Hi to all,

last weekend, we (I and my instructor) crashed a Reactor 46 size. Actually, we were having engine problems with the 55AX on-board. As he entered the hover, the engine cut and he didnt have enough altitude to recover. As the thing hit the ground, the landing gear rotated backward, destroying the whole front end of the plane.

Now having to replace the model I have a number of choices:

1) Black Horse (BH Models) Diablo 3D
2) Phoenix models xterme-50 size
3) Great Planes Extra 300SP GP/EP
4) Aeroworks Edge 540T 46-61

The Aeroworks plane is plane is universily described as good on RCU but have have shipment trouble. GP 300SP is good and it has the landing gear fixed outside the fuselage unlike the reactor. But my 55AX will be heavy for it and it has the same colour scheme on bioth the top and bottom of the plane. Phoenix Xtreme is reputed to be very good. I am not sur of the BH models

I am not limited to a 55AX. I have a 75AX and a 91FS. But I havent had much luck with inverted or near inverted engines with both the 55AX, and the 75AX. I also have a Phoenix Topstar 60 and the 91FS is currently mounted on that. However, I am missing the woodruff key on that and there are throttle linkage and tank installation problems on this old plane. However, I am limited to a 65" (if wing is single piece) wingspan and 60" length due to transportation issues and this limits my choices. Hence request to suggest which of this is better for 3D

Ameyam

I have an Aeroworks Edge....awesome plane. Wont be as light as the Reactor though. The 91 four stroke would work well.

Edge all the way..... mine hovers with the .81 alpha and 14x4W propeller.

OK, I add the Minicraft Xtreme 40-46 to the list. I could'nt find this plane in RCU airplane ratings. Anyone have experience with this one?

Ameyam

I personally would do away with the full fuse if you want to learn to 3d... I think a profile is the way to go if your looking into a .40 size to 120 size airframe. I never like the full fuse planes to learn to 3d on back when I was learning. I know they have changed these days, but I still believe a profile is the best way. Easy to fix when you crash.

I agree with Sukhoikid.

If your goal is to learn, get a profile. You can fly the pretty stuff later when you have the skills.

A 4.5 lb profile with your motor is the way to get experience.

Both SukhoiKid and wind junkie have the right ideas. Profiles are ugly, IMHO, but MAN do they teach you to 3D. My Dad dislikes 3D, but decided to give it a shot just to learn to use the rudder so he can fly his Cub better (man are those things a pain to fly well), and I had him hovering my 16oz foamy on the first pack through. I've tail-touched a profile in the first 4 flights it had, and that was back when I really sucked at flying (not that I don't suck now, but I REALLY sucked then ). Profiles are awesome.

Look into the OMP profiles, or a Mojo if you don't mind building. Those will help you progress.

Actually, I have been flying, or atleast hovering when I didnt have engine problems, with full fuse models for some time now. In the summer I was flying a Phoenix Topstar which is essentially a UCD 60 clone. Only stopped because of engine issues with the inverted 75AX. Right now, I am getting used to a Reactor. The new model will be for later, when I ,God Forbid, crash or lose my Reactor

Ameyam

The OMP Yak or Edge is perfect choice to use to learn 3D with. I have also flown a mojo. I believe it was the 40 size and it also flew awesome!

Well, when you go with a profile plane and finally step away from UCD's and other heavy full-fuse planes you'll see how much more you can accomplish. Twists (and the knock-offs) are the only planes worse than a UCD or Funtana for 3D'ing. Some people love them, but they're few and far between. I had the Central American IMAC Unlimited Champion help me set my X50 up for almost six weeks with no luck. Also, hovering and 3D'ing are VERY different things. With enough power, you can hover a brick....to 3D well, you need a good plane. Check out some Pro Bro videos on YouTube to see what I'm talking about.

Yes. Also, make the distinction between "hovering" and TR or "torque rolling." Lots of guys declare victory when they can hang the plane on the prop (usually 10 mistakes high), but of course the real skill lies in getting the plane down on the deck and let the wings spin around without holding the ailerons to stop them.

That's what the Pro Bros show you with profiles. They have higher thrust to weight and low moment of inertias on all axes so the control is superior in every way. You just can't get that with a full fuse "fatty."

.......in that size range.

Right. I was thinking about qualifying that statement to exclude the giant scale 3D planes (like the great 20-22lb 33% 85cc birds which really do exhibit "foamie power"), but really, the larger birds react much more slowly than the 40 size ones. Their mass slows everything down so it seems like you have "forever" to correct mistakes and make things happen. It's the "Godzilla" effect of walking in slow motion. Stalls are more gentle, and all aerodynamics get much better on lifting/control surfaces the bigger a plane gets.

Let me put it this way if you can do it with a 40 size profile, a giant size bird is a piece of cake. Bigger flys better. A "fatty" fuselage is much better at deflecting air in KE when it's a giant scale bird. For the 40 size ones, a profile wins hands down.

Of course, you can always go the other way and get a small 5-7 oz foamie which is a great way to learn 3D too. They have all the desired traits by virtue of their extreme lightness, huge control surfaces and excellent thrust to weight ratio. But this is probably obvious.

I think the only plane I have flown that was a good 3d plane full fuse is the Funtana from Horizon. Back in the day I just wish I had the right engine on the bird. I only had a OS 91 four stroke. Barely enough power. Kyle W on the other hand had a YS 110 I believe (not positive) and 3d the crap out of that plane.

But for the smaller range def get a 40 size profile. It really helps out with the rollers also. Its fun doing rolling harriers inches from the ground. And most of the time if the rudder,elevator, or ailerons scrapes the ground if you give it power it will get out!

Uh all this profile talk wants me to get back into them. Havnt flown a profile in a while!!!

One of my favorite things about profiles is they're affordable. You have true 3D performance at your disposal without the enormous expense of the giant scale craft. I've done both and my feeling is I have just as much fun (wait, more because the fear is removed) with profiles and the same sense of accomplishment with each new skill added. Yet the expense is in the afterthought range. I sold all my big birds. I'll always have a profile.

Well I'll get you a 6oz foamy AND an OMP 47" Profile, both RTF....and I'll trade you for that Dalton Aviation Extra 260 in your profile pictures!!

ha ha! That would be a deal. Only I think you have me confused with someone else. I've never owned a Dalton and the only pics in my profile at thie time are of helis.

Woops, I thought SukhoiKid said that!! Well, whatever. I'll still trade you for SukhoiKid's Dalton .

ha ha. That is a plane I can never give away. My granddad and I built that plane from a kit for my 16 birthday. It flew for 3 years and I got another 40%. Trying to save money up to get the Dalton back going. All the equipment went to the new plane.

It's a beautiful plane, and I'm sure you've got great memories with it and of it. I'd bet anything I've ever owned that that's one of the smoothest flying planes out there. It sure looks like a million bucks!!

ameyam, sorry to have hijacked your thread....but if you really want to progress with 3D (y'know, beyond hovering), I really do suggest a profile plane, no matter how ugly they really are! Regardless, good luck deciding and happy landings!!

Yup. Hovering in nose up tail in orientation is a sliver of what's available. The real fun begins when you start learning the upright and inverted harrier, rollers, TRs etc,. and work on getting these moves to flow together. As everyone has said, the profile is the perfect tool to surive this learning curve. And you might find, as I have, its your favorite type of airplane.

thanks for the comments. Its last few flights were at the 08 XFC. I gotta get it back going! It is the plane if you want to Freestyle and do IMAC with.

Actually, I had a scratch-and-dent Reactor that I am trying out my luck with right now. This week I had 5 flights all ending with dead-sticks. This brings back memories of the Topstar where I had the same problem with a 75ax. Problem is, this is with a new 55AX.

Though I don't want to open a can of worms, what I want to ask is can 2cycle engines run in any config other than upright or is my luck extremely bad with engines. So far any engine that I have installed anything but vertical, including that one which was running fine when vertical on a earlier plane, have stopped working properly when inverted or evern at 45 deg from inverted.

I am now using fuel with Klotz lubricant and 10% nitro. And the tank is about the same height as the carb. The thing cuts off in level flight at 50% or so throttle and very randomly.

By the way, a picture of my Reactor is attached

Ameyam

First make sure all of the screws, bolts, fittings, and anything else that come apart are tight. On one of my brand new 55AX engines the head bolts, backplate screws, carb screws, needle valve seat, and even the fuel line nipple were all loose from the factory, which was causing frequent deadsticks.

Tightening the parts cured about 99% of the deadstick problem. Switching the glow plug to an OS F plug cured the remaining deadsticks.

There is no reason that a well-tuned 2-stroke glow engine should run any worse when running at different angles if properly tuned for that angle. I had an issue with an inverted .46AX, but it got resolved once I learned how to use the low speed needle.