Spun

My Feedback: (3)

I've got this plane with a Moki 2.10, and its all stock its just over 13.5 lbs and its awesome. Turning a 20x10 or 20x 8 its a powerhouse. check the winjg/stab incidence, mine was off by 2.5 deg on one wing. Good luck.

Darrinc

My Feedback: (5)

Has anybody made a attempt to really lighten this plane, or has everyone been building it stock?

Although I love flying my big planes, somedays I just don't want to haul the suckers around, so I have been thinking of picking one of these up just because it will be cheap and easy to haul.

Years ago, before our lite engines, batteries and manufactures that cared about weight, I lightened a H9 1/4 Cap down to 12lbs with a brison 2.4.

I still have the engine, and this plane should be a ball at 12lbs or less. My goal is 11lbs, we shall see what we get.

Darrinc

My Feedback: (5)

Just thinking out loud, sounds like it will need all the standard stuff, lose any aluminum, swiss cheese motor box and anything else ply, wrap firewall corners and landing gear plate edges with kevlar, take out any trays or mounting plates and replace with swiss cheesed carbon/nomex plates, dremel everything out or make thinner, only use CA, use carbon tubes, use spiderwire for pull-pull.

Weight is not super critical, although I am still very weight concence, when you get to 35% and above, but a plane this size, weight will make or break it if you want it to fly like the big planes.

This will be fun!!!

As far as setup, Brison 2.4 w/ 450mAh 2-cell Li-poly for ignition, 1200mAh 2-cell Li-Poly for RX, (maybe 900mAh) NO REGULATORS, 5945 on rudder, what ever MG digital servo they have out that is 225 size for elevator and ailerons, HS-55 on throttle, 16oz fuel tank, no pilot, plastic spinner.

Funny that this is a very similar setup to my old Cap, but this stuff will weigh a fraction of the old stuff and be more powerful.

You got to love progress!

3D Joy

And you think you are weight concious, wait until you meet my girlfriend [X(]...
Good luck with your setup although I think it may be over the limit IMO.

BoneDoc

My Feedback: (1)

I personally am not comfortable putting HS55 on the throttle. All that vibration will eventually knock the gear loose. It's not worth loosing the plane over IMHO. But hey, it's free country and different people have different tolerance for what is "comfortable"

Darrinc

My Feedback: (5)

Darrinc

My Feedback: (5)

Sorry guys, been doing stuff like this for years. Come to think about it, I have never used a throttle servo other than the HS-55 in 12 years, never had one fail, and that includes five 33% to 35% planes.

Not to be rude, but I was asking people that have actually experimented and pushed the envelope. The only difference between this setup and the old setup is the lighter batteries (last time I used Li-Ions for rx and this tiny AAA Ni-Metal pack for ign) and the servo's will be digital this time.

I haven't got to see one of these personally, so I was hoping someone could give me the heads up on where to hog out wood and where hogging was too much.

My old Cap is the plane that I taught myself composites on, in it's 3 year life it went through a lot, (a lot of failed composites attempts!!!) people used to walk up to me and tell me they felt bad for my plane.

It was quite the learning experiance though, I once made a landing gear plate that was so strong, that when I hit a groundhog hole, the entire motor ripped off. (ha, ha) It took me a while to learn how to balance strength in a airframe.

I also learned how to balance my setup, I fly three, 15min flights on a typical day, so I sized my batteries accordingly, if I want to fy more, I switch out the batteries. I also size my fuel tank for the time that I fly, no sence in having a half tank everytime I land. These where the things that really made the difference in weight on my planes.

Darrinc

My Feedback: (5)

How are the wings and tail surfaces hinged?

cobia

My Feedback: (30)

Hinge point like robart if you get it down to 12 lbs with 2.4 brison it will fly great.

quietstorm366

My Feedback: (9)

I'm going with a redundant battery backup. My question is where can I mount a second switch? There's not much room. And where should I mount the ingnition switch? Thanks, John

kolarshooter

My Feedback: (1)

Mine flys fine with a Brison 2.4.

You don't need redundant batteries on a plane this small and cheap.

Best of luck!

quietstorm366

My Feedback: (9)

Well, maybe you don't, but the guys at Troymodels told me different. For the cost of the extra parts, I'd rather have it. Thanks

Flying Geezer

My Feedback: (14)

I took a 1/8 inch piece of ply a little longer than the diameter of a lightening hole, and laminated a second piece just slight smaller than the lightening hole to the first piece. I cut the switch mounting holes before I glued the assembly across the lightening hole. The shorter pieces was placed to the inside so that it touched the covering. Then I ironed the covering down to adhere to the assembly. Cut the covering at the mounting holes, and you've got an easy mounting.

Hope this helps,

kolarshooter

My Feedback: (1)

Of course. You're gonna buy their batteries and regulators, right? Besides, they're not the ones flying an unnecessarily heavy plane, you are. The wing area is only about 1,100 square inches. Guys are building these planes with DA-50's and redundant electronics and they come out to 15#. Insane.

1,100 squares is what my Funtana 90 has...even with a Saito 150 it doesn't weigh but 10 pounds. With the 260, we're often seeing 50% more wing loading (at 15#.) This plane would have to fly like a brick.

Just my $.02

ps: I like TBM...their products and their people. I have TBM stuff throughout my 34%er. Whatever you decide, good luck!

LSP972

My Feedback: (13)

By use of the words "would have to", I assume you haven't flown one at this weight.

You're dead wrong. Mine weighs 15.5 pounds with a BME 50, and flies quite good. No, it won't "rocket out of a hover"; I guess, anyway, since I don't do the flip-flop thing. But it damn sure will continue to climb straight up until it gets too small to see what attitude its in. What more do you want?????

One can argue the merits of "redundant electronics" all day long. I don't have a back-up receiver battery, but I do have a Smart-Fly Optical kill System. I don't really know WHY mine weighs so much; the BME 50 is supposed to be one of the lightest 50cc engines around. I really don't care. The model flies beautifully, and lands better than any trainer I've handled. If that constitutes a flying brick in your world, so be it.

You want to talk insane? Not everybody is thrilled and enthralled with harriers, waterfalls, touching the rudder, whatever. Some of us actually prefer a heavier model, because it doesn't get tossed around like a leaf in wind.

Enjoy your flying style and super-lightweight models. But try being less narrow-minded, eh?

kolarshooter

My Feedback: (1)

Hi Steve,

Thanks for responding. I figured you might chime in..and you did!

I wrote that it "would have to..." because I flew mine with a Saito 180 (11.5#) then with the Brison (13.5#) and in my opinion, the plane flew much "better" when it was lighter. You might disagree. It's all personal preference and flying style, I guess...you might like how scale fighters fly, too. If you fly in a lot of wind, you might want an unusually heavy aerobatic plane. It's all good...just a preference.

Some people (I would be inclined to say "most people" ) would prefer flying a smallish plane with less than 25oz/ft2 wingloading. Yours is 32.2 oz/ft2!.

I don't remember...have you ever flown your plane at a lighter weight? Maybe before the BME50? Have you had the chance to compare the two? Have you flown it heavy, AND light? I have.

Also, you imply that I am a flying 3D with this plane. You are mistaken, sir. I bought mine for IMAC stuff. This plane is not set up for 3D, and frankly I think this ARF is ill-suited to 3D flying.

Incidentally, You omitted the MOST important aspect of my post when you selectively quoted me... " Just my $.02"
You'll notice that I NEVER SAID THAT ANYONE WAS RIGHT OR WRONG, I just offered an opinion and reiterated when I signed-off with the $.02 line. Conversely, you tell me, rather imperically, that I am "Dead Wrong." Sounds kinda judgemental, huh?

Enjoy your flying style and super-heavyweight models. But try being less narrow-minded, eh?

quietstorm366

My Feedback: (9)

I've lightened the plane with a CF wing tube, CF tailwheel. There are only 6 batteries, and their very light. How many batteries do you have in your plane? Plus, I may want it a little heavy. No one has ever told me that their light plane flys better in a gusty wind. But I do know for a fact that a heaver plane will fly good in a stiff breeze. What ever floats your boat. Just my .02 worth. And if you need to address this topic more, call Gene at TBM.

kolarshooter

My Feedback: (1)

CF tube...cool. My ARF came with a CF tailwheel, but I don't care for the quality of the unit. If you replaced it, you did a good thing.

6 batteries? I might not understand your question. Mine has a 1200 LiPo with TBM regulator for the ignition, and a 2000ish mAh NiCd (5 cell) for the radio.[/quote]

Agreed...to a point. I flew at the IMAC contest in Vegas last weekend and saw two GP Patty Wagstaffs fall out of the sky in big winds. One tipstalled on final, and the other...well, it tipstalled but not on final. These planes were both similarly (wing)loaded, both with DA-50's, both with way too much weight on the wings. A third plane went down, but that one was a larger Yak-55, and it experienced some sort of radio faliure. A fellow at our field lost his (heavy) PW in a procedural turn that was a little too tight and a little too low. He's now flying a 50CC size plane with his 50CC engine.

$.02 worth...these forums are all about experiences and opinions. Thanks for sharing yours and reading mine in the spirit in which it was written.

Unnecessary, but thanks.

LSP972

My Feedback: (13)

No more so than your post; which is what I responded to.

When I had the OS 1.60 on it, the airplane was just over 13 pounds. So, yes, I have flown it "both ways". The only real difference I note is the greatly increased acceleration and vertical provided by the gas engine. It certainly doesn't "feel" any heavier now. Of course, 13 pounds would appear to be heavy by your standards. As for the wingloading figures... well, I too used to put a lot of stock in that. Now, I dunno. I have flown scale warbirds with less wingloading than 32 oz. that were absolute PIGs. This Extra has no bad habits, AT ALL, that I've found yet.

No, I have no love for scale fighters, etc. Too much complexity (retracts, etc.) and most of the larger ones I've flown, as noted above, were less than fun to fly. And I had a 68" EF Yak; nine pounds wet. It was a joy on a calm day; in wind, it was a squirrel.

So I won't fight you for the light planes. BTW, Im curious... do your planes have spinners and wheel pants???

kolarshooter

My Feedback: (1)

At least you're not "dead wrong" like I am.

yup.

quietstorm366

My Feedback: (9)

I have 2 batteries for the receiver, 2 for the Ing, two for back up. That 6 batteries total. There are only 2 batteries per pack, at 2800mah/7.4v. I think that may save a little weight. I didn't come here to this forum to receive B.S. about my setup. I only asked a question, when you put your .02cents worth in. TBM is just up the road from me, maybe I should have asked them instead. But I thought I ask the
forum some questions. I didn't think it would turn out to be a war of who's done what and how it should be. I didn't think that's what this forum was for. Answers like yours make new person feel stupid, and your's is only a subjective OPINION. Thanks for nothing. And please do me a favor, don't respond to this reply. I can do without it. Safe Flying

kolarshooter

My Feedback: (1)

John,

I went back and re-read each of my postings. I am at a loss trying to figure out your animosity towards me. Steve and I have debated the weight issue before, and our discussion here was, to me, an extension of that debate. Our exchanges were good natured, and punctuated by winks and grins, and no offense was intended or taken by me, and I hope he feels the same about it. His needs (a plane which flys well in the wind) and preferences are obviously different from mine, and that's OK. I hold no grudge and I hope he doesn't either...we were having a discussion.

Your last post (to which I wasn't going to respond) made me feel bad. I thought that maybe I had written something thoughtless in response to one of your postings. I have re-read my posts to you and have not found anything for you to be upset about. I haven't found anything I wrote to you which should make you feel "stupid", and I never shelled-out any "BS" about your set-up.

Interestingly enough, I went and read your post in [link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=4109066]this forum[/link] where Mike McConnville tell you guys to "keep it light" and to skip the redundant batteries. His advice to you is the same as mine, yet I'm the *****hole. I believe he designed this airplane.

Maybe you could re-read that thread (it's just one page long) and come back here and tell me how wrong I am.

Finally, my postings to you were meant to be helpfull, not hurtfull. Unless you misread or missunderstood my postings to you, I still can't see why you are offended.

If you still need help on how to cut the cowl, or how to install the switches, just ask. One more bit of advice...unless they've changed the kit, the stab is a mess on this plane. You might consider gluing it into place. That's what a lot of the guys are doing.

I hope you enjoy the plane!

Here are a few pics of mine..

Tor

WOW [X(] 6 battery packs in a plane this size? Where du you keep them??

Tor

Mine is 14 lbs 8 oz with a Evolution 45 and Emcotec, havn't flow it yet - but compared to the WH Edge a flying buddy mine has at 18 lbs, I think it will be light as a feather. What's your altitude??´


Funtana 90 is hardly a good reference.... not the ordinary wing area for a model it's size.

BoneDoc

My Feedback: (1)

WH edge has more wing area also, so it'll fly differently.