Staticxd00d

Great, thank you!

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

I'm still watching the thread. Sorry that I missed your post. For some reason my email program dropped them email notification into the spam folder of my mail program. Welcome to the Brotherhood.

Ken

DMehalko

My Feedback: (42)

Anyone? I'm going to do it

KaP2011

My Feedback: (17)

I would think the US 1000 would be a better candidate for a gasoline engine, you would have more room in the cowl area to work with.

AmishWarlord

My Feedback: (5)

Do you have the ground clearance for the prop that the DLE 20 swings?

The US 60 was designed around an 11" prop.

AmishWarlord

My Feedback: (5)

I'll check the my plans real quick DMehalko.

AmishWarlord

My Feedback: (5)

I think you may have some troble with your plan unless you resort to Stork Legs for your US60.

A 13" Prop is about the best you can do with the stock gear height.

Staticxd00d

No worries! Thank you!

John

smkrcflyer

What if you use an NGH 17cc with a 3 blade prop. Also if you make it a tail drager with the landing gear on the fuse you can pickup another 1/2" prop clearance.

lonestoner

Anyone have a us 1000 kit to sell me ?

Super08

My Feedback: (2)

Just keep doing a Google search and one may show up. That is how I have gotten a few of my classic kits.

N410DC

There is occasionally one for sale on this site's classifieds, and on rcgroups.com.

lonestoner

I am in the process of purchasing a us 1000,what recommendations you all have for me ,? I have been flying the tiger 6o with a Saito 91 for three seasons and I'm ready to up my game,

Calvinman

Hi Lonestoner, I went from the 40 size tiger to the UltraSport 40 The Tiger is a great plane and the US will, as you say up your game. Are you planning on trike, tail dragger, retracts? I am sure there is lots of room in the 1000, but the 40 is a little cramped for the tank, so I put a hatch on the bottom of mine to ease fuel tank installation/maintenance. I put flaps on mine and enjoy playing with them, some days without flaps the US just does not want to stop flying. I think the next wing I build I will do it one piece building it upside down, the dihedral will (for the 40) be 3/4" instead of 1" and should make the build a little easyier.Calvi

lonestoner

The model will be a tail dragger and don't know about flaps yet but I intend to have sick landing strobe lights .

Calvinman

Landing strobes sound cool, as far as landing gear go, I put mine on the fuse rather than the wing, this makes transportation a little easier, but landing a little more....bouncy, the plane lands a few times before settling down, I have to try to keep the tail up after touch down I think. I would like to see a US 1000 fly, maybe if I get a larger vehicle one day I will have to try one also.

N410DC

The wing is a lot easier to transport if you have retracts and a cradle for the fuse. Granted, you have the extra step of extending the retracts after you assemble the plane at the field.

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

Lonestoner:

The US 1000 was originally designed with a 74" wingspan. Great Planes increased the span to 80" for marketing reasons, but they did not change any of the other dimensions. As a result of the longer span, the roll rate was reduced and rudder coordination is necessary to keep the rolls linear, tracking is not as smooth and the tail is more likely to hang in the turns, and with the extra wing area, the 1000 is difficult to land with the engine running. It just floats, and floats, and floats.........

The short span is shown as an option in the kit, and it is the better airplane. The short span version flies like a big Ultra Sport 60, smooth and on rails. The long span version is not as good.

Jim

N410DC

Sounds like they just wanted to make the aircraft IMAA legal.

Calvinman

Yes I agree retracts are the way to go, maybe someday I will do the retracts. Good info on the 1000 wingspan being fudged, it would be a disappointment to build one expecting it to fly like an Ultra.

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

Bingo. You got it in one. IMAA is gone, but I understand some of the big bird events still require 80". If you have to have an 80" Ultra Sport, get a set of US 1000 plans and have them enlarged 10%. Then build the short span version from the enlarged plans. (74" + 10% = 81.4") That way the areas and moments will still be in proper proportion and it will fly right. (A little more room in the engine compartment won't hurt either.)

Jim

KaP2011

My Feedback: (17)

I would start with reading Minnflyer's build thread on the US 60. There is a lot of good info that I'm sure would transition very well to the US 1000. The US 1000 powered with an OS Gemini 160 is on my to do list and I will make the same modifications to it as I did my US 60. My second plane after a trainer was a US 60 and while it was at times a hair raising experience, I wouldn't change a thing. You will love your Ultra Sport.

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/kit-...ld-thread.html

ochsnm00

I wonder if there are any kit cutters that can do a US 1000?

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

If you can get the RCM plans, you should be able to get any of them to cut it. Or even from blown up kit plans, but probably not from the stock kit plans. (Copyright issue.)

Jim

smkrcflyer

There is a ultra sport 1000 bult for sale in Houston and he says he has another one that's not built. Maybe he will sell you the kit or plans and tracings of the die cut parts.

http://houston.craigslist.org/tag/4753178117.html