raptureboy

Good to know, I never would have thought about that. Perhaps a food grade silicone or one used in aquariums would be better.

radfordc

My Feedback: (14)

I use E6000 instead of silicone. http://www.eclecticproducts.com/e6000_retail.htm

JoeMamma

Thanks ! Oh, oh..........I didn't know about that acid.

Joe M.

acdii

Vinegar. Thats what you smell from the silicone when it applied. Usually the electronics have a coating over them after they have been soldered to prevent corrosion, so they are safe for low levels of the acid, but still, why take the risk.

chorner

The biggest PITA I've found with this ARF is that the retract rails are not parallel with the centreline of the wheel wells. If you put a straight strut into the retracts, parallel with the retract rails you'll be too close to the trailing edge of the wheel well. I've had to bend the wire adaptor I made (5mm down to 3/16", another pain in the rear) at a few degrees to end up in line using Robart struts.

They really did a poor job IMO on the retract setup on this plane. On top of that I've had 3 separate wings now for this plane, 2 different tones of covering, some OK ailerons and flaps, and some really crappily built ones. No wing set has been 'spot on' in all areas. Always a small handful of sub-par areas. In my opinion, the Hangar 9 ARF's are a bit better in the QC department and their retract situation has been figured out; it's easy to find retracts that are easy to install and hold up without any mods. The one thing I like about some of the Top Flite ARFs versus Hangar 9 is the lack of the cheesy panel lines... some of the colour schemes and build details (like the cowling on the P51 is better on the TF for sure). However, the hardware sucks on these Top Flite ARF's... seriously, soldering up clevises? It kind of ages the design right there alone. TF needs to update their lineup badly.

All in all, this P-51D is the best .60 size I've found "out of the box" for looks and it flies decently but I don't think it's a "show stealer" by any means. The CG in the manual is way too far aft, and you need quite a bit of down trim if you run near recommended CG. It tracks well to a point, but more than good enough for some Sunday sport/scale flying.

JoeMamma

Not parallel ? Yeah.....I hear Ya.

I can't remember every single step I used to modify mine, but I do remember building some hardwood angled shims to kick the strut angle more forward. I figured with the wheel centerline more forward it would help prevent nose-overs.

Can't remember if also slightly moved the wheelhouses on my P-51 as may have been on my Top Flite P-47.

Joe M.

acdii

Do like I did, loop it into the ground. Helps loosen those pesky rails so they can be installed correctly. For CG, have you found a good setting? I think I had mine a 3 1/4" back at the root, but will have to verify as it has been a while now, and it is sitting on its rack for winter storage.

raptureboy

LOL too funny! I have not had any issue with the C.G being o.k but for sure there seems to be an issue with quality control concerning covering. I'm sure they don't throw any away so when they get half way through the job and switch to another roll you end up with a quilt Overall mine was acceptable and if it lasts another season I will strip it all and glass and paint.

chorner

lol a nice loop into the ground always helps straighten things out for sure For CG I've found that between 5" - 5.25" is the best balancing point depending on your "taste". They recommend in the manual a little further back around 5.5" or further if I recall correctly.

flycatch

My Feedback: (26)

The CG is not an issue once you do the math.

chorner

What's the math on it then, and why do you suspect it to be so tail heavy when flying it using the suggested starting point for CG? I'm not the only one who's found it off, and closer to 5" - 5 1/4" to fly properly. The Giant Scale P-51's CG is further forward than the .60 size, and using a base % for finding the balance point doesn't seem to make sense when you compare the two.

What's the math, I'd like to know personally (and how to properly calculate it as well in that case)

flycatch

My Feedback: (26)

http://adamone.rchomepage.com/cg_calc.htmI finding more and more ARFs with misleading CG locations.

acdii

Is that 5 1/4" from the LE at the fuse side? I am still wondering if I have mine balanced correctly, until I find out exactly the cause of the snap over at any speed, the plane is grounded.

Flying Fiz

"However, the hardware sucks on these Top Flite ARF's... seriously, soldering up clevises? It kind of ages the design right there alone. TF needs to update their lineup badly."

You have to solder on the clevises????? OMG that sounds so old school, I have never come across that before. And besides I'm so crap at soldering :-( I picked up the model and put it in the back of the garage, havent had a spare minute to check it out, other than a one minute inspection when I picked it up.

Bob Paris

My Feedback: (13)

Aloha Guys,
I have been flying one of these P-51's for several years and my T.F. P-51 is flying with a CG at 5.25"... She groves and is an amazingly stable model to fly. I am now in the process of revamping my landing gear and installing new struts onto my Lado retracts. I am also removing the K&B 1.00 nitro engine and installing a 20cc gas engine. I'll be taking care of a little hanger rash and wing tip scrapes, but for a model this well flown, she is in remarkably good shape. I'm not sure if I will go with a DLE, VVRC or RGC 20cc gas engine. DLE makes a rear carb, aft exhaust 20cc gas engine and VVRC has a good price on them right now...a good $30.00 bucks cheaper then Tower.

http://www.valleyviewrc.com/estore/d...as-engine.html

Has anyone installed the VVRC 21cc gas engine into the airframe yet?

Happy Thanksgiving,
Bobby of Maui

raptureboy

Bob there is a thread on the vvrc engine, there may be some info there. My guess would be they are all about the same dimensions as they are designed for a beam mount. I flew mine at the recommended c.g and had to add a little tail weight to balance and she flew absolutly perfect. Not sure why everyone is having such an issue, I would be interested in knowing what methoed all are using to check their c.g. I am using a vanessa rig and it is very accurate, much more than my stupid tower c.g machine ever was.

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

Bob Paris

My Feedback: (13)

Hay Raptureboy,
All I have is the Tower CG machine. It works...not the best, but it works. I am looking to buy a CG machine that is nuts on and easy to use. The Tower unit is kind of flimsy at best, especially with models over 15# (7 kilo's). Where did you buy your Vanessa CG machine?

There seems to be an issue over the years with the CG on the Top Flight P-51D ARF. I chose to use the 5.25" placement for the CG to be a bit nose heavy for my first flights and it turned out to be right on the button for my type of flying. If you like to be a bit more aerobatic, you may take the manual figure for the CG. All I know is that my Mustang flies like its on rails and rock solid on landing. Full flaps or no flaps...its a easy bird to land, at least for me.

I'm not sure exactly what 20cc gas engine I will use...I'm also looking at the new OS 20cc gas engine that uses no electronic ignition...but a spark/glow plug. My model with a K&B 1.00 Aero engine came out nose heavy, but its not a light engine, and in fact the new OS engine is lighter. I'll be rereading all the threads on the instillation of a 20cc gas engine in this thread and then make my decision on what I'll use then. But there is one thing I'll always need to say...this is one great flying model.

Soft Landings Always,
Bobby of Maui

radfordc

My Feedback: (14)

Bobby, don't buy a CG machine...make a Vanessa rig. It will work for any size plane and is absolutely accurate. Takes a half hour to make one and costs maybe $5 for materials if you don't have what you need already around the shop. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/tips...g-rig-how.html

KaP2011

My Feedback: (17)

The Vanessa rig is a homebuilt cg machine that is very accurate if built properly. You can do a search here on RCU and find tons of info about how to make one. I used the Great Planes CG Machine and balanced mine at the recommended starting point which is 5 5/8" and have never moved it. It fly's great where it is and slows down nice for landing with or without flaps.

acdii

Yes, do the rig, so much easier and safer to balance any plane. Just some string, a block of wood and a dowel. It also works to lateral balance if your careful.

Bob Paris

My Feedback: (13)

Ok Guys,
Thanks for the input on the Vanessa rig. Simple and the information will be used... : )

I installed new struts that I got from Hobby King. 161mm struts, 3" wheels installed on my Lado retracts and I still have to figure out a way to install my gear doors. I will be purchasing a DLE 20cc gas engine with rear carb and rear exhaust. It will drop right in...but will take a bit of work to shoe horn this modification. I was looking at the VVRC 21cc gas engine for its the most compact 20cc on the market. I just picked up VVRC's 40cc twin cylinder gas engine for my ESM F6F and the engine is a drop in with out cutting the cowl. The cowl is 8.25" across where the engine will sit and it fits...with the mufflers on too. These are really compact little jewels.

Happy Thanksgiving,
Bobby of Maui

acdii

Thats the one that has the plugs canted back for clearance. I was considering a pair of those for an upcoming P-61 build as they would fit inside the cowls without cutting. Be interesting to see how well it performs.

flycatch

My Feedback: (26)

Flew my Mustang today and made my first one wheel landing. The EFlite unit malfunctioned and the right main gear assembly refused to come down. I held the right wing up using aileron and tracked with rudder. Ground roll was about twenty feet with flaps retracted and the only damaged incurred was a scuffed right wing tip. I bring this to you attention because of so many damaging the landing gear mounting rails. My airframe exceeds the ten pound limit and it would be characterized as a flying brick. To many times modelers blame the manufacture when in reality it is there own fault.

radfordc

My Feedback: (14)

I'm glad you had a successful landing with no damage to the landing gear mounts. However, I still think that the gear mounts are a weak point and do need reinforcement. Better to strengthen the mounts before you tear them out of the wing...if it turns out that you didn't need the extra strength you still haven't hurt anything.

chorner

Flycatch you probably got lucky or had a nice smooth landing field. I tore out the rails on two occasions before I had some wood lazer cut and a couple hardwood angled blocks installed and she can take a beating now without issue.