Anybody owns this plane?, I need for info.
Joe

I just purchased one from tower and I'm currently putting it together. The quality is much better than the markI version which I owned early this summer and put into the ground(inverted and did not relaize it and pulled up on the stick). The cowling is a full fiberglass cowling and they did away with the turtle deck that was on the markI version and have gone to a balsa sheeting on top with covering. I will hopefully have this plane up and flying in the next week or two depending on the weather here in Kansas temp are good this week but it is a little windy for flying. Any the Mark I was a good flyer and I really liked how it flew for my second plane (first low wing) and I think this version will fly just the same. The one thing that I did was to keep the engine upright and not inverted on a recomendation of a fellow flyer that also had owned the voyager and found that the engine was on his plane would not stay tuned inverted. I will be dong the same thing on this plane and keep the engine in the uprgrigh position and then trming the cowl to fit for that placement. With the Mark I version the cowl was setup for a inverted engine so I never flew with the orignal cowl instead I used a TT Sport 40 L Cowl which is a close cousing to this plane in construction(MKI version). The price that I got it for was 99.00 towers sku was ea1001 for that price. They still have that code listed for that price. I will be putting a OS46FX engine which was on my original Voyager but instead of the stock exhaust pipe I will be putting a different pipe since the crash of the voyager destroyed the original pipe on this engine and the cost of replacement with a original part was about the same as upgrading to this pipe.
John

Thanks for the info, I was looking for a low wing trainer, for the price, this might be it.
Joe[8D]

Just finished putting this plane together friday night and the only major issue that I ran into is the CG of the airplane with a OS46FX is nose heavy just like the mark I version. What I did with the mark 1 was put the battery behind the Cockpit under the turtle deck. I made a battery box for it. With the Mark II version there is no turtledeck so there is no way to put the battery back there without cutting into that area and building a hatch or something. What I ended up doing was putting the batter under the above the servos and adding about 1/2 ounces of wieght at the tail area to correct the CG. Had it out yesterday but ran into a air leak in the fuel system that kept the engine from running right. Got the airplane up but the engine died and I recoverd it with no damage to teh airplane.
John

I'm also in the final stages of building the voyager. Seem to be a good quality plane so far. I also noticed last night that my OS .46 FX is making the plane very nose heavy. Even with the motor pushed back to the firewall, I had the battery sitting just ahead of the tail to get good balance. I'm going to get a light weight motor mount today and huck the heavy clamp style that came with it. Since I want to keep the plane light as possible, I'm going to look at mounting the battery in the fuse towards the tail. Cutting a hatch should be pretty easy.

Would be interested in seeing pictures of the mod when you get done.
John

I've had a Mk 1 Voyager for approx 4 years. It has MANY flights on it. One of the best flying sport planes I have ever come across. My engine is inverted - a Tower Hobbies .46BB. This is a great engine. I installed onboard glow and has not had any problems with engine tuning. You do have to shut off fuel flow to the engine between flights to prevent the carb from flooding when not in use - I use a fueler valve for this. I start the engine with the plane upside down. This is a bit inconvenient but the plane does look great with the engine inside the cowl. I modified my rudder and elevator- see picture - and now it does a great knife-edge ! ! I increased the control throw on my high rates and it is very aerobatic in that way. I bought a Mk11 for the day that the inevitable happens.

Looks nice and sounds like she is a fun flyer.
John

I agree with a OS46 engine it is a bit nose heavy and with the new design it is harder to place the battery aft of the wing which you have to do to get the CG right. I ended up putting the battery above the servo's and then installing about 2-3oz of lead on the tail area. This put the CG in the proper place. Was hoping to get the airplane up today but when I got to the field I decided not to fly since the melting snow made a mess of the field. I fixed my airleak on the fuel tank and the engine is running nice now. Looking forward to getting this airplane up and flying soon. I really enjoyed flying the Mk1 version.
John

how bout the covering? i heard the MK1 is very cheap covering... was wondering what type it is and if its better than the MK1

i just put my easy sport into the ground 2 days ago =( just b/c i forgot to connect the ailerons due to hurrying and ctahcing the last few minutes of day light...time for a new plane..bummer =D

thanks

~Matt

The covering is holding up well and is not coming of in any areas of the airplane. The MarkII contruction is alot better without the cheap plastic turtle deck that was on the MarkI. I did not have any problems with the covering on the MarkI either. I have alot of flights on the MarkII now and I still have to put the cowling on and the cockpit covering but it has been fun flying it without these items. I might set down and do the cowling this weekend if I have time.
It is going for 99.99 agian so it is a good price for the airplane agian. The hatch Idea is a good one and I have thought about doing that but I have the batter above the servo tray and just over an ounce of lead at the tail which I will paint over with white paint to blend them into the aircraft structure.
John

An update on the covering. After many flights on the airplane the covering came off on the tail and is coming off on the nose of the aircraft.
Looks like I will have a winter project of covering the airplane.
John

OH GEZZZ,[] I bought 1 my self and planing to to put it together

it said that covering was durable, was that mark 1 or 2

My Voyager is almost 10 years old now and has somewhere between 250 - 300 flights on it. What a trooper it has been. Now powered by a Tiger Shark .52 from Kangke it has great power and continues to travel to the field regularly. See it fly here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcd35-Uu8nc

If you're concerned about the quality of covering on the Tower Voyager ARF, the Phoenix Models Dolphin 40 ARF is a good alternative. Also available from Tower Hobbies, the Phoenix Models Dolphin 40 is a nice flying and quick building low wing sport plane ARF priced at $99.99.

While the Dolphin 40 ARF seems to be designed very similarly to the Sig Four Star 40, it's primary advantage over the Tower Hobbies Voyager ARF is that the Phoenix Models Dolphin 40 is covered with Oracover. Oracover is marketed here in the U.S. by Horizon Hobby as Ultracote.