rainedave

My Feedback: (1)

This might be fun. Available from MAN, I think.

hogflyer

It was a free plan in the Sept 2006 edition MAN. I've noticed one problem with the free plan (at leasty my copy of it) - it seems to be skewed [&o]. In order to build from it, I’d have to redraw it. Has a small wing so it should be quite fast. I can see CP mounting a Fora to this one...... Looks like it should also fly quite well with a Norvel .061, even better for those forturnate enough to have a Norvel .074.

Wing Span.......... 21.50�
Wing Area.......... 115.11 sq. in.
Dry Weight......... 16 oz
Wing Loading...... 20.01 oz./sq. ft.
Length............... 24.31�
Power................ 049/.051
Radio................ 2 ch with standard or micro servo’s
3 ch with micro servo’s

Hogflyer

rainedave

My Feedback: (1)

Ha! I was thinking of CP and his Fora when I saw this.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

Guys, I'm flattered that this plan reminded you of me, but at the wing area specified, and at 16 ozs, this plan isn't worth the paper it's printed on. I have a 105 sq. incher that weighs 11 ozs, and it lands like a meteorite. The plane shown in the plan, [no matter how nice it looks] is good for 1 flight
EDIT, after looking over the plan, I don't see why on GODs' GREEN EARTH this plane has to weigh more than 10 ozs with a TD?

flyinrog

My Feedback: (1)

hahaha, I was thinkin the same thing..that short ws at a pound? looks fun but it shouldnt weigh that much, especially with 2 servos...CP would never go for that!!...Rog

rainedave

My Feedback: (1)

Looking over the plan more closely, it's incredibly complicated for such a small model. Example: It has 1/64" ply cap strips with a second layer of 1/32" balsa cap strips glued on top of those. But, as complex as the construction is I simply can't add up 16ozs of materials off the plans. I'm thinking that it's a typo. There just isn't that much wood and hardware there. Still, it looks really cool and redesigned I bet it would be a good flyer. That 16ozs has to be an error.

scudrunner77

I think they show full size servos, RX, and battery. I bet that's where the 16oz comes from... Looks like a sweet design though.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

The build it to crash well mentality + full size gear would explain the weight. That much weight in such a small package could really push a TD beyond its' red line in a death dive. A plane that heavy and small would be a chore to launch with a 4.2x4 prop, you would be stuck either in 5x3 or 6x3 mode to get it going. This little plane nowadays could be a great match for a TD, AME or KB with a 4.2x4 prop. Might be too small for a heavier Fora?

fireman7875

My Feedback: (7)

Where is it as a free plan in the Sept.2006 issue? I have my copy in front of me right now and don't see it? I wouldn't mind taking a stab at this plane. I agree that I can't see any reason it would weigh so much.

Brian

hogflyer

Here's the issues and a what the plan looks like. It's attached in there some where. Sorry about the poor quality pic - I had to take it with the flash off - too much glare reflecting off the cover otherwise.

Hogflyer

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

HF, thanks for that photo. I can see why it uses ply cap strips, look how thin that built up wing is.

fireman7875

My Feedback: (7)

I got gipped! Mine didn't come with the plan! Guess I'll have to have a little talk with the nice folks at MAN. Thanks, HF

kydeer7301

My Feedback: (2)

Hey fireman - I just grabbed my copy to look for it, and amazingly, no plan. I am thinking it is not so much a matter of getting jipped because the cover on mine differs from the one posted by hogflyer. I am a subscriber to MAN and wondering if this is how we get thanked for our subscribtion! If you contact them please let me know what comes of it.

rainedave

My Feedback: (1)

I didn't get the pull-out plan either, and my cover is different, too. Maybe it was a promotional issue to drum up subscriptions.

BTW, I just got an issue of MAN in the mail because I let myself get talked into joining the Tower savers club. No way would I subscribe to this magazine today! There's an "engine review" in it where the reviewer did nothing more that tach it. I remember when people like Lee and Gierke (sp?) would completely disassemble engines and tell you everything about it'sinternal design in their reviews. Another thing that bothered me is the way words are getting reappropriated. Both "kit" and "construction" were used in an arf review. I'm not a member of the Semantics Police Squad (SPS), but arfs are not kits and they are not constructed. Humph![>:]

hogflyer

Know what you mean on the quality - nothing like it used to be. They are just like most other magazines - geared for the ARF electic parkflyer crowd, not the kit builders. I got my copy at the LHS and the only reason I picked it up was the plan was in it and it looks like it has some possiblities after it is put on a diet.

Hogflyer

fireman7875

My Feedback: (7)

Kydeer, I didn't notice the difference in the cover! I'll bet they put those on the news stands just to get more Non-subscriber sales. That SUCKS! I will definitely be calling them now!!![>:]


Preach on Brother Dave!! Can I get an Amen?!? You're speakin my language. That is one of my biggest pet peaves.

Brian

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

It's kind of amusing to lurk the ARF forum and listen to their tales of woe and hardship [&o].....

small_rcer

Good Day All:

This link has their on-line construction article.

http://modelairplanenews.com/ma/plan/microjet.asp

Jim H

kydeer7301

My Feedback: (2)

rcer - I did see the construction article on the website, but did not see the plans. Did I miss a link to download them. The cover on mine looks the same as the one posted by hogflyer, however the top banner is missing the "plan pullout" and says "Rotor speed: New heli column" [&o]

I just think it really sucks to find that I have paid for a subscribtion to find out that the plans were not inlcluded. Maybe it is just me, but I would think that if you want to keep subscribers, then a perk like a pull out set of plans would be included to your subscribtion base and not the newstands were they would be more apt to not make it to the buyer anyways. I am not as pissed about not receiving the plans as I am with the thought of having to pay $15 if I decide that I do want them.

I wish RCM could get things settled and start putting out their quality mags again.

rainedave

My Feedback: (1)

kydeer7301, PM me your email address and you'll have full-size plans.

fireman7875

My Feedback: (7)

I made a call to MAN today and, just as I figured, they only put the plan issues on the news stands. The ones without plans went out to subscribers. I told them exactly what I thought about this practice and they actually supported my opinion! They said that it was intended to entice nonsubscribers to purchase. The good news is that if anyone wants the plan, just call MAN and they will send it to you. Mine is on the way[8D] Might be a project soon!

Brian

Jim_Purcha

My Feedback: (8)

I had the similar beef with MANs a few months back about the same issue. I wasn't happy with their policy either. I thought if they were getting my money in advance as a subscription I should get all benefits possible. I must admit, I like the British magazines for always providing a free construction plan.