dylan i am with you on the needed reinforcements, but that all adds up to just weight....this plane definetely does not need that......

I just ordered 3 each 60 size UCD's from T.H. for me and two Brothers. Delivery date 08-06-03. I got some good feedback on how this plane would really everything 3D before purchasing. After ordering yesterday I recieved info. from a good 3D pilot that says this plane sucks doing 3D except for hovering. Anybody out ther have any info. as to the 3D performances of this plane. Thanks for your help.
Dan

Glassing the firewall is a great idea if you have access to it.

No plane needs more weight, but with the rearward CG of the UCD 46 front end weight is not a penalty.

I still can't believe that with a Saito 0.91 in front and a sub-C cell battery pack right behind the tank I am still 3/4" behind their most rearward recommended CG.

tanner1
The 60 size UCANDO has this thread (link below)

which is a monster. If you take the time to read it all, yes it does have some limitations which many pilots have had to deal with. A computer radio is manditory for 3D in my estimation and with it you can mix out a lot of sins. It will not flat spin upright, but it will inverted. You should be able to Wall, waterfall, possibly harrier, and of course hover with it. But some can't do it, either. It is no 40% Extra 330 and never will be, because it is too small. Being small makes any model hard to 3D for most Sunday fliers.

The .40 size design has it's stabilizer lowered and this has helped a lot. Disclosure: I can't fly 3D, but I have a .40UCD on order!


Go to page 66 for the latest opinions about the .60's 3D capabilities:
http://www.rcuniverse.com/showthrea...033&forumid=230

rwh,

Is this with the new revised CG, (sorry I tried to find your CG but this thread is a little long).

http://www.greatplanes.com/manuals/g...-addendum2.pdf

I was also going to try a Saito .91. I'm very interested to hear your results.

Ken

I ordered mine from Great hobbies on Tuesday of last week and got it on Thursday. First of all,,, they lie about the build time. Took me about 12 hrs to build. Second,, the manual has a section in it that states "The U Can Do 3d 46 ARF's have fantastic LOW SPEED maneuverability,,," , "We DO NOT recommend a .91 4 stroke or largerengine. Using a larger engine than recommended will put your model at high risk for CATASTROPHIC FALIURE and VOID ANY PROTECTIONS offered in its warranty." Not that I am harping at you guys (and girls) but do you think that maybe that guys who designed this plane maybe know a little more about it than you?? Third ( I know I am long winded) I put a O.S. 70 surpass in mine and it weighed in at 5lbs 6oz. I am using 4 S3003 servos (ail and ele), S148 (thr) and CS-70-mg (rud) I have on board battery indicator and I am using a 4 cell 1650 Ni-mh battery pack. It balanced at 4 7/8" from leading. Now ,,, If anyone is still with me (PLEASE??) I have a problem. I am using the GP easy fueler and it seems to flood out my carb to the poin that I can't start. I mouinted everything as per the manual. How has anyone else ran their fuel lines. BTW,,, I love the way she harriers down the field!

Mine balanced nice at 5 1/4 with a Saito 72 and a 5 cell battery. I don't know the total weight but this thing is unbelivably easy to fly. I'll move the battery back a little further after a few more flights.

Tipstall....

Well, no, I didn't realize there was an updated CG recommendation. Up to 6" behind the leading edge!

I guess I'm pretty close to that, without the heavy hub and washers I added to the prop shaft to get me as far forward as possible. Thanks for the updated info!

Tipstall.....

I have flown it a couple of times since the Saito 91 was stuffed in to replace my 61 FX. The weather over the last weekend was very gusty and turbulent so we (the two of us who braved flying) were lucky to return safely, let alone wring out trim details, etc. I think the Saito will be fine. I know I'm exceeding the recommended power for this plane, I think I can handle it, but if something breaks I won't complain.

Since we choose, buy, build, assemble, and decide when and how to fly our own stuff I believe every crash is pilot error.

James77, been there, done that. Either two or four strokes mounted inverted in the UCD 46 will have the tank above the carb. Simply put, the high tank means fuel siphons out until it's below the level of the carb. That's a lot of fuel! With an inverted two stroke the fuel dribbles out of the carb onto the ground. With an inverted four stroke the fuel dribbles into the engine until you have hydro lock.

Here's the way to handle this problem with a simple procedural change!. First, turn on the radio and trim the carburetor all the way off (stick down, trim down). This will help to close down the fuel orifice so very little can flow into the carb. Now connect the fueling line and fill 'er up. Some fuel will shoot out of the vent, but that opening is very high in the tank (in an air pocket) and will not siphon continually. Now pull out your fueling line and quickly stick in a short, plugged piece of line into the fueling port. The fueling valve will prevent fuel from flowing to the carburetor and the plug will prevent the siphoning action. Now get everything ready, put the radio trim up to a good starting level, pull the plugged fuel line out of the fueling valve, and spin 'er up! Vroom!

Sorry for such a long post (he says, making the post longer).

I am using a .80 Magnum and an APC 14X6. I am not having any luck with spinners. Can anyone recommend a spinner that can accomodate this setup?
Thanks

I am having pretty good luck with the Magnum .80. It runs very smooth and has alot of power. With the APC 14X6, the plane flies great. I hope my luck continues!

mine arrived last week and yes there was and update sheet in the kit as far as cg...it basically said that this plane will fly without any problems with a cg between 4 to 6 inches behind leading edge.....for you guys running the magnum...i don't want to down anyone or any manufacturer for trying....but when it comes to anything RC, after being in this hobby for 25 years and owning a local hobby shop here...that 90% of the the things you buy are on the saying "you get what you paid for".....for example when GP came out with the 1/4 giles i bought one and after looking at the servo torque required and the prices of the ones available...i went with the hobbicos and let me tell you yes they definetely have the torque...but that is it....it takes them an infinety to find center compared to the JR digitals and the slop around center we don't need to go there.....any how i can go on and on over crap i have been through in this hobby....how many of you know that Hobbico is actually the "main" owner ship of Tower Hobbies via Great Planes, Futaba and recently bought and owns Dubro...hmmmm this could turn into a wal-mart deal....point is why would the head name put there name on the cheaper products....hmmmm..

Since the CG has been revised to 4 to 6 inches, I'd like to know what is the best CG to use on the model for very stable flight characteristics? I was using 4 3/4 and it seems to be a bit nose heavy at that CG

Regards,

Scooterpilot

Im 5 1/2" ... seems perfect.

I have a Saito 100 in my plane and I've been trying different props. Today I flew it with a 15X5 and it flies great with it.

Regards
Scooterpilot

So where is this CG revision coming from anyway. I have'nt been able to find it. Just curious. I'm close to this part of of finishing my ucando...

later, Ken

You'll find the CG update on the Great Planes website at www.greatplanes.com/parts/index.html

I've finished ripping out my OS 61FX (which is a great engine, just not enough for this plane) and breaking in my new Saito 91. The Saito is just the ticket for this plane, sounds great, plenty of vertical, and long flying times with the supplied tank. My CG is at 5 1/2 now, seems just right. Using a 14 x 6 prop.

Two guys at the field last Thursday ordered UCD's after seeing mine in action! This plane is the bargain of the year!

How many of you have NOT used flying wires on the tail feathers of the ucd46 and had no problems?

no wires with a saito 100 up front. 8 flights, no problems.....so far



Neo

Saito 100...No wires...No fear...

If you fly like a pattern flier, yes you need wires, if you fly it like a 3d plane, no wires needed. It's all about speed and throttle managment.




Neo

I have over 100 flights on mine. Saito .72, NO wires

Rljumps,

you are the first I have seen with the Saito 72, how do you like it, that is what I have on the shelf to go in mine.

What props, what servos?

I love mine. Saito .72 is plenty of power for this plane. I have Hitec 625 servos and am running a 14x4 Wide prop. Can hover this thing till you run out of fuel. This plane is alot of fun.

Just flew mine today for the first time. I have a 1500 mah NiMH battery pack under the fuel tank. I have a Higley Aluminum nut and a Dubro aluminum spinner nut running a 16 X 4 wide APC prop. The prop was thin and I had to use a washer so it would tighten down on the shaft. I have 9202 servo's on the elevator and ailerons and a Hitec 615 Metal Gear servo on the rudder, and a standard servo on the throttle. I upgraded all control surfaces to 4 40 rods and used Dubro Quick Links, the ones that are black with the gold pin retainer. Balanced right at 5 inches from leading edge with no weight needed. First flight all that was needed was 2 clicks or right aileron for level flight. Inverted flight required just a trace of down elevator. Recommended control throws are I feel just right. I am using a Futaba 8U Super radio and on high rates have -70 dialed in for expo. Plane is a pure joy to fly and flew it 4 times today. Engine is still new and requires more break in before leaning it out some more. Even rich it pulls out of a hover with authority, however I wouldn't call it excessively over powered, in fact it feels just right to me, but I also use good throttle management. I did try a fast pass and experienced no flutter of any kind. Flight times are very good around 10 minutes with plenty of fuel left for go around. I really like the way it lands. I can land so slow that there is no roll out with good control through out the landing. The controls are very effective at slow speeds even on low rates. For the hovering maneuvers I use high rates. Need more practice though as I haven't done any 3D stuff was into pattern and scale aerobatics but this 3D stuff looks like a blast. I definitely recommend this plane. It is a true winner. Hope this information helps. Happy flying. Chuck

No flying wires on my tail, and the Saito 91 is starting to tick over reliably at all throttle settings.

I can tell you that after 75 landings including dead sticks into the corn field and into the apple trees, including a freaky wind slamming the plane down onto the runway, flattening the gear, I was able to rip the gear plate out of the bottom!

Ah ha! The plane is mortal!