RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> RC Warbirds and Warplanes >> RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk
Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/3/2005 2:52:51 PM   
Bama


 

Posts: 194
Joined: 1/24/2002
From: Prattville, AL, USA
Status: offline 		kmtranmd,
I am sorry to hear about your buddy's plane. It is good to hear that Hnagar 9 refunded him for it. I hope you have as much good luck with your P-40 as I have had with my planes from them.

smitty,
You are right, I am sure I would have a different outlook if I had a failure. I am sorry to hear that you are one of the unlucky ones. My remarks were for the great number of people making claims without ever having a problem. You are also right to say that it's better safe than sorry. I guess I have been very fortunate not to have any failures with any of the ones that I have assembled. I don't think that 120 has that much more power than the Saito 100, which is recommended, so I don't think that was the problem. You are probably right that there was a defect there. Good luck with your next one. Did H9 treat you right with the plane, or did you even try to get anything from them?

Alan

(in reply to smitty9969)
       Post #: 26

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/4/2005 12:28:13 AM   
ROBERT101


 

Posts: 52
Joined: 1/8/2004
From: PEORIA, AZ, USA
Status: offline 		here are some pics more comming.

Attachments
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize 		Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize 		Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize 		Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize


< Message edited by ROBERT101 -- 4/4/2005 12:31:05 AM >

(in reply to LDM)
       Post #: 27

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/4/2005 12:38:36 AM   
ROBERT101


 

Posts: 52
Joined: 1/8/2004
From: PEORIA, AZ, USA
Status: offline 		kmtranmd:
I have already flown this plane it fies verry well but I set my cg at 3 1/2 inch back I would rather a little nose than tail. a nose heavy plane flies good a tail heavy plane flies once.

(in reply to kmtranmd)
       Post #: 28

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/4/2005 3:51:59 AM   
kmtranmd


 

Posts: 386
Joined: 10/1/2004
From: eugene, OR, USA
Status: offline 		Robert:
I set my CG at 3" per instructions. But yours flew well at 3.5", so you technically got yours set up a little tail heavy??? I got my new Saito 100 run 30 min break in today. I'm still waiting for Oregon rain to stop so I can maiden my plane. I had a moment of weakness the other day, thinking about not showing up at my office and go flying instead because the sun was out.

_____________________________

GI Doc

(in reply to ROBERT101)
       Post #: 29

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/4/2005 4:19:51 AM   
ROBERT101


 

Posts: 52
Joined: 1/8/2004
From: PEORIA, AZ, USA
Status: offline 		at 3 inch it was real tail heavy bad enough it would try to fall off my ballancer. so I added a trueturn spinner, weighted adapter and 2oz lead and it was alittle nose heavy at 3.5 inch and flew great.

(in reply to kmtranmd)
       Post #: 30

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/4/2005 4:53:09 AM   
seanychen



Posts: 2914
Joined: 7/20/2002
From: Canton, MI, USA
Status: offline 		I got the Pro-Spin 3.5" 3-blade aluminum spinner. It weighs 5 oz, which is about how much most aluminum 3.5" spinners, including Tru-turn weigh, short of going to lightened backplate. So I guess with a YS 110 it should balance fine.

_____________________________

E_Total = M*G*H + 1/2 M*V^2
When H=0, all of airplane's velocity becomes crash energy!

(in reply to ROBERT101)
       Post #: 31

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/4/2005 6:45:21 AM   
smitty9969


 

Posts: 85
Joined: 8/10/2004
From: APO, AE, USA
Status: offline 		Bama,
That was also my thinking considering the magnum vs. saito power issue.. I didnt try to contact H9 because of its still a 120 and since I work in the middle east, sending mine back wouldnt be worth the trouble..
Just got the H9 P-40, so Im not one of the flyers bashing H9, I agree with most people that with an ARF you have to do alittle deviating, but I do same thing when I build from plans. So, on a personal note, I dont see the big fuss about doing mods. If its a price issue, on most arf vs. plans, the prices once everything brought is only about $50 bucks give or take.
Can someone help me out here?
Price a quality .60 size corsair kit. Then price all the support equipment it will take to build, ie fuel system, retracts, etc. I could be mistakin on the price difference
It was my own mistake for not beefing up the wing. Just got in a hurry because it is a nice looking model. But with the warhawk, i brought covering when i ordered the plane.

(in reply to ROBERT101)
       Post #: 32

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/4/2005 8:08:04 PM   
ROBERT101


 

Posts: 52
Joined: 1/8/2004
From: PEORIA, AZ, USA
Status: offline 		mike:
this is alittle off topic but I understand you are head of design at horizon hobbies. is there any plans in the making for a 60 size zero in the near future?

(in reply to MMcConville)
       Post #: 33

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/5/2005 4:57:19 AM   
MANFRED



Posts: 765
Joined: 1/26/2002
From: san diego, CA, USA
Status: offline 		That's what we need, another Zero on the market! Sheesh, can't these manufacturers model one of the other great Japanese warbids once in a while? How 'bout a 60 size Tony, Frank, Tojo or George? I would buy any one of these instantly. Adding another Zero to the market would be like adding another Corsair or Mustang to the already saturated ARF market, oh wait, they already did that!

_____________________________

Life is too short to fly ugly planes!

(in reply to ROBERT101)
       Post #: 34

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/11/2005 4:33:57 AM   
mookie1


 

Posts: 74
Joined: 1/7/2004
From: Charleston, SC, USA
Status: offline 		I know this is the wrong forum but I am converting my H9 P-40 to electric with a Hacker motor and Thunder Power Li-Po batteries. I had great success with the P-51 and I don't have to cut the killer cowl.

(in reply to MANFRED)
       Post #: 35

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/12/2005 12:42:10 AM   
LDM


 

Posts: 4777
Joined: 5/29/2003
From: Denver, PA,
Status: offline 		Mookie , let me know if and when you post your results please

_____________________________

LDM

(in reply to mookie1)
       Post #: 36

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/19/2005 2:00:36 AM   
hy flyr


 

Posts: 159
Joined: 9/20/2003
From: Rawlins, WY, USA
Status: offline 		After putting a os91fx on my p-40 I noticed the engine mount holes were askew and the engine mounts weren't even, making the engine slightly cockeyed. Really bugs me. Anybody else have this problem?

_____________________________

AMA #654919
Club SAITO member #523

(in reply to LDM)
       Post #: 37

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/19/2005 2:20:46 AM   
Capt G



Posts: 819
Joined: 1/27/2002
From: NV
Status: offline 		I noticed this too. A little right thrust built in is ok but mine had way too much. I added a couple washers to decrease the amount some. Finally got my Zero going good so I had a chance to make some progress on the P-40. Finished the cockpit today (had to make an instrument panel to replace the cheesy decal). Canopy is glued on and drying now. I was really surprised at how goo the retracts work. I just hooked 'em up and the locked up and down with no real adjustments at all. ran 'em about 15 cycles so far. Now just balance, fuel proof and panel lines and decals and we can see how she flys. Can't wait.

(in reply to hy flyr)
       Post #: 38

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/19/2005 3:01:33 PM   
RCKen



Posts: 13815
Joined: 7/10/2002
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Status: offline 		Just want to take a second and say hi to everybody here in the war birds area. I'm getting ready to build the P-40 for a review and I have a quick question (well, one question now. maybe more later). Has anybody replaced the stock tail wheel assembly? I've been flying for 9 years and I've never liked tail wheels rods that are mounted into the wood of the rudder. I fly off a paved runway that is a little bit short which makes for fast landings sometimes. I like to have a tail wheel that is isolated by a spring when I start trying to control the plane on a fast landing.

If anybody has replaced the tail wheel, what did you replace it with??

Thanks in advance for any help.


_____________________________

The take off is optional, but the landing is MANDATORY!!
AMA # 712539 www.gettingairborne.com
Moderator- Beginner's, Sport Flying, Off-Topic, & AMA Discussions
RCU Community Moderator

(in reply to Capt G)
       Post #: 39

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/20/2005 12:30:39 AM   
kmtranmd


 

Posts: 386
Joined: 10/1/2004
From: eugene, OR, USA
Status: offline 		ARF companies always use cheesy tailwheels for even pricey birds. I always swap them out for the Sullivan tailwheels. They are built better and put less stress on your rudder. Well, I got my H9 P-40 retracts locked up and tilted forward 20 degrees, now wheels are right below the LE where they belong. If this bird flies well tomorrow, I will think about getting rid of the crappy stock retracts and go with the CJM rotating variety. Sierras are nicer but pricey for $250 a pair with nothing else. Robarts are only $140 but I hear they are not duable.

_____________________________

GI Doc

(in reply to RCKen)
       Post #: 40

RE: Hangar 9 P-40 Warhawk - 4/23/2005 11:00:03 PM   
rc_for_me



Posts: 97
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Goodyear, AZ,
Status: offline 		Finished my H9 Warhawk last week and maidened it yesterday. It's a joy to fly. Very smooth and stable at all speeds.

Last night went over all of the linkages, connections, etc for tightness, as one should do after the first couple of flights.
Found that one retract would not lock in down position. Found that the factory installed bell crank hold down screw had backed nearly all the way out. Had to remove plastic wheel well covers and drill access hole to tighten screw. Did so on both sides.

Today I was flying it again with several club members observing. In mid flight on a shallow down line at about 1/3 throttle on my TT .91 4-stroker the port side horizontal stabilizer parted company.

Picked up the wreckage (totally destroyed). Inspected the root of the stabilizer and found it constructed of soft balsa with the grain running parallel to the fuselage.

Now, I've been building and flying for years. In my experience, I have no problem reinforcing where needed or when I expect to push a craft to it's limits. But when I spend $260 for a semi-scale Warbird that I intend on flying in a scale like manner, pieces should not come slinging off during a slow shallow dive.

Further more, I should not have to install flying wires, re