Jason 3-Danhakl

My Feedback: (10)

I have been reading the other U-can-do forum that is 234 pages long and really couldn't find the answer I'm looking for. I have a U-can-do .46 that I'm using 9202 Futaba servos all the way around. 1320 mha Ly-po battery and 6 volt regulator on rx. The air plane weighs right at 6 pounds may be 6 pounds 1 ounce depending on what scale I put it on. The question I'm asking is why does everyone say you have to use at least a 80 four stroke to 3-D this airplane? I have an O.S. .50 SX with a tower muffler, 12x4 APC prop that seems to put out more pull than any .80 four banger I've ever seen. I think that the heavier four stroke will kill the wing loading which is what makes the airplane fly so well. I don't have a video yet but this airplane with the OS .50 has more power with a better wing loading than ANY U-can-do with a 4 stroke. Video will be comming this Saturday. Going to have one of my buddies video the flight. Just wondering what some of the ideas you guys were having?
Big Bird

Aero Graphix

My Feedback: (2)

Jason,

Any glow plane that I have ever had has always had a 2 stoke on it. Not sure how a 4 stroke would do in it. I had an OS .46FX a few years back and that engine was a little bad ass! I'm sure your plane will fly fine. It's all the pilot anyway Not sure if Jason has it in him but well find out in the vid!

rclement

My Feedback: (1)

Jason, I've been flying this plane with a Saito 82 for about 2 years and can say that it's a perfect combo for it. For one thing the 4 stroke has a better bottom end and I can run a 14x4W or a 15x4W prop.

asmund

Plus the Saito 82 is just as light as a 46-50 twostroke

georgec

Yeah Jason sounds like another one of those 3D want a bes to me. He prolly got a hole garage full of warbirds. You know take off and turn left thats all HE CAN DO with his YOU CAN DO.[:'(]

beachflier

Well I just looked and the OS is 1.8 oz lighter than the 82.

DENNIS C

My Feedback: (99)

I had a Saito 100 in mine and didn't notice it flying heavy

bzrogers

My Feedback: (7)

I agree with georgec!!!

chitty3d

I think that set up is going to suck. Look, your not going to get the power out of a 2stroke like you would out of a bigger 4 stroke! Just that simple. Let me save you the time and money dude, go with the 4 stroke! Not that it matters, but what percent fuel are you using?

asmund

asmund

My next 3-D plane will actually be the U-cando 46 and it is definately getting a fourstroke. If I had the doogh I would also buy the Saito 100 for it. The Saito 100 is almost 2 oz lighter than my 91, so I know the weight will not be a problem and great power is needed when doing tail touches down on the deck, but as the U-Cando is lighter than my harrier I guess the 91 will be just fine.

But if someone can make the OS 46-50 turn APC 12-4 at 14000 rpm like my MVVS 49 and Magnum xls 52, it will indeed have enough power to pull out of hover

Flying Scotsman 70

i think that the 50 should be okay on the u can do, its just a question of how much power you have for punching outta the hover. If you have the 50 already just stick it on and find out! It might be enough for you even when other guys put 100 4strokes on theirs.

trentmark

My Feedback: (15)

I wouldn't mess with the glow, put a DA50 on it and call it good. You'll have so much excess power you can run a generator off of it and never have to charge your batteries. Also I wouldn't worry about wing loading, it won't be any worse than your warbirds.

Mark

Jack Hyde

My Feedback: (1)

I have a UCD 46, have flown it with YS 63 and OS 91 fs. The plane has a 1000 sq in wing and weighs 6 lbs. I also have an OS 50 that I use on a 4 lb Mojo. The OS 50 produces a little les than 7 lbs thrust, the OS 91 fs produces 10 lbs. I would not fly a 3d plane that weighs 6 lbs with an engine that produces 7 lbs thrust. No matter how good you can fly , you need thrust about 50% greater than the planes weight to be happy - lots of guys fly thrust to weight of 2.
Great Planes should not call the UCD 46 a 46. It is larger and heavier than most 60 size planes. My Mojo 60 has the same wing area and weighs 8 ozs less than the UCD46. I doubt anyone flies a Mojo 60 with a .5 engine of any make. Most use 1.00 4strokes. I am a sissy with only a Saito .91 on mine. It is perfect for me.

asmund

Right on jack[8D] I just pulled on a digitale fish scale with my MVVS 49 on an APC 12-4 and it showed 4.2 kilos, I guess in pounds that would be about 9 pounds. When hovering my Harrier 46 it was fast and strong out of hover, which took place at just past half throttle, but I suspect the OS 46-50`s to be weaker than this. Anyway after flying two different twostrokes of about the same power I finally settled for the 91 fs in my harrier. It just make me look better There`s no such thing as too much power in a 3-D plane, only too much nose weight.(but those Saito`s sure are light)

rclement

My Feedback: (1)

That's my opinion too. I think that Great Planes made a mistake by labeling it that way. I was planning to sell my U Can Do to someone at the field and he wanted to put his 46 AX on it and was surprised when I mentioned that I had a Saito 82 on it. He said "I thought this was a 46?"

stinger40

Yeah, I agree. I have a Saito 1.00 in mine and I have a couple of weights on the tail. It flies GREAT! It floats like it should. [8D] DENNIS C, you forgot to mention the POWER this thing has. Take-Off at half throttle.

georgec

Alright Jason wheres the video. Oh and I see Big Bird in your post and the U-Can-Do ain't no big bird either. This is what you call a big bird. In case you didn't know.

gilbertfh

My Feedback: (5)

He did a good job working everybody up I would love to see the video also.

georgec

Yeah me too.

southern_touch9

My Feedback: (3)

In case you guys didnt notice let me remind you who the orginal poster is.
Jason Danhakl
I think he is well qualified to fly most of us under the bus.

Does it ring a bell?? I know mark trent knows who he is.

georgec

Yeah and if you notice the plane I am holding is Jason's old 35% Carden Edge.

southern_touch9

My Feedback: (3)

It did look strangly simular

gilbertfh

My Feedback: (5)

Call me a noob but I went to his profile and I didn't see anything. There was nothing there. I guess it says a lot for him if he spends more time flying than talking about flying . I can say one thing I saw the views of his profile views going through the roof after you posted that he was somebody of some notoriety.

Jason 3-Danhakl

My Feedback: (10)

Hello again fellow pilots,
First off thank you very much for the kind words. Looks like I promised you guys something that I cannot produce at the time I promised. Before everyone flames me about the statements I made about the 2 stroke vs 4 stroke. I do have an OS .50 SX-h powered U-Can-do. And yes it flat rips up the sky. I have full intention to making a video of the aircraft doing its thing. Promise this is one of the most bad ass aircraft /power plant combo ever.
Here is the reason's the video did not get shot this weekend. Tuesday at 2 pm I slipped on wet polished cement. This resulted in a severe twisted left ankle and hyperextended right wrist. So I was down and out till Friday. Saturday was a fly-in where I was planning on making the video. Well it was blowing 25 mph gusting to 30 mph. So I stayed home and worked on an aircraft to fly at the XFC this year. Today I went out to the fly-in and flew but none of the guys out there had a video camera including me.
I will try the get a video shot this week of my U-Can-Do. Untill then all I can do is give you guys teaser still shots!!
Jason Danhakl

ps. The intend of this thread is to show that just bolting on an over size engine is not always the answer.