P-47 is a nice one!! I just finished a TF Corsair. Wanted a fun-plane, an everyday flyer for this spring and.... here I am with the Skybolt!

Has anyone put a twin on this?

I have a Saito 90T, not sure if it has enough power.

Thanks
Gary

It would fly it ok, but not great. So if you're not looking for too much in the way of verticle, but still have a very aerobatic plane, it will do

For comparison, I have a Saito FA-100T in a SIG WACO SRE that I am very satisfied with. The WACO weighs 10 pounds less fuel. The 100 twin pulls this quite well and although it is not an aerobatic airplane it will do all of the various un-scale aerobatics you could want. I have a Saito FA-80 in my Skybolt. This engine is very close in power to the FA-100T that is in the WACO. This combination weighs 7lbs. 12oz. less fuel. Again, I am very pleased with the performance of my Skybolt. Any limitations that it has are because of the pilot and not the the airplane. I don't claim to be anything but an average R/C pilot, so you should consider that as well. I'm not hard to please. Bottom line to what I'm saying is, if your FA-90T produces close to the same power as the 100T (I believe it does) you should see similar performance to what I do with my Skybolt. Not spectacular but not too bad either. Hope all this helps.

MinnFlyer

I read through the posts that you recommend a Graupner 14x7 prop for the OS 91FS. Is this the older nylon type or the newer "Sonic" type? Also, do you know if you need the Graupner "prop adapter" for the OS 91?

Cheers,

George

I use the older type. I haven't tried the new Sonic

No prop adapter is needed, they just go on like any other prop

I havent used a Graupner prop yet. Why is this your chice over a , for example, Master Airscreww Classic, same size?[sm=72_72.gif].

I am one of those people who doesn't usually care much about things like which prop I'm using. While I will see a difference between an 11x6 and an 11x7, I don't usually see a difference between brand X and brand Y. But the first time I used a Graupner, it was like - WOW.

I don't know if it's the shape, the stiffness, the weight or whatever other factors are involved (nor do I care). All I know is those things pull like a gorilla.

Another nice thing about them is that they are heavy, which makes the prop act like a flywheel to give you an incredibly low, smooth idle

Well said, MinnFlyer, Thanks.

Hi Silver Kiwi,

Thanks for your reply.

Looking at Saito specifications between the 90T and the 100T. The HP on the 100 T is 1.6 and the 90T is 1.0, that's a surprisingly big difference. They both use a 14X6 prop but the 90 is 1000 less rpm. Bummer, I thought it would be a lot of fun with the twin. May need to buy another twin or stay with a .91.

Gary

Silver Kiwi,

Thanks for your reply.

Looking at Saito specifications between the 90T and the 100T. The HP on the 100 T is 1.6 and the 90T is 1.0, that's a surprisingly big difference. They both use a 14X6 prop but the 90 is 1000 less rpm. Bummer, I thought it would be a lot of fun with the twin. May need to buy another twin or stay with a .91.

Gary

Hi, has anyone tried the new O.S. FSa-110 with this ARF? I do have a very trustworthy O.S. FS91 with pump, but since I intend to add smoke and both engines share more or less the same dimensions AND weight, yet the FSa-110 is more powerful, wouldn't it be better? Is there something that I do not take into account (for example, better go with the pumped engine). I must add that I would also like to use 2 servos for the elevators, add smoke and still be able to have unlimited vertical. Any thoughts?

I think the new 110 would be GREAT!

Thank you Mike for the reply. I have read on a previous post of yours that you do not get along well with OS pumps, although you like OS engines. I own several pumped OS engines, and I must admit that I have mixed feelings (the worst being the FS 70 Ultimate). Yet, and I mean it, the pumped FS91 I have, never failed me. NEVER. No matter what the weather conditions or the rich/lean fuel mix. So, my question is, if assuming that the pump works well, does the Skybolt needs a pumped engine to perform 3D? Is it capable of 3D that may need a pump?
To be honest, I'll most likely try the new FSa-110 just because I like the looks of it (a very important factor in the hobby I believe), but the question will be in the back of my mind. You know "haven't I set up my Super Skybolt the BEST way I can?"

First of all, the Skybolt is not designed for 3-D. You may get it to preform SOME 3-D maneuvers, but don't expect much.

As Mike stated it will do some limited 3D , but you really have to work at it . Get a cheap profile to throw around for 3D . The S.B is a great airplane ,but 3D is not it`s sweet spot.
The OS 110 would be a nice engine , the crank vent to carb should really help on the glow fuel mess. Not sure what they weight , but with a Saito 1.00 , mine balanced with out any additional weight .
If you intend to pound on your Bolt really hard , I would epoxy the servo tray in really good and reinforce the firewall . I pulled the fire wall just about out , hovering and had the servo tray come loose .

Reinforcing the firewall in my case is more than necessary. It is a strange story: somehow I managed to pay and receive the Skybolt ARF from Tower Hobbies at the price of the kit ($100 less) but the firewall at its left side is not glued correctly with the fuselage and the only thing that keeps it is the triangle stock from behind. I cannot return it to TH because they will probably find out their mistake and charge me more. I intend to drill 4 holes at the points that the firewall touches the crossed ply structure of the fuselage (the parts that form the tank area) and pass through them sticks (haven't decided the wood type or dimension yet) that I will glue for at least 2" behind the firewall. It is a little more complicated than what I can describe here and a picture would say a lot more, but that is planned for this weekend. To facilitate this I will probably have to open a hatch at the bottom of the fuselage, where the exhaust goes. All that added weight and the smoke setup, will need some extra power than what the FS91 can give.
As far as 3D, yes, I may have exaggerated. I know what the SS is. Anyway, I'll post some pictures if anyone is interested in what I intend to do. All my decisions really come out from what I've read to this thread, so thank you all, it is very helpful, even if it is experience read and not acquired the hard way!

To celebrate the Maiden Flight of my Skybolt ARF I'm posting a picture just after the first full stop landing. The engine is an OS91FS 4 Stroke, Wildcat fuel, MA classic 14X6, JR 7202 gear, using all low rates, and all trims were centered. very light breeze down the runway. It landed very nicely and as you can see, all in one piece. The wheel pants were left off on purpose. I'm looking forward to trying the Graupner 14X6 like MinnFlyer uses. I didn't weigh my Skybolt, but the OS91 was enough power, but certainly not OVER powered. I'm excited because this is my first bipe, first 60 size plane, first tail dragger, first 4 stroke, first coweled engine.

Thanks for all the input from all of you guys.

MK

Wow, you blew the wheel pants right off it!

I use a Graupner 14 x 7 or 13.5 x 8. If your LHS doesn't carry them, Hobby Lobby does.

Just Google "Graupner props"

Well, I flew the maiden of my Super Skybolt today. It was a really nice day up here in New England (49 degrees) and no wind. My S.S. is powered by a Saito 125 with Futaba FAAST spread spectrum. Balanced per the book, throws set for my comfort. This is one pretty plane. With my skis on, I fired up the motor, did a range check and brought her to the runway. Gave it throttle, tracked nice and straight and it just climbed right off the ground. A little rudder pull to the left, a click of down elevator and a click of left aileron. With a 16x6 APC it really screamed so I backed of to less than 1/2 throttle, loops, rolls, stall turns, everything just perfect. Made my approach and it just tracked right down to the runway. Couldn't ask for a better 1st flight.

Great Planes, another winner!!!!!

R/C Foolish

Anybody seen or tried to fly one of these on floats? Seems that the Super Skybolt ARF would be a real nice looking and flying float plane if done right. Paul

Well.. I've just got my pinkies on one of these beauties too. As I was surfing the web for an engine, I ran across the OS 110, and jumped over here to see if anyones tried it yet... and I see it's already being discussed.. as it does look like a winner for this plane in my book.

According to TowerSpecs... it weighs about 4-5 oz's less then the OS91pumper.. and about 3-4oz's less then the .91surpass. They also guage at using up to a 16x8 prop comparitively to the .91's guaging a 16x6(this strictly for comparison, as props will vary). This engine is modern in every way.. and I don't know that one could go wrong with it.(I'm talking myself into it). I'm actually hoping someones' already tried it and can report thier findings.. curious to know how compatible it is with a smoke system, etc..

Also ran across some other things/questions I'd like to toss out.. one is about the elevator set-up.. with the 2 pushrods collared together.. I totally understand the set-up, and wonder if anyone's using it.. or honestly if anybody thinks it's as cheesy as I do.. I'm all for using a proven set-up.. but have to totally question that one. Installing 2 elevator servos is totally within my capability.. and then I'm thinking about weight.. with a 19oz engine..and 2 elev servos in the rear.. hmm a smoke system would offset that nicely, quite possibly... just thoughts.

Rudder system.. On the box label.. they have a pic of a pull-pull system(in the little feature boxes).. Is there actually hardware in this kit for that? I havent ran across any yet.. I have to admit I havent even taken it out of the box totally.. I get too excited and its not time yet for me to actually start on it.. hehe.. I love this plane already.
But.. I can easily see a pull-pull system in it's future.. but just looking for different experiences.

Overall..I'm not one to change out a ton of stuff on a proven plane, as I do totally believe designers know how to design.. but do know kit-makers have to cut costs somewhere..and some do it in hardware/equipment.. and certain areas of most planes can use mini-makeovers, if nothing else just to personal-preference..

I've read this whole thread before(it's been months though, this was before I had the plane in my mitts).. and will read it again, as I know there's alot of answers to questions I'll have.. but I'm anticipating and speculating the future for this incredible plane.. I've wanted one since Sig kitted it years ago.. and am fortunate one literally fell into my hands thanks to a good friend of mine(Thanks Don!! You Da man!!)... So I won't go on here, but do appreciate any and all input. Thanks guys.

PS... Here's TowerHobbies link to that OS 110 if anyone wants to check it out. It sure is a nice looking engine!!
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...&I=LXVVW8&P=SM

I wrote the RCU review of this ARF

http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/a...article_id=750

And when I do a review, I try my best to stick to the original parts and instructions. I used the wheel collar method on the elevator pushrods and it's still holding up to this day.

That said, if you're uncomfortable with it, you could add some CA to the two pushrods, or wrap them with thread before adding the CA, OR you could just wrap them with copper wire and solder the two together.

As for the pull-pull... don't kill yourself looking for it - It's not there (I made mention of this fact in the review) But it's really not needed either. Personally, I'm losing my enthusiasm for pull-pull systems and prefer a solid pushrod nowadays

I've been pretty happy with mine. I've been thinking of switching out my YS91 for a YS110 that I have laying around. If I end up adding a smoke system this spring, that change should do a small bit to counter the extra weight.

Thanks guys for the comments..

Mike, I totally forgot to mention,.. I read your very well written review a few times(definately a Pro review)... and will refer to it from time to time.. as well... I saw that you did have the kit version a while back too, that was equally worthy. ... and I think I caught most of the vids on this plane too.. here as well as YouTube.com.
Good info on that rudder system too.. I don't want to re-invent the wheel..nor will I try with this plane..

R/C Foolish .. Congrats on the maiden voyage. I do know the Saito is one fine engine as well.. and the 125 has got to be a stump puller..very powerful engine!. I wish you many days of excellent flying.. and Spring is upon us.
I'm curious if you took any measures using that 125... structural or otherwise. ?
Or if anyone has installed flying wires? Reason I ask that is I did lose a GreatPlanes Extra due to flutter(overpowered also)..so when I replaced(read built a new one, still overpowered it) I installed a Sullivan flying-wire kit.. and have had no further problems.. those control surfaces are very large on this SkyBolt.