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.

Page 1 of 151 1231151101 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 3770

  1. #1
    pettit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    2,760
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...?&I=LXNXB7&P=0

    But take a close look at some of the specifications:

    81" span (not bad, IMAA legal)

    948 square inches (small but scale)

    17-20 pounds (Pudgy little feller, eh?)

    43 - 50 oz/sq ft (Holy #@$^&*)

    Look for it in "late December", maybe March....July...

    Dick Pettit
    WACO Brotherhood #168
    Balsa USA Brotherhood #41

    If You Can Not Stand Behind Our Troops, please Feel Free To Stand In Front Of Them!!!!!

  2. #2
    TexasAirBoss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    2,970
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    I would have expected 11 to 13 pounds for .46's. They never cease to disappoint me.
    ME: \"I need a good rate down to one three thousand\". EXPRESS: \"Roger, we\'\'re coming down like a Bonanza full of doctors\".

  3. #3
    Flyfalcons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Bonney Lake, WA
    Posts
    6,544
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted


    ORIGINAL: PilotFighter

    I would have expected 11 to 13 pounds for .46's. They never cease to disappoint me.
    11 to 13 pounds for a 80" plane? Are you kidding me? Even the super-light aerobatic planes have a tough time reaching that goal, let alone a scaled out plane with retracts, etc.
    Ryan Winslow
    Fly PAU!

  4. #4
    TexasAirBoss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    2,970
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted


    ORIGINAL: Flyfalcons


    ORIGINAL: PilotFighter

    I would have expected 11 to 13 pounds for .46's. They never cease to disappoint me.
    11 to 13 pounds for a 80" plane? Are you kidding me? Even the super-light aerobatic planes have a tough time reaching that goal, let alone a scaled out plane with retracts, etc.

    Gee, I must be doing something wrong.
    ME: \"I need a good rate down to one three thousand\". EXPRESS: \"Roger, we\'\'re coming down like a Bonanza full of doctors\".

  5. #5
    Flyfalcons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Bonney Lake, WA
    Posts
    6,544
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    You can make a scale plane like a 310 at 80" weigh 11 pounds? I know pattern planes can do it. Not so sure about when you add in scale detail, retracts, etc. I have a Cub around that size that doesn't weigh anything, but a Cub is not a 310.
    Ryan Winslow
    Fly PAU!

  6. #6
    TexasAirBoss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    2,970
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    Sure .

    I have two Rockwell Commanders, 79 inches, not built but in the box. The recommended wieght is 10 to 11lbs. They have fiberglass fuselages and nacelles and retracts.

    I did one twin, a King Air, only 68" wing with two 40 fp bushing engines, one hp each. It weighed under 10 lbs. I'm not sure exactly what it weighed, but I believe it was under 10 #. It flew pretty good. But there wasn't much reserve power. The bushing engines are only 1hp. The 46 ball bearing engines are 1 1/2 hp. So, I think that two 46's can haul around about 15 lbs and probably no more.

    I actually built an 80 inch C130 Hurk at 7 1/2 lbs. But it was for electric and wasn't built for any vibration.

    I routinely build scale 60 size planes at 7 1/2 pounds. They are fat and with some detail.

    I will concede that a mass produced plane may not be as light as ones built at home. I can see the C310 wieghing 13 or 14 lbs. I'll give you that much. But it just won't be very forgiving above that wieght. If I built a C310 myself and it wieghed 17 to 20 lbs, I would consider that a failure.

    Now a ball bearing 60 can offers nearly 2 hp. But the C310 stats don't recommend a 60, they say a 50. The 50 is actually made in a 46 case and offers pretty good numbers. I'm actually using one on a Sig Bonanza, (7.5 lbs) Two 50's might be capable of flying a 17lb model. But again, I don't think there will be much reserve. The wieght of this model really suggest two 60's or even larger engines. I personally favor twin 46's because they idle so well and hold their tune almost permenantly. That is why I am so disappointed.

    I feel it is very realistic to expect an 80 C310 to weigh 13 lbs and even less without the retracts. Especially if it is to have a good reputation and be forgiving and easily handled by the typical modeler.

    I suppose time well tell if these numbers posted on the tower site are correct. And time will tell if this 310 flys well or not. I will hang back and watch before I run out and buy one. Or even worse, I might drag out one of the Commanders and get to work.
    ME: \"I need a good rate down to one three thousand\". EXPRESS: \"Roger, we\'\'re coming down like a Bonanza full of doctors\".

  7. #7
    mugenkidd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Posts
    1,709
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    Did anyone notice this

    "Lighting System: Wired and preinstalled"

    That sounds pretty sweet!!!

  8. #8
    Flyfalcons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Bonney Lake, WA
    Posts
    6,544
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    ORIGINAL: mugenkidd

    Did anyone notice this

    "Lighting System: Wired and preinstalled"

    That sounds pretty sweet!!!
    I did, awesome feature. Is that a first for an ARF?

    The real 310 has fairly high wing loading, so if this model does as well it shouldn't be a big deal. Fast approaches and takeoffs are a 310 trademark. [sm=thumbup.gif] I just wanna see a picture of this one so I can decide whether to get one or not. Weight won't be a consideration.
    Ryan Winslow
    Fly PAU!

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Burbank, CA
    Posts
    2,718
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    Great Planes seems to be moving toward great looking, unusual scale planes that are a real treat to look at, but "difficult" to fly. Personally, I wouldn't walk from the pits to the flight line for stick time on a twin with a 43-50 oz wing loading.

    Jim

  10. #10
    mugenkidd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Posts
    1,709
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted


    "difficult" to fly.

    Thats all relative I'm sure its no more difficult to fly than a scale warbird or a jet. There are plenty of other "sport" arf twins out there with low wing loadings, if you can live with a non-scale looking plane (nitro planes 310)

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Grande Prairie, AB, CANADA
    Posts
    147

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted


    ORIGINAL: jrf

    Great Planes seems to be moving toward great looking, unusual scale planes that are a real treat to look at, but "difficult" to fly. Personally, I wouldn't walk from the pits to the flight line for stick time on a twin with a 43-50 oz wing loading.

    Jim

    Jim's right. That's pretty high wing loading!

  12. #12
    TLH101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Corpus Christi, TX
    Posts
    6,527
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    An 80" model with a 40oz wing loading will fly vert similar to a 70" model with 25-30oz wing loading. As the size increases, the wing loading becomes less of a factor. Most any warbird with 80-85" wingspan will have over 40oz loading.
    Terry
    "Old Fart" in training. (not to be an R/Cer, but to be an "Old Fart")
    P-39 Brotherhood # 6
    P-38 Brotherhood #69

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Burbank, CA
    Posts
    2,718
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    Wing span has nothing to do with it. Wing area is the important factor. As wing area goes up, the airplane can support a higher wing loading. The 310 supposedly has a wing area of 948 sq. in. which would be about right for a 60 size trainer or a 90-120 size aerobat. Either of which would probably have a wing span of about 70 inches, putting them, and the Top Flight 310, squarely into your 25-30 oz category.

    Jim

  14. #14
    TexasAirBoss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    2,970
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    Wing loading aside, I doubt that 3 hp will fly 17-20 lbs, briskly anyway.
    ME: \"I need a good rate down to one three thousand\". EXPRESS: \"Roger, we\'\'re coming down like a Bonanza full of doctors\".

  15. #15
    OldScaleGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Seymour, IN
    Posts
    2,472
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    High wing loading is strictly dependent on the aircraft and its flyablility. Many scale planes are flying well over 50 ounces. Don't knock it unless you have tried it. It is not that big of a deal.
    Steve
    Hellcat Brotherhood #1
    P-47 Thunderbolt Brotherhood #5
    ​Glow Head Brotherhood #17
    Spitfire Brotherhood #144
    Full size airplanes are real, our models are too.

  16. #16

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Meridian, ID
    Posts
    727
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    Greg Hahn had the pilot model at the Scalemasters Championships. Beautiful plane. He didn't fly it, but says is scoots with the .46's. Very clean airframe. Comes with flaps, and lights.

  17. #17
    LaCerne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bartlett, TN
    Posts
    315
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    There's an ad in the latest Model Aviation!

    Larsen
    Larsen
    AMA 93432, SPA 411

  18. #18
    LaCerne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bartlett, TN
    Posts
    315
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    Here is a scan of the ad, for those who don't want to go searching. The ad does say 17-20lbs!! She's a heffer.





    Larsen
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Ki19691.jpg 
Views:	60 
Size:	182.5 KB 
ID:	565210  
    Larsen
    AMA 93432, SPA 411

  19. #19
    TexasAirBoss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    2,970
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    In the words of Paris Hilton, " that's hot".

    Its been a few years since I had a twin and I definitely feel the need coming back.
    ME: \"I need a good rate down to one three thousand\". EXPRESS: \"Roger, we\'\'re coming down like a Bonanza full of doctors\".

  20. #20
    Kmot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Northridge, CA
    Posts
    10,888
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    That really looks nice! [sm=omg_smile.gif]
    ~Tom~

  21. #21
    Flyfalcons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Bonney Lake, WA
    Posts
    6,544
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    Bummer, so much for my R model pipe dream.
    Ryan Winslow
    Fly PAU!

  22. #22
    bruff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    383
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    Electric conversion here I come!!
    Bob

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Urbandale, IA
    Posts
    1,058

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    any price on it yet???..haven't seen one posted...

  24. #24
    Flyfalcons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Bonney Lake, WA
    Posts
    6,544
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    Tower has it listed at 499.
    Ryan Winslow
    Fly PAU!

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    West Monroe, LA
    Posts
    539
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback

    RE: Top Flite Cessna 310 posted

    The only thing that bugs me - All the scale detail they put into the plane, and the lighting kit, it appears that the plane will have fixed gear out of the box, with a retract "option" - meaning sink another $300 or so into the retracts, and add that much more weight to the plane.
    LAtes,
    CHRIS

    http://www.nelarc.com


Page 1 of 151 1231151101 ... LastLast

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 03:42 PM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.