It's like a Dear YNOT letter LOL

This would be so much easier on the phone, however we certaintly do not want to leave all the others out on our fun.

I know everyone has their prefference in how a planes flys and performs and I understand that.
I've read most of your posts. I took your advice. I spend the time to type it, glad to know other read it and appriciate it. I purchased a Fusion 90 X3D profile just so I could see how it flys. I'm running a mighty 110 in it. My weight ready to fly less fuel is 7lbs 8ozs. I have these servos: Rudder HS5945, Elevators (2) HS5945, Ailerons (2) HS5625, Throttle HS85MG. Prop APC 17x4W. Like the set up.

To my knowledge this would be an excellent set up. Yep If you have ways to improve let me know. Nope Anyways, my point is this: I wanted to compare a decent profile to a decent UCD. My expectation was that the profile would blow the socks off of ANY full bodied plane. Not true. A better comparison would have been a thick wing profile, instead of a thin wing. The wings fly very very different and you bring many of them up though out the thread.

This is the set up on my UCD: YS110 also, servos aren't as good: Rudder = HS5645 Elevators = HS5625 Ailerons = HS 645 and throttle = HS85MG. Very similar but I went with better stuff on the Fusion just because I'm upgrading everything I use and I also wanted to make sure and not give the profile a disadvantage. My ready to fly weight on the UCD is 7lbs 10ozs. Where is the weight savings on the profile? I also built a Mayhem 40 and it weighed 5lbs 1ozs with a Saito 82. Again, where would be the weight savings be on the profile?

The Fusion costs over $100 more than the UCD and the covering job was barely adequate to poor in my opinion. Also, I had to cut the fuse apart to get the servo wires from the elevator/rudder area to the receiver. They didn't make a big enough area to accomodate 3 servo wires. I flew the kit version and lay no claim to quality of the build of the airplane. No offence Mike and I know where you are coming from on this one Barry

Anyways, the UCD is a lot better "out of the box" build and value. It also took less time to build the UCD. Here is where I may come off as an ass a bit and that I don't intend to be. By the time the UCD came out, I had been flying a ZN Line Madness for years and was flying a Flip at the time. The USA has been very slow when it comes to design of 3D planes. I personally imported airplanes, just buying them from hobby shops in England, Germany & France, becasue they were not available here. Still have my orignal Madness and it is 10+ year old plane now. When the UCD came out, it was such a dissipointment in flight performance compared to the European designed planes. I never was a fan of the plane becasue compared to similar designed planes there just are better ones available, you just have to be willing to pay for them. The UCD was designed to teach how to hover, too easy to hover and teach how to fly slow. With the UCD's fat wing, helps teach that.


Flying can pretty much be summed up to this. Rolling Harriers, regular Harriers and KE go to the Fusion. It does them better than the UCD clearly. Thats the thinner wing (I love the way the Fusion flys, it flys good) But Blenders/Flat spins clearly are better with the UCD. Now that is odd. Something may be a miss in balance or control deflection, something in the set up. Slow flying/landing is easier with the UCD. That is the thick wing, you need a bit more power with the Fusion. Hovers are the same (very easy with either plane, super easy would be a better explanation) The UCD will do a rising flat spin, maybe the Fusion will when I get more used to it. I donno, the thicker wing planes do a climbing inveted flat spin better, it has something to do with amount of lift it gives, the thicker wing, more lift. (I'm still learning the limitations with the Fusion) but right now I can't get it to rise. Waterfalls are considerably better than the Fusion with the UCD. Thinner wing again, it rotates better, due to less lift Rolling circles are MUCH easier with the UCD. The Fusion will do them but it takes more inputs and they just aren't as level and the Fusion has more "tail wag". Once again, difference in the wing, you need to work the throttle more with the Fusion, just like in the bigger birds, the UCD you can almost find a sweet spot in the thottle and just work the elevator and rudder. You need more rudder in the Fustion, too. Another thing...The UCD has the fuel tank mounted on the CG so I get zero weight change as I burn fuel. That isn't an option on the Fusion and I can tell the difference as the fuel goes away. It starts getting tail heavy and starts pulling to the right a bit. I agree with you 100% on this one, center tank is always the ticket. It can be done on most airplanes, you just have to do the mod. Get R/C boat fuel tanks, they lay flat and can fit in the wing.

Anyways...In my opinion I would rate the planes as equal. When it comes to cost the UCD is the winner. Both are excellent flying planes.

So....I've read many posts that you have stated the profiles are much better for learning and much better at flying 3D and are much easier to build and fly. I just don't think that is the case.

A good full bodied plane is equal to a good profile. And I think the full bodied planes look better and give more options on mounting the receiver and battery etc.

Another big difference between the typical profile and the Fusion is the tail moment. The longer tail moment allow for additional stablity in a stright line, however with massive throws, you can overcome it and get it really going. A short tail moment profile will fly very differently from the Fusion. You have very similar planes that have some differences in performace, however a short tail moment profiles does more. It will just twist up and do stuff that the longer tail moment planes just won't do.

Set up is a whole other subject. And I don't mean the set up of the equipment, I mean the set up on the plane. What people do not seem to understand is that the setup of the plane can not be done via the internet and advice. It can only be done by flying the airplane. Recently I was at a field and this guy is fighting trying to hover and harrier the plane. I asked him some questions and all the quy would say is, well this is what I saw on RCU. I made some suggestions and he told me that this is what they said on the internet. I fly the plane. It was a handful to hover and harrier however I touched the tail with full confidence and made the plane rock. His buddy commented that is was no fun to watch someone else fly his plane better than him. I land. Go back to the pits, move his battery pack to the back of the wing, increase the throw in the elevator, dail in some more expo in the elevtor and rudder, fly the plane again, then had it to the guy and give him specific instructions on how to enter a hover and maintain it. He FREAKED OUT!!! He could not belive he was hovering the plane on the deck and he had never done it before. A little bit of an ajustment in the set up and it made the difference. Setup is a major part of 3D, just like race cars, however it is near impossible to do here.

And another comment...the first Funtana was a lousy plane. So can I start another Funtana thread?

I luv this stuff, can ya tell?