YAK 54 vs SUKHOI
#1
Thread Starter

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Covington,
KY
I will be planning my winter project soon and will be considering either the Yak 54 from tower or the just released Sukhoi, both 25%
I plan on using a os 160 with a pitts style muffler.
I like more precision / IMAC type flying with some mild aerobatics thrown in. Which plane would best suit those needs.
What are the differences?
Thanks,
Mike
I plan on using a os 160 with a pitts style muffler.
I like more precision / IMAC type flying with some mild aerobatics thrown in. Which plane would best suit those needs.
What are the differences?
Thanks,
Mike
#5

My Feedback: (2)
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Panama City, FL
I would look at some other factors. As well as the fact that the Yak54 is a true mid wing, and the Sukhoi is a slightly lower than mid level. They're almost identical in all areas. For what you want to do... I'd lean towards the Yak due to the axial roll mid wings. However if you're awesome with the sticks.. You can't beat the value of the Cap232 for 314 bux, minus the 25 with free shipping if you're a Super Savers Tower member. Atleast a pound lighter than the Yak/Suk, less expensive, and if you ever wanted to do some 3D.. You got the best of both worlds, as the 1.60 does quite well with the 1.60 at 12.5lbs.
Yak54:
Wingspan: 81 in (2055 mm)
Wing Area: 1138 sq in (1138 sq in)
Weight: 12.5-15.3 lb (5.7-6.4 kg)
Wing Loading: 25-30 oz/sq ft (78-84 g/dm2)
Sukhoi:
Wingspan: 77" (1950mm)
Length: 70" (1780mm)
Weight: 13-15 lbs. (5900-6800g)
Wing Area: 1155 sq. in. (74.5 sq dm)
Wing Loading: 26-30 oz/sq. ft. (79-91 g/sq dm)
Cap232:
Wing Area: 1168 sq in (75.3 dm2)
Weight RTF: 12.5-14 lb (5670-6350g)
Wingspan: 79 in (2005mm)
Wing Loading: 25-27 oz/sq ft (75-84 g/dm2)
Yak54:
Wingspan: 81 in (2055 mm)
Wing Area: 1138 sq in (1138 sq in)
Weight: 12.5-15.3 lb (5.7-6.4 kg)
Wing Loading: 25-30 oz/sq ft (78-84 g/dm2)
Sukhoi:
Wingspan: 77" (1950mm)
Length: 70" (1780mm)
Weight: 13-15 lbs. (5900-6800g)
Wing Area: 1155 sq. in. (74.5 sq dm)
Wing Loading: 26-30 oz/sq. ft. (79-91 g/sq dm)
Cap232:
Wing Area: 1168 sq in (75.3 dm2)
Weight RTF: 12.5-14 lb (5670-6350g)
Wingspan: 79 in (2005mm)
Wing Loading: 25-27 oz/sq ft (75-84 g/dm2)
#6
Thread Starter

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Covington,
KY
Radar,
Excellent insight. I like the looks of the yak and fly more precision than anything. I hopefully go with the Yak combo.
The only other question would be how well does the 160 pull it around. I really don't want to go gas right now.
Thanks Again!
Mike
Excellent insight. I like the looks of the yak and fly more precision than anything. I hopefully go with the Yak combo.
The only other question would be how well does the 160 pull it around. I really don't want to go gas right now.
Thanks Again!
Mike
#7

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Carrollton
nrthwing,
The Yak should fly very well with an OS 160 for aerobatics. I had a 72" QQ Yak with a pumped OS 160 in it. I bought it off a guy who liked to do 3D and it was an awesome combination. I've since sold it to a friend who took the pump off and it does IMAC style aerobatics very well. I'd consider adding a pump to your plane for two reasons. The first is that you would be able to mount the fuel tank on the CG so the flying characteristics wouldn't change as you burn fuel. The other reason is that you will have stronger up lines and you would be able to do loops as large as you want without running low on power. JMHO. Good luck on whichever plane you get. Keep us posted on your flight report.
Fly safe and have fun!!

David
The Yak should fly very well with an OS 160 for aerobatics. I had a 72" QQ Yak with a pumped OS 160 in it. I bought it off a guy who liked to do 3D and it was an awesome combination. I've since sold it to a friend who took the pump off and it does IMAC style aerobatics very well. I'd consider adding a pump to your plane for two reasons. The first is that you would be able to mount the fuel tank on the CG so the flying characteristics wouldn't change as you burn fuel. The other reason is that you will have stronger up lines and you would be able to do loops as large as you want without running low on power. JMHO. Good luck on whichever plane you get. Keep us posted on your flight report.
Fly safe and have fun!!


David




