Fly Eagle F-14
09-22-2016, 07:09 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Fly Eagle F-14
A friend of mine is selling and unstarted Fly Eagle F-14 kit. Its the Deluxe kit (All Plywood) with everything pre-installed. I know there is a lot of negative feed back regarding these jets.. My question is. Has anyone had success with one of these F-14's ? If so, what modifications did you carry out on the model ??
09-23-2016, 07:58 PM
#4
If you are aware of all the "negative feedback" why are you even considering this thing?
I will ask the question another way. How much disposable income do you have? If you choose to build this piece of crap, you will be disposing of around 15 to 20k.
Just don't fly it around innocent people that could be injured when it hits the ground in a big fireball.
I will ask the question another way. How much disposable income do you have? If you choose to build this piece of crap, you will be disposing of around 15 to 20k.
Just don't fly it around innocent people that could be injured when it hits the ground in a big fireball.
09-24-2016, 12:23 PM
#6
If you want a smodering hole in the ground buy it. Otherwise you will be better off running away from that deal. I wouldn't waste turbines on that model. They are just going to get trashed.
09-25-2016, 12:25 AM
#7
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Leeds, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 1,449
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
8 Posts
If we leave the Hyperbole alone for a moment, to answer the original posters question, yes there are examples of this model flying successfully in Europe. There was a Brit flying one for a few years, and a German guy has been campaigning one for some years now. These are the original Plyood former construction and there is no honeycomb in these models, so they have not fallen apart in the air. That is the good news.
Conversly, the model is very heavy and must land quite fast (although this can be improved with the slatted wing version and spit flaps). There is much work to do to make it right e.g. fuselage stiffeness, wing bearings etc.
So, yes this model can be made to fly but you can expect a lot of work, and need a lot of modelling and engineering prowess along the way,
John
Conversly, the model is very heavy and must land quite fast (although this can be improved with the slatted wing version and spit flaps). There is much work to do to make it right e.g. fuselage stiffeness, wing bearings etc.
So, yes this model can be made to fly but you can expect a lot of work, and need a lot of modelling and engineering prowess along the way,
John
09-25-2016, 07:16 AM
#8
09-30-2016, 09:49 PM
#13
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: yorba linda,
CA
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have an older plywood version that I bought in a similar way. I'm still going through it. I wouldn't fly one without going through it. I found a couple of weak formers I have had to replace.
I had a buddy of mine lose an F-14 SKYMASTER because the elevator arm bent an jumped.out of the grove. He was able to land it (roughly) but one of the motors got fodded up and lit on fire, total loss on the ground.
All of these planes can have issues. FEJ just has had a few more than anyone else.
Just go through everything. Like you would buying a used aircraft that someone else built.
I am an engineer so I enjoy the challenge of coming up with fixes for things. It may become a smoking hole someday. It wouldn't be my first. Gravity and Murphy's Law are always at work.
Happy Flying
I had a buddy of mine lose an F-14 SKYMASTER because the elevator arm bent an jumped.out of the grove. He was able to land it (roughly) but one of the motors got fodded up and lit on fire, total loss on the ground.
All of these planes can have issues. FEJ just has had a few more than anyone else.
Just go through everything. Like you would buying a used aircraft that someone else built.
I am an engineer so I enjoy the challenge of coming up with fixes for things. It may become a smoking hole someday. It wouldn't be my first. Gravity and Murphy's Law are always at work.
Happy Flying
10-01-2016, 06:02 AM
#14
My Feedback: (30)
If there's no honeycomb there's a greater chance of success with the model no?
tia
...Just don't fly it around innocent people that could be injured when it hits the ground in a big fireball.
I've not heard or read that the non honeycomb version of the model is bad like the honeycomb version
Thx in advance
10-01-2016, 07:04 AM
#15
My Feedback: (30)
If we leave the Hyperbole alone for a moment, to answer the original posters question, yes there are examples of this model flying successfully in Europe. There was a Brit flying one for a few years, and a German guy has been campaigning one for some years now. These are the original Plyood former construction and there is no honeycomb in these models, so they have not fallen apart in the air. That is the good news.
Conversly, the model is very heavy and must land quite fast (although this can be improved with the slatted wing version and spit flaps). There is much work to do to make it right e.g. fuselage stiffeness, wing bearings etc.
So, yes this model can be made to fly but you can expect a lot of work, and need a lot of modelling and engineering prowess along the way,
John
Conversly, the model is very heavy and must land quite fast (although this can be improved with the slatted wing version and spit flaps). There is much work to do to make it right e.g. fuselage stiffeness, wing bearings etc.
So, yes this model can be made to fly but you can expect a lot of work, and need a lot of modelling and engineering prowess along the way,
John
I plan on making mine EDF with the new 144 fans and graphene packs, I expect my AUW to be around 50 - 55 lbs with twin 16ah packs
Thx in advance
10-01-2016, 07:08 AM
#17
EDFJim had one he converted to electric and it flew very well, the only mods the old version needs is the crossbeam brace and possible splitting the flaps to help with tip stall.
10-02-2016, 09:48 PM
#20
Thread Starter
There are several Fly Eagle jets over here that I've seen flying over the years. I'm yet to see or hear of one crash due to Structural Failure.. Not saying it hasn't happened elsewhere..
10-02-2016, 11:58 PM
#21
The plywood version is horribly heavy. And still needs reinforcements.
The plane flies like a brick. It is very difficult in cross wing. Does not like slow speeds. Tends to tip stall.
One of the problems is that FEJ did not follow my advice ( as always ) and did not incorporate any downwash on the wing.
Also the landing gear/ retract system is a piece of junk.
If you have a full workshop with CNC machines handy, then go ahead and re-design 80% of the gear to get it to reliably carry the 75 lbs of the airframe.
10-03-2016, 12:00 AM
#22
Gyros compensate wing tip stalls with ailerons. This will get you into an unrecoverable flat spin...........
10-03-2016, 12:07 AM
#23
But I had to put 600 hours of work on the airframe and gear to get the plane to this level of reliability.
And also, this is 72 lbs wet. Flies well, but with a B-300F.
https://vimeo.com/album/1465015/video/27378882
10-09-2016, 02:20 AM
#24
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Leeds, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 1,449
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
8 Posts
The weight is a serious problem with this model, and since for me the days of having access to airfields seems to be ending, a 75lbs model off grass, does not appeal.
It is false to say that only the cross bracing on the fuselage need stengthening. There are a plethora of technical challanges due to the fact that FEJ are fully qualified to product paper lanterns! I had a discussion (via James) with one of there ngineers (ROFL), who stuggled to grasp the concept of a lever. Hence the wing bearings are thrust races. This results in a variance of tip postion of close to 2" with the wings fully swept! The English Electric Lighting had exactly the same sweepback as the F14 at full sweep. This plane had the ailerons on the wingtips and they were very effective. it seems to me that this amount of vairiance at the tips would be similarly effect at producing roll; but alas with any control of it.
As has been mentioned they are not great on the metalurgy front either. Stale cheese would be at least as good as the metal they have used.
As for tip stall, I have gone for slats and split the flaps. My MO was to have 85 degrees inner flap travel and 15 degrees on the tips. Since the model is heavily loaded I want the wing to lift as much as possible right up to touch down. And its true, if they has addded a few degrees of washout, the tip stall would not have occured.
I was talking to a UK jet Modeller who is building one for a customer. He is ready to give up after two years of trying to make this right. I am in the same place. I plan to sell mine and move on to some projects that will land at a sensible speed, e.g. my Tomahawk Hunter will be as big as the F14, but will have a take off weight of circa 45 lbs and far more wing area.
John
It is false to say that only the cross bracing on the fuselage need stengthening. There are a plethora of technical challanges due to the fact that FEJ are fully qualified to product paper lanterns! I had a discussion (via James) with one of there ngineers (ROFL), who stuggled to grasp the concept of a lever. Hence the wing bearings are thrust races. This results in a variance of tip postion of close to 2" with the wings fully swept! The English Electric Lighting had exactly the same sweepback as the F14 at full sweep. This plane had the ailerons on the wingtips and they were very effective. it seems to me that this amount of vairiance at the tips would be similarly effect at producing roll; but alas with any control of it.
As has been mentioned they are not great on the metalurgy front either. Stale cheese would be at least as good as the metal they have used.
As for tip stall, I have gone for slats and split the flaps. My MO was to have 85 degrees inner flap travel and 15 degrees on the tips. Since the model is heavily loaded I want the wing to lift as much as possible right up to touch down. And its true, if they has addded a few degrees of washout, the tip stall would not have occured.
I was talking to a UK jet Modeller who is building one for a customer. He is ready to give up after two years of trying to make this right. I am in the same place. I plan to sell mine and move on to some projects that will land at a sensible speed, e.g. my Tomahawk Hunter will be as big as the F14, but will have a take off weight of circa 45 lbs and far more wing area.
John
10-09-2016, 09:10 PM
#25
Spot on, John.
Back a few years ago, a local modeller offered me 10 k USD to build this one ( plywood version ).
I refused the offer as my estimate to get this plane right was about 300 building hours, excluding aluminum parts manufacturing.
Another local modeler took it on and the model never made it out of the workshop. It is now a hangar queen.
Back a few years ago, a local modeller offered me 10 k USD to build this one ( plywood version ).
I refused the offer as my estimate to get this plane right was about 300 building hours, excluding aluminum parts manufacturing.
Another local modeler took it on and the model never made it out of the workshop. It is now a hangar queen.