hi guys ,
just wandering if my cap 232 kyosho breitling .32-.40 size is 3D capable? or is it possible to modificate it to perform 3D manovers
i have a os 46 fx on it


thanks

Hi my Dad has a Kyosho cap 232 and he has just had to rebuild it and all he did was pull out of a KE too fast!! I don't think this plane is right for 3d the control surfaces are too small and my dads has a nasty snap and stall on it i don't know if yours is the same but it's great for sport flying but not really for 3d.......hope this helps......Flyjunkie

Lovely plane to fly but not a 3D candidate ... the ailerons are not that large and does not come in close to the fuse.

The bigger 60 size Kyosho Cap with the eyes and mouth on the cowl is 3D capable. If you can find one. 3D's with a Saito 100 or YS110

to 3d, do i REALLY need ailerons that comes all the way in to the fuselage? is this very important?

Im currently building a yak and thinking about making her 3D capable.

Getting it as close as possible helps to give you more control as its in the prop wash. Also, the ailerons are not that big. The Kyosho CAP is a lovely flying plane, will fly great aerobatics but 3D is not its forte. Will fly really nice with a simple SA72.

they are 3d capable.. there are a few pics of a friend of mine, Jeff Slack's in the 'our models' section

http://freespace.virgin.net/bob.nicol/

Hey Nathan! How are you ... I was informed quite a bit about you by Daniel. He was here for a holiday and we met up. Is the CAP really a good 3D plane or just 3D capable? What engine was being used?

It is fully 3D capable, in fact it is the best damn 40-sized harriering plane I have flown (very stable once stalled). Waterfalls and walls are out of this world. Best blenders I've seen. But, rolling harriers will be snappy and hovering is not very easy due to the short coupling.

I have made some modifications to it that help a lot get rid of the snappiness many people complain about. It has to do with elevator linkage play. Have a look at this old thread:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_19...tm.htm#1942232

I would suggest a 70 4stroke if you want max performance form the plane. The 46 might be a bit anaemic...

Hpergm - love the mods you did ... esp the elevator.

thanks Tianci, Best of all... they work well, too!

Its not necessary to have the ailerons close to the fus if you can configure Ailivators i.e. two servos controlling the elevators and working in conjunction with the Ailerons, I did this to my Flair Yak 54 with great success, 3D capable slow and unfortunately too low, stuffed it but my fault not the aircraft.

I have to agree with you on this, the modern practice of putting servos at the rear has increased the weight of most aircraft due to the neccessary additional weight needed in the nose to compensate, I built a Graupner Extra 300L LEKI with a Webra 80 in the nose and 10onz of lead, eventually I converted this to electric which decreased the overall weight even with 6S2P liPos installed. Closed loop linkages are the only way to go in reality to ensure slop free links, with Ailivators i.e. two servos on the elevators working with the Ailerons it makes sense to keep the weight at the rear as low as poss.