CafeenMan

I ordered the Inspire from [link=http://www.atlantahobby.com/]Atlanta Hobby[/link]. The plane is currently at the top of their home page.

They shipped it today and said I'd have it by thursday. The only problem now is how to power it. Fliton recommends the YS .63 but all I have is a brand new O.S. .61 FX (bad choice I think) and a YS .91 aero. Nothing in between.

I think the .91 will probably be too much for the plane so I may go with the OS until I can get a more suitable engine.

What do you guys think about the .91? 3D isn't my thing - this is my first one so I don't know much about it.

Thanks,

- Paul

GarySS

My Feedback: (13)

Seems like the guys in the Fliton Extra 330 thread really like the Saito 100.......also saying the Saito .82 is OK but not great. That's a 5 pound plane too. How is that YS .91? Is it smooth enough to go into a lightly built plane? Otherwise I would think it would work OK for great 3D, power is king in 3D, etc.

CafeenMan

The engine was given to me. I had problems with it at first, but the pump was screwed out as far as it would go and it would run about 30 seconds and then die. I reset the pump and have run just one tank through it on my test stand and it seems real good. I'm mostly concerned about the power tearing up the light airframe.

GarySS

My Feedback: (13)

Yeah, that would be the main concern with me too. I have heard of that engine tearing out of motor mounts on a pattern aircraft. But, maybe it wasn't set up properly?

CafeenMan

Well, I've been working on my Inspire all weekend... sort of. I get disgusted and frustrated about every hour and have to leave my shop so instead of finishing it in a day or two I'm still working on it after 3 days. What a miserable experience. Now I know why I don't assemble ARFs.

All the hardest parts (installation) are done at the worst possible time - after the plane is built. When I build all installations are done before or during the build which makes things go much more smoothly for a better result.

There's nothing particularly wrong with this ARF that isn't wrong with all of them, but I don't see me getting another ARF for a very long time. I haven't had this miserable of an experience in my shop since I can't remember.

jdan

My Feedback: (1)

Be real careful when you apply the iron to the covering.I don't know what it is,but it doesn't like heat. Also, the tank is located under the wing tube,so if you're not using a YS,think about a pump.

CafeenMan

The covering is my main complaint. There is no "right" amount of heat. The thing is covered with wrinkles. It already looks like it's been through 3 seasons of flying.

CafeenMan

I managed to get both engines set up so that I don't have to change anything in the radio if I switch engines. All I have to do is change the linkage.

mr.scale

My Feedback: (4)

what engine is the oneon the left and what is the one on the right? do you think standard servos will actually do good on this bird? how is the hardwarepackage? tell us more bad and good things and what would you do to improve it!!
Fernando

CafeenMan

Fernando - I'll be doing a full write-up on my website when the model is complete. It's about done.

I don't like my engine choices at the moment. On the left is the OS .61 FX. On the right is the YS .91. I think this plane definitely needs a 4-stroke, but I'm not sure about the YS because I got it from somebody else. It was set so far from where it should have been I wonder if the engine will be reliable. The pump was backed all the way out. It ran ok on the test stand a couple years ago, but that's all I know about the engine.

The covering sucks. I wish I knew what it is because I would never buy it or another ARF covered with it. The build is ok but not to a standard where I would be proud to say I built it. The instructions are mostly good but a couple things left out. There are two squares of plywood that I have no idea what to do with. The axles are way too short to use the wheel pants which isn't a problem for me because I won't use them anyway. Wheel pants are nothing but problems on a field as rough as the one I fly at.

Anyway, if you like ARF's then there are no significant problems other than the covering. I just don't like doing things the hard way. I'd have rather built the plane from a kit so that things could have been addressed when I could have done them more accurately and with less frustration. I have a very low BS tolerance and this plane surpassed it too frequently. But again, I think it's an ARF thing not a problem peculiar to the inspire. I think it will fly great once I get it trimmed and tweaked over a few months of flying.

And no, I don't think standard servos will be adequate. I'm using dual servos mounted in the bottom of the stabilizer (Hitec 225's), a pair of Futaba 9202's for the ailerons and a Hitec 635 for the rudder.

- Paul

Ken Bryant

My Feedback: (10)

Looks interesting, I have a Satio 82 that needs a home. Going to watch and wait and see how things work out with this plane.

.:RClunatic:.

My Feedback: (21)

Hi Paul,

I appreciate you sharing all of this infomration with us and keeping us posted on your build. I just picked mine up this week and am very impressed with what I see. The covering on mine didnt seem to have any problems so I wonder if yours was damaged. Nonetheless, I am throwing on a YS 63 on there and Im not sure where I should mount it. Do you have measurements on where you mountd your engine? If you have the numbers or a general idea, that would be perfect. this thing is just so nice I dont want to screw it up, if you know what I mean.

again, thanks for your help here and i look forward to seeing more information along the way.


James

CafeenMan

James - My Inspire wasn't damaged. I just hate the covering. By that I mean the covering itself - not the scheme which I think is nice. If you normally build ARF's then this is probably a good model. At the risk of sounding conceited, when I build I have much greater attention to detail.

Our field is closed until tomorrow afternoon. Unfortunately, it opens about the same time as we've been having thunderstorms all week. Mine is ready to maiden but it's not done. I haven't mounted the cowl because I'm still not sure of the engine. Personally, I think the .63 is probably the way to go. Maybe up to a .80 or even a .90. I put my YS on the stand today and it was giving me some problems. Again, it had a previous owner and when I got it the settings were all screwed up which makes me wonder how badly the engine was abused.

After an hour of fiddling around with it I got it to run out a tank and throttle ok so I'm crossing my fingers.

After I fly it there are some more details I need to take care of. The canopy is screwed on but I need to tape the edges. I also want to splice the servo extensions from the tail instead of having them plug in.

OH yeah... mine came in WAY nose-heavy. Much more nose heavy than the larger engine accounts for. Especially when you consider I'm using two elevator servos mounted in the rear instead of just one (plus the extra extension). I also used a heavier tail wheel because the tail gear wire is too small for the mount it comes with. I bent a new one from music wire (heavier than stock) and the tail wheel is one I had on hand and weighs a lot more than the one supplied. Even with that I taped a bunch lead back there for now.

There's something really wrong with the landing gear. The left gear is back about 3/4" farther than the right gear. There's only one way to bolt it on and everything is already drilled so it's not something I could have messed up. I don't know if the problem is the mounting holes in the fuselage, the gear being mis-drilled or if the two gears aren't identical to begin with. In any case it makes the plane sit with the left side low and looks bad.

CafeenMan

Oops - Sorry James... the engine centers on the off-center hole in the firewall. With the right thrust the back of the propeller will be on the fuselage centerline. There are laser-etched lines at 90 and 45 degrees to help out. I used a small straight edge to extend the lines.

wildnloose

James,
All you have to do is check out CafeenMans' website to see what he is talking about. Excellent build site. Kinda surprised me that he actually bought an af...he must have seen something in the Inspire that the rest of us cannot.

As for myself, I just like these types of birds (pattern like 3d ships). I think they fly better than a SA 3d plane.

CafeenMan

wildnloose - The guys at the field about had heart attacks when I told them I bought it. The true story is I saw the ad in Model Aviation and just thought it had beautiful lines. Most 3D planes are ugly monstrosities and I don't even like watching them fly. Sure, they can do anything you can imagine, but they have no grace about them.

I've wanted to try my hand at 3D but frankly, I don't know enough about it to design my own. I'd be reinventing the wheel. I bought the inspire with the intention of learning what I can about 3D and then if I really like I would basically copy the design and build one "my way." I still think it's a beautiful design, but it's mass produced having the necessary compromises to be competitive.

I know I've said a lot of bad things about the plane but I hope everyone understands that what I really mean is that it's nothing about this plane in particular but just the way things have to be when a plane is an ARF rather than lovingly built by a person who wants the plane to be as good as it can be.

My honest opinion is that if you do like ARF's and the problems with them don't bother you then this one is probably as good or better than most of them. But then I've only assembled 3 or 4 ARF's so I know my opinion about it doesn't count for much.

CafeenMan

My Inspire flew for the first time yesterday. I hadn't mounted the cowl yet because of the uncertainty of the engine. The YS .91 is WAY more power than this model needs. It will hover at about 1/3 throttle. I went over 1/2 throttle only a few times in vertical climbs. I can get about 10 minutes before the tank starts getting low. I'll need to either stuff in a larger tank or add a header tank.

The model was initially balanced at the forward recommended CG. Fliton recommends from 5.5" - 5.9". The plane has a very bad habit that almost caused me to lose it.

On low rates the elevator moves about 5/8" in each direction. It likes to snap when pulling in close to full up. As I understand it that means the CG is too far back but I'm not sure about that. We removed some of the tail weight and it didn't change the snap behavior.

The way it works is this: Lets say I'm making a slight left turn that loses altitude. When I give right aileron to level the wings it's ok until I add a little elevator. It snaps hard to the right every time. In fact, I almost lost the plane when it snapped and when I tried to correct it the plane snapped again. Had it snapped a 3rd time it would have been lost.

The plane weighs 6lbs 6 oz. ready to fly. The CG is now ahead of the farthest forward point recommended.

At full elevator throw on high rates the plane sinks but doesn't snap. That's as much throw as the elevators have. I'm not sure how much it is but the elevator and stabilizer are both beveled so it's a lot. I checked all linkages, servo mounts, etc. to make sure nothing was loose. All hinge lines are sealed.

Frankly, it's a really spooky thing and doesn't give me a lot of confidence in doing anything below 300'. It doesn't take much elevator and it happens at really odd times when the elevator throw is mild and all I'm doing is turning the model.

On the plus side, this model lands better than almost any plane I've had. It's rock solid on approach and very easy to adjust attitude and altitude using elevator and throttle. It settles in very nicely and doesn't porpoise like a lot of planes do when adding a touch of elevator. Once it touches down it stays down. I had one landing that was a little too fast and hit a little too hard and that did bounce back into the air but that was just a poor landing. All others were picture perfect.

We didn't try too much aerobatic stuff. Mike tried to knife edge the model but it pulls very hard toward the canopy. I don't have the skill to work the sticks to hold down elevator and aileron at the same time. Getting that kind of thing mixed out will wait until we figure out the snapping behavior. If we can't get that straightened out then the model will be permanently grounded.

I think our next move will be to put the CG at the aft of the range and see if that makes a difference.

We never balanced the plane laterally but the wing panels were exactly the same weight and the servos are well inboard so I seriously doubt that the problem is lateral balance. Even if it's not balanced it can't be that far off. I mean this is a really vicious behavior.

Anyone have any ideas?

smok

IMHO this plane is a blend of 3D and pattern design, also from the pictures it looks like the whole elevator is quite large, so that plus the long tail and moderately sized wing with not-so-thick profile would likely mean that one should be careful with the elevator rates during normal speed flight ( not slow 3D ). A forward CG, plus rapid elevator deflection at medium to high speed would likely result in a violent tip stall. This is not a Flip3D type of plane, rather more close to Funtana or Synergy 3D. My take on that one setup would be to balance the CG, so it does not point up from level flight, when slowing close to idle, and it does not become squirelly when not moving the elevator but flying in some wind, so to keep straight lines and not to show symptoms of being tail heavy ( like dropping the tail on slow approach etc ), but to be quite close to aft limit of CG and far from being nose heavy . One more check is what happens when diving vertically at idle - it should not try to level the flight, maybe only a bit ( one click of trim kind of correction ). Also next check is to fly inverted and it should need a click or two of down trim, but not more, to fly hands off that way. That's for the CG...

Next the deflections - for elevator I would setup low rates in the way that from level flight, half throttle ,when steadily applying full up elevator, but not ramming it suddenly - it should not tip stall. If it does, lower the rate. Then when full elevator is applied suddenly, it should stall or be very close - this should allow for nice snap rolls. The ailerons being that big may also need quite low rated for pattern flight, while my preference for the ruder for low rates is some 70% of high rates plus plenty of expo ( 70% or so ) to smooth it around the center line, so the full deflection at low rate is only used for stall turns. Some people use 3rd medium rates for snaps and stall tturns, low rate for pattern and high for 3D - that's down to personal preference. I also usually add around 30% of expo for elevator, ailerons and more for the rudder at low rates, and start with twice more expo for high rates, then adjust after getting used to the plane reactions and habits.

But my take on the Inspire 60 is that is not a 3D trainer, it is rather a expert 3D machine with some pattern capabilities and should allow to practice stall / tumble manouvers as well, unlike the Flip3D type which does not like to stall unless almost slowing to zero speed.

Well, for now I can not afford to get the Inspire, so I can only have some fun posting about it, the plane seems interesting, I would love to see one in flesh and flown by a good pilot,

Cheers,

Smok

CafeenMan

smok - Thanks for the comments and advice. As it's set up now, the elevator has very little throw on low rate and at least 70% expo. It snaps at way below half throttle and even when pulling elevator in slowly and smoothly. I think you may be right about the CG. I'm going to move it to the aft limit recommended by Fliton and see what happens.

I don't know where people got the idea that the Inspire is a 3D trainer. I don't know jack about 3D but this looks like a very capable airplane. The wing is triple tapered and the overall lines and moments of the model look excellent.

mr.scale

My Feedback: (4)

for some reason i dont get any mail from RCU! anyone kinows why?
I dont know if I consider on buying this plane now I have the engine Magnum XLS 52 and some servos laying aroun and standar servos are a bad choice for this thing. Ill keep an eye on more flight reports!!!
Fernando

bdavison

My Feedback: (1)

WOW....that snapping problem is sounds IDENTICAL to what my little electric BRIO was doing. EXACTLY IDENTICAL. I never did figure out how to fix it, and it eventually snapped one day low altitude and went in hard. I gave up on it, because I couldnt get it to fly right. That unpredictable snap really drove me nuts.

If you do manage to figure out what is causing it, Id like to know how you fixed it. I liked flying the BRIO, but I didnt trust the plane.

tIANci

Its funny to hear that this bird will snap and does not KE well. Its very much like the Prodigy and the Prodigy does not snap and will KE without coupling. Now I wonder if I should order one to join the FL Edge and Extra that I got ...

CafeenMan

I wouldn't discount this plane just yet. The plane is nose-heavy which will cause it to pull to the canopy on knife-edge. I was in a big rush to put this one in the air and didn't pay much attention to some of the details. I balanced it the quick and easy way just to get it in the air, but it was still nose-heavy.

I plan to replace the elevator servos (Hitec HS-225's) with Futaba 3202's which are metal-gear and a bit heavier. I also plan to cut open the decking in the rear and put the battery farther back.

Most of the problem is that I'm using a much larger and heavier engine than recommended. I managed to stuff a 12 ounce tank in place of the stock tank so that will resolve flight time issues.

I think if you assemble this model per the manufacturer's intent you'll have a better model than I have. I will work things out as best I am able over the next few weeks. Until then, take my comments as being my problems - not the model's. I didn't do things the way the manufacturer recommended and I have only a half-day's worth of flying on it. Plus, I'm honestly not a very good pilot. I bore holes in the sky.

Hopefully somebody with more skills and piloting credibility than me will post a thread about their Inspire which will give you a better overview of what this model can do.

- Paul

tIANci

Paul - you sound like my kinda pilot! Just like me. Let us know more when you have had more flights.

CafeenMan

That may never happen. I am so frustrated working on this model that I had to leave my shop because I was about 2 seconds from smashing it to bits. I'm putting it away for a while so I can work on something enjoyable instead of dreading walking into the shop.