3DownLow, what did you use to add tint to your canopy?

Sorry threw the can away, but got it at my LHS. It was for tinting RC car windshields. Check in the RC car and truck forums. They have some cool colors too, blue, gold, and silver too I think. Beware of the hot summer sun and dark canopies though. I've got 2 caved in canopies to support that![:@] Not on this Reactor but on other planes. So far I've been careful to keep it out of the direct sunlight. Sorry couldn't remember the name.

There's just enough width at the base of the LG to put 2 x 4-40 set screws in to install stock wheel pants. It's a good thing, I like the wheel pants on this plane. Looks kind of blah without the pants.

Oh, I see you're in O-town. Go to Central Florida Hobbies. They've got the tinting spray cans.

Got a few flights in for Father's Day. Glad to report that the LG are 100% better than the stock gear. Noseover tendencies in grass were non existent. Even went up over a driveway from grass and did a ground loop for fun. No problemo. The old stock gear would not have handled going over transitions for paved to grass so well. Would have had to stop plane and go grab it. Now I can taxi normally without worrying about whacking the prop. Worth the $35 for sure.

3DownLow, how's your reactor doing overall.... balance, etc.?

Thanks,

Ernie

I discovered that I need to keep the most mass forward as much as possible to keep the great tumbling stuff the Reactor does. I tried another motor out and had to rearrange my packs rearward. Not so good. Ruined the tumbling. Got a Neu 1509/2.5D and WOW! what a difference! Not only do I get unlimited performance, but the balance has worked out perfectly. There's still a little wing rock left upright and inverted, easily managed. Still thinking about adding SFG's to help in that department. Other than that it's an awesome intermediate 3D trainer for me. Very forgiving airframe, wish GP would make a 50cc sized version. I'd like to place my order now!

Thanks for the info. I'm not too far from Central Florida Hobbies.

>>> I discovered that I need to keep the most mass forward as much as possible to keep the great tumbling stuff the Reactor does>>>

Do you mean keep it on the nose heavy side rather than a reward CG?

Thanks,

Ernie

My CG is right where it says it's supposed to be as far as the instructions go. When I went with a heavier motor the weight distrubution seemed to be all wrong with the batteries moved to where they needed to be to find the recommended CG. Ruined the tumbling. Now I have 2 x 3s 2070's + 1 x 2s 2070 next to the air intake on the fuse and 1 x 2s 2070 behind them. So most of the 5s2p pack is all the way forward=much better! Don't think I could have balanced it out correctly with a single 5s2p pack or a 3s2p+2s2p pack. At least not to my liking. My 2 cents. If you were running a nitro setup I would assume it might have better tumbling after losing some fuel? Plane seems to respond well to keeping it light as possible. Mine current setup comes in @102oz. AUW. With the Neu motor it's got too much power...nah! I can hover at 1/2 throttle and take off at about 1/4 throttle. KE is best at the factory recommended setting. So in answering your question, my CG is neither nose or tail heavy. Elevator trim is at zero. I think I've got some mixing to do though. Oh well, more flights to check it out, too bad!

Hello, the F1 comes with positive angle?

Greetings.

What's the F1 and positive angle about? This is a Reactor thread.

On mine and Rob's Reactor, with the recommended CG, we were nose heavy and had some up elevator trim. I think we are quite a bit furher back than 5" from the LE now.

Ernie

Maybe he's asking about the engine bulkhead. ? Not sure.

My CG is at 5 1/2" now.

That's it Rob. The F1, or firewall angle has built in right thrust. It is supposed to be that way. Without that lots of right rudder is needed on takeoff and up lines. Most aerobatic planes have right thrust built in.

Ernie

What is Graphtec's web address?

Here you go.

Thanks. Jim D.

Funny you mention Reactor gear,

I have asked Great Planes and Tower both about this issue and was told several times that it doesnt exist. Nope , no complaints ever. Up until this point I have been a steady customer of Great Planes. I currently own their Gee Bee, Reactor and .60 Fokker DR1 and I have had aeromasters (2), cap 21s (both 40 and 60) and even flew a tiporare for a while back in the day, heck I started flying on a PT20. But I will tell you the way they handled this issue was poor. I was told in an e-mail that they have NEVER heard of this issue. The guy e-mailing me was probably soiling diapers when I was building my tiporare. Then I was told that I needed to flair better????? I clearly stated that my issue was taxi nose over not landing nose over. I guess I am at a loss. I asked if the engineer who designed the poor gear geometry was able to correct it and supply gear. No response to that one. Great Planes seems to be changing from the Great Planes I have done business with for 20 years. Maybe I need to look elsewhere for aircraft. Anybody dealt with hangar 9 much?

Unhappy
103/17

I just maidened my Reactor today (no cowling, no decals, just couldn't wait). Only 2 flights with a rich engine setting. Power is a Magnum .52 2 stroke and it's still not fully broken-in. The plane required a few clicks of up trim and one click left aileron. My initial impression is AWESOME. I installed the stock lg backwards and it actually looks cool. Contrary to what has been said, I experienced no problems whatsoever taxiing, taking off and landing on our grass runway. This is the first 40 size plane I fly in quite some time, but it's definitely a keeper!

Hey,

Same exact set up as mine. I run a 12x4 apc on 15% S&W and its a rippin fast airplane. My Magnum was so tight I used 1200 grit paper to hand fit the piston after 12 or 13 flights. I used to do this with K&Bs years ago and its a great way to fix a poor cylinder to piston fit but you need to pay attention and be carefull. You should have only the slightest pinch at TDC with a stone cold engine. Mine needed a stiff grip to turn it over cold after a dozen flights, way to tight, I bet .004 interference fit. Did you ever fly yours with the gear in the stock position? If you run the gear in the swept back position it noses over, with the gear backwards ( swept forward ) I would imagine it would have no problem what so ever, I just dont like the looks of the swept forward gear. I am still waiting for a fix from Great Planes. I better not hold my breath.

103/17

My Magnum too was very tight but it is beginning to loosen up after about 45 minutes total running time. I didn't know you could do that to the piston, but anyway, that's not something I would feel comfortable trying. After reading other Reactor owners' comments, I didn't even try the gear in the stock position since ours is a grass field. I guess since I never saw the plane with the gear in the stock position (only in pictures), mine looks completely normal to me in the "backwards" position. Anyway, none of the other guys at the field noticed anything about the lg and they all liked the plane, even without the cowling. I will post some pictures later.

I would agree that Great Planes could have done a better job with handling the landing gear problem. I filled in their feedback form at their website and mentioned the problem. Customer reps almost always seem to deny that a problem is widespread.

However, the problem is easy to fix. Just reverse the gear; takeoffs and landings are a piece of cake. Only drawback is that the cg moves a bit forward.

Malcolm

I had mine reversed for a bit and it does work just fine but since I had a set of the U Can Do 46 it was just too easy to make a block and add it on. And it's about an ounce lighter too.

This is my last post to Great Planes after I was told they have no problem. I still await an answer that will most likely never come.


http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_57...tm.htm#5758168

To whom it may concern,

Please visit the link above, I have visited it as have many other people. I have contacted both Tower and Great Planes about the Reactor landing gear problem and what solution your engineers are going to offer to solve it. This is a fantastic airplane with an enormous flaw. The wheels are placed to close to the CG, many years of experience will tell you that. Mine is balanced perfectly with a neutral elevator to fly level and lands as smooth as glass on a runway that looks like a putting green. as soon as I stop and throttle up again with elevators on high rates over I go. Is there an official fix or is everybody's head still in the sand. I own 5 great planes aircraft right now all are excellent performing craft and none have a flaw like this. Is there a fix or are you telling me I am on my own. The last reply I had to this was that I didn't know how to flair when I land. That's not a good answer from your call center / customer support people to a customer of 20+ years. After 22 years flying RC aircraft the comment doesn't sit well.

Thank you,

Respectfully

Here is my 2nd e-mail to Great Planes about the Reactor landing gear issue. The response is below my question. Its always the same, they have never heard of the problem.[:@]

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_57...tm.htm#5758168

To whom it may concern,

Please visit the link above, I have visited it as have many other people. I have contacted both Tower and Great Planes about the Reactor landing gear problem and what solution your engineers are going to offer to solve it. This is a fantastic airplane with an enormous flaw. The wheels are placed to close to the CG, many years of experience will tell you that. Mine is balanced perfectly with a neutral elevator to fly level and lands as smooth as glass on a runway that looks like a putting green. As soon as I stop and throttle up again with elevators on high rates over I go. Is there an official fix or is everybody's head still in the sand. I own 5 great planes aircraft right now all are excellent performing craft and none have a flaw like this. Is there a fix or are you telling me I am on my own. The last reply I had to this was that I didn't know how to flair when I land. That's not a good answer from your call center / customer support people to a customer of 20+ years. After 22 years flying RC aircraft the comment doesn't sit well.

Thank you,

Respectfully

Thank you for your recent e-mail and we apologize for the delay in answering you question,
Our research and development technician's perform exhaustive testing to ensure the aircraft performs from takeoff to landing. To date, we have not received any complaints regarding this problem. However, your comments will be passed on to the appropriate department.

I hope you find this information helpful. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us at this email address. (Please be sure to copy all previous emails into any future questions.) You can also reach us 217-398-0007, or via fax at 217-398-7721.

DID YOU KNOW that our web pages now all contain FAQs? (Frequently asked questions) Please drop by and take a look! We hope you'll find the information helpful and valuable to you.

Sincerely,
Rick B.
Product Support Technician