Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Results 1 to 4 of 4

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Swift Current, SK, CANADA
    Posts
    70
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    Hangar 9 Katana or Great Planes Eagle 580?

    Just as subject. Will honestly be my first aerobatic plane. Previous experience is an Avistar 40 and and H9 Pulse 40. Which would you recommend for me and why? I have the Phoenix sim and the Funtana (Katana) seems pretty twitchy on the sim but manageable.. Is this true to life? Would the Eagle 580 be a little more stable? I know this depends a little on the CG but just generally, which is nicer?

    Thanks, Jamie

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Zachary, LA
    Posts
    4,636
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Hangar 9 Katana or Great Planes Eagle 580?

    Jamie, I'm just finishing up an H9 Katana, and I had the other model when it was the Matt Chapman "Splatball" CAP 580.

    If you are a relatively inexperienced pilot, i.e. just past the trainer stage, then I would definitely advise you to go with the Great Planes Eagle 580. It is a MUCH more solidly-built model than the Katana, which uses an open framework type of construction intended to be as light as possible. IOW, the Eagle would be much more forgiving on those less-than-perfect landings, and easier to repair if you did ding it.

    Other than the fact that it will bite you hard if you slow it down too much on approach, it has no bad habits that I am aware of. But this (tip-stall at low speeds) is shared by just about every aerobatic model with a thin double taper wing. You cannot float these airplanes in like a trainer; you have to fly them onto the ground. Also be aware that the elevators on this model are quite sensitive; do not exceed recommended surface travels, and use lots of exponential. Again, this is a pretty common characteristic of this genre of model.

    The only problem I had with mine was engine over-heating. The cowl fits really close, I was using a big engine (OS 91 Surpass), and even with a baffle directing air onto the jug it still got hot after a few minutes. With a .46 two stroke, I don't think would be an issue.

    I haven't flown the Katana yet, so I cannot compare them on that basis. But that little CAP is a very nice kit that assembles into a good-flying airplane. I was quite impressed with how solidly the structure is put together; I am assuming (and hoping) that they didn't change anything on the airframe when they changed the color scheme.

    I am equally impressed with the Katana; the build quality is first-rate, and the hardware is some of the best I've ever seen in an ARF. The only thing I replaced were the wing bolts. Check out the Katana thread in the 3D Forum for some pictures I just took of mine.

    That said... unless GP changed things radically, I still think the CAP (or Eagle, whatever) would be a better way for you to go this time.

    .

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Zachary, LA
    Posts
    4,636
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Hangar 9 Katana or Great Planes Eagle 580?

    Here's a pic of my CAP/Eagle... you can see where the "splatball" name comes from...

    .
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Ol31531.jpg 
Views:	5 
Size:	84.8 KB 
ID:	1840042   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Pm34814.jpg 
Views:	5 
Size:	124.3 KB 
ID:	1840043  

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    5
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Hangar 9 Katana or Great Planes Eagle 580?

    was just wondering about 3d radio setups,specifiacally would it be better to set a lo med and hi rate on the rudder elevator and ailerons or would it be better to s et it up with progressive rates wherein small stick movements use a lo rate and full stick deflections get a hi rate,thanks in a dvance , Gary


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:26 PM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.