H9 P-51 PTS; the original yellow-tail example. Just bought the airframe, since I have tons of everything else (engines, radio gear, etc.). We'll be buddy-boxing, so I figured we didn't need a conventional trainer. Well... I assembled it, and am not terribly impressed with its flying qualities. Oh, it flies okay, but needs a lot of rudder in slow-speed turns and is a pig in general at low speed- with OR without the droops. It has a strong O.S. 46SF for power; I triple-checked the balance and incidents, etc., and it is within proper weight parameters. I even tried different props. But for whatever reason, it won't be the optimum thing for him to learn to land with. So we'll put that one back on the wall for his "second plane". Now comes the dilemma; i.e., what trainer to get? I've got an LT40 kit NIB, but don't have the time to build it quickly. The ARF version (which I had, until grandson #1 and I killed it playing around on a VERY windy day; a GREAT trainer, IMO) has been AWOL for quite some time, I'm told, even though Sig is supposedly re-organizing. Ah, I say to myself... I know, I'll get an Eagle ARF. Then I find out that The Empire now owns what is left of Goldberg, and the Eagle 63 ARF is "temporarily unavailable"... which is Empire-speak for "We're getting ready to dump it". So I go to the LHS and check out the various Empire trainers; Hobbico AviStar, NexStar, Tower Trainer, etc. Not impressed with any of those (nor the few "off-brand/economy" offerings), either, for various reasons. So, here's the question: What else is out there? The new offering of the TameCat looks intriguing, but I'm betting its squirrelly on the ground; and everybody seems to be out of stock, anyway. Have I missed anything? All I want is a simple high D-tube wing and box fuselage, that is light enough to fly on an old O.S. 40FP. I'll make a taildragger out of it, and as soon as the kid is competent with it he can try his P-51 again. Wish I had the time to build that LT40, but that just isn't in the cards now. I need SOMETHING, before the kid loses interest. Help me out here, guys... I've run slap out of options. .
Posted on: 4/20/2011 1:15 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10474875

RE: Seagull Models yak 54 90 Maiden
Sorry, I am totally unfamiliar with your model. Perhaps it was designed/intended for a gasoline engine, with the attendant extra weight those have? I know that when I put a 50cc gasser into my H9 Edge, I had to move the rudder servo to the tail. .
Posted on: 4/20/2011 4:56 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10473987

RE: Seagull Models yak 54 90 Maiden
Oh... I just noticed that you are referring to a different kit; not the SeaGull. Sorry. .
Posted on: 4/19/2011 1:59 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10472671

RE: Seagull Models yak 54 90 Maiden
I really like these Haigh tail wheels. No more messing with those communist springs.
Posted on: 4/19/2011 1:45 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10472644

RE: Seagull Models yak 54 90 Maiden
Finally got around to finishing mine. Well... almost; haven't put the decals on it yet. Dunno what to tell you regarding your balance issue. Mine has a Laser 150 (32 ounces all-up), and my battery is right behind the second fuselage former, that supports the rear of the tank. I have carbon fiber mains, too, which are a lot lighter than the pot metal junk that was in the kit. Other deviations from the kit-supplied goodies is a Haigh tail wheel unit, most of the screws/bolts, and the wheels. Now that I think about it, the rudder pull-pull set-up was the only kit hardware I used. This is a very flimsy airplane. Yes, its built light, and there SEEMS to be sufficient glue, etc. But you have to handle it like eggshells when moving it around, lest you put a thumb, finger, or whole hand right through it. No free lunch, I guess. I cannot find my scale, but I'm going to get another one tomorrow. I'm guessing this one is between nine and ten pounds. I'm HOPING it doesn't weigh anymore. I'll try to maiden it this week-end if the weather cooperates. I'll get back with you on what it weighs. You know, a buddy who built one of these before I got mine warned me repeatedly that it was going to be major tail heavy. But that simply isn't the case with this one. Anyway, pics in next post... .
Posted on: 4/19/2011 1:42 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10472639

RE: Pilot RC 73
Gee... this thread sure died. Guess most folks went with the 50cc... .
Posted on: 4/18/2011 4:37 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10470669

RE: Pilot RC 30cc sbach 342 build thread
I'm getting ready to start mine. I've had it for almost a year, purchased it from TBM I believe. Never opened the box; been away from the hobby for some time. I hope mine has the gear! Has anyone used an OS 1.60 in this model? .
Posted on: 4/18/2011 4:20 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10470632

RE: Jeff Troy's Tamecat trainer, World models..
I looked at one of these many years ago; I assume it was the MRC kit. The workmanship wasn't too spiffy, and the pieces/parts weighed a TON. One assumes that World Models has produced a better offering? My #2 grandson is 9, and becoming interested. I too think a "regular" box trainer would bore him, so I built an H9 P-51 "trainer", the original yellow-nose version. Let's just say I was rather underwhelmed with this model's performance. It flies, but does not react the way I think a youngster needs. To be fair, I have only flown it twice, was unimpressed, and put it up. Perhaps if I spent some time tweaking the set-up, prop, etc., it might be "better". But the TameCat is just too cool. Still, it seems a bit large for a plain bearing .40. I do have a good-condition OS .40FP laying idle. I would like to read of some more experiences with the model here... .
Posted on: 4/5/2011 5:36 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10444056

Deleting conditions on 9ZWC2
I am trying to copy my model memories onto a CamPac. There were five models previously on the CamPac. I reset ALL on them, and set all the secondary conditions of each model to NULL. It says I need to clear a condition before it will copy. Been through the manual twice, I cannot find anything about clearing/deleting conditions. Please advise. .
Posted on: 12/6/2010 2:40 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Futaba Radios Direct support forum"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10180783

RE: Seagull Models yak 54 90 Maiden
Just got mine buttoned up. Next is the balance check, install the battery, and she's ready. I'll get pics, weight, etc. when I put the wings back on and balance her. Stay tuned... .
Posted on: 12/5/2010 6:38 PM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "Sport Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10178959

RE: Pilot RC 73
[quote]ORIGINAL: GeeBee-RCU ... the Moki footprint is too big for the stock firewall. [/quote] That's the same impression I got from a quick look with the OS BGX the day the kit arrived. This engine also has a square jug; I think the slope of the cowl is a bit too "steep" to cover the top of the jug when the engine is side-mounted. I'm looking forward to your photos. .
Posted on: 12/5/2010 7:22 AM by Author "LSP972" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10177265