Please pick one of the options. Feel free to leave comments. Hopefully GP will solve the problems that some people have had with this plane. Luckily, I've never had a problem with mine.

John

I'm sending mine back to GP this weekend. [:@]No need for this to happen. [sm=punching.gif]

Have had two with no probs. 30-some flights on the first, and 7 flights on the second, so far.
The second has CF sandwiched between the joiner halves.

I am the new proud owner of the Lancair on skis. It has only a couple of flights on it. So Fas so good.

Have had 2 no problems...

Maybe it only happens to people who pull too many Gs on the plane with oversized engines.

You got that right! Almost every model airplane, and EVERY fullscale airplane will break inflight if pushed too hard. It's the pilot's responsibility to keep the airplane in a safe flight envelope.

Yak

Sorry you are most wrong ... I have to say this because I used to fly home made Cox .09 sized box planes that were so light you can never break it!!! Heheheeee ...

If you read through those who have reported problems, wings have come off in level flight in some instances. The thread on wing failure highlights concerns of construction. While some may have received good kits, other may not have and don't even realize this yet. Many had reported several defects with the kit right out of the box. Thanksfully GP recognized this and replaced items with very good service.
However, this doesn't help if the plane has crashed entirely.

This thread will hopefully gather the extent this is happening to pilots. Lets not jump to conclusions that this is just pilot error. While hopefully not, your's may be next.

As for oversized engines: The largest engine I recall is one person thinking of putting in was a SA twin 100T. A little much due to the final weight.
However, keep in mind many of the engines spoken of are very close to the same weight range (within 3 or so oz.) of a OS 61 FX with muffler assembly (if not less) or weighs less than the OS91FS. The four strokes that most are using are not going to do the high RPMs of the 2 strokes (unless your looking to bust your engine and your plane) and the typical prop that most have mentioned using are pitched at 7 or 8. This is well within the range of the 61 (if not slower) based on what one would expect in the way of speed.

The primary thing most will get from placing a larger engines typically spoken of is more thrust. Useful thing when going vertical or in a pinch.

I personally can see gaps in the spar on my kit viewed through the Servo Bay. I've gone to the LHS and looked at other kits and they were finetelling me this was not the way GP intented the kit to be built.

Hey now this is becoming another wing failure thread. Not

__________________________________________________ ______________________________________________
MAX

I did say ALMOST every model...

Yak

I must say I had a lot of fun with that plane, easy to fly and because its a little under powered you can make it do plane stupid things, like stall turns, it stalls cause there is not enough power!

I have two. My first plane has over 20 flights (I stopped counting) on it. During the first few flights, I brought it in too slow with full flaps and had a not-so-smooth landing that tore out the right main landing gear. I re-installed it and have have no problems since that. I have not completed my second model but I am glassing the wing joint and making some mods to the servo installation inside the fuse. As I have stated before, this is a great looking and flying model. Sorry, but I think some of the wing failures were due to poor construction by the builder OR flying outside the intended envelope.

I hate to stir up the mud but, the pilot who posted that the plane was "Under Powered" is not flying a GP Lancair OR is use to flying a 40 size plane with a 60 size engine. The power plants recommended give very good scale flight characteristics plus some (check out the video in the RC reviews).