Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Page 257 of 313 FirstFirst ... 157207247255256257258259267307 ... LastLast
Results 6,401 to 6,425 of 7805

  1. #6401

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Amelia, VA
    Posts
    1,994
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver


    ORIGINAL: wjcalhoun

    Luchnia and other who have had the issue with the anti-rotation pins not aligning:

    Is it clear that the AR pins are misplaced in the wing root, or is it possible that the index holes are incorrectly placed in the fuse? May be a small point, but if we can figure it out, it might help GP sort out the QC issues.
    It is the pins. It looks like someone just did not get them straight when they glued them in. The hole may even be crooked. The fuse is fine and looks very nice. It did not even have many wrinkles in it. It is not a big deal to fix the wing pins as you could either remove the pin and make sure the hole is corrected in the wing, then replace the pin or you could file it down to fit. I think it is just the aggravation of this being a new plane and out of the box having rather poor workmanship on the wings - something you don't expect from GP.

    If you are buying a 100 dollar CMP or Nitromodels you would figure to have cross drilled holes, wrong size bolts, misaligned wing pins, servo bays off, etc., but just not something expected from GP product. I can certainly fix my issues, however I decided to let GP know and give them an opportunity to respond to see what they would do.

    Again mine is fixable and to me that is not the question. The question is should I fix it and let it slide? The Revolver is not a hundred dollar plane. It is just a tad under 240 and at that a bargain for the type of flyer it is. If GP does nothing it won't upset me at all, however it could sway my next purchase. At least they have the info and I told them to check this forum out.

  2. #6402
    VictoryRoll's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Norfolk, MA
    Posts
    289
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    Luchnia... ditto... I am in your corner, my friend and totally agree.  These are what is simply described as "Manufacturer's Defects", and NOT the responsibility of the consumer to design, develop and employ fixes for issues/problems that were caused by the factory/manufacturer.

    I am NOT a fan of modifying the wing pins or the fuselage so that the alignment pins fit, for the sake of having them fit.  This is called "incidence" or angle of attack of the wing.  It is not my responsibility to modify, fix, or orrect in any manner whatsoever this defect and I could possibly (and if you know me, definitely, lol) change the angle so that the plane is nonfunctional,  unpredictable and could possibly cost me more than the cost of the ARF itself (i.e. engine, servos, etc, etc).

    If GP was unwilling to take responsibility, I would be upset, but the opposite is true.  They have ONLY been MORE than willing to work with me (and it seems many others), to get this remedied.  It will take time, no doubt, since the USA operation needs to compile all of the issues, verify and then convert the problems/issues and document them in a readable, transferable state to the factory in China.   I give them the slack that is appropriately needed so that this situation, as a whole, is fixed, once and for all.  I trust GP to do that, as that is their history and track record.  Not that I am raising the GP flag and all, but "crap" happens, and it seems the crap has hit the fan on this specific ARF.

    As always, I will keep you informed of my trials & tribulations with this frustrating conundrum.

    Meanwhile, communicate, convey, document and keep on top of your situation and together we will survive and hopefully cause change/improvement.

    I too, am frustrated, but I look for action from GP, not BS or being run in circles.

    Best to all,

    Don


    Club Saito Member #691
    H9 Pulse XT Brotherhood #4


  3. #6403

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Pueblo West, CO
    Posts
    395
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver


    ORIGINAL: Luchnia


    It is the pins. It looks like someone just did not get them straight when they glued them in. The hole may even be crooked. The fuse is fine and looks very nice. It did not even have many wrinkles in it. It is not a big deal to fix the wing pins as you could either remove the pin and make sure the hole is corrected in the wing, then replace the pin or you could file it down to fit. I think it is just the aggravation of this being a new plane and out of the box having rather poor workmanship on the wings - something you don't expect from GP.

    If you are buying a 100 dollar CMP or Nitromodels you would figure to have cross drilled holes, wrong size bolts, misaligned wing pins, servo bays off, etc., but just not something expected from GP product. I can certainly fix my issues, however I decided to let GP know and give them an opportunity to respond to see what they would do.

    Again mine is fixable and to me that is not the question. The question is should I fix it and let it slide? The Revolver is not a hundred dollar plane. It is just a tad under 240 and at that a bargain for the type of flyer it is. If GP does nothing it won't upset me at all, however it could sway my next purchase. At least they have the info and I told them to check this forum out.
    I agree with what you said. From a cheap plane, just bite the bullet and repair it yourself. But relatively speaking, the Revolver is at a price that we should not be having minor problems, much less the major problems that are being reported here.
    Initially i thought, 'why not just make these repairs myself and get it flying?' If I had not had the bad cowl I probably would not have sent anything back. But to get replacement parts that have the same problem, and to hear many people are having the same problem, that is not acceptable. If they claim to be quality airplanes and charge a quality price then we should get quality. Maybe a misaligned pin every now and then, but not as many as I have been reading about, and certainly the servo cutouts should not be different on Any of the wings.

    So my answer to you, if you can afford to wait, is to send it back or ask for replacements, and keep asking until you get something you don't have to repair before you use. Maybe they will begin to see that something is wrong.
    Had I known all the issues I have had beforehand, I would have kept asking for replacements. There is really no excuse for these airplanes to be like this.


    Ultra Sport Brotherhood #73

  4. #6404

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Amelia, VA
    Posts
    1,994
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    ORIGINAL: RoyR

    So my answer to you, if you can afford to wait, is to send it back or ask for replacements, and keep asking until you get something you don't have to repair before you use. Maybe they will begin to see that something is wrong.
    Had I known all the issues I have had beforehand, I would have kept asking for replacements. There is really no excuse for these airplanes to be like this.
    Good post and I do agree. I have plenty of planes and in not in a hurry to build this one. I just want to make sure it is right is why I pulled it out of the box and that thanks to you guys posting these problems on the forums. I could have had this plane for a year or two and then opened it up and found these issues.

    This has reminded me on any new plane purchase to open the box, remove ALL the parts and look them over and even make sure they all fit. I can always put everything back and put it away for later. I mostly bought this Rev 70 because I liked my last one enough to have one on hand.

    If I were building this plane it would be important to me to make sure my customers are getting the product in top condition as I believe GP will do. More than that though is to get to the bottom of why these planes are slipping out with some of this shoddy workmanship. Just the wrinkling alone in the wings has amazed me for a GP product - again maybe expected from some el-cheapo plane, but not GP.

    Since they are coming from different vendors with problems there should be concern about the quality of the shipment. The two we bought came from TH. There could be twenty five or thirty or many more of these out there sitting in boxes with these quality issues.

  5. #6405

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Waterford, Mi/Citrus Springs, Fl
    Posts
    2,749
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    Guess I'm still too used to having to build it if I wanted to fly it. Maybe more forgiving of having to tweak a few things while doing the final assembly? Maybe old age just makes me more forgiving?

    When I got back into the hobby after a 15 year hiatus 5 or 6 years ago, I thought the degree of prefabrication available in ARFs was awesome! When I look at this 200 dollar kit I see extreme value, even if I have to beef up the gear or possibly fit a few other parts I'm not happy with? Doesn't bother me at all?

    I think people should slow down and smell the roses. Asking for perfection in a 200 dollar kit is a bit much. Doubling that price may legitimize this griping? Maybe they should have a second/premium model available with a higher degree of prefab available for those that want the plane assembled in one 4 hour session? As it is, with the work required to straighten out the few known issues taking an extra evening or 2 (including fabing up an alum reinforcement that will make the landing gear mount nearly indestructible) just doesn't seem that much to ask for your return on the investment?

    Consider your options? How many other choices do we have in this price, size and weight range that will handle 20cc's like this plane does? How many of those have replacement parts even available?

    Yes, I do get the fact that it wouldn't take that much to eliminate some of these issues, especially if there were a shorter path to travel from those constructing the kits to those that are doing final assembly. From that standpoint I can see the purpose for all these notes. Otherwise, I think we're beating up on one of the better kits available to us right now? That's me though. FWIW, -Al

  6. #6406

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sandy Springs, GA GA
    Posts
    1,686
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver


    ORIGINAL: ahicks

    Guess I'm still too used to having to build it if I wanted to fly it. Maybe more forgiving of having to tweak a few things while doing the final assembly? Maybe old age just makes me more forgiving?

    When I got back into the hobby after a 15 year hiatus 5 or 6 years ago, I thought the degree of prefabrication available in ARFs was awesome! When I look at this 200 dollar kit I see extreme value, even if I have to beef up the gear or possibly fit a few other parts I'm not happy with? Doesn't bother me at all?

    I think people should slow down and smell the roses. Asking for perfection in a 200 dollar kit is a bit much. Doubling that price may legitimize this griping? Maybe they should have a second/premium model available with a higher degree of prefab available for those that want the plane assembled in one 4 hour session? As it is, with the work required to straighten out the few known issues taking an extra evening or 2 (including fabing up an alum reinforcement that will make the landing gear mount nearly indestructible) just doesn't seem that much to ask for your return on the investment?

    Consider your options? How many other choices do we have in this price, size and weight range that will handle 20cc's like this plane does? How many of those have replacement parts even available?

    Yes, I do get the fact that it wouldn't take that much to eliminate some of these issues, especially if there were a shorter path to travel from those constructing the kits to those that are doing final assembly. From that standpoint I can see the purpose for all these notes. Otherwise, I think we're beating up on one of the better kits available to us right now? That's me though. FWIW, -Al
    +1 I have built at least 100 kit or scratch planes in the last 60 years and correcting things like a tilted anti-rotation pin I do not consider a big deal. I consider the R70 one of the best designed and flying planes I have seen. Yes, I have had to add a bar across the landing gear and beef up the glueing on the inside of the landing gear mount. And, yes I had to file down the anti-rotation pins, iron out wrinkles in the covering, and add glue to the aileron servo boxes. But in the end it was no big deal and I ended up with a great looking and flying plane.

    Bruce
    Bruce L. AMA# 54227
    Ultra Sport Brotherhood #15

  7. #6407

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Whitestone, NY
    Posts
    1,797
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    I love reading when guys who have been building planes for 60 years say that the Revolver is one of the best designed and flying planes they've seen. Makes me feel good! (and even at $240 I still think it's a bargain!)

  8. #6408

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Rocky Mount, NC
    Posts
    109
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    I think most are just saying that even a small effort to increase quality control could yield big results as far as the final "out of the box" condition of these ARF's. Have the work stations spend a few extra seconds to make sure there is enough glue in the places that really need it and maybe pull a few kits out of every 50 or so and check them for obvious defects. Sure we get a pretty good product at a decent price, but I think everyone would actually spend a little more money if they saw a substantial increase in quality. i've been lucky with my two 70's. Really nothing more than a few wrinkles to iron out. I have beefed up my landing gear area after they ripped out once and that really is my only gripe about this aircraft.

  9. #6409

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Pueblo West, CO
    Posts
    395
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    I'm not trying to be a hard case, but I too am an old guy and have been flying RC since the 70s, Built more kits and scratch built than I can remember, so I know how to build. I have bought and assembled my share of ARFs, and have come across good and bad. I would agree with the above statements up to a point, and for me that point was crossed with this Revolution. I had recently purchased a Great Planes Escapade to break into electrics larger than park flyers, and loved the way it went together. The design of the Revolution seemed similar, but the quality was out of control on the bad side. In my "Many" years of building I have never bought an ARF with wrinkles as bad as this one had, even with the very cheap el cheapos. I can also understand some of the alignment pins being off, but not as many as I read about here. (and for me the pins were off on 4 different wings) And for the record I did remove and realign the pins myself, but that is not something you should have to do if buying an ARF. The servo cutouts are also unacceptable. That's why they are built on jigs, so they can all be made the same and all fit.
    Yes, I can accept some slip ups every now and then, but to have this many similar problems with this many different people is a sign that something is slipping through and should be corrected.

    I will also add, I have been flying my Revolution. I corrected all the mistakes myself except the cowl which was too badly damaged to use. So yes, these things can be fixed with a little work. But I can’t understand letting it slide on this kit when there are much less quality and less expensive kits with much less problems than the Revolution.

    I imagine most of you have been buying and driving cars for years also, and how many of you would not take a new car back if the radio didn’t work, or there were large scratches down the paint, or the wheels wobbled, even if you were a master mechanic?
    Ultra Sport Brotherhood #73

  10. #6410

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Amelia, VA
    Posts
    1,994
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver


    ORIGINAL: afjetmech
    I think most are just saying that even a small effort to increase quality control could yield big results as far as the final ''out of the box'' condition of these ARF's.Β* Have the work stations spend a few extra seconds to make sure there is enough glue in the places that really need it and maybe pull a few kits out of every 50 or so and check them for obvious defects. Sure we get a pretty good product at a decent price, but I think everyone would actually spend a little more money if they saw a substantial increase in quality.Β*Β*Β*Β* i've been lucky with my two 70's. Really nothing more than a few wrinkles to iron out.Β* I have beefed up my landing gear area after they ripped out once and that really is my only gripe about this aircraft.
    I see and understand both sides of this issue totally. I have fixed some of the worse ARFs imagineable - one was a PHP Edge 30cc (a total workmanship disaster). I spent hours upon hours fixing the plane because I "got a deal." Granted it flies good now, but I could have just paid more and got a better plane. I don't intend to buy another one, unless it is almost free.

    Something more rides along with the GP name. Could I have fixed the Rev, absolutely. Should I have fixed it? I debated on that question for quite some time and I thought about the quality of GP planes and that is why I decided to let them know. I fly my ARFs with some guys that are builders and have some well built planes. I have had many compliments on the Rev 70 and I could hear them now talking about the wing pins being poorly installed.

    I just received an email from airsupport at GP and they are sending me out a set of wing blanks. I think that is very reasonable as long as the wing blanks are ok. The way I am looking at it is if the wing that is the worse one can be exchanged then I am good-to-go and applaud GP for their great support. I told them I had no problem fixing the other minor issues. GP has a great support team and seems to me they do a fantastic job.

    Here are some more thoughts about this. If you were the manufacturer would you be satisfied that your planes were going out severely wrinkled, cannot put the wings on, and some servo bays so misaligned that you have to do modifications to? Just ponder this for a moment or two. I am always proud of what I build and know GP holds to that standard and I can bet they do not want thier name brought down over some poor quality control issues.

    If there is a chance that a plane will have issues when we buy it one would wonder why there is not a disclaimer on the web site covering such, ex "You may notice on our airframes there may be misaligned wing pins, improperly cut servo bays, and improperly glued landing gear blocks which can result in problems such as the wings won't fit." and so forth?

    Wrinkles are a known with covering as temps change, but faulty build issues is another matter entirely. I am still trying to figure out if not being able to put the wings on is an acceptable issue even if you are a builder. How do you builders view that?

    This in no way implies that the Rev 70 is not a great bargain and a fantastic plane, nor is it a slam against Great Planes.

  11. #6411

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sandy Springs, GA GA
    Posts
    1,686
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    The one thing we all seem to agree on is that the R70 is a good looking and great flying airplane!

    Bruce
    Bruce L. AMA# 54227
    Ultra Sport Brotherhood #15

  12. #6412

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Sydney, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    2
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    Sorry if this has been asked before but just about to start a build of the Rev70, as I only really do relaxed sport flying will a Saito FG17 fly this bird?

  13. #6413

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Whitestone, NY
    Posts
    1,797
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    RoyR - You're talking about a different plane - problem solved! Just kidding... It's "Revolver".

    Kiwi - The DLE 20 is a monster on this plane, so I'd imagine a Saito G17 would be fine for casual flying.

  14. #6414

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Sydney, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    2
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    Thanks Microdon2, I do have a Mintor 22 floating around but I do not want to build a speed demon and I do not have a lot of spare build time to change out all the supplied hardware.

  15. #6415
    VictoryRoll's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Norfolk, MA
    Posts
    289
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver


    ORIGINAL: ahicks

    Guess I'm still too used to having to build it if I wanted to fly it. Maybe more forgiving of having to tweak a few things while doing the final assembly? Maybe old age just makes me more forgiving?

    When I got back into the hobby after a 15 year hiatus 5 or 6 years ago, I thought the degree of prefabrication available in ARFs was awesome! When I look at this 200 dollar kit I see extreme value, even if I have to beef up the gear or possibly fit a few other parts I'm not happy with? Doesn't bother me at all?

    I think people should slow down and smell the roses. Asking for perfection in a 200 dollar kit is a bit much. Doubling that price may legitimize this griping? Maybe they should have a second/premium model available with a higher degree of prefab available for those that want the plane assembled in one 4 hour session? As it is, with the work required to straighten out the few known issues taking an extra evening or 2 (including fabing up an alum reinforcement that will make the landing gear mount nearly indestructible) just doesn't seem that much to ask for your return on the investment?

    Consider your options? How many other choices do we have in this price, size and weight range that will handle 20cc's like this plane does? How many of those have replacement parts even available?

    Yes, I do get the fact that it wouldn't take that much to eliminate some of these issues, especially if there were a shorter path to travel from those constructing the kits to those that are doing final assembly. From that standpoint I can see the purpose for all these notes. Otherwise, I think we're beating up on one of the better kits available to us right now? That's me though. FWIW, -Al


    Al, I think an arguement can be made in a different manner than your statement as it is OK to have to modify, improve or actually repair an ARF before one sets out to do the typical ARF additions, etc, to complete the plane for flight.

    What I mean is the following:

    I DO understand that it is necessary to do various amounts of work//tasks to get an ARF to be flight ready, tasks that we are all aware of , and most of us enjoy doing.... to a point. As I stated, the problems with this beautiful aircraft are manufacturer's defects. I personally believe that they should be eliminated to give the consumer the best possible plane that they are capable of. As far as your point that the plane is an excellent buy and an excellent flyer is not the point, necessarily. The arguement being, would I pay more, say $250. for the same plane, but without ANY issues/problems that are created during maufacturing, not end-user fault(s). So, in my particular beliefs, I feel as though that their (GP's) own Sales & Marketing departments have determined that the correct price point of this plane should be set at $239.... It is not my fault or I have not paid less than the Suggested Mfr.'s Price to get an ARF in the condition one would expect and free of mrf.'s defects. I WOULD pay a bit more to have the same plane deleivered free of these defects. You may feel fine with the $239 price with several hours needed to "repair" the plane to it's "expected" condition. I do not. Time is money. My money/time is better spent either flying or scratch-building, than fixing GP's Mfr.'s lack of QC. That is what is called due-diligence on their part.

    In all due respect, I differ on your feelings/statement, as explained above. BTW, I too am an old-guy... sort of... 58 yrs old.

    I respect your thoughts/position, but $239 bucks is their price and I DO expect to get what I paid for, not their problems. Especially in today's economy where every buck counts.... even my time, and I am sure your time is just as much, if not more valuable than mne.

    Fondest Regards,

    Don


    Club Saito Member #691
    H9 Pulse XT Brotherhood #4


  16. #6416

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Amelia, VA
    Posts
    1,994
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    Just to echo some thoughts that folks have had. We all know we can fix the problems and most buyers probably will because they want to get the plane in the air.

    More importantly is that even if we fix the issues is that we make sure GP is aware of the problems (send photos so they can see the issues) so they can get to the bottom of them. I want to know that if I, or my flying buds, buy another Rev 70 it will be ready for the skies in normal time! [8D]

  17. #6417

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Pueblo West, CO
    Posts
    395
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver


    ORIGINAL: microdon2

    RoyR - You're talking about a different plane - problem solved! Just kidding... It's ''Revolver''.

    Kiwi - The DLE 20 is a monster on this plane, so I'd imagine a Saito G17 would be fine for casual flying.

    Did I do That???? Sorry, My fingers were typing faster than my brain. I really know the name of my plane, honest. It says it on the box, as 'Plane' as day.


    I'll be glad when I can join in on this flying discussion for the R E V O L V E R. I had three quick flights before the gear came off. I was just beginning to get the feel of it. Then after putting the cowl back on after the repair I stripped out the prop adaptor on the motor. (I said I was new with electrics.) It had been hard to get the prop nut on since the first time, and it stripped. I'm waiting for a new one to come in. Also it's been cold and windy here so haven't been flying in a week anyway.

    However I do have a question for you long time Revolver flyers. I set the throws as per instructions for low and high rates. The first flight was low rates as usual. Once it was airborne I had practically No control. Response was lagging and I even thought I had lost radio contact at one point. So I landed. The next day I put high rates on for the fight and it handled nicely. I was still surprised at the slowness of rolls, even on high rates, considering the size and deflection of the ailerons. I was planning on increasing the throws even more but haven't had another flight since.
    Have the rest of you even been able to fly with the low rates as published? I seem to have plenty of speed. Also that cheap electric motor gives it seemingly unlimited vertical climbs, so I think it has enough power. CG is at recommended spot.

    This IS the "R E V O L V E R" I'm talking about. That revolution thing, it just flies like something In my imagination.

    Ultra Sport Brotherhood #73

  18. #6418

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sandy Springs, GA GA
    Posts
    1,686
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    I fly most of the flight on low rates with very good response. I have an OS 95V four stroke in the R70 which gives good performance.

    Bruce
    Bruce L. AMA# 54227
    Ultra Sport Brotherhood #15

  19. #6419

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Whitestone, NY
    Posts
    1,797
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    Same here - I keep it on low rates for sport flying - gives me plenty of response and decent roll rate. Though I do keep the rudder on high rates, for knife-edge and hammer-heads. I only go high rates on ailerons and elevators for flat spins (and that still scares me a little, as I have yet to convert those high rates to be controlled by one toggle). I would not fly sport with this plane on high rates on ailerons or elevators - WAY too reactive. (twice I took off with high rates on the elevator and almost lost it before I switched it back down to low). Maybe your throws could be increased? (not sure what mine are - but they may be greater than the recommended - will have to measure).

  20. #6420

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    League City, TX
    Posts
    854
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    OK, i'll be the dissent here.

    I think the R70 book rates are TAME. Good to have them for when things get TOO exciting, or when your airframe is moving at 90+ mph.

    I like the feel of the plane better on high rates, at usual crusing speeds, and i have a max rates setup beyond high rates that i use for flat spins, KE spins, etc.

    The plane snaps much more cleanly on max rates; even on high rates, snap rolls are a bit lazy compared to any of my Extra aiframes.

    I have my control surfaces on a single 3-position switch - low/high/max. I know many set up separate switches for each axis but i like the security of being able to pull one switch and get the plane to docile mode.

    So Roy, if the rates are tame, dial them up, or alternatively prop the plane up with a 10 pitch prop so that her cruising speed is higher, which will make her more responsive to lower deflection rates.

  21. #6421

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Whitestone, NY
    Posts
    1,797
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    wjc - can you share your high rate throws, in inches? You don't find flying at high rates too twitchy?

  22. #6422

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    League City, TX
    Posts
    854
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    Hi Mike
    I'll measure my throws tonight or tomorrow and post them.
    I do use expo on my control surfaces which mitigates the twitchiness.

    And, now that i am flying at 80-90, sometimes 105+, i use low rates more.

    BIll

  23. #6423

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Whitestone, NY
    Posts
    1,797
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    wjc - cool, thanks. I'll measure mine, too (just out of curiosity). I do think my throws are greater than recommended, too.

    Wondering what would happen if you tried at snap-roll at 105mph? If you DO try it pls be sure to tape it!

  24. #6424
    lopflyers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    1,500
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver

    [X(]Dont, if u like ur plane
    Keep your wings level
    Club Saito Member #693

  25. #6425

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Amelia, VA
    Posts
    1,994
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Larger Revolver


    ORIGINAL: lopflyers

    [X(]Dont, if u like ur plane
    + a billion or so! [X(] [X(] [X(]


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:45 AM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.