Just test flew my Creek Hobbies Extra 330. First flight to trim out was fine, nice flying plane. On the second flight on the first snap the wings pulled away from the fuse and the plane is now back in kit form.

Has anyone experienced this problem, or an I the first? According to Creek they have never heard of this before.

Jim

There has been some talk about this. I'm assuming you relied on the spring to hold the wings together? Many of us who are flying the Creek Planes, have come up with various ways to "help" the spring, or eliminate it all together.

I use zip ties to hold the wings in the fus' (tied between the hooks). Another member retrofitted some neat plastic studs and wing nuts.

Sorry about your loss.

Mike

Mike,

I did rely on the spring alone to hold the wings together. According to Creek, they have sold over 400 kits and this is the first report they have heard of where the spring did not hold the wings together tightly. I find this hard to believe.

Jim

The spring in my kit seemed really weak. So, before the first flight, I went to the hardware store and got a stronger one. They come in lots of sizes and I got one just slightly shorter than the kit one. It's was a heavier duty silver colored one and it works great. Cost about $1.25... But, I guess you don't need one now, huh? Is Creek going to do anything, as far as replacement?

I really like my Staudacher. I was just getting used to it after about 8 flights, until I got a little too slow on the last landing and it dropped in from about 6-8 feet. I've usually had trouble slowing it down on landings, so I set up a lot further out this time. Lost perception of how fast it was coming in. Landed flat on the gear, but shattered both legs and wheel pants. No other damage, thank goodness. Waiting on the OK from the wife to order a new set...

telll ya what they always say that!!! THATS THE FIRST I'VE EVER HEARD OF WE'VE SOLD OVER 400 KITS YADA YADA YADA!!!
the plane sucks the company and there service sucks and the extra was the worst example of a plane ive ever flown
dont waste ur hard working money on there inferiour {sp?} product... they stiffed me for over $300

Someone else on here also had the same thing happen. Planes of this size and flight characteristics are a little ahead of the novice pilot (not to say you are, but many who bought this plane were). Always install bolts for plug in wings on a high performance aerobatic. Sorry for your loss, an expensive lesson. My opinion?, this is where ARF's have taken this hobby.

Details, please. Tell us what was so bad.

ok heres a aold excerpt...WELL CAPTAIN G
were did i use that CR@P! word at!! i would have used much worse.
u can take any advice u want! im just telling you that they are a really poor! and i'm saying poor quality plane, and there customer service was well lets just say that, i've had better luck trying to return a slurpee at a 7-11 are getting my dog to meow...ok u want me to explain well then sit back cause this is going to be a long read..

ok first off just to get this plane in the air! i neeeded to reglue the whole fire wall and motor box asssembly back together do to the lack of glue..
the landing gear structure box was built out of the cheapest grade ply i've ever seen, i've seen better wood on thoses lil 99 cent galliow balsa gliders.
it only had glue on a spot on one side, and on one end!
i did a standard landing! and the landing gear popped out so trying to find the prob. i seen that the ply popped out (now im not sayin rippped!! Popped ) due to the lack of glue and the ply actually seperated delaminated , due to the poor quality ply chossen for a landing gear box
the ultra cote! are cheap ol coat!! are what ever its called was the cheapest most fragile stuff ive ever seen, and it looks like it was put on by a blind man and a candle to heat it up.
then u look at the design of the plane it looks like the nose was designed a lil to short,, for u to put the servos in the tail were the cut out's are ur going to have to put at least 8 to 14 oz's of lead in the nose to get a docile C.G. and that makes for a nice heavey plane..
and these prob's are just the tip of the iceberg!
then u talk customer service thats about as friendly as waiting in line at the D.M.V. for 2 hours.
i called them up told them about what was going on, and they said ohhh ya sure send it back and we will decide !! I said send it back the tail feathers are built??
yup send it back ..So i said ok then send UPS to come pick this up and send a large enough double box (remeber this is a 1/4 scale 3d size tail feathers built already)to pick this up and ill have no prob sending it back. And they said no that they wernt going to do thats! so i did some home work for me to send my plane back with a double ex large box in the size it would take and weight!
it was going to cost me $87 .00 from california to new jersey
and that wasnt even with insurance
so let''s do a lil math
it cost me
$200.00 plus tax
$45.00 to get it to me in the standard box
$87.00 to send it back
lets see that put's me
$332.00 in the hole for them to decide if my plane was of cheap quality.. are not do anything at all!! and send it back !!
even if they were to stand by there product, and send me a new plane id still be in the hole.
then they asked me what size motor i was running and i said a 1.60 and then they replied ohhh welll thats the prob!! that i'em over powering it
but when i said that i have a magazine ad that say the recomended motor size's!! has the 1.60 printed in black in white
they denied!! that there was a ad in any magazine that stated this info..
they know that most of the product sales come through mail order are via internet and they know its going to cost some money to send stufff back via UPS/MAIL/etc etc. lt and then u have the pending fact that THEY will decide if the product is defective.
ohh well what can u do be in the hole $300 plus buck's plus time and labor
just to get the door slamed in your face when you need some product support
when i get the support i deserve from creek hobbies and they choose to stand up for there product
like they should!!! they are nothing but another money hungry company making a quick buck off a hard working person
trying to enjoy a hobby...........


__________________

Really sorry to hear about your bad experience. I can say that not all Creek planes suffer from the problems you had. My Staudacher seems to be pretty well built. Haven't had any problems with it yet. I did break the gear last week, but it was from a pretty hard landing - dropped it in from about 10 feet. The only damage was the gear and busted wheel pants. No structural problems at all. The covering job on mine was way better than I could ever do.

I have just completed assessing the airframe to determine if it is repairable and have the following comments:

1) The plywood delaminated almost everywhere. Poor quality and surely not built for the long haul.

2) Landing gear plate delaminated. Also was not glued well, only sporadic application of glue in certain areas.

3) Firewall triangle stock was not completely glued. It would not have survived long based on the poor quality of the glue joint.

4) Engine box bottom was barely glued on. Poor application of glue to adjoining wood.

5) Engine box side plates which extend back into the fuse and capture the wing tube came detached at the glue joints all the way back beyond the wing tube interface. Again lack of glue. Note that the places that contact the bulkheads are reinforced with triangle stock and were so poorly glued that the whole structure could be easily separated from the triangle stock. A sure sign of a plane that would not live long in the air.

6) Further back in the fuselage, at the turtle deck/rear fuselage interface, the wood joints did not touch. Their was a gap between adjacent pieces of wood.

7) Lower hatch hold down stock (the wood that the hatch screws thread into) puled out. Again, very little evidence of glue.

8) Covering - I can not find a color match from any major covering manufacturer. What the heck is this stuff?? Also can not seem to get it hot enough to get the wrinkles out. I feared that if I continued to heat it I would burn through.

9) Cowling - The areas that cracked on impact revealed that the gelcoat used to line the mold must have set up prior the application of the fiberglass sloth since the gelcoat all separated from the cloth and exposed a soft cloth with almost no resin. The cloth was pliable as though it did not have enough resin to saturate it.

As I continue to investigate further, I will report further discoveries to the RCU readership.

Jim

hey thanks JIM
it seems like im not the only one with this problem. but hey CREEK HOBBIES just seems to laugh in my face when i told them of the same problem.. may be with your voice and anyone else that really looks at there CREEK planes before the have a structural(sp?) failure can voice what they find
as of now my plane is a garage queen.. do to i cant waste the radio and motor and time too put in a plane that just wasnt built rite and doesnt fly worth beans
i tried to fight it and make it some what of a flyer ,, but with the money i need to put in it to make it airworthy i can get a whole new kit ,,
i guess that's why they sold them so cheap no other company would put there name on this inferiuor(<sp?) product

i guess the old saying is true

YOUR UP SH*T CREEK WITH OUT A PADDLE

[giantscaleslim]

I am sorry to hear about your plane. In reading your post, I have read your comments. We truly have sold in excess of five hundred of these planes to date. I have very few customers that are dissatisfied with our kits, or our service. We do our very best to stand behind the products that we sell. All of the factories's as well as our prototypes have been tested in their stock configuration with no problems. Yes, we do make some recommended changes on these planes with specific aircraft set-ups. For example, with the guys that are installing gasoline powered engines, we are telling them to glass the firewall area with light glass for extra support. We have also instructed people to retain the wings with an additional rubber-band, tie strap, etc. in order to support the spring with the increased horsepower of the larger engines. I know of three people that have called us in the early stages of our productions with concerns about the spring, since then we have included a slightly heavier spring with all of the kits. But to date, I only know of one guy that I can recall that lost a plane do to a spring failure. In this case, the plane was returned to Creek Hobbies for us to review which later went back to China. We sold the customer a plane at an agreed upon price. We sent the damaged plane back to China for review. This is the only way that we can assure the quality of our planes. IN regards to your comments about the construction, most of what you are saying is an assessment of crash damage. These planes are all constructed the same way, many people have hundreds of flights on them. We are all entitled to our own opinions, I have been doing this for well over 20 years now and have built many of hundreds of planes for sport as well as for clients, and I do understand where your comments are coming from. I take a good hard look at my planes construction after unfortunate situations as well, but in most cases I have flown these planes many flights, so what I am getting at is there is no way to detect how long a plane will fly the way that it is constructed by the assessments that we are making after a crash. My thought has always been that if there was a major design flaw, or the plane was not constructed properly, there would be a major problem immediately resulting in a crash. If you wish to discuss this with me further, I will be more than happy to discuss this with you further.


[flat-spin-lover]

I am the person that you talked to directly in regards to your problems with your plane. I must say that if there was one guy that I could never satisfy no matter what, you would be the guy. I am sorry to say that, but you absolutely did not take me up on any of my offers and this was your decision. We attempted to make right by you, but even your own representations left us baffled about your abilities with this model. You made statements that myself as a builder, I would have never built this plane and immediately sent it back to the manufacture for an exchange or a refund. The plane must not have been as bad as you said since you continued to construct it anyway. Our service in your eyes is the worst because we could not do exactly what you wanted us to do. As I recall we gave you three options, you declined on all three. Sucky service, we would not have been here for you at all. I am still willing to present to you the three options that we had discussed, but that has to be your decision. Again, you are entitled to your own opinion as well, so if you think we are the worst, than so be it. I tried my best to solve this problem with you and that is all I can do. These planes are not beginner planes, as you stated, this is one of your first ARF's, if not your first. There is a lot of customizing going on, this is every customers prerogative.....heck we do it ourselves, but I can honestly say that these planes are proven to be great fliers for a long time if you just K.I.S.S. You know what I mean? Again, I say the same to you, If you want to discuss this further feel free to contact me.


Thank you to all of you that have supported us and continue to enjoy this line of ARF airplanes. The next production run is due in three weeks. The new Giles 202 and 3D Quest pattern plane will be here with that shipment. We would not be investing in this line as well as releasing these new planes if we were having all of these problems. Search Creekhobbies, there are many people that are satisfied with our products and service. The Katana's will be in this shipment as well.
We encourage your comments. Feel free to contact us anytime.

Jim@Creek

blah blah blah blah ,,,blah what wre the 3 options that u gave me
why did u guys say that the 160 is not a recomended motor for the plane but yet i have a ad in a magazine that!!! say's in black and white are should i say blue
don't come on her and say you tried to make things right with me cause u didnt the plane's u sale are cr@p and are a poor example of some great flying plane designs
and stop putting words into people mouths to make your self look good you are stating info that is so far into left field that im begining to think you dont even know what customer your talking about
you do not even know what service is

and look at this you come on her to try to pat your self on the back by saying all this hoop la!! about this and that trying to cover your mess up's and then you put in a plug for your new planes coming out now thats a true man after money how true it is

as far as im concerned i have a $300.00 paper weight thanks to your company

Flat-Spin-Lover

First, I will say this is the last time that I will reply to this issue with you over the Internet. It is amazing to me how guys like you "come out of the closet" on the net, but do not have the guts to call me directly to discuss this matter. This is why you do not see manufacturers monitoring these sites. Anyway, one last time.......you do have three options, you are aware of them, but you have no desire to take advantage of any of them because they will cost you a little money. That is your decision to make and there is nothing else that I can do for you. So the only person you are hurting is your self. "blah, blah, blah" does not affect me. It is only affecting you. I have no idea where you are coming up with this 1.60 statement because we have the same engines in our own planes. We do advertise them with 1.60's. I truly do not know what your problem is, you are a mystery to me. You can think that they are a poor example of plane designs, but then again people may judge you as a flier as well. Maybe you are not the best flier??? Who knows. All I know is we are here, we have been selling them for a little over a year now, people are flying them and many of them must be happy since I have a lot of repeat customers. I have nothing else to prove. The only reason why I am here now is to defend our company against your slander. In regards to service, you do not know who you are dealing with. Do you know who we really are? Do you know that this business has been here for 30+ years. How did we stay around so long if we all we had to offer was "crappy service". "A true man after money how true it is", that is amusing........am I not a business? This business is mine as well as my 20 employees livelihoods. Do the math. With that I will end my discussions on this subject with you and will reiterate, watch what you say......if you want to discuss this any further, call me, if not we will monitor your comments, specifically your slanderish remarks.

giantscalejim
if u get a chance look at the forum MHawker


started on the creek extra i show an alternative method of installing the wings.

Thanks. I had seen this thread as I was building the plane. I guess I should have followed my (and others) better judgement and installed an alternate method of securing the wings. I did assume that the manufacturer would have validated the integrity of the design prior to sale. If you discuss this with Creek, they say their attachment method it is adequate. I sure do disagree.

I can understand a beginner making a mistake that leads to airframe failure, but I have been flying 1/4 and 1/3 scale for almost 15 years. This is the first time I have had the wings separate from the fuselage.

The thing that irks me is Creek claims that they were unaware of this ever happening before. Based on the numerous posts in RCU that is not the case.

Jim

what so now your down to threatning me lol! what 's this the big company pushing around the lil guy
your just showing everyone really how great your are
and as far as being in business for as long as u have ??/
well even the yugo car company sold a whole lot of cars before they went under

here's a perfect example of being pushed around just for speaking the truth about the personal experence with a product

'Planes of this size and flight characteristics are a little ahead of the novice pilot (not to say you are, but many who bought this plane were). '

I would take the above comment as advice well given. It's not worth it over one customer. We sometimes respectfully decline selling our products and service to a customer when we know that we can not satisfy them - even when we bent over backwards.

I bought a Creek Edge 540 at my LHS. I examined it thoroughly and could not believe that I only paid $219 for it (tax excluded). I traded it (with some cash) for a kit built Balsa Nova 120. The man I traded it with spared no expense/time to build his BN 120. I am sure he would not have made the trade with me if he did not see the quality in the Edge. He also was offered my already assembled DP Ultimate 120. He chose to go with the Edge (wasn't sure he wanted a bipe).

Bob Pham

It is not just one customer. I too have heard the popular phrase we have sold 500 of them and not have had that complaint. Here is my experience. It is not a matter of not being able to make me happy it is a matter of them keeping their word. I talk to Dave at Creek and he made me a deal. When the parts did not arrive in two weeks I called Dave back and he wanted to renegotiate the deal. My problem was with weight and CG. The advertise this plane at 10 1/2 pounds. With a YS 140L and everything set up as specified I came in at almost 14 pounds. All my weight is added to the nose none added to the tail, so I can not save weight with another motor choice. What a lead sled. At this weight it will not 3D like it should. I suspect anyone who is satisfied with this plane is an intermediate flier that does not 3D fly. There is no way that I can save any weight on this bird unless I change the design and intended servo placement. I did not buy an ARF to have to redesign it. The plans state that the CG should go (for 3D) at 30 percent. Being an experienced 3D pilot I placed the CG at 30 percent. I also put the throws were recommended. On the maiden flight I had an incredibly unstable airplane. At a normal landing speed just breathing on the elevator would make it snap. It was all I could do to get the airplane on the ground. I am the test pilot at our field, so I have lots of experience with maiden flights. This plane was the worst. Way, way , way too tail heavy. Remember I am into 3D: I like tail heavy. The only way I could get it in was to land real hot. I mean hot. The landing gear came off and some damage resulted. After what was a good conversation with Dave about the CG and that the plans seem to be wrong and that I was real disappointed with the weight of this bird, he said to keep me happy he would send me some new parts. As I stated before I waited and nothing showed up. When I called back he said that he could not send me any parts with out me fist sending him the defective parts. That was not part of the deal. He said that he would send me what I needed in order to have a satisfied customer. I am still trying to call and get things rectified. This was in January, I since have the plane back in the air. It is still a lead sled. If he still wants defective parts back , I will send him the instructions or I will send him the entire plane, because it is way off weight spec. The whole plane must have the hardest wood in it the Chinese could find.

BTW, I have built enough kits to know that the spring that came with this plane is a joke. I added wing bolts.

My edits were to change some grammer after reading it on-line.

i very seldom see any planes come in at what the box says: i think i heard they use that with the lightest motor battery, no wire and a quick hardware package. 14 lbs will def, change the wing loading on the bird. I hope you get your deal worked out. i still have a creek extra to finish up so i will be able to comment on my deal here in the coming weeks. i still am excited about seeing her fly, i'll keep you all posted......

http://members.cox.net/krayzc


i will have to weigh mine with the OS-160 thats on there and see how it pans out i have a 2700 nmhi on the receiver and a 700 on a smoke system the rest is basic stuff........

I understand and agree most fudge on the weight, but not pounds. When you have to add nose weight, choosing the lightest motor will not help. I placed the tank over the C.G and moved the receiver, and a 1600 nmh pack as close to the firewall as I can get it. Everything else is standard all the servos are in the cutouts provided. I could move the elevator and rudder servos to the fuse, but I like the positive set up of short rods. That was one appeal to this ARF. I know lots of people have to add nose weight to balance, but I think mine is one of the heaviest I have heard of. I also noticed by reading RCUniverse that there is a wide variety of weight added (comparing the OS. 160 posts). This tells me they are inconsistent with their wood selection. This will also mean they are inconsistent with their quality. I have scratch built enough to know how much weight can be saved and lost on wood selection. I think I got bad wood selection on this ARF. Bad wood selection along with an already heavy tail made me add even more weight to the nose and now I have a lead sled. If the quality is that inconsistent, then one person can say they are great and another person can say they are junk, and you know they are both right.


If I would read these before I submitted them, I would not have to edit.

I agree with you about the nose weight. I don't see how you could balance these planes using the stock setup unless you went to a gas engine. With two servos in the tail and an OS 1.60, my Staudacher needed 12 oz of lead in the nose to balance. And that was with the battery pack mounted to the top of the engine box. However, moving the servos just behind the wing tube, I was able to remove all of the nose weight. It seems that these planes vary greatly in quality and weight. I seem to have gotten a pretty good one. I don't think it's much over 11lbs, though I haven't weighed it. Still a great flying plane. Sounds like you got a dud.....

I am not seeing where weight needs to be added to this plane. Mine is about 12 lbs. The quality is about what you paid for. Wish mine were lighter too, but I can't imagine my particular Extra is so different that I didn't need to add weight to fly it. Posted before but I have an OS 160, Slimline pitts, ele sevos in the tail, rudd on pull-pull, and zero lead. Flies good but a bit heavy.

I do not only wish mine was lighter, I wish it was what they advertised. I did not get what I paid for. The plane was on sale: it is still a $289.00 plane. I paid for a 10 to 11 pound plane. See page http://www.creekhobbies.com/extra330.html for this weight. You are one of the lightest and you still are as much as 20 percent over what they sold you. They did not sell me a good flier, they sold me an exciting 120 Class unlimited 3D aerobatic airplane. This plane is anything but an unlimited 3D aerobatic plane. I do agree that after the disappointments, it is not a bad plane for $199.00, if all you want to do is fly around or do some mild 3D.