U Can Do 3D
05-08-2003 | 12:23 PM
#1126
Senior Member
My Feedback: (13)
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Dublin, OH
Unpopular opinion
I guess I'll speak up for those of us who would rather go digital on the UCD. I've flown it both ways, and it was much more crisp to control inputs on the digitals. You can get into the 5625-45 for little more than the price of a Futaba or JR high torque servo, and you get 5 times the holding power from the digital. I find that a little more confidence inspiring on say the back side of a KE loop. Everybody has their own opinion though, but this has been my experience with it.
05-08-2003 | 12:23 PM
#1127
Senior Member
My Feedback: (51)
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ashland, KY
U Can Do FOr Sale on the Sale Forum
Just wanted to let you guys know I've put my UcanDo3D up for sale..
After flying my Edge, I just gotta have more of them big dogs...
See the thread here:
My UC3D for sale post]
After flying my Edge, I just gotta have more of them big dogs...
See the thread here:
My UC3D for sale post]
05-08-2003 | 12:31 PM
#1128
Senior Member
My Feedback: (51)
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,833
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Ashland, KY
Re: Unpopular opinion
Hey Columbus guy... I'm in Hebron, and fly in Newark... 
Good thoughts on the subject, I think what people ought to take from this thread is that this plane WILL fly great with standard servos... and maybe a Hi Torque on the tail...
But they might get better performance from Digitals...
Bottom line is the plane doesn't REQUIRE them, and when I say that I mean... to fly well, strong, aerobatic, etc... and I don't think anyone would be dissapointed in a more basic setup...
And if the budget is no issue (5645's are $56... 425bb's are $14 and 605bb's are $30) then I'm sure one WOULD enjoy faster response, more authority, etc....
Good thoughts on the subject, I think what people ought to take from this thread is that this plane WILL fly great with standard servos... and maybe a Hi Torque on the tail...
But they might get better performance from Digitals...
Bottom line is the plane doesn't REQUIRE them, and when I say that I mean... to fly well, strong, aerobatic, etc... and I don't think anyone would be dissapointed in a more basic setup...
And if the budget is no issue (5645's are $56... 425bb's are $14 and 605bb's are $30) then I'm sure one WOULD enjoy faster response, more authority, etc....
Originally posted by eness76
I guess I'll speak up for those of us who would rather go digital on the UCD. I've flown it both ways, and it was much more crisp to control inputs on the digitals. You can get into the 5625-45 for little more than the price of a Futaba or JR high torque servo, and you get 5 times the holding power from the digital. I find that a little more confidence inspiring on say the back side of a KE loop. Everybody has their own opinion though, but this has been my experience with it.
I guess I'll speak up for those of us who would rather go digital on the UCD. I've flown it both ways, and it was much more crisp to control inputs on the digitals. You can get into the 5625-45 for little more than the price of a Futaba or JR high torque servo, and you get 5 times the holding power from the digital. I find that a little more confidence inspiring on say the back side of a KE loop. Everybody has their own opinion though, but this has been my experience with it.
05-09-2003 | 12:00 AM
#1130
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: State College, PA,
Just Trying to Help
I was just trying to help out those on a lesser budget or might be steered away from buying and having as much fun with their UCD as I have had. P.S. While you guys are putting the extra $$$ in the U-Can-Do, I'll be putting the extra in my Carden. You can stand in the pits and watch.
05-09-2003 | 12:36 PM
#1134
Senior Member
My Feedback: (13)
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Dublin, OH
just an opinion
hey I didn't mean anything elitist or anything like that. I know alot of guys like the Futaba and JR high torque servos, I'm personally a fan of JR myself. But on something like the UCD, my point was that you could spend a few extra bucks and get the extra holding power (5x) of the cored digital by Hitec, which I'm also a big fan of. For 50 dollars, you can't beat the holding power of these servos, and holding power is required for walls, KE loops, Blenders, and any power on spins where propblast is really working the surface. I wholeheartedly agree that these aren't required, but I've flown them both ways, and my preference is the more solid feel of the digital, there is a difference. I just thought I'd add my input as someone reviewing this thread for setup info may find what I have to say of value, after all, I do have 21 years of RC Experience with a majority of those years spent in the pattern arena.
Hey Mordib, I fly at the Delaware Model Airplane Club, just north of the city.
Hey Mordib, I fly at the Delaware Model Airplane Club, just north of the city.
05-10-2003 | 11:00 AM
#1136
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Edison, NJ
Hi all question.
Ok I am going to get the ys 110.
OK here is the question, what prop would be good?
Thanks..
And what is a good prop balancer for big props ..
I am ordering everything this week for the U-Can-Do, exccept the engine...
June 1 it looks like........
OK here is the question, what prop would be good?
Thanks..
And what is a good prop balancer for big props ..
I am ordering everything this week for the U-Can-Do, exccept the engine...
June 1 it looks like........
05-11-2003 | 12:03 PM
#1137
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Edison, NJ
Steve how is this holding up?
Originally posted by Steve Campbell
<<The stock tailwheel is fine...>>
Until it breaks, or is ripped out by side torsion on a bad landing.
Two of the four flying here have had both things occur.
If every landing is a good one, yes, it is fine.
But this airplane encourages one to 'push the envelope' and try new things; like dragging it along on the prop just above the runway ("high-alpha" flight). The model flies so slowly that you become mesmerized and it gets away from you, and the next you know it has slammed onto it's landing gear. Is that the model's fault? Of course not. But reality sucks, sometimes.
Moral of the story; it is a quick and inexpensive modification to put an easily-replaceable tail wheel unit on the UCD. That "skid" area just in front of the rudder is solid balsa. If you cut a quarter inch or so off, fabricate and install a plywood plate to serve as a base you can screw solidly into, and recover with scraps of MonoKote, you now have a solid platform to firmly attach the after-market tail wheel unit of your choice.
You don't even have to trim down the existing area; my pal just glued a five-ply plate in place and bolted a Sulivan unit right on.
Below is a pic of how I did it; a bit more work, but more aesthetically pleasing, if that sort of thing matters to you. If you look close, you can see where the left rear corner of my plywood plate doesn't quite match up to the tail post of the fuselage, as well as the seams of the scrap MonoKote I covered it with. My primary reason for cutting the "skid" down was to maintain prop clearance; that 16x4W is huge. My pal has no clearance problem on his, but the model does sit quite a bit higher in the rear.
Whatever. If you land the airplane "vigorously" the issue tail wheel unit is not long for this world. YMMV...
Steve
<<The stock tailwheel is fine...>>
Until it breaks, or is ripped out by side torsion on a bad landing.
Two of the four flying here have had both things occur.
If every landing is a good one, yes, it is fine.
But this airplane encourages one to 'push the envelope' and try new things; like dragging it along on the prop just above the runway ("high-alpha" flight). The model flies so slowly that you become mesmerized and it gets away from you, and the next you know it has slammed onto it's landing gear. Is that the model's fault? Of course not. But reality sucks, sometimes.
Moral of the story; it is a quick and inexpensive modification to put an easily-replaceable tail wheel unit on the UCD. That "skid" area just in front of the rudder is solid balsa. If you cut a quarter inch or so off, fabricate and install a plywood plate to serve as a base you can screw solidly into, and recover with scraps of MonoKote, you now have a solid platform to firmly attach the after-market tail wheel unit of your choice.
You don't even have to trim down the existing area; my pal just glued a five-ply plate in place and bolted a Sulivan unit right on.
Below is a pic of how I did it; a bit more work, but more aesthetically pleasing, if that sort of thing matters to you. If you look close, you can see where the left rear corner of my plywood plate doesn't quite match up to the tail post of the fuselage, as well as the seams of the scrap MonoKote I covered it with. My primary reason for cutting the "skid" down was to maintain prop clearance; that 16x4W is huge. My pal has no clearance problem on his, but the model does sit quite a bit higher in the rear.
Whatever. If you land the airplane "vigorously" the issue tail wheel unit is not long for this world. YMMV...
Steve
05-11-2003 | 12:52 PM
#1138
Senior Member
My Feedback: (13)
U Can Do 3D
The installation is holding up fine. However, the tail wheel unit is getting rather loose and sloppy in the plastic bearing/mount; to the point that it is canted a bit when the tail is on the ground, necessitating holding considerable rudder to make the airplane track straight.
Bending the wheel/strut doesn't help, since the wheel is at an angle to the ground.
This is not a big deal- yet- but the Sullivan unit appears to be made rather cheaply. The beauty of this arrangement, however, is that when it becomes objectionable, it is a five minute job to replace the unit.
You will end up doing some variation of this eventually, since the stock unit WILL fail. It is just a question of how soon...
Steve
Bending the wheel/strut doesn't help, since the wheel is at an angle to the ground.
This is not a big deal- yet- but the Sullivan unit appears to be made rather cheaply. The beauty of this arrangement, however, is that when it becomes objectionable, it is a five minute job to replace the unit.
You will end up doing some variation of this eventually, since the stock unit WILL fail. It is just a question of how soon...
Steve
05-11-2003 | 02:08 PM
#1139
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Edison, NJ
This is true..
Originally posted by Steve Campbell
The installation is holding up fine. However, the tail wheel unit is getting rather loose and sloppy in the plastic bearing/mount; to the point that it is canted a bit when the tail is on the ground, necessitating holding considerable rudder to make the airplane track straight.
Bending the wheel/strut doesn't help, since the wheel is at an angle to the ground.
This is not a big deal- yet- but the Sullivan unit appears to be made rather cheaply. The beauty of this arrangement, however, is that when it becomes objectionable, it is a five minute job to replace the unit.
You will end up doing some variation of this eventually, since the stock unit WILL fail. It is just a question of how soon...
Steve
The installation is holding up fine. However, the tail wheel unit is getting rather loose and sloppy in the plastic bearing/mount; to the point that it is canted a bit when the tail is on the ground, necessitating holding considerable rudder to make the airplane track straight.
Bending the wheel/strut doesn't help, since the wheel is at an angle to the ground.
This is not a big deal- yet- but the Sullivan unit appears to be made rather cheaply. The beauty of this arrangement, however, is that when it becomes objectionable, it is a five minute job to replace the unit.
You will end up doing some variation of this eventually, since the stock unit WILL fail. It is just a question of how soon...
Steve
What is thw web link to that tail gear?
Thanks for your time on this Steve..
05-11-2003 | 04:49 PM
#1140
My Feedback: (45)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: DAVIS,
CA
16 X 4W APC prop on YS 91 UCD 3D
I was going to try the 16 X 4W APC prop on my YS 91 and my Tru Turn spinner adaptor bottomed out way before the prop hub. Any one else experience this and have a clean solution? Am using a 15 X 7 which flies the plane ok but can't get the rpms desired.
05-11-2003 | 05:29 PM
#1141
Senior Member
My Feedback: (13)
U Can Do 3D
The "W" APC props are not as thick as the "regular" ones, in the hub area. That may be why your adapter is bottoming out.
Another reason why I put a five-dollar DuBro spinner on mine. Sure, they're all spiffy and trendy, but I cannot see spending the equivalent of a case of fuel on a prop spinner... different priorities, I guess.
Steve
Another reason why I put a five-dollar DuBro spinner on mine. Sure, they're all spiffy and trendy, but I cannot see spending the equivalent of a case of fuel on a prop spinner... different priorities, I guess.
Steve
05-11-2003 | 05:33 PM
#1142
Senior Member
My Feedback: (13)
U Can Do 3D
<<...Is it really that bad (the stock gear)...>>
Depends upon one's definition of "bad". It works, and if the airplane is handled gently (no hard landings) it will last a long time. But it transmits all the ground loads into the servo, plus same for the hinges. One good thump will tear it out.
You pays your money, and you makes your choice...
Depends upon one's definition of "bad". It works, and if the airplane is handled gently (no hard landings) it will last a long time. But it transmits all the ground loads into the servo, plus same for the hinges. One good thump will tear it out.
You pays your money, and you makes your choice...
05-12-2003 | 08:49 AM
#1143
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Edison, NJ
Re: 16 X 4W APC prop on YS 91 UCD 3D
Originally posted by loveflyn
I was going to try the 16 X 4W APC prop on my YS 91 and my Tru Turn spinner adaptor bottomed out way before the prop hub. Any one else experience this and have a clean solution? Am using a 15 X 7 which flies the plane ok but can't get the rpms desired.
I was going to try the 16 X 4W APC prop on my YS 91 and my Tru Turn spinner adaptor bottomed out way before the prop hub. Any one else experience this and have a clean solution? Am using a 15 X 7 which flies the plane ok but can't get the rpms desired.
It has a True Turn on it I think..
RCADMIN has it on his..
05-12-2003 | 03:33 PM
#1144
My Feedback: (45)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: DAVIS,
CA
U Can Do 3D
I checked out rc universe review of the UCD and he has a tru turn all right but is using the 15 X 6 prop so it doesn't answer the question. I have emailed tru turn with the porblem and await their answer. Will post it if interested as this has probably come up or will come up again. I would like to find an aliminum washer or spacer with the right id and od so as not to ad weight to the nose. That would be one solution. The other is to go back to the "Rudolf the red nose spinner" that came with the arf and put the 16 X 4W on with the stock YS 91 washer and nut and hope there is enough thread.
05-12-2003 | 03:36 PM
#1146
Senior Member
My Feedback: (11)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Greensboro, NC
U Can Do 3D
Just do what I did and put a dubro prop nut on it. I use a Higley flat nut as well, so its double nutted. I do have enough room for a second higley nut, if it tries to work itself loose. You cut out so much of the plastic spinner that it is liable to break on either startup, or inflight stress.
Steve
Steve
