Just finished the Matt Chapman .46 size GP arf and installed an OS .61 fx. Seemed to be an excellant unit. But I notice the engine has some upthrust. The engine mounting box comes out from the firewall 1/8" further on the bottom than on the top causing this. Looking over the inside of the nose all looks like it fits good. Is this normal for this plane? Appreciate some comments before I maiden.

most caps carry upthrust look at tower hobbies website they'll usually tell u in the write up the throws and thrust... the GP caps that tower sells requires u to add 2-3 degress of up thrust

Thanks, Krayzc. We'll look for no wind, cut grass, sunshine and hit the sky.

a cap is a 3d animal take the air strong even if you are just flying circles as i love to do this to on my calmer days

This plane isn't a 3D plane by anymeans but I did find that a little bit more down thrust made the plane fly better. Also, be sure to use a 13x4 APC prop on the .61FX. It was the perfect combo.

cadconversions
what makes this animal a not so good 3d machine?

It's a great flying plane, a friend of mine had one (sadly crashed it a few months back). I flew it, and it's nice for precision stuff, but 3d wasn't what it was designed for. It's got a relatively high wing loading, and didn't have the control authority for 3d.

Mine flew like it had a piano stuck in the cowl with the 55AX. Just couldn't get it to fly stable and ended up loosing it on the third flight. Checked the balance after the first two white knuckle sorties, and balanced to the tail as far as I could. Still couldn't keep the nose up at less than 3/4 throttle and heavy elevator. I'm wondering about the down thrust now that I've read this. It's obviously gone now, but anyone have any experience similar? I can't imagine even trying 3D with the lack of low speed stability I saw.

the cap carries up thrust not down thrust. This allows for cleanier up lines and comps for the stab location in relation to the wing location (one high the other low). its usually takes me 20 or more flights to get a plane line up correctly by changing CG 1st, throws, up thrust or down thrust, maybe servo locatons or adding servo in some case, taking a plane off certain hardware flaws, mixes, to give my true thoughs to the bird.

Hey Krayzc,

I've owned this plane twice and I can tell you from experience that this plane was not designed with any kinda of 3D at all. Might get it to hold a hover for a few seconds but that's it. Now tumbling, it will tumble and flies well but it's really finicky as well. To bad it wasn't like the 33% version.

I had this plane with an OS 61FX. It flew very well. If i get another one( I traded this one for a Heli), I would put a 91Fx on it. Its not a 3D plane, its very heavy. Make sure you go with their throw recommendations & keep the speed up in a loop or it will snap on you. With all that said I really like this plane.[8D]

would it at least do a blender?

Anything will do a blender. It's awesome at snaps, tumbles, spins and things like that.

ok anything huh

what does it do bad then?

It can't hover, anything high-alpha like harriers, water falls, etc.. I guess the way you would say it - this plane is a U-CAN-NOT 3D with a cool color scheme

I have flown one of these on a .91 FX and would highly recommend against it. There's so much torque from the spinning prop that anytime the throttle was applied, it would torque roll the airplane over on it's side. My most exciting take off was a full throttle punch out for fun. Luckily, I hit full throttle about the time it was leaving the ground, rolled to the right, I applied full rudder deflection in knifeedge - missed catching the wing tip by mear inches, and flew out in knife-edge till I could roll the plane back to level.

cadconversions
tks for the info that really helps me to understand. I sure do like that color scheme. well h-9 has their old cap coming back out for those who can move that direction. that is a winner in the cap dept....