GFoushi

Hello Mick,

So, your A-10 arrvied.... That's great!!! Going to put 160's in it holy cow it will be a rocket ship. Mine flies great on P-80's. I actually was down graded at Top Gun for it flying it to fast.... I can't imagine how fast yours will fly...

mick15

Ha ha, yes I was waiting for that reaction!

Reason 1 they are the only engines I have spare at this time
2 they are not a lot heavier than a P80.
3 I am aware of the dangers and will be very careful with the throttle!

I do like the pics of yours especially the bomb release.

m

mick15

I have agonised over making this post for some while now having threatened Skymaster on numerous accessions over their poor business practices. Recent events have though left me with little choice as I feel it my duty so to do.

1st is a copy of one of many e-mails to them over delivery promises broken.

2nd is another

3rdd is the one that will welcome them back to work on Monday.


“John/Anton, where is my A10? Your site clearly stated at the time of my order “Delivery 7 to 8 weeks� my moneys were in your bank on the 27th June so yesterday was 10 weeks!

I am sure you will want to avoid any unpleasantness on your stand at Jetpower and any negative posts on RCU so; I ask again where is my A10?

Regards, Mick�

"CAN IT REALLY BE BEYOND THE WIT OF A COMPANY THE SIZE AND PERPORTED REPUTATION OF SKYMASTER JETS TO HONOUR IT’S OBLIGATIONS?



On the 27th June this year my payment was in their bank, payment in full for everything available for the Skymaster Jets A10. After some less than encouraging exchanges at Jetpower this year I received the models tracking number.



Shortly after returning home to the UK the three boxes arrived that’s a total of thirteen weeks, six weeks late of the delivery date promised on the pro forma invoice. The model was damaged, the windshield was crushed the tail plane was punctured and the contents of the engine nacelles had been shocked forward causing damage to the moulding from the inside. All this damage in my opinion was as a result of rough treatment by TNT but more from the poor and careless packaging at the factory.



I did e-mail the factory with photos and was promised a new Tail plane and a windshield lens, they also promised to send the stores they had left out of the original shipment. At this point in time, no windshield and no stores coupled with very little communication, for the record I did say I would be prepared to repair the tail plane. I am at this point waiting to fly the model but it needs to be complete and finished for it’s CAA exemption certification. That’s fourteen weeks from funds receipt; (yes that’s correct, over a quarter of a year!!) I think you will agree that’s just not good business. I think the way we are required to do business with the East is just plain wrong. They should accept a ten percent deposit then payment in full on completion of the order. Payment in full negates their need to honour their promises".


Mick


“Unfortunately I will not be requiring the ordnance it has taken you FIFTEEN WEEKS to deliver because, after a very successful and uneventful maiden flight the second flight was anything but!
Two minutes into the flight and coming out of the bottom of a loop the tail plane departed the fuselage! This somewhat understandably resulted in the total loss of the aircraft along with most of the radio gear and both engines.
I will be sending you several pictures, whilst I await your response to this unfortunate incident. I feel at this time compelled to post this in the A10 thread on R/C Universe as I consider this to be a significant safety issue�.

m

Dave Wilshere

Mick

Oh, Colin St said you were due at Baldock today...guess that's why not!

Dave

mick15

Yes Dave that's the reason, I can't at this stage face the van full of wreckage! (don't need any extension leads do you?)

I will be back!

m

Gonzalo38

mick15:

Sorry for your loss. I have also lost an A-10 but mine wasn't related to quality of the product. I was so happy with my plane that actually, I just received my second model.

Are you sure that the tail didn't suffered any damage during shipping ? You said that you have a puncture and I wonder if the internal damage was bigger that what you could realize. I personally think that this model could benefit of some reinforcement of the tail.....

Maybe this plus the usage of bigger turbines than recommended caused this mishap.

Any ideas of what might have been the cause ?

mick15

Thanks for your moral support, I think engine size is something of a distraction; they would surely only present a problem if they were run flat out, which they never were.

The shipping damage was superficial, as photos to follow will support. The damage to the stab was confined to the area of the front 5mm fixing bolts and plywood reinforcing.

The thing that bothers me about this airframe is the 12degree positive tail plane incidence, this means the stab is in constant opposition to other aerodynamic forces, whatever they are. The resultant force is therefore on the front of the stab, which is where mine failed.

m

mick15

It's hardly surprising the tail plane came off, there was BU**ER ALL holding it on!

Anyone out there flying one of these should give their horizontal stab a serious inspection, now.

wojtek

My Feedback: (73)

that wooden mounting board inside the tail should run at least half-span of the stab ! , or be directly supported by a spar or ribs. Its only the fiberglass skin holding the elevator on in that point :\


~V~

GFoushi

Hello Mick,

It makes me sick to see what has happened to your A-10.... Here are a few pictures of the tail section of mine. I have one of the first few off the production line.

Greg

johnls

I feel for you Mick. I'm very sorry for your loss.



John

mick15

.

snobird

My Feedback: (36)

I have over 25 flights on mine with JC Cheetahs... can't see any issues in the stab. but now i getting concerned, any ideas for a fix or beef up.

gonzalom

My Feedback: (1)

Wow with the last picture! It seems to me that both turbines separated on flight from the pods? One flying to one side and the other one crash into the wing and split that wing? Hard to understand why after the stab issue the turbines separation? Or perhaps was the other way around? So sorry Mick.

Gonzalo

mick15

Hi Gonzalo, and others, yes the tail plane definitely separated first then the violent pitch change caused the engines to part company along with one wing half.

It is my understanding that Skymaster are in the process of contacting all owners and agents at this time. They are apparently working on a fix right now.

There is also talk of an airframe replacement in my case although I cannot confirm this as fact right now. I will of course keep this thread up to date as soon as I learn stuff.

m

dubd

Mick, sorry for your loss! My A-10 is still sitting in the box, so hopefully this gets resolve before I start working on it.

Pylon2

So sorry to see that Mick. I know how that feels, I do hope SM come to the table.
Keep your chin up.
Richard.

pilot tw

Hello Mick,

Sorry for your loss, I just ask my staff open the stab for check the stab controution, and we already imform to all customers of A-10 ,

Best Regards

Anton

airspeed917

Well now I'm totally freaked out,, I lost an A10 back in May due to a flame out in one engine, Now I'm ready to maiden my new A10 and have to worry about this issue.
Should I fly it or wait to hear from S/M about a solution to the problem,,, I had two great flights on the last one,, with high G turns and split S's. with no problem?? I have watched you tube videos of guys tearing up the sky with this plane,,

MNModels

Airspeed917,

Yes you are correct that many 3d flights were done with16-17kg turbines with great success, although it was not designed with this in mind. But for safety I suggest all A10 customers with larger than 10kg thrust turbines wait for the instructions to reinforce this area of concern. You can cut the stab as shown by Anton. The reinforcing will be added via this section.

All A10 customers should receive e-mailed instructions soon.

Regards

Morne

Colin Gontier

I am building 2 of these A 10's and thought about this carefully as there are a number of these aircraft flying with no similar issues.

However for peace of mind I decided it was best to go in and reinforce. I initially went in through the front of the stab as Anton's picture above but I felt I could not get as much access as I needed for what I wanted to do. Therefore I went in through the bottom of the stab, cleaned any excess glue that wasn't doing anything and began strengthening.

The important thing in my opinion is to make sure the plate that the mounting screws go in to is well secured to another part of the structure. I achieved this as follows:-

1) Remove any excess glue and abrade all areas of skin and woodwork ready to receive cloth.

2) Apply a layer of laminating resin going over the mounting plate, on to the skin up the spar and into the structure to the left and right.

3) Run a bead of epoxy with micro balloons around all 90 degree edges so there are no voids when applying the cloth.

4) Apply 2 layers of carbon cloth over the mounting plate and all the way up the spar at the rear and the front face of the stab at the front and also inside up to the left and right rib structures. (interestingly the rib structures on the left and right are slightly different on both of mine).

5) When the epoxy is tacky (or after it is dry but abrade first), fit two cross braces running from the main spar forwards over the plate and to the front face. I routed these from epoxy board but ply would be fine. hysol in place.

6) Re-fit the panel cut out from the bottom of the stab with guide tubes for bolts.


This is just the way I have done it. I'm not sure what will be the official instructions from SM but I thought it might be of interest.

mick15

That seems a well thought out fix Colin, the important thing is to make sure the reinforcement extends beyond the line of the fuselage towards the 1st ribs inside the tail plane, this is the area in which mine failed.

Thank you for your sympathies Anton, I look forward to future communication regarding this model. I also congratulate you on your prompt action in regard to this safety issue.

m

ps..............middle picture post 558

snobird

My Feedback: (36)

I did not receive any notice about this issue !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! except what's here on RCU

DelGatoGrande

My Feedback: (23)

Because there isn't any issue when you use the recommended engines like p100rx and be careful when using the upper 12kg limit of thrust.

twin p100=20kg of thrust
twin p160=32kg of thrust = way too much

my 2c

airspeed917

I hope this is an isolated incident, but one has to wonder since it happend while using two P160's if it was overpowered through the loop,, unless the engines were tuned down, the're still putting out well over 30lbs total thrust at half throttle.
In any case having seen what happend and what the inside looks like after Anton posted that picture of it cut open.
I went into the tail yesterday and added pieces of hard wood and balsa and nearly two tubes of hysol so now the ribs on the sides the upper and lower pieces of plywood the screw guide tubes and the rear former are all tied into each other. Better safe than sorry......... Ron