RE: Lanier Yak
 

Hi Justin,

Well I have cut out plenty of balsa on the canopy but have not modded anything else to reduce weight. The canopy did start to come loose after 70 odd flights so I repinned the front and added two other supports midway between the front and the securing screws, seems fine now.

I have used one HS-5955 on the rudder and the same servos on all other surfaces apart from the engine. My dry weight when she was first assembled was 21.5lb, so with a full tank the Yak would be well over 22lb's. I have no problem with the stall speed on landing and have made several return to runway deadstick landings, although these were not due to the engine. I wouldn't want the Yak to be any heavier though as a personal preference.

Lang

RE: Lanier Yak
 

Thanks langster,
I think the 115 would be a waste.... I could do so much more by spending it on a 50cc and then lighten it up with a carbonfiber wing tubes, landing gear,tail wheel, and then do the lighting mods that were done by the guy that reviewd in on rcuniverse. It would then be a 3d machine... I guess you can say that I could have gone a different direction with a already lightened airframe and come out about the same amount spent on money, but I think that this has so much more potential; Even without exchanging of gear and mods!
The only thing that I am thinking about now is get it up and flying after I finish my giant p51 and my chapman cap 580.... I think I will do the exchanging for lighter gear, tubes, and carbonfiber spiner. I think that with these things it will fly fantastic and no need to get anything else...... Except for QQ's 50cc Pitts M12 that will be out sometime soon... I just think that I need a biwing aerobatic in my hanger yet!

Cheers
Justin

RE: Lanier Yak
 

Kochj,

I'm the fella that shared most of the lightening mods and did the review...

I think you are going down the right path... you might also consider the Brillelli 60... it's about 6 oz more weight thqn the DA50 but it should put out a little more more power... and the pricing is a little less, offsetting some of the cost of the carbon fiber components...

Still once I got it to the 17.5 lb mark I was quite pleased with the DA50 and BME 22x8 prop... Either way... I really think you'd enjoy the plane more at 17.5-18 lbs with a 50cc-60cc engine than at 20lbs + and an 80cc engine...

RE: Lanier Yak
 

Hi Justin,

I would tend to agree with Maudib in reference to lightening the Yak and using a smaller capacity engine. If you could get the weight down to those sorts of figures at 17.5-18 lb with carbon fibre and mods you would have a better plane to fly.

I didn't do that because I have very little building time available and the cost is high for shipping the carbon fibre parts from the USA which would have made the finished product very expensive.

Lang

RE: Lanier Yak
 

Maudib AND LANGSTER.
Thanks for the advice...
Maudib, Have you used a brillelli 60?
I am glad to hear that you still have the Yak. I thought perhapse you had parted with it. How would you rate the way your plane flies compared to other simularly wing loaded planes in the 50cc class?

It seems that many companies are starting to produce the 1400 square 50cc planes now. It seems to be the trend, in a good way. I had thought about the comparison of the rc car/buggy indistry and how they make improvements on there models and upgrade them. I wish that a company that makes ARF planes would start to do this. I think for example the GP Extra 300S Patty Wagstaff. I love the look of this plane but it has gotten dated and needs more wing area to be a better flying plane. Perhaps having upgrades for the current model like bigger wing sets ect ... heck perhaps it is just pipe dreams!
I was working on my P51 mustang today and all I can say is wow! Making sure your prop is very well balanced really makes a gas engine run soo much smoother. I had the plane roll of the work bench (because my foam robart stand melted for gas being spilled on it) and I though for sure the vibration was comming from posibly somthing bent on the prop shaft on the engine! I re-balanced the prop on the top-flite magnetic balancer instead of the robart prop balacer, and being that it is just more sensitive I was able to get it better balanced and vibration was then gone!!! Wow that would have sucked if I wrecked the new 64cc fuji engine without ever gettting it off the ground!
I really now know about hangar rash! Before the plane rolled of the bench, it had a hole through the wing by a falling gear pully from the ceilling, and my father triped on the wing prior to that and cracked some balsa on it........... I had my planes on pully system so they would be high in the rafters of my garage. I didn't think that the pully that I used to hoist it would fall off the hook that holds it up on the ceilling and land on the plane!! LOL
I will let you guys know what I decide to do as far as engine choices......
Update,...............
THe temp in Minnesota is -12 F. I is way to cold to fly~
Justin

RE: Lanier Yak
 

I don't still have the plane... I got quite a few flights on it, but then sold it as I was getting ready to move and had even more projects coming...

My first Brillelli experience is coming up... the 60 is coming in the next week or so for another similar sized Yak... but the reported numbers are good...

RE: Lanier Yak
 

What yak are you going to assemble?

RE: Lanier Yak
 

With the Brillelli 60? The 88" EF Yak... I'm just now finishing the 86" QQ Yak with DA50 and MTW canister (I like Yaks) :)

RE: Lanier Yak
 

Thanks for the info.... had no idea that EF released a new 88'' yak! Better yet I had no idea that QQ's new 50cc yaks were released and delivered!
Pipe channel and all! looks nice.:D
What is the build thread for the QQ yak 50cc (the new one)?

RE: Lanier Yak
 

I have the lanier yak with a 3w75 under the hood. The plane is an animal with that engine. it weighed a little under 21 pounds with little or no attempts made at lightening it. I removed some balsa and other unnecessary goodies and got it a little lighter. The carbon fiber components should shave off close to a pound and that will get me under 20.
This plane is very nice to fly.At 21 pounds, it really didnt mind the extra weight.there's plenty of wing area there.
but maudib is right. with the DA this plane just floats around.It will be a great plane no matter what engine you choose.The airframe will take just about anything you can throw at it, the stock landing gear is TUFF, and the plane really doesnt have any bad habits.

RE: Lanier Yak
 

Looks like the Yak is getting a big brother !

http://www.lanierrc.com/lrcprivate/r...94yak54arf.htm

Check the weight ( heavy[:'(] ), looks a little more realistic than the 87 incher claims.

RE: Lanier Yak
 

It is interesting that everyone and there brother now makers 87''-88'' 1400+ squar WA in both yak and extra and edge, but they all claim to be in the 17lb+/- wieght range.... Why coudn't lanier do it? Just lack of carbonfiber included? I know that the kit is 150.00 less than others, and has no carbon fiber.. Perhaps that is the diference!
Lanier priced that 94" Yak 54 ARF in the range higher than the GP cap 580. Not sure how that will go for them? 800.00$ puts them over the compitition price..... Being that everyone is so damn frugal these days!

RE: Lanier Yak
 

there is 4 or may be 6 manufactures in china, this people does the airplanes for everione with the exeption of QQ somezini airplane that is done by only one factory, and using QQ engeniering, I got friends in china and Tailand, and he said that the price of this airplanes is only $100 dollars, what you see here is a extreme over price of this airplanes. some are done better than others but done by the same people. Just info.

RE: Lanier Yak
 

Maxun, your friends are misinformed... what you will find is that there are LOTS of people in Chine that try and ACT in the know so they can try and get their cut.

QQ planes are rokcin' but they are not made in a sole factory... Ultra RC and others use this factory... (as did Extreme Flight) fact.

These larger planes don't sell for $100 each either, but it's not much more... but they are not overpriced... UNLESS you live in China.

The cost to buy 500 of them is significant, then add the shipping, freight, packaging and handling. The magazine ads, website maintenance, protoype and manual expenses, replacing every tenth plane with replacement parts, maintianing parts for future needs, warehousing, phone, electric, trade shows, employees...

That doesn't include having to eat shipping damages or fight for them for MONTHS because the shippers don't cover model airplanes. Or the enduser you spreads their gear on landing and rips them out and starts a thread saying your plane is faulty and sucks because you didn't give them a free plane to cover their dumbthumbs...

And of course trying to maintain a professional appearance when people online state you are overcharging for your planes, it should have been blue, the hardware is crappy, the covering shoddy, the wheels are too weak, the plane is too heavy, too light, surfaces warped, manual sucks, you prescribed a too small engine, etc...

BELEIVE me... if it was as easy as sending $50,000 to China for a boatload of planes... I would have done it long ago... because as you tell it I would have made back my money 5X... But when it comes down to it... that is a fantasy... not the reality. If a manufacturer clears a 20% margin on their stuff after it's all said and done, they are doing good.

Huge companies like Horizon and Great Planes have grow to the point where they can make a $1 on a million purchases and do well... but these smaller manufacturers like QQ, EF, Lanier, Wild Hare, etc... don't have that luxury.

And sure we could buy planes direct from China (many do... look at e-bay) bt then again... look at the China products you can buy on e-bay... can you by anything similar to the manufacturer's products I just listed?

ANd if something is nusted... just how much does it cost to send it back?

And lastly if we did lose our smaller designers/manufacturers... just look limited offerings we'd have available from GP and Horizon. Slim... VERY slim.

It's true that a "cost per unit" in China might be $150-$200 on some designs... If you buy 300-350 of them... and so tell me...

After figuring how much it costs to ship them, store them, have a phone line and website, employee or two, some advertising so people KNOW of your product, etc...

how much do you think YOU could sell the planes for and make enough product to go "fulltime" iwth your endeavor?

Truth is... I have a LOT of respect for these guys... they can't win no matter WHAT they do... and they keep sticking their head on the chopping block with every new design. Which is a lot more than I can say for armchair designers who can sit back, and criticise their efforts... Only a few have the guts to try and build their own business... and 4 out of 5 of those fail miserably.

All I can say is if ANYONE has a better solution... by all means let them put their money and their "expertise" where their mouth is. It takes a WHOLE lot more than knowing a few people with the names Chen, Lee or Wang...

RE: Lanier Yak
 

Ups, well see you in Argentina F3A Championship in Santa Fe. My country is really beautiful and I will be there if god letme in November.

http://www.argentinaf3a.com/

RE: Lanier Yak
 

Maudib,
I didn't know you had it in you!! :D
I wish all of us were able to see all that you see! I have always loved the RC industry and you could have not said it any better!
I can't help and think about some of the forums that when a company doesn't monitor some randum webpage forum that someone posted (which is not there job to do anyway, they have enough to worry about) People on the forum began to complain that nobody from there company is paying attention to them and that they have poor customer service and or they must be out of business because they haven't posted anything within 3-days..... Case in point when I had read a forum about the newly released aerotech pitts python M-12. We have some serious needy people out there!!
By the way I wasn't *****ing about lanier's yak, I was just trying to figure out where all of the weight came from!

By the way, could you link up your QQyak 88 new build page forum please?

kochj

RE: Lanier Yak
 

I would love to get my hands on the new bigger Lanier Yak and do some lightening mods and throw the BME 115 in there. That would be AWSOME performance!!!!!!!!!! I would think it would be better than the bigger 102" QQ and 107" Ultra that people have been putting DA 100s or what not, hopefully much lighter with more power! I'm thinking that with mods, you may be able to keep it 22 lbs range, judging from the work we were able to do in the 87" Yak. Maudib, I think (since you seem to be able to get all the great stuff) should do a review with that set-up. Whadda ya say? I know it must sound tempting. :D


You know after thinking about it, I don't know if 1727 sq in. and 22 lbs is all that good. I just did some ruff numbers and it comes to about 29 oz a sq ft. Then again my 87"er comes in about 28 oz a sq ft. So now I guess I'm torn. I guess it would be a good flyer, from the expirence with the 87"er, but can it be stripped to 22 lbs AUW? Even though the bigger you are the better you fly.

You know, I just looked at the Ultra site and they claim thier 107"er comes in at 27.5 lbs, with it's wing area that would be about 30 oz a sq foot. So anyway you look at it the bigger Lanier Yak should be a good choice with the BME 115.

I know I have gone back and forth in this post, but I just was thinking a lot about it. I want to go ahead and do it, but I don't have the time or room (remodelling my whole house as we speak) to do it. So Maudib, why don't you go ahead with this project, keep us updated and I'll follow suit this summer. :)

RE: Lanier Yak
 

My only concern is whether the 94" will come in at the spec'd weight or if it will be a little heavier than stated (as was the 87")

I would think that if 24-25 is the stated weight that it SHOULD come in at that (as 102'-105" planes are not much more than that)

I'm going to guess that similar weight savings could be found in the tail and elsewhere...

BUT... if you are going to put that much time. money and effort into lightening this one... one MIGHT be better off looking at the 102" Quique Yak...

Considerably more wingarea and still as light as the suggested weights for the 94" Lanier... Still if you really liked the 87" Lanier... this one should perform just like it.

With the same motor (a BME 10/115) the 102" or 107" SHOULD come in at 23-24 lbs... I wouldn't asume you could get the Lanier Yak any lighter even with CF gear/tubes/etc... Ultra RC is out of the 107"... but Quique just got in a new shipment... So if you calculated wingloading based on 24 lbs on all 3... the 100+ planes win hands down...

I have both the 102 and 107... and if they indeed built out the same... I'd have to lean toward them over the 94"...

Now the 94" lightened and with the new DA85... :)

RE: Lanier Yak
 

Kochj,

The QQ 86" Yak thread is here:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5274030

And I'll be starting an 88" EF Yak thread sometime next week when the airframe arrives...

RE: Lanier Yak
 

I agree, that the idea of getting the 94"er down to 22 lbs seems a bit radical. But from the flight expirence that I've had, I was not too fond of the 102 QQ Yak. Very nice plane, don't get me wrong, but it seems that my smaller Lanier Yak handles much better. Granted they are 2 different class of planes and my set up would have been different if it were my plane. Overall I just think the Lanier could be a better flyer due to the larger % of control surface area. I mean the Lanier 87"er has about the same size surfaces than the 102"QQ, if not bigger. All in all, either would be a great plane, I would just be curious about that combo's abilities. It would be nice 11 hp at 22 lbs. Alas, time and space will not allow this for some time. Plus I'm trying to get a turbine going for the summer. At that point money becomes an issue too!

RE: Lanier Yak
 

What's the DA-85 supposed to weigh in at AUW?

RE: Lanier Yak
 

It's rumored to be about 4.5 lbs with ignition and stock muffler...

RE: Lanier Yak
 

If it's 4.5 lbs AUW that would be awsome on the 87"er also. Gain less than a pound over the current ZDZ 50 that I have in there and close to double the HP.

RE: Lanier Yak
 

Yep...if lightened down to 17.5 lbs with a 50cc... then it's be around 18.5 with an 85... Holy Smokes!

RE: Lanier Yak
 

check the new video of Extreme Fly and the new 88" (Neal see you in the field).:D Let's do crazy 3D.

http://www.extremeflightrc.com/html/media.html