RC Jets Discuss RC jets in this forum plus rc turbines and ducted fan power systems

Reaction 54 Jet Kit

Reply
Old 07-07-2017, 07:38 AM
  #3651
JustFlyIt
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 103
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Ah, the distinction between our models and full scale is always helpful.

With the flaps set to 60 degrees then I guess that they are no longer flaps but speed brakes in our models. With that distinction then speed brakes are necessary, but already there.
JustFlyIt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2017, 11:00 AM
  #3652
SALMONBUG
 
SALMONBUG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: kampenhout, BELGIUM
Posts: 1,232
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

on real airliners huge flaps setting are mainly to create drag. This enormous drag is create to allow to make approach with high engine rpm, so in case of go around around the engine spool up faster..............
Only the first degrees of flaps extension increase highly increase clmax for a moderate drag increase (that's why small flaps angle are used for take off)

I can only talk from what I know, years ago I flown dc 10 and 747 for a major belgian airline and when you go around with a big bird you set max power , you IMEDIATLY partialy retract your flaps (to decrease drag) and when you have the positive vario you rteact the gear (to also reduce drag). once you have more speed you retract the last part of the flaps

r54 didn't need the extra lift. Bu as mentioned above with a huge flaps setting (60 degrees) the drag will be enormous and flaps will do the job fine.
BUT imagine you performe a nice Rull flaps approach, with plenty of trust , low speed and nose hig and for some reason you have to go around Retract your flaps imediatly to reduce drag, but not completly, otherwise you could fall from the sky.
this kind of risk doesn't exist with pure drag generator like speedbrakes, you go around, you retract them and you climb..

By the way I abandoned my idea of speedbrakes and I am curently slowly building my first wing panel fully stock (Either Bruce tharpe said me that speedbrakes could be a nice experiment for the bird). I simply don't hav a lot of time for the moment to build and modify a design. I want my R54 ready for next summer. Maybe after that I'll build a speedbrake version
SALMONBUG is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2017, 01:32 PM
  #3653
JustFlyIt
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 103
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Interesting perspective. My experience although not extensive like flying an airliner relates more to using flaps to control the degree of lift during landing and takeoff. This thread relates it nicely: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/q...n-to-use-flaps

We used the flaps to control the rate of descent, not so much over all air speed although the changing of stall airspeed in relation to the degree of flaps was always interesting. In the end, I gave up flying and enjoy sailing much more!

Isn't that the advantage of these threads, to hear the different experiences and perspectives.

So true on the R54, it does slow down nicely with its current configuration...hats off to the designer! But speed brakes would still look so cool! I have been toying with adding them on mine just for grins but am now thinking about smoke instead, and maybe some fiberglassing.
JustFlyIt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2017, 09:51 PM
  #3654
SALMONBUG
 
SALMONBUG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: kampenhout, BELGIUM
Posts: 1,232
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustFlyIt View Post
Interesting perspective. My experience although not extensive like flying an airliner relates more to using flaps to control the degree of lift during landing and takeoff. This thread relates it nicely: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/q...n-to-use-flaps

We used the flaps to control the rate of descent, not so much over all air speed although the changing of stall airspeed in relation to the degree of flaps was always interesting. In the end, I gave up flying and enjoy sailing much more!

.
let me share something that hapened to me on real airplaines 35 years ago,. I was 16 years old and learning to fly airplanes. I had a good experience on real gliders alrready and was familiar using speedbrakes to control the glide path. I was in a small cessna 150. This little thing like his big brother the cessna 172 has enormous flaps deflecting a lot and producing a LOT of drag ( to me they are overdimensioned). The cessna 150 I was flying had something I never saw again on a plane after that. The electrical proportional flaps were controled by a two position swith (up/down), the down position had quick release and you had to hold your finger on the switch until you reach the desired flaps angle, but the UP position had NOT, meaning that when you select up position you have to return the switch to neutral if you want to stop the flaps retraction.
I duno remember the circumpstance, but one day I ended up in long final with full flaps forced to apply lot of power to stay on the glide.. I decided to go against the golden rule telling "never retract flaps during normal approach". I slightly pushed the flaps switch up because I wanted to reduce my drag a bit but i simply forgot how this stupid switch work. and the flaps retracted entirly If my souvenirs are correct I losted something like 300 feet before I reagained the control of the rate of descent. fortunatly I was high on long final.
I never forgot that lesson and I NEVER use flaps to control a glide path.

on the glide with a jet I have my rules wich are

SPEED IS controled by power
RATE OF DESCENT is controled by attitude
SALMONBUG is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2017, 07:03 AM
  #3655
JustFlyIt
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 103
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Yep, as I said before, I really enjoy the different perspectives. Doesn't chang my mind but I do enjoy other people's perspectives and experiences.

My initial training was in a Cessna 152 and thankfully never had your experience. Might have wet myself if I did.

Thank goodness our R54'd don't get that exciting.
JustFlyIt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2017, 04:56 AM
  #3656
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,641
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Here's another perspective on the flaps / speedbrakes / airspeed / AOA / throttle discussion. USN carrier jets fly back side of the power curve on approach, full flaps, speedbrakes out. Pitch controls airspeed and throttle rate of decent. You're higher on the throttle in this kind of approach, which means faster spool up and immediate excess power when you retract speed brakes. On missed approach / touch-n-go / bolter, it's full throttle and retract speedbrakes only ... no change to flaps or gear position (limit configuration changes in landing pattern, less complexity, fewer trim changes, easier to focus on setting up for solid next approach).

Now that I'm retired, I fly light civil only these days, but I still fly approaches the same way. I've never been a fan of multiple flap position changes in the pattern. I decide the flaps appropriate for the situation, set them on downwind, then fly the entire pattern to touchdown on one flap setting. Fewer trim changes and it allows me to focus on a good stable approach. If I end up on final and have too much flap, I go around and reset and retrim on downwind.

Last edited by franklin_m; 07-27-2017 at 04:59 AM.
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2017, 08:21 AM
  #3657
BruceTharpe
 
BruceTharpe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rogue River, OR
Posts: 676
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Interesting perspective, thanks for that. I think it would be hard to get on the back side of the power curve with the R54 because of its large wing. But the procedure of setting flaps on downwind and focusing on the approach makes sense to me. I often find that reaching for the flap slider for just that moment sometimes gets me out of sorts during approach.
BruceTharpe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2017, 08:27 AM
  #3658
sweetpea01
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lebanon OH
Posts: 3,311
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
Here's another perspective on the flaps / speedbrakes / airspeed / AOA / throttle discussion. USN carrier jets fly back side of the power curve on approach, full flaps, speedbrakes out. Pitch controls airspeed and throttle rate of decent. You're higher on the throttle in this kind of approach, which means faster spool up and immediate excess power when you retract speed brakes. On missed approach / touch-n-go / bolter, it's full throttle and retract speedbrakes only ... no change to flaps or gear position (limit configuration changes in landing pattern, less complexity, fewer trim changes, easier to focus on setting up for solid next approach).

Now that I'm retired, I fly light civil only these days, but I still fly approaches the same way. I've never been a fan of multiple flap position changes in the pattern. I decide the flaps appropriate for the situation, set them on downwind, then fly the entire pattern to touchdown on one flap setting. Fewer trim changes and it allows me to focus on a good stable approach. If I end up on final and have too much flap, I go around and reset and retrim on downwind.
From my few years flying in the EA-6B and F-16 (AF guy who got to do both, from the back seat)........the Navy also slams the jet into the deck. there is no flare! You position the jet so that every landing has a chance for takeoff if you miss the wire. Both jets were fun to fly and land in. Just different techniques.
sweetpea01 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2017, 02:15 PM
  #3659
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,641
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetpea01 View Post
From my few years flying in the EA-6B and F-16 (AF guy who got to do both, from the back seat)........the Navy also slams the jet into the deck. there is no flare! You position the jet so that every landing has a chance for takeoff if you miss the wire. Both jets were fun to fly and land in. Just different techniques.
No doubt. The main point I was making is that I really don't like how light civil pilots are taught to fly the pattern, namely monkeying with the aircraft configuration low to the ground and in a fairly busy phase of flight. Each time the flap setting is changed, it induces a trim change, and now the pilot is busy re-trimming for yet another airspeed ... while making 90 degree turns and trying to concentrate on other aircraft in the pattern, the radios, the landing area, etc.

Whether flying models or full scale, I set my landing configuration on downwind and don't mess with it. I also fly the Navy style pattern, that is a constant radius turn with a constant rate of decent. I find it's easier to judge and easier to stabilize if you're only making minor adjustments to AOB, power, and pitch. I like a nice steady constant radius turn where I give it just jab of power right at touchdown to flare (when flying models).

Last edited by franklin_m; 07-28-2017 at 02:22 PM.
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2017, 05:50 AM
  #3660
Dr Honda
 
Dr Honda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Latrobe, PA
Posts: 2,280
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

How about....

WHO CARES !!!!!

Keep it on subject (reaction 54) and move the flap/full scale talk to the off topic forum?
Dr Honda is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2017, 08:01 AM
  #3661
RAMFlyer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 893
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Back on the Reaction 54 topic; I have a set of Dr. Honda's mounts and they are beautiful. Nice work no matter which thrust angle you like...
RAMFlyer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2017, 09:38 AM
  #3662
mr_matt
 
mr_matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Oak Park, CA,
Posts: 10,090
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

I am back on mine boys, pics to follow

I picked up my kit when my wife was 9 months pregnant with my son
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_20170519_105133.jpg
Views:	131
Size:	3.50 MB
ID:	2226127  
mr_matt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2017, 02:35 PM
  #3663
BruceTharpe
 
BruceTharpe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rogue River, OR
Posts: 676
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

franklin_m, I thought your posts were interesting and had some relevance to the R54 simply because there has been a lot of discussion about landing configurations for this model.

RAMflyer, what are Dr. Honda mounts? Something adaptable to the R54?

mr_matt, how old is your son now?
BruceTharpe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2017, 07:29 PM
  #3664
afterburner
 
afterburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New City, NY
Posts: 2,949
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_matt View Post
I am back on mine boys, pics to follow

I picked up my kit when my wife was 9 months pregnant with my son
That's about as fast as I get kits done! It's worth the effort. Will be your most stress free/trouble free jet. Mine is going on 11 years and hundreds of flights. Only problem is the Monokote is getting brittle in spots. Have a lot of patches.Might be time to strip it and glass it.
afterburner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2017, 08:18 PM
  #3665
mr_matt
 
mr_matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Oak Park, CA,
Posts: 10,090
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceTharpe View Post
mr_matt, how old is your son now?
12. If memory serves, I got the kit from you at the IMS show in Ontario.
mr_matt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2017, 04:05 AM
  #3666
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,641
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceTharpe View Post
franklin_m, I thought your posts were interesting and had some relevance to the R54 simply because there has been a lot of discussion about landing configurations for this model.
Bruce,
Thanks. I've been toying with a jet for a decade. Unfortunately with three kids and a couple other hobbies, I really don't have time to drive long distance to nice fields - and the local one is pretty rough grass. I've wondered how difficult it would be to mod a R54 for larger wheels on trailing link gear?

I realize the roughness of a field is tough to quantify, but a 40 size plane typically has the prop hitting the grass and bent nose gear after every takeoff, unless you hold full up elevator and forget any idea of scale type takeoff.
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2017, 11:08 AM
  #3667
mr_matt
 
mr_matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Oak Park, CA,
Posts: 10,090
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

I just mounted slightly larger than stock tires (3.25 inch intairco) but the wing could take much bigger ones.

I also extended the length of the struts and used trailing arm gear designed for the reaction ARF. As you can see they are a bit longer. I started this kit so long ago there were no trailing link gear to use
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_20170730_110328.jpg
Views:	76
Size:	2.50 MB
ID:	2226218   Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_20170730_110319.jpg
Views:	63
Size:	2.49 MB
ID:	2226219  
mr_matt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2017, 02:57 PM
  #3668
joeflyer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Plymouth, MI
Posts: 2,665
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

I also used the Reaction ARF set from Dreamworks. These were my first set of ProLink electrics, and after 60 flights I'm still quite happy with them.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMAG0142.jpg
Views:	69
Size:	1.38 MB
ID:	2226238   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01908.JPG
Views:	85
Size:	136.8 KB
ID:	2226239  
joeflyer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2017, 05:28 PM
  #3669
mr_matt
 
mr_matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Oak Park, CA,
Posts: 10,090
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Can anyone chime in on the aileron throw they are using? I am just looking for a range, i need to get as close as possible to the actual throw while I am setting up.

Thanks

Last edited by mr_matt; 09-11-2017 at 04:59 PM.
mr_matt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2017, 03:12 PM
  #3670
redtail
 
redtail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 1,941
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Mr. Tharpe and all the wonderful builders and advisors who helped me with my build of the Reaction 54. A Serious and Grateful "THANK YOU". Just want to report that my Reaction 54 (X-54) with the anhedral stabilizer/elevators flew just beautiful. Slight trim tab movements upon lift off and she was flying at half throttle hands off using a BEE II. Lots of power in that engine. My stabilizer is angled down 15 degrees from where the fuse and stabilizer meet. What a gorgeous view of that F-4 style tail from the back. As you may have figured, I Love The Phantom F-4. Working my way up to a Skymaster F-4. Thanks again Mr. Tharpe. For those interested in doing the same, view posts 3462, 3606, 3388-91. As directed and suggested by a couple of guys on this thread, I also enlarged the inlets and the engine ran very well. My two turbines are on Facebook - Nirly Built. Chic
redtail is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2017, 03:43 PM
  #3671
afterburner
 
afterburner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New City, NY
Posts: 2,949
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Talking

Congrats Chic! It truly is a great design. I maidened mine in August of 2006 with a P-60 and had 28 hours on that engine when I put in a Rabbit 90 which has about 24 hours on it now. The Monokote is starting to crack off and will need recovering soon. It is a stress free extremely reliable jet.
afterburner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 08:00 AM
  #3672
BruceTharpe
 
BruceTharpe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rogue River, OR
Posts: 676
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Oh man, that's good news Chic. Hope you get plenty of turbine stick time on that bird!
BruceTharpe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 08:05 AM
  #3673
redtail
 
redtail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 1,941
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Thanks Guys, appreciate the kind thoughts. Chic
redtail is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 08:17 AM
  #3674
why_fly_high
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Edmond, OK
Posts: 515
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

I am curious as to the lightest Reaction built. The new Kingtech K70G weighs 1.5lbs. WAAAAAAAY lighter than what people were originally running. Will this cause an issue with CG? There is also the new K85G which is 2lbs. My thought is super light build+super light engine+need to carry less fuel+then can use lighter landing gear= an even more relaxing easy going jet.
why_fly_high is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 08:25 AM
  #3675
BruceTharpe
 
BruceTharpe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rogue River, OR
Posts: 676
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Lightest ones have been in the 17-18 lb range (dry). Lighter the turbine the better - most R54's need nose weight, so add that to the list of items that may help reduce overall weight. Would be tough to reduce weight of the retracts, they are already very light. Also, guys with the lighter R54s report floatiness on landing. They've just never seen a jet land that slow. Reduce overall weight by a pound or two and you will see amazingly slow landings!!!
BruceTharpe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:10 PM.