RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [RC Airplanes] >> RC Warbirds and Warplanes



Message

John Redman -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/6/2007 9:07:55 PM)

A couple of Saito .56's would be more than enough power for the model. The .72's would be extreme overkill!!!



LDM -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/7/2007 5:05:41 AM)

At $369 that is a great deal , ok Santa /Wifey are you listening ?? Looks like a trip to the jewelry store is needed , the bartering is about to begin [:D]



kahloq -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/7/2007 6:05:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Redman

A couple of Saito .56's would be more than enough power for the model. The .72's would be extreme overkill!!!


Although it may seem overkill when both motors are running, the purpose is in case of an engine out, one motor can fly the plane with rudder input. Theres no way a saito 56 would carry a 13.5 - 15 pound plane on its own. I highly doubt the evo .36 2 strokes would fair much better then a saito 56 relative to the weight with only one motor running.



LDM -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/7/2007 12:48:57 PM)

if the engine goes out why not kill the other one and glide the baby in [X(], after all you have a big crew on board to fly that thing [:D]



John Redman -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/7/2007 2:30:28 PM)

The Saito or Evo would carry the bird arond to get it on the ground. You would be surprised how well you could maintain altitude with either the .56. or .36 running if you were down to one enigne.

Twins are heavy enough to start with. Bigger motors equals more weight which in turn will eat you upif a motor quits. Flown too many twins in my day to want a bigger motor just because one might quit. Get the motors set right and you will be fine. People woory way to much about syncing motors on twins and such. Not necessary, set the rpm with the needle and adjust the top end rpms with travel adjust.



kahloq -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/7/2007 4:46:29 PM)

Yes bigger motors equals more weight, but in the case of a saito 56 compared to a saito 72, its only 1.5oz difference, but the available power is dramatically different. Having too much power is not a problem, having not enough is, but, with a high power motor, the yaw might overtake the rudders ability to compensate on one motor.

Now as far as not worrying about an engine out, well, yes, get the engines running rock solid before flying. But, with twins, an engine out is not a matter of IF, but when it will happen.



CorsairJock -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/7/2007 8:43:17 PM)

OK how about this for the 'it needs more power' crowd (which certainly does NOT include me):
Saito has introduced a new engine: the .62 which as I understand it has the same dimensions and weight as the .56. Problem solved?

BTW: my wife has offered to get me this ARF for X-mas (ARF only, I would have to supply retracts and the rest). I'm thinking real hard about it, especially since I've done a little reseach and realized that a Dolittle Raider could be made from this with very little effort. Leave off the side turrents, the side mounted guns, and the tail gunner canopy,then move the top turrent aft and that pretty well convets it to a B-25B as flown by the raiders.

As for power: altho I am an avid electric flyer and even have a pair of AXIs and speed controllers that would probably work: I would really like to hear a pair of 4 strokes on it. I already have 1 NIB Saito .56, so it would be a matter of picking up a second one.

I would also attempt to lighten it up: maybe having a completed wieght of 12 lbs. Most of the H-9 motor mounts are heavy (metal), and I usually replace them with lighter, composite ones. There are some pretty strong servos available now that are about 1 oz, and affordable as well ($20 or less). Here and there, I am hoping I can shave a pound or more off.

If an engine quits on me: I plan on landing ASAP, even if its with the wheels up in a hayfield. I have seen way too many twins spin in and crash after loosing an engine. Not having enough power was the least of their problems, in fact: having too much on the good engine may have contributed to the crashes.



Corsair 29 -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/7/2007 11:08:26 PM)

Excellent choice on the "Bat", and the testimony that Cpl Jacob DeShazer gives is incredible!!



CorsairJock -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/7/2007 11:35:36 PM)

Uh actually: I decided not to do "Bat", nor even "Ruptured Duck". Fact is: I found out after the previous post that a Kalamazoo native was co-pilot of the number 14 raider (14th to 'launch' from the Hornet).
Unfortunately, he passed away just a few months ago (June, 2007).

As Kalamazoo (MI) is my home town also, I decided that his plane will be my model, which will have the number "02297". The co-pilot's name: Lt. Jack A. Sims

http://www.doolittleraid.com/crews.htm##14

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1849578/posts



kahloq -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/8/2007 12:24:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CorsairJock

OK how about this for the 'it needs more power' crowd (which certainly does NOT include me):
Saito has introduced a new engine: the .62 which as I understand it has the same dimensions and weight as the .56. Problem solved?

BTW: my wife has offered to get me this ARF for X-mas (ARF only, I would have to supply retracts and the rest). I'm thinking real hard about it, especially since I've done a little reseach and realized that a Dolittle Raider could be made from this with very little effort. Leave off the side turrents, the side mounted guns, and the tail gunner canopy,then move the top turrent aft and that pretty well convets it to a B-25B as flown by the raiders.

As for power: altho I am an avid electric flyer and even have a pair of AXIs and speed controllers that would probably work: I would really like to hear a pair of 4 strokes on it. I already have 1 NIB Saito .56, so it would be a matter of picking up a second one.



Since the wife said she would get you one...well.. hot damn, better do it before she changes her mind :)
Two operational saito .56s will fly the plane scale. So dont worry about it. The .62 is not much difference in power so its pointless to put them in unless someone already had them on hand as compared to the 56.
The reason for the larger motor, such as a siato 72, aside from the ability to fly the plane and set up for a controlled landing (and possibly a go-around if necessary), would be to swing larger more scale props.

As a reference, I built my son a H9 PTS P-51 and put the saito 56 in it. It flies well with an 11x8 MAS 2-blade prop. Power off and the plane will still glide forever(but still has the droops on the wings).

I do highly recommend though, no matter what fuel engine choice you go with, that you put onboard glow on both motors.

Im not going to argue the more power vs just enough power debate. There's two schools of thought on this and both sides have merit



CorsairJock -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/8/2007 3:17:31 AM)

Altho I have a NIB Saito .56 as stated earlier, I was also considering a pair of Saito .40s. I have one, and used it with great success in a Global Corsair, swinging a 3 blade 10 x 6. I know what these engines are capable of, and how LIGHT they are (about 11 oz with muffler!).

HOWEVER: it appears that sales of Saito engines with a dispalcement of less than .56 cu. in are non-existant anymore, or at least inthe US. Horizon does not list them, nor any other supplier that I could find (online).

This means that not only is the .40 no longer available, but neither is the .30 ('the .30 that thinks it's a .40'). Altho the .30 was not a consideration for this aircraft, I think the .40 could do as well as the .36 2 stroke.



kahloq -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/8/2007 5:11:10 AM)

Be careful with going too lite on the motors or you'll end up having to add dead nose weight to get the plane to balance. The motors sit in front of the CG so they do affect the balance. Some of the KMP B-25 builders ended up either using heavier motors(like saito 91's or even saito 100's) to avoid adding dead nose weight.
The H9 B-25 will be similar to some degree simply due to the design of the plane itself. But, H9 may have done some "sport scale" modifications and deviated a little from actual scale to affect a more generous layout difference relative to motor weight since its designed for both electrics and glow from the start.



shaolintiger -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/11/2007 4:06:17 PM)

Hey John Redman and bbrundle ,
Curious thing, I just purchased my pre-ordered Hanagar 9 B-25 from my LHS for about $370 or so.
When I opened up the Nacelle boxes I found to my amazement and joyful surprise that you guys saved me some time and money and already mounted 2 Evolution 36NTs into the plane.

I am very pleased with this discovery. What I want to know, Is this a special promotion to those who pre-reserved the B-25,
Is this a mistake or Are you Horizon Hobby Guys just Coooler that all Heck?

Sorry for the anonymity of my screen name and false location but I am trying to protect my LHS and the sales people if this was indeed some mistake on their part.

-Shaolintiger



bbrundle -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/11/2007 5:57:49 PM)

This was not a mistake on anyones part. Your Hobby store was one of over 300 to receive the airframe with two Evolution 36NT engines already installed. We feel very strongly that this combination of airframe and engine works extremely well and so we sent these out as a special thank you to you and our dealers. Now take the money that you would have spent on engines and have your LHS order up the special Robart Retracts from Horizon and enjoy your new B-25J Mitchell.

Thanks again






minlwintun -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/11/2007 6:59:37 PM)

Bill,
Thanks for clearing that up. This is my account under my real name minlwintun(aka Shaolintiger)
Thank you guys for throwing in those Evolution 36NTs engines. I'll be sure to pick up those Robart retracts now!
Horizon Hobbies and Hanagar 9 totally Rock![:D]

Also thanks to you guys for not putting the Nose Art Gal decal on the plane straight out of the box. I love to customize my ARFs so they don't look like others and I have a different lady I wanted on the nose of my B-25.

Now I can sit out the long cold winter happily working on the Mitchell. I'm thinking I'll name her Double Trouble...
-Min



wildswan -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/11/2007 8:57:07 PM)

Bill,

Are us guys in the UK with back orders getting this special treatment too?

I've had mine on order since I first knew about them. Surely your UK part of Horizon can find it in their hearts?

Faithful customer so far I've had H9 Spit/P-47 150/F-22 Raptor/P51 Miss America/Sundowner (latest).

Jason



ramcfarland -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/11/2007 10:32:28 PM)

What do you guys think; is the Mitchell by Hangar essentially the same as Top flites also soon to be released ARF twin WWII bomber.

Does any one have either one yet??I'm going to do a Ziroli anyway but indeed fascinated with the Hangar and TF offerings -the molded canopy detail is crude though[:-]



John Redman -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/12/2007 1:02:57 AM)

The Top Flite is about 10% larger than the Hangar 9 model and has a larger number of scale offerings on it. The Hangar 9 B-25 is a great mflyign model and looks good. The Top Flite is a great flying model and looks great, but with a much higher price tag. I flew formation with Greg Hahn at DOGS this year and we talked a fair amount about the two models. We both agreed that the Top Flite offers more in teh scale looks arena, and the Hangar 9 is a killer value for a good looking brid. I want to say it is close to $200 more just in price difference between the two. Greg really likes our B-25 at teh price point, he thought The Hangar 9 guys really hit a homerun there. And I will say that I really liked the Top Flite B-25 as the scale presentation beat ours hands down.

Your choice, they both fly great and are ttwo different classes over all.



ramcfarland -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/12/2007 2:06:01 AM)

Thanks for the infro well put[8D]



CorsairJock -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/12/2007 2:23:25 AM)

I voted for the TopFlite in the RCU poll. HOWEVER, I had already decided that if I ever get a B-25, then it has to be 'done' as a Dolittle Raider. The H-9 vesrsion only requires modest changes to finish it as such. The TopFlite version has yellow rings on the cowl, which were NOT on any of the Dolittle Raiders aircraft. That said: re-painting the cowls would be necessary to make them a Dolittle Raider.

My wife offered to buy me one as a Christmas present, and I have accepted her offer.

My H-9 B-25 is on order from my LHS. If it comes with the Evo .36s, I will sell them as I prefer the sound of Saito 4 strokes. Mine will be (twin) .62 powered. I will adapt it to be capable of dropping 4 'bombs', and it will be in the markings of my hometown's 1st WW II hero: co-pilot of #14 aircraft, Jack Sims from Kalamazoo, MI.

As the title of this thread is in reference to the H-9 B-25, and NOT a comparison thread, would it be asking too much to keep the comparisons out and focus on the H-9 B-25? I doubt that anyone has BOTH of these aircraft (H-9 AND Top Flite), so why invite comparisons? the differences are obvious: Top Flite is bigger, more detailed, and more expensive. That says it all. Need anyone say more?

Again, since this thread is directed towards the H-9 version, could we please keep it that way?



reincarnate -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/12/2007 2:27:33 AM)

I got to handle one at the LHS tonight. Only thing I didn't like about it was the glossy finish, and as Richard said crude plastic pieces. I wish they would put out an ARC version of it. Oh, and I actually walked out with out it...but I'm going back tomorrow.[X(]



kahloq -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/12/2007 3:17:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: reincarnate

I got to handle one at the LHS tonight. Only thing I didn't like about it was the glossy finish, and as Richard said crude plastic pieces. I wish they would put out an ARC version of it. Oh, and I actually walked out with out it...but I'm going back tomorrow.[X(]


Doubftul it'll be there tomorrow. There are 2 stores nearby my location and both got one in. Both were sold in less then 40 minutes upon being put out on the shelf.



reincarnate -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/12/2007 3:19:44 PM)

They're holding it for me. Trying to figure out if I can put a a couple of 4s in it. Seems I am a lollipop, since when they got it in, they called to tell me, and I had never even expressed interest in it to them. [:@]



Going to go back through and see if anyone talked about 4s, but if you have please let me know.



reincarnate -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/12/2007 3:34:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bbrundle

This was not a mistake on anyones part. Your Hobby store was one of over 300 to receive the airframe with two Evolution 36NT engines already installed. We feel very strongly that this combination of airframe and engine works extremely well and so we sent these out as a special thank you to you and our dealers. Now take the money that you would have spent on engines and have your LHS order up the special Robart Retracts from Horizon and enjoy your new B-25J Mitchell.

Thanks again





EDIT!!!
After re-reading this post from BB, I called the LHS and sure enough, they got one of them with the Evo's installed!! I'm so happy about that, that I'm just going to forget about the 4s and spend the money elsewhere!! Like on lawyer fees when wifey gets home!



dbateman -> RE: New Hangar 9 B-25 (10/12/2007 4:19:47 PM)

I ordered mine from a small hobby shop in NJ. I would imagine they are pretty far down the food chain in relation to other higher volume shops. I also ordered the complete retract package. I'm pretty sure i won't be getting the motors but that is ok since i'm going electric anyway. It would be nice if one from this first wave found it's way here... Looks like i'm set for winter projects, the B-25, Savex L-39 EDF, and the Alfa A-4 EDF. A mild winter will see some test flights on one or two of these birds. Doug



Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13   next >   >>  

Valid CSS!




SITE MAP!   : :   FORUM RULES

© 2001 - 2007 24-7 RC, LLC, all rights reserved.
0.34375