I maidened it today.

The snow at the field was not plowed so I had to clear 8' x 30' patch for takeoff and landing. The flight was 5min short and never made the 2nd due to possible ignition module failure. In order to take off in 30' and not knowing anything about this plane, I gave full throttle and it did take off and just cleared snow.
More than anything, I wanted to see rock solid harrier with wide range of elevator positon but the plane did rock as much as other planes not known for good harrier.
Rolling harrier was surprizingly smooth. I manage to put in 1 inverted flat but did not experiment much. Hopefully I'll get the ignition module replaced by tomorrow for another flight.
In a new engine with slightly rich idle, it manage to hover below 1/4 throttle but it was difficult to hold from climbing as the stick was near idle and engine rough at idle. 2nd flight will tell more.

The plane came in at 13.25lb. For the purpose of getting DA50 plane under 13lb, slimline pitts will be replaced with stock DA muffler.

If I build one from scratch (no existing hardware or engine), I will go with zdz40re. I don't know if it is smooth running engine or not but that is another debate.

if its like my BME Cap maniac there is an area of rock when applying elevator but after it goes past a certain point of elevator it gets rock solid on harriers and elevators .but i have to stay on my toes because if I back off the stick slowly it does the same thing. it starts rocking again..

Here is not so exciting maiden video of the cap.

www.bsc-engineering-usa.com/Cap232Maiden.wmv

Another few trim flights today!!

I got to trim out for K-E coupling. It required 17% elev on left rudder and 19% elev on right rudder. I got to test tumbles. It seems with good practice you can do end over end tumber without any altitude drop!!! Amazing. I purposely pushed and banged the sticks and did not yet find any deterring bad habits. This has to be the best upright flat spin on any airplanes I've flown including 36% AW Katana, 35% C-A Yak 55sp, and bunch more. As you enter the flat spin, more right aile is applied to flatten the wing and more power applied to pick up the nose. As it stablized it spins about the axis near cg point rather than near wing tip on most other birds. As a result you get blindingly fast spin and it is dead flat. With more experiment in slowing down the decent, it might even be possible to do a flat spin landing. Hover is done with up elev held. It was expected as the vertical cg is well below thrust line due to low wing design and lower stab position. It may require a little upthrust to tame this.

Vertical is..... well.... should I say rocketlike?

I really wish I have the 2.4lb zdz40RE on it try.

I did not think it was boring at all. It was a very good take-off in those condidtions. I stayed with the video to see if you could hit the "handkerchief" of cleared runway when you landed. Nice Job and well done. My kind of enthusiast!

I noticed the flat upright-spin capability when I cross controlled mine. I expect that when the weather gets better we will see a stream of happy campers reporting on this plane.

One tip for short take-offs. If you drop both ailerons about 25 degrees, on a switch, you can get airborne really quickly under 1/2 power. Usually 6-10 feet. It's not good for landing or slow flight but gives great take-offs from rough fields.

For landing you might try 5 degrees of up on each aileron. This airbrake allows for very slow sinking approachs and "almost-stopped" touchdowns.

Regards,

Eric.

Some pictures of 13.25lb soon to be 12.xxlb DA50 Powered Cap 232.

I just ordered this plane with the OS 1.60 and Futaba High Torque servos with metal gears. Couldn't get to your video as it just says "Under Construction" but would love to see this thing fly. Any good building tips you could pass on would be appreciated.

I found the wood blocks and sheet metal screws don't hold up the cowl well. If you look carefully you will see that the position of side screws and top do not match. I have blind nuts going to side of fuse instead of glueing wooden blocks for sides and top could not be done due to foam so I glued one block and blind nut. Using locktite and rubber backed washer will hold up cowl without loosening for long time.

I opened up monocote directly below the stab to apply glue directly around stab and fuse and resealed.

If clicking the video link does not work, retype entire address as shown and video should download.

plane went together very nice. they give you a template to mount the os 1.60. don't get much easier than that. after gluing horizontal stab you can go in thru the elevator cutouts with a bamboo stick or such and drip epoxy where the stab joins the fuselage. makes for a strong bond. I did notice on the pull-pull cables that they were rubbing on the elevator servos. I installed swivel clevises on the bottom of the servo arm to give a little more clearance. my receiver and switch is mounted in the canopy section. I blackened my canopy which I usually do so they can't be seen. this plane is a FLOATER with that engine. I mounted my fuel tank on the cg but I think I may have to move it up a bit. my landings want to float and ballon indicating I'm a little too far back. plane does everything in the book well. hangs with the os at probably 80% power. but its the last twenty percent when the power really comes on. knife edges to me seem to be it's weakest point, as far as coupling. requires some elevator and aileron to keep it on course. I kind of expected that with a low wing plane. another point when installing the wheel pants make sure your wheel is centered in the wheel pants. mine was closer to the inside of the wheel pants and with it being foam wheels they made contact with the inside portion of the pants, causing some cracking (my fault). this is my first gp and I'm very happy with it.

Finally got the link to work!! [:http://www.bsc-engineering-usa.com/Cap232Maiden.wmvD] Thanks for the tip on the cowl mounting. I must have tried a hundred different mods to get the cowl right on planes. Great landing!! I'd still be circling trying to hit that bare spot![:@]

Thanks for the tips. I plan on trying the old YS trick with the fuel tank. I ordered a one-way valve to put in the pressure line from the muffler so I can run a closed pressurized system. May need a regulator though. Lot cheaper then a fuel pump and lighter too. Just have to remember to wrap some packing tape around the tank. I was reading another thread on this plane where the guy dialed in some elevator mix to get this thing to knife edge.
(http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_37...tm.htm#4084886) Says it flies great now. Everyone who has one of these seems to really like it. Can't wait to get started.

Well I maidened mine today... pretty windy but still had some fun.

The 1.60FX with a Bisson inv. pitts has lots of power for this plane... unlimited vertical with rolls on the way up...a nd that's a new engine on it's second tank... running the APC 18x6W.

Though some might think there would be fuel draw issues due to the lower tank, I didn't find that at all... I set it up stock, started the engine, set the high end and she never leaned or richened the whole first flight of 8 minutes.

My all up weight is right at 12 lbs with a single Futaba digital rudder servo on pull-pull and a mini coreless on the throttle and a 6 volt, 1700 mah NiMH. That's with pants and spinner. My CG is 1/2" behing the suggested 5.75" from leading edge at fuse... so I was at 6.25". I want to experiment with it some.

As I suspected, it ehxibits some of the "snappiness" of the CAP design, but not as much as other CAPs I've flown. Certainly handleable and predictable. Basically if you hammer the elevator, it will drop the right wing. But it recovers VERY quickly.

Because of this design element, it does some really wild snap rolls, especially negative snaps. Upright flat spins were very slow and pretty flat, while the inverted seemed faster and with a tad bit more nose down attitude.

The wind was really pushing me around so I didn't get to try much hovering, but it felt like it was gonna hang in there.

I hope to get moretime this weekend for a more thorough analysis. Then I'll get the RCU review written up and submitted.

Do you think it would have deicent pullout of a hover with the 1.60? I have been eyeing this plane too but i have to finish my ultimate and my 87 Yak and my showtime#2. I think this plane is next on my list though..

It does have decent pullout... again my 1.60 only has 2 tanks through it and it has lots of power... at 12 lbs the 1.60 does a great job for 3D. It's not radical but very nice indeed.

not sure I would like the plane as much if built heavier... (i.e. with a gas engine at 13.5 lbs)

Here's a quick teaser video... not much to look at overall as it was pretty windy... but it should show some promise anyway...

[link=http://www.rcguild.com/videos/teaser.wmv]GP CAP 232 Video[/link]

Please Right click the link and select "Save Target As"

I cancelled my 1.6 order for the time being and am looking at putting a 50cc Fuji gas engine into this thing. That way I'll be able to locate the servos in the tail with direct linkage to the rudder and maybe put a smoke system in. I figure with a 20x10 carbon fiber prop it should fly great if left a little nose heavy. Any thoughts?????

Looks like I'm going to get this plane. However, I'm undecided between the DA 50 and OS1.60. Overall I don't fly enough to worry about the cost of glow fuel vs gas. What should I be considering in order to decide between gas and glow? Tough decision for me since I'm not that active with flying.

Thanks.

I do not think you will be happy with a 40 or 50 cc gasser on this plane. Obviously it will fly, but the wing area is still too low for a 14 to 15 pound plane...... If you can get the new BME 55, That should help keep you at 13 pounds or less..... I believe this would be the best setup for this plane, but you will have to wait for the engine.

I have flown several planes that weighed about 12 pounds with the OS 1.60 and they all performed well provided they had sufficient wing area. More than enough verticle power.


LIGHTER IS BETTER

You can tell the needle is set on break in mode rich,, looks like a YS smoke trail

Yep and running on Wildcat 10%nitro/18% oil.

I've found that the 1.60 does not like running lean in the beginning... at least I can never get away with it... always seem to get flameouts from going lean on verticals.

Once I have a couple gallons through it, I'll be able to lean it out a good bit. Even with it fairly rich it has lots of power. When it's broke in and leaned out it'll be even sweeter... then some may add some hotter nitro and really have the power...

I would have to agree with the CAPtain... It flies very well at this weight and could handle a 40-50cc engine fine... but you will exacerbate the snapping. Like he also said, the BME55 if it comes in all it's supposed to, will open the gasoline pumps for MANY of these 1100-1200 sq in aircraft. Also the new ZDZ40RE-FAI might prove a good match as well...

I'm not sure why this sudden trend in trying to put 50cc engines in these large glow planes. The question would be why? When there are SO many great choices for 50cc applications with 1350-1450+ sq in. of wing area. They still are fairly easy to transport and fly inifinitely better than a weighed down 1150sq in aircraft. Each aircraft is intended for a certain flying weight, going above that often destroys the flying characteristics of that plane.

Some get into gas that way... I dunno maybe it makes them feel more comfortable staying in a large glow plane but adding gas to it than jumping to the next larger airframe... but in the long run they miss the real benefit that the 50cc class really affords...

The thing about it is people can fly this size plane with a gasser for maybe $200-$300 less money..... The only difference between the 1.60 size plane and a real 40 or 50cc gasser is the size of the plane itself. I would for the most part put the exact same gear in either size plane....EXCEPT for the engine. A 1.60 size plane should stick with a 1.60 size (weight class) engine. The planes with 1300+ sq in of wing area are the true gassers.

Only if you can keep the overall weight down to 12 to 12.5 pounds or less should you put a gasser in the plane. Hopefully the BME 55 or any newer light weight designed engine will allow this...... Problem is going to be PROP CLEARANCE. The OS 1.60 spins an 18" prop, the BME 55 should be able to spin a 24 or 25". Even if you switch to a 3 blade you are still looking at a 22 maybe 23" prop


Blue Skies and happy landings

I'm going to build this plane but am still trying to decide on which engine to use. I've looked at the Super Tigre 2300, OS 1.60, Fuji 43, YS 1.60, Saitos and too many others to mention. The one that intrigues me is the Brison 2.4. Seems like a very light and powerful engine (talking with no experience at all with gas engines) and would seem to be a good choice to get the best of both worlds, light weight and powerful. Any thoughts on that one??

The Brison 2.4 (39.33cc) looks light until you add the ignition & battery/switch, muffler and plug. At $450 the 43cc Fuji will put out a little more power, wieghs about the same (all up) and comes with a muffler in the price... add to that Tower's discount and you end up with another $20-$25 off.

The 43 would fly the plane very nicely, coming in at maybe 14.25 lbs... I flew the Ultiate 1.60 in the RCU review with a 43 and it started reliably and flew the plane nicelye... not the "3D power" most would want but bery authoritative.

With 3/4 less lbs and a more optimal prop (a 20x8 MSC or CHP seems really nice) it woul dprove very nice.

I have the 43 now on a Chip Hyde Tunnel Vision and at 13.75 lbs it's a perfect setup.


The question now is will you like the CAP at 14.25 lbs... It will fly well for IMAC but I think to heavy for 3D. The 1.60 I have on mine is a perfect match with plenty of power for 3D and a total weight of 12 lbs dry...

If you wanna go for 3D I'd recommend the 1.60, but if you are more into IMAC/Sport flying... you could go either way...

I'm definately into this one for the 3D. What do you think of the Super Tigre 2300 as opposed to the OS? I believe it's lighter and it is definately cheaper. Just not sure about the reliability issues. I plan on using an 18x8W APC prop if I go to the 1.60. I really wanted to find a 4 stroke glow for this plane but there are horsepower issues unless you get into the really big expensive engines.

I don't have any direct experience with the SurperTigre engines... Seems to be a very divided line between guys who love them and guys who can make ''em run.


I suppose that could be said specifically of the 1.60 too... but in my case I bolted it on, used 10% Nitro, started on the very first compression stroke, has no issues drawing fuel from the stock tank location, leaned it out and backed it up about 3 notches and flew two tanks without a single issue. No leaning, richinening, flameouts nothing....

Couldn't be more pleased.

I think I'm using the 18x6W... plenty speed and lighter load on the engine new...

I know the one OS engine I have is VERY reliable. The Super Tigre .90 I own tends to flame out at low rpms. Had to put an on-board glo-driver on it. I may do the same with either engine though. Like the low end reliability. I just happen to have 6-18x8Ws on-hand so I'm going to run them after breaking the engine in with a lighter prop.