OK FLIGHT,

I just made a terrific trade for a H-9 540 edge. It has been flown with a BRISON 3.2. The friend that had it was trying to fly (no pun or disrespect intended!) over his head. I have read a lot of post on here on how GREAT this plane flies and lands. The two H-9 540s I've seen including this one, are snappy on landings! Is this because of the engine weight? (the other one flies with a MOKI 210)

I've seen post that say this plane can land like a trainer! The guy that put this plane together is a perfectionist! there are no mistakes here!

I plan on flying it with a MVVS 150 on a PIPE.

ANY SUGGESTIONS OR HELPFUL HINTS/IDEAS?

THANKS,

RON in NEVADA

Ron,
Try this thread.... 540 aeroworks edge 120 Q/A ... It is just below.......it gives you a little knoledge and also I am dealing w/ the same problem. are your servos for the elevator in thee tail?

Scott

I'm sorry....but why in the world would anyone put a Brison 3.2 on that plane???

Took my H9 for a maiden flight today and had a blast. Unlimited vertical with a YS 140.

The secret seems to be two fold: keep it light; limit the elevator travel. When they say 9/16" of travel, believe it. More travel=more trouble (unless attempting aerobatics).

It is a great plane but why use an engine that will pull a 20# plane and add lots of dead weight?

If only there was a better engine for the 120 size planes. Any chance the MVVS 1.6 will pan out?

bigben...if your YS 140 pulled it so well, why would you ask for a better engine? Is your question is related to a gas alternative to your YS 140?

Joe

Hi Rice-
Thanks for the question. Seems as though I didn't make my point very clear so this will be take number two...

Being that I have a grand total of one flight on my H9 Edge 540 I'm not looking to make any changes, especially with the pulling power my YS 140 demonstrated.

I do have a deep interest in gas as I fly other planes with gas engines and see a big void in the 120 size class aircraft when it comes to a suitable (performer) in gas. The application of a 3.2 cube gasser in a 120 size aircraft has got to be a treat to watch because of the serious over power and yet how does the extra weight detract from the flight envelope of any size 120 plane?

Well that is my thoughts and a few questions/opinoins. In the mean time I'm going to burn lots of expensive glow fuel and have as much fun as my wallet can stand!
Jump in the water is fine!

bigben

SCOTT,

I picked the plane up today! A friend had it flying it with a brison 3.2. Yes the elevator servos are in the tail section. so is the rudder pull-pull. He cut a hole in the bottom of the fuselage and built a cover, set rudder servo in there.

I'm either going to put a MVVS 150 in it, or a MDS 148, I have both.

RON in NEVADA

do you guys think it would fly good with a webra 1.2? i mean good for 3d'in and vertical

any 120 in the edge is not enough to 3d.you need at least a 140 but preferably a engine like a OS160.I like my OS because it has more power than my big saito and gets better milage on cheaper 5% fuel.

I just finished an H-9 Edge for a friend, we put a Brison 2.4 on it and so far it does fine.Flys and lands great.So far He has only tried quite abit of 3-D and it is AWESOME!!No hovering yet though.But They are right about the elevator,we had the elevator throw at what seemed to be acceptable but it was very snappy,he landed and adjusted the throw and it was 100% better,lands jaust as pretty as can be.AS for the "lands like a trainer"I really dislike that statement when it refers to "aerobats"none of these planes,Edge,Extra,Cap,etc.are going to land like a trainer,but some will be eaiser than others,the Edge is probablly the best,followed by the Extra 330L.Here's a thought.if you want to land like a Trainer,buy a trainer.Just joking
Mike

Got an edge im putting together now with a saito 180 I think it will be pretty cool.

I'M still working on mine, I'm going to put my MDS 148 in it but I'm orderering the ASP 108 CARB. and I need a muffler.

EVERYTHING else is done Just waiting for those parts.

RON in NEVADA

Imac Buff, I have the same combo you are building and I just thought I would tell you, that I just tried the apc 17-6 prop and really like it. I had been using the apc 16-8 but it just wouldn't pull out of a hover very well with the 16-8, But its not a problem with the 17-6! I will now be able to hover a lot lower than before because I can pull out, instead of leveling off and flying out. Just thought I would let you know my experience. Happy flying, its a great plane.

What's the difference in the prop sizes in relevence to hovering? I know by reading the different posts/forums that it does make a difference but why?


RON in NEVADA

Just to give you guys a bit of info on the H9 EDGE540( THE 3.2 IS VERY MUCH OVERKILL. IT WILL FLY THIS PLANE JUST LIKE A DIESEL WILL PULL ITS LOAD, BUT A TRUCKS JOB IS TO CARRY LOADS NOT TO SET LOW LAP TIMES). This is an aerobatic plane not a scale warbird, and as such need a very good power to WEIGHT ratio. Good choices for sport flying(os 160,mds 148,ys 120) for 3d were torque is nescessary(saito 180,ys 140dz, moki 2.10) on petro(zdz 40,brison 2.4,bme 44).
For 3d you need the largest prop with the smallest pitch possible.
The saito works good with the 16x8 but works better with the 17x6 (slightly lower prop loading factor) the petros can swing an even bigger prop like a 20x10 at a lower rpm wich works great for 3d.
Overkill is good if you can leave behind the weight

The way that prop sizes was explained to me was that the pitch is like the gears in your car. Low gear you have lots of power and not much speed, and you can accelerate quickly. In high gear it will go a lot fatser, but takes a long time getting up to speed. Try taking off in a five speed auto in 4 or 5 gear. The edge is slower with the 17-6 in top speed but it has a lot more pull out of a hover. Also takes off fatser and has a better climb rate. Its like a lower gear. very simplified version but it makes sense to me anyway. Hope this helps.

I hear ya. I will be tryting the 17x6 next week. Will post my experience after that. I think if the 17x6 does what is said here, it will please me immensely. I just love the immediate and instant vertical takeoffs and fly straight up till it becomes a dot; everything else comes later. When I was experimenting with props when I first got the H9 over a year ago, I only tried 16x8,16x10(I think) and 17x8. I remember it performed bad on the 17x8 so I stuck to 16x8 since. Now I have to try 17x6. Thanks for the information guys. Vim