cvedral

It only took 4 years! Not sure if the pic will load lets see.

Stinger3

Good looking covering job. Good luck on your maiden flight.

cvedral

Tommorow morning, Its charged and ready to go!

jrbmoto

Very nice job cvedral! What engine are you running?

-Johnny-

cvedral

A saito 72 4 stroke on the Phaeton II. Let you know how it flys tommorow.
I also have the Phaeton 90 in a kit to start this winter . I have a ys 91 for that.

sean444

Sooo whats the word? How did it fly? I built one last winter but have not flown it yet. Hopefully I'll get enough nerve to fly it soon.

cvedral

It flew great! Really great, as docile as a trainer to as quick as my twist 40. Have to admit the maiden flight nerves got to me and i handed it over to the club expert. Once i calmed down, and honestly not sure i ever will with this plane, it is in my limited experience the best i have. Emotional attachment. This plane was my rehab project from spending 2 months in a coma. I cann't wreck this one it will be a garage queen.

hrrcflyer

Cvedral,

Awesome looking Phaeton and congradulations on your maiden flight!!!.

There's nothing wrong with asking a more experienced flyer maiden your airplane. I'm pretty sure allot of us have done it. Besides, If I had done it on my Ultrastick 120 Lite, chances are I would still have the airplane to fly (ie, I destroyed it on final approach on landing after the maiden flight...[:@])

Good luck with your Phaeton. May it give you many years of enjoyable flying..

cvedral

Thanks for the kind words. I am getting setup to start on its bigger brother the Phaeton 90. Lets see if i can complete that a little quicker.

fcf

Cvedral,

I started building my phaeton II about 9 years ago when I moved to AR. Looking at yours and the stories how it flies I guess I’ll have to finish it that shore is a great covering.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

Both of the Phaeton biplanes are good, easy, smooth and easy to fly models. Just build it with the stock incidences and CG and you will be in Hog Heaven, with a gentle friend added to your hanger of models.

I flew an original Phaeton for a couple of years. It was bone stock. It was also one of the most pleasurable models I've ever built and flown. I wish they would bring back the original kit.


Ed Cregger

Rodney

I have built two of the Phaeton 40's and two of the larger ones. All flew great although I did have to do a bit of adjusting on incidences, probably the result of my bending of the the upper wing support wires. Anyway, once I had the upper wing at about -1.5 degrees with respect to the lower wing, all flew great. In fact, on both my 40 sized ones, they flew upside down as well as right side up with no elevator trim or back stick required. Both had about 3 degrees right thrust in the engine and almost 5 degrees down thrust.

cvedral

A bit to windy but got one flight in on the phaeton this morning. A wind gust got me, tiped it over landing and broke a prop, no big deal. Too hot in the garage in the summer this fall i'll start on the Phaeton 90.

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

-


Thanks for the memory jog.

I did not use the stock incidence on my Phaeton 40 (1982). At the time, Don Lowe wrote in an article that he was experimenting with 1/2 degree negative incidence in the top wing of his biplane and said that the results were encouraging. I incorporated the same 1/2 degree negative incidence in my top wing and the model grooved like a pattern ship. My only complaint of sorts was only having ailerons on the bottom wing. So, I made sure that I had humongous throws available. No problems at all with that arrangement.


Ed Cregger

crashinator

Hey guys, I just ordered the Pheaton II .40 What are people running for engines?
The kit claims up to a .91 4 stroke, what engine size might come out close to balanced, without 4lbs in the tail??

captinjohn

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

Yep, I see the error.

The Phaeton 40 that I built and flew was bone stock EXCEPT for the half degree of negative incidence in the top wing. That did make it fly better than other Phaeton 40's that I had flown.


Ed Cregger

fcf

I having problems with mine it wants to claim. I have added weight to the nose but that did not help. Does anyone have any suggestion? Other than that it fly’s OK. I was thinking of getting another but this time a 90

hrrcflyer

fcf,

Can you give us a little more details? Does it climb faster as you increase airspeed of is the climb more consistent? My first suggestion is check your wing incidence and if that doesn't solve your problem, you may need to decrease the up thrust in your engine.

David

cvedral

Great to see some interest in the Phaetons. A friend is building my Phaeton 90 now, 75% done. I was going to put the Ys91 on it but decieded to go gas. My thoughts are DLE 20 for it to get away from glow.
All this talk of the Phaeton, I will charge the II and take it up tomorrow. Its been sitting since this thread started.
I also just picked up a Aero works Stearman at the local hobbie shop! Its ready to fly and beautiflul! A retirement gift to myself!

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

That would be a nice model (Phaeton 90) for a DLE 20cc engine.

Don't forget including the half degree of negative incidence in the top wing. Don Lowe wrote an article concerning model biplanes some decades ago stating that this trick can make your biplane less zoomy and better grooving, so I built my Phaeton 40 that way. He was right. I had flown a few Phaeton 40 biplanes owned by friends before I built mine. I'm really glad that I used Don Lowe's suggested 1/2 degree of negative incidence. The model was not squirrely at all. In fact, just the opposite. It grooved beautifully and stayed in the groove.


Ed Cregger

ratshooter

I have built a couple of Phaetons in the past. The long ago past. Here a picture of one of them. It has an OS 46SF on it for power. It was sure a good flying plane. I nearly lost it on the maiden flight. I took it to the field assembled. I forgot it only had 4 rubber bands on the top wing. I made a turn and the wing wiggled around. I knew what I did and flew VERY slowly back and landed.

Toysareforkids

My Feedback: (4)

I built a couple of Phaetons, oneback in the late 80's, regret selling it so I build another one in 90, sold it years later, and wish I didn't! Both had OS 40's
I have a Phaeton 1st edition to build now again, and a OS 46 FSR to put on it, so I'll have a Phaeton to fly again!
It would do52 inverted flat spins, before having to pull out! Thats along way up, to start counting!

I added struts to the wings, because I had to put to many rubber bands on it, to keep the wing tips from slapping, and it flew much better with them on.

Pat

oldtyme

Dumb question here............who makes the Phaeton?

NM2K

My Feedback: (14)

My Phaeton 40 was powered by a then new Super Tigre S-40 Bluehead. While it was adequate in power, just, I had to add five ounces of lead to the firewall in order to get it to balance. I used a Kraft radio with KPS-15 servos (heavy). A better choice of engine would have been an Enya .60 series II or III, or any other lightweight (for the day) .60, such as a K&B or Fox non schneurle ported engine. An OS .46F-SR would have been great and much more powerful than the ST S.40 that I did use.

The Phaeton kits were made and sold by Balsa USA.


Ed Cregger