Lanier Laser 200
11-01-2005, 09:57 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (75)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Aurora,
CO
Posts: 1,471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lanier Laser 200
I'm going to start building one of these within the next month, powered by a OS 160FX, for those of you that have built this plane, how was the build? any area of concern? any mods? Post away pictures as well, I need some ideas for mine.
Joe
Joe
11-03-2005, 08:23 PM
#2
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Dadeville,
AL
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Lanier Laser 200
Joe
Just noticed that you are going to build a Lanier Laser 200. I have built many of the 1/3 version and we love the planes. They build well and, when built light, are great flying planes. I use a 50cc gas engine and they will do anything in the air. CG and servo power are a factor if you are doing freestyle stuff.
Brian
Just noticed that you are going to build a Lanier Laser 200. I have built many of the 1/3 version and we love the planes. They build well and, when built light, are great flying planes. I use a 50cc gas engine and they will do anything in the air. CG and servo power are a factor if you are doing freestyle stuff.
Brian
11-03-2005, 09:14 PM
#3
Senior Member
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (75)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Aurora,
CO
Posts: 1,471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Lanier Laser 200
Wow!, I almost gave up on this thread. I'm not planning on doing 3D maneuvers with this plane, this one will be my introduction to 1/4 scale and above model plane, I just want to learn aerobatics with a bird that I can see, maybe compete in IMAC as a beginners or participate in a IMAA event (should be legal according to the manufacturer). I just wanted opinions and ideas from those who have built this plane.
Joe[8D]
Joe[8D]
11-07-2005, 11:57 PM
#4
Senior Member
My Feedback: (56)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Front Royal,
VA
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Lanier Laser 200
Joe,
I haven't built the Lanier 1/4 scale Laser 200, but have been considering it as a future kit. I think I'd have to replace the plastic turtledeck with a balsa unit, though.
I've flown the Lanier 27% Edge 540 ARF with an OS 1.60FX, and it's a good scale-like combo. My AUW is near 15 lbs with smoke and everything else, so it's quite heavy for the size, but this allows it to fly more scale-like. I'm sure that if you keep your weight to a reasonable level, you'll have great success with this combo!
Good luck and keep us posted of the progress (with pics!)
-Wayne
I haven't built the Lanier 1/4 scale Laser 200, but have been considering it as a future kit. I think I'd have to replace the plastic turtledeck with a balsa unit, though.
I've flown the Lanier 27% Edge 540 ARF with an OS 1.60FX, and it's a good scale-like combo. My AUW is near 15 lbs with smoke and everything else, so it's quite heavy for the size, but this allows it to fly more scale-like. I'm sure that if you keep your weight to a reasonable level, you'll have great success with this combo!
Good luck and keep us posted of the progress (with pics!)
-Wayne
11-08-2005, 01:18 AM
#5
RE: Lanier Laser 200
The 25% Laser builds pretty easy. It's a builders kit. You get a box of sticks, some plans and some foam. Thats it. You get main gear, but all the rest of the hardware is up tp you.
You should keep your servos in the front. Putting servos in the tail will lead to an extremely tail-heavy condition. Don't ask how I figured this one out.[&o] I ended up hacking my servos out of the tail and running pushrods back. Not fun after it's already built and covered.[:@] Engine was an MDS 1.48.
The 160FX will be plenty of power.[X(] It's not a 3D plane, but you stated that you don't want that. It's an excellent introduction to giant scale and a perfect basic plane for IMAC.
Consider a glass cowl. There are 2 lite ply formers that you must glue to the plastic turtledeck. If I was going to build it again, I'd simply glue the formers in and then run a few stringers between them. Then sheet it all with 1/16" balsa. It'll be fragile, but who grabs a plane by the turtledeck? I hated the plastic pieces.
Your gonna need an incidence meter for this kit. You'll need to glue the tail on and then set your wing incidence off the tail. Basically, build it untill you get to the point where it looks like an ARF. Then glue your horiz. stab on. Then set your wings to 0 by leveling the tail and putting an incidence meter on the wings.
If you build it right and don't put any servos in the tail--it will come out under 10 pounds. Thats pretty good for a 25% plane. The only other 25% kit that I have built--and weighed under 10 pounds--was the Aeroworks Edge 540. Of course, the AW kit costs almost twice as much.[&o]
Good luck.
You should keep your servos in the front. Putting servos in the tail will lead to an extremely tail-heavy condition. Don't ask how I figured this one out.[&o] I ended up hacking my servos out of the tail and running pushrods back. Not fun after it's already built and covered.[:@] Engine was an MDS 1.48.
The 160FX will be plenty of power.[X(] It's not a 3D plane, but you stated that you don't want that. It's an excellent introduction to giant scale and a perfect basic plane for IMAC.
Consider a glass cowl. There are 2 lite ply formers that you must glue to the plastic turtledeck. If I was going to build it again, I'd simply glue the formers in and then run a few stringers between them. Then sheet it all with 1/16" balsa. It'll be fragile, but who grabs a plane by the turtledeck? I hated the plastic pieces.
Your gonna need an incidence meter for this kit. You'll need to glue the tail on and then set your wing incidence off the tail. Basically, build it untill you get to the point where it looks like an ARF. Then glue your horiz. stab on. Then set your wings to 0 by leveling the tail and putting an incidence meter on the wings.
If you build it right and don't put any servos in the tail--it will come out under 10 pounds. Thats pretty good for a 25% plane. The only other 25% kit that I have built--and weighed under 10 pounds--was the Aeroworks Edge 540. Of course, the AW kit costs almost twice as much.[&o]
Good luck.
11-08-2005, 01:16 PM
#6
RE: Lanier Laser 200
A friend framed up my Lanier Laser 200 25%, and I finished it. With a 160 Magnum fourstroke up front and servos in the rear, this is one sweet flying plane. Very neutral. Inverted flight requires just a hint of down elevator.
Reinforce the landing gear mounts, just in case. You'll see, the block mounts to the luan sideplates. A bit of bracing during construction might solve problems later.
I didn't like the recommended screws to hold the wings to the fuselage. I bored a hole in the wing root through existing holes in the fuse. (used a long 3/8" aluminum tube with slots cut in the end, for a hole saw.) Then I bought a package of toilet seat bolts, cut the head off the bolts and epoxied the plastic bolts into the foam wings. The nuts that came with the bolts hold the wings on just fine.
If you dislike ABS parts, you won't like the cowl. I still have mine, but it's getting some cracks. I used the ABS turtledeck, and it's okay. Some people like to build their own from sheet or stringers.
Good luck,
Dave Olson
Reinforce the landing gear mounts, just in case. You'll see, the block mounts to the luan sideplates. A bit of bracing during construction might solve problems later.
I didn't like the recommended screws to hold the wings to the fuselage. I bored a hole in the wing root through existing holes in the fuse. (used a long 3/8" aluminum tube with slots cut in the end, for a hole saw.) Then I bought a package of toilet seat bolts, cut the head off the bolts and epoxied the plastic bolts into the foam wings. The nuts that came with the bolts hold the wings on just fine.
If you dislike ABS parts, you won't like the cowl. I still have mine, but it's getting some cracks. I used the ABS turtledeck, and it's okay. Some people like to build their own from sheet or stringers.
Good luck,
Dave Olson
02-20-2006, 08:52 PM
#8
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: georgetown,
TX
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Lanier Laser 200
Glad to find this thread. Here are some Qs for those building the Lanier ¼ scale Laser 200 kit.
First some background. Last year I purchased (at a swap meet) a built-up Lanier Laser 200, built from a kit. I don’t know the builder and neither did the seller. I assumed it was built to spec! It came with engine, servos and batt pack. Added my Rx and went to fly! %$#. This was the worst flying RC plane I have ever flown. It flew extremely tail heavy (pitch sensitive) and I was lucky to get it back on the ground without damage. It was balanced at the wing tube and I thought this was a good starting point. The seller did say that he flew it but that it was too much for him to handle. Needless to say it was a lot for anyone to handle. I moved the cg forward a half-inch and the plane was more manageable. I moved the cg forward another quarter inch and it was flying better. So now my cg is ¾ inch forward of the wing tube but still not flying very good.
I later found that the wing incidence was about ½ degree negative and I changed it to be about one degree positive. Now it is flying much better. In my quest to achieve optimum performance from what is suppose to be a great flying RC plane I have these questions for those who are building the kit version of this plane.
1. Where is the wing tube located relative to the leading edge at the wing root? And
2. What is the angle of incidence of the wing?
This info should be on the plans or in the instruction manual which I do not have.
It is quite possible that the builder of the plane made some changes that are driving me crazy.
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Bob P.
First some background. Last year I purchased (at a swap meet) a built-up Lanier Laser 200, built from a kit. I don’t know the builder and neither did the seller. I assumed it was built to spec! It came with engine, servos and batt pack. Added my Rx and went to fly! %$#. This was the worst flying RC plane I have ever flown. It flew extremely tail heavy (pitch sensitive) and I was lucky to get it back on the ground without damage. It was balanced at the wing tube and I thought this was a good starting point. The seller did say that he flew it but that it was too much for him to handle. Needless to say it was a lot for anyone to handle. I moved the cg forward a half-inch and the plane was more manageable. I moved the cg forward another quarter inch and it was flying better. So now my cg is ¾ inch forward of the wing tube but still not flying very good.
I later found that the wing incidence was about ½ degree negative and I changed it to be about one degree positive. Now it is flying much better. In my quest to achieve optimum performance from what is suppose to be a great flying RC plane I have these questions for those who are building the kit version of this plane.
1. Where is the wing tube located relative to the leading edge at the wing root? And
2. What is the angle of incidence of the wing?
This info should be on the plans or in the instruction manual which I do not have.
It is quite possible that the builder of the plane made some changes that are driving me crazy.
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Bob P.
02-20-2006, 09:32 PM
#9
RE: Lanier Laser 200
Block up the tail untill it reads level on an incidence meter.
Set your wings at 0 degrees. Not positive 1/2 degree or negative a bit. 0
Look for about 2 or 3 degrees right thrust and 2 degrees down thrust on the engine.
When you get the wings set at 0--your balance should be right on the tube. Start out on the front and move back as you get more comfortable.
Set your wings at 0 degrees. Not positive 1/2 degree or negative a bit. 0
Look for about 2 or 3 degrees right thrust and 2 degrees down thrust on the engine.
When you get the wings set at 0--your balance should be right on the tube. Start out on the front and move back as you get more comfortable.
02-20-2006, 11:39 PM
#10
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: georgetown,
TX
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Lanier Laser 200
Rcpilet, thanks for the quick response. Zero degrees it is for wing incidence. I’m still not sure about the location of the wing tube. Is it possible to install the tube in the wrong position? On my plane the center of the tube socket at the root is 5 inches behind the leading edge. When this is projected across the length of the wing it is one inch behind the 25% MAC which is also one inch behind the thickest point of the airfoil. This seems to be a bit unusual.
02-21-2006, 02:08 AM
#11
RE: Lanier Laser 200
Those wing cores come pre-drilled for the sockets and the wing tube.
It would have taken MAJOR----MAJOR work to relocate those wing tubes.
I'd trust that the tubes are in the correct spot.
I could be wrong on the CG being right on the tube.
I'll go downstaris and get my old plans out. I'll post the CG tomorrow.[sm=thumbup.gif]
It would have taken MAJOR----MAJOR work to relocate those wing tubes.
I'd trust that the tubes are in the correct spot.
I could be wrong on the CG being right on the tube.
I'll go downstaris and get my old plans out. I'll post the CG tomorrow.[sm=thumbup.gif]
02-21-2006, 02:18 AM
#12
RE: Lanier Laser 200
My plans show the CG dead center on the tube. Right smack in the middle of the WS ply former on the side of the fuse. The WS former is a ply former on the side of the fuse. It's there to beef up the fuse where the wing tube goes through. It is approx. 1.5" wide and 2" tall. The wing tube should run right through the middle of it.
The CG is right in the middle of that former. Exactly 10" from the BACK of the firewall.
OR--if your firewall location has been modified to accomadate a longer or shorter engine---7" from the FRONT of the F1 former that is in front of the LG plate.
Should be dead center on the tube.
The CG is right in the middle of that former. Exactly 10" from the BACK of the firewall.
OR--if your firewall location has been modified to accomadate a longer or shorter engine---7" from the FRONT of the F1 former that is in front of the LG plate.
Should be dead center on the tube.
02-21-2006, 11:56 AM
#13
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: georgetown,
TX
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Lanier Laser 200
Well I think we found a major difference. My wing tube is 7.5 inches behind the firewall and 4.5 inches behind the F-1 former. Maybe the front end was shortened to accommodate a heaver engine. There is a Saito 120 in this plane. After I reset the wing incidence to zero I will let you know how it flies. Have you flown yours yet?
02-21-2006, 12:09 PM
#14
RE: Lanier Laser 200
Mine didn't last more than 3 seconds.
Darn MDS 148 sucked air and leaned out on maiden take-off. [:@] Got it 30' above the runway and the engine quit.
Pointed the nose down to keep the speed up--but low rates on the elevators wasn't enough to flair it at such a low speed.
SPLAT!!
It weighed 9.5 pounds.[sm=thumbup.gif]
Darn MDS 148 sucked air and leaned out on maiden take-off. [:@] Got it 30' above the runway and the engine quit.
Pointed the nose down to keep the speed up--but low rates on the elevators wasn't enough to flair it at such a low speed.
SPLAT!!
It weighed 9.5 pounds.[sm=thumbup.gif]
02-21-2006, 12:12 PM
#15
RE: Lanier Laser 200
ORIGINAL: bpetrinec
Well I think we found a major difference. My wing tube is 7.5 inches behind the firewall and 4.5 inches behind the F-1 former. Maybe the front end was shortened to accommodate a heaver engine. There is a Saito 120 in this plane. After I reset the wing incidence to zero I will let you know how it flies. Have you flown yours yet?
Well I think we found a major difference. My wing tube is 7.5 inches behind the firewall and 4.5 inches behind the F-1 former. Maybe the front end was shortened to accommodate a heaver engine. There is a Saito 120 in this plane. After I reset the wing incidence to zero I will let you know how it flies. Have you flown yours yet?
I'll bet someone had a really heavy engine on it when it was originally built. They moved the wing forward to compensate.
No matter--it should balance on the wing tube. Doesn't matter how long the fuse is or where the wing is placed on the fuse. It should still balance on the tube.
That means--keep the servos out of the tail. Put a heavy engine on it. Ya might get lucky and balance it without additional weight.
