t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

Sorry for no updates, I wasn't able to even get on rcu for a couple days due to "500 internal server error" and I still can't load pictures. I wasn't able to get much done to it yesterday because I was gone about all day but the wing is near complete, the fuselage is all framed up the firewall,landing gear mount and wing mount are glued in and I'll hopefully finish the fuse within the next couple days. Ill keep trying to upload pictures but no luck so far. It finally worked! Here are a few more pictures, ive gotten further than this and ill upload more pictures soon.

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

Here's some more, Im about to start on gluing the stab and fin on and then make the turtle deck.

DGrant

My Feedback: (4)

Nice work! I always like seeing a clean frame job.. very cool. Double check the sub-crutch formers above the landing-gear plate. I found those to be thin.. and wished I would have put 1/4" in there when building.. as that area did fail on me, the sub-crutch and formers just basically folded. No big deal, as it was clean internal break.. that I simply added another layer to the crutches and formers down there.. if that makes sense.. even some tri-stock of some sort might not be a bad idea there.. as it was the only area that was easily comprimised.

Stalls are very typical aerobat.. straight and clean drop. It doesn't seem to like 3D type stuff.. as the plane likes to be flown a bit faster then a foamy for sure.. Its not big at all on floating. Still it can just cruise along level at a quarter throttle all day.. which is probably about landing speed... It can literally be flown right down to the runway.. shutting the engine down about a foot off the ground. A key to all that is keeping enough power pulling it along.. with that they fly very smoothly.

These planes absolutely shine in bigger aerobatic manuevers.. for sure. Loops are as big as the sky.. Hammerheads all day long... rolling circles.. knife-edge..

I dont know if I mentioned.. I have a Magnum .91 4-stroke. Plenty of power.. It has unlimited vert .. so vertical manuevers are well within the realm. Do yourself a favor and install flying-wires if you "up engine" this plane. Sullivan makes a great set for these.. I found using the 91 could create flutter/vibration/etc.. the flying-wires shore up the tail well.. and you can install mounting points within your frame(hor/vert stabs) if you like.. A few strips of c/f tape along the LE stab areas can't hurt either. I did not do that on the first 300 I built.. and lost it .. because of that.. the second one I did all that(and maybe more).. the plane is still in great shape.. and even its taken a few hits/crashes... with no damage to the points I'd already shored up. It sounds like alot.. maybe.. this is a plane I flew the heck out of for 5yrs or more.. It taught me alot.. and was/is a great stepping stone into larger aerobats.. and thats just what I did..

Keep up the great work man.. can't wait to see this plane.

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

Thanks for the reply its helpful, I did brace the landing gear a bit but I might a little more. Sorry for no updates iv'e kinda taken a break for a few days but i'm going to get back too it soon. Do you think flying wires are really needed if I put a smaller engine on mine? Like a .46 2 stroke or a .70 4 stroke?

52larry52

My Feedback: (1)

t-max, DGrant gave you all good advice. You can never make the landing gear mount area "too strong"! A little extra well placed wood in that area is smart, and the small amount of additional weight is not a factor as it's very near the C/G. You're doing a nice job, keep it up. What are you going to use for covering? I would steer you away from Monokote and suggest using Ultracote. Have you seen "K.C.'s" fax T-28 that I recovered for him? That's Ultracote! I'am pleased to see you doing so well in both your flying and taking on a kit build. Good job! Regards, 52larry52

Lone Star Charles

Nice looking job. I completed the GP Extra 300s .60 size and yours seems very similar.

Regarding the pictures that you have posted of the vertical fin and rudder - suggest that you double check the construction ofthe trailing edge of the fin as well as the leading edge of the rudder before you go much further. I suspect that those pieces of balsa should extend to the bottom of the fuselage as one piece.

Love seeing the pictures.

Charles

UltimateFlyer120

My Feedback: (5)

I'm building the same kit and about the same place T-max97 is on his build. The elevator on the side view of the blue print is tricky. I built my vertical fin and rudder with a long post that Lone Star Charles talks about. Good build on the kit!

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

Yes I was there when he flew it for the first time since you recovered it, it looked great! Iv'e used both ultracote and monokote, the ultracote seems easier to apply but maybe not as tough, why do you suggest it? I liked it, just curious.

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

Lol yes I saw that and it has been fixed, it was hard to tell from the plans. Good eye though.

J.Paul Saure

Weight does make a lot of difference on this airplane.
Mine is very light even with a Saito125, it has a very nice landing speed, not like some overweight examples I've seen at my club.

I don't recommend reinforcing anything on this kit. It is very strong as is.
It is an aerobatic plane and not a flying SUV. If you break the landing gear, then you are landing too hard...

I also don't recommend enlarging the control surfaces. Mine does wild lomcevacks with the stock surfaces and suggested control throws and CG! http://youtu.be/Vy4IXccsMv4

Saludos,
Jean Paul

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

Wow nice video! I did reinforce the landing gear some.
The only problem I have is the counter balance on the rudder breaks off way to easy due to the grain direction of the 1/4-1/2 balsa stick it's glued to but all the sticks in the kit have about the same grain pattern, Should I get a basswood stick to replace it or what?

J.Paul Saure

I have never broken the rudder counterbalance.
Besides, if you reinforce it, you may tear the whole rudder off if you hit it hard...

Same thing with the landing gear, I prefer a clean break in case of a bad landing... ...that's better than having "half" of the fuse still attached to the landing gear!

Think of a structural "circuit breaker"...

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

Hmm, it breaks off fairly easily for me and it seems like it would be under alot a pressure during flight. Lol yeah I guess, I thought about using nylon bolts on the landing gear in case of a bad landing/crash but I ended up just using the ones supplied.

UltimateFlyer120

My Feedback: (5)

The counter balance has a 1/4x1/8 stick running across the top. My counter balance is stiff. It should take alot of pressure.

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

I must have been half asleep when I built the rudder because I didn't do that either [&:], everything else is correctly built though

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

Im at the same place except I haven't sheeted the turtle deck yet. Looks good!

52larry52

My Feedback: (1)

t-max, I suggested the Ultracote because I found it to be easier to get good results and seems to hold a non wrinkled finish better than the Monocrap. I used to be a "monocrap guy" but after covering K C's plane with Ultracote I am sold on it. Use what ever you want to try so you know for yourself what works best. BTY, I also have covered a biplane with Towerkote and liked it. It went on nice, shrunk up well, and has held up without wrinkling (low price too). Color selection is limited with Towerkote however, just basic colors. Keep pluging along, your doing fine.

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

Ok good to know, I also found it easier to get good results and I think it's a little lighter too. Thanks it's my first kit build so I'm learning but I'm enjoying it and I plan on building another plane sometime. It gives me lots of stuff to do since I sold my ps3's to buy planes lol.

UltimateFlyer120

My Feedback: (5)

I think Ultracote is easier too. The cowl and wheel pants need paint to match the covering. LusterKote matches MonoKote colors and tower sells the spray paint. The only reason I am using MonoKote is for the easy matching colors.

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

I won't be using the pants because we have a grass runway but I will use the cowl of course. Ill research a little and see what people are using.

EDIT- hanger 9 sells ultracote paint.

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

I still haven't started back on it yet but here are a couple pictures of it's current state.

J.Paul Saure

Oops now I noticed yours is a .40 Extra, I have the .60...

DGrant

My Feedback: (4)

There isn't alot of significant size difference between the .40 and .60 size. Another club member had the .60 size.. and you have to get pretty close to realize they're different sizes... The first time I saw the .60 size I had to look at it for a while... even sitting next to my slightly smaller Extra... and this is even after building 2 .40size planes..

I've always liked the way this plane flies... its always felt bigger then it is... and still fits inside a car(although I don't drive a car..haha..).. it takes up little space storing it also.. just take the wing off and it will sit out of the way in any corner or shelf.

Keep up the good work on that build.. and about the wires.. I don't know that would go without them myself.. once bitten, twice shy in my case.. but.. whatever you do.. take it easy on shaping the stabs leading-edge.. don't take off much if any material.. and only flat-sand what you need to make it true.. You want that as stiff as possible.. regardless of what engine you run...

Although the .46 won't have the vibes and torque the .91 does.. I'm sure theres a reason they spec it at a .46 or so 2-stroke.. and if I'm not mistaken.. the max 4-stroke they spec is a .70. I'm a glutten for punishment though(at least when I built these Extra's).. I imagine if GreatPlanes says "good to go" with a .46 you'd be OK without them.. probably not worth re-inventing the wheel.. but they didn't say "good to go" for the .91.. so I had to re-invent it if I wanted one with a .91.. and I don't think I'd change a thing..

Regardless.. have fun and learn.. that's a great kit to learn with.. and you'll have a very nice flying model when done.

t-max97

My Feedback: (9)

Hmm, where did yours break at? I would prefer not to use flying wires just for appearance really but it's not a big deal. I almost got the .60 size but I thought Id rather keep learning on a little smaller planes and once Im comfortable flying highly aerobatic planes such as the extra I would like something in the 30cc range.

DGrant

My Feedback: (4)

The horizontal stab broke due to flutter... about 1" out, both sides at same time. It was the leading edge that failed.. I'm sure. Upon breaking, the stab(both sides) just folded back, creating a yard dart. It happened very quickly.. and yes.. I'm sure I was hammering on the throttle, the plane was/is pretty fast when flown as such. It happened so quickly I didn't realize why the plane went down. I actually picked up all the pieces, bagged them and took them home to my garage and did an NTSB type of investigation, spreading the pieces out/around in order on the garage floor..

When I got to the rear empenage, I noticed the hor.stabs were folded back... hmm.. interesting I said.. for a plane that upon crashing everything went forward.. the stabs were folded back. As I further inspected, I was able to simply kind of snap them back into position(as much as one can when its already destroyed).... still attached by wood splinters and covering... and as I "unfolded" them, it all just sort of fell back into place(again..as much as something can that was destroyed).. In my mind, thats the only thing that brought that plane down that day.. everything was operating as it should... and I was wringing it out about that point.. as it had only about 10 flights on it. I did what any true modeler would do though... I ordered another identical kit that day.. and built the second one in a few weeks time.

The engine and the front of the plane was disintegrated.. and it left about a 4" hole in the hard ground. A few servos were broke.. I don't think I used anything from that first Extra, other then the lesson I learned the hard way..

I'm not going to say this plane needs them if built per plans and specs engine wise.. I would say this plane needs something like that if "up engined" for sure. As I mentioned though, my second Extra(even covered identical to the first one) is still with me, after 12yrs... and probably a few hundred flights.. its a well flown plane.

I think you're doing fine, and will have a nice plane when said and done.. you're doing your homework.. can't go wrong there.. have a great day.