Boy, that Great Planes 79" Spacewalker ARF keeps dropping in price and looks darn good now at $200. I'm thinking of buying it.
It would also be an interesting move up from my Hobbistar 60 MKll which as you know is basically an enlarged Avistar 40.

BUT:
I am currently finishing up an enlarged 90" Sig Astrohog. I have the wing dihedral cut down to about 2.5 degrees, and have a 2.1 Moki in it.

Question: Do you think these two planes would be very similiar in flight, and so I would wind up having duplicate performance and end up being bored with one of them???

Is this "enlarged" Sig Astrohog a customized version? I don't believe I've seen anything from Sig other than the .40 - .60 size.
Even if you stretched the wing to 90", that Moki 2.10 is WAY too much motor for that plane. So I guess the answer to your question would be no, they won't be anything alike. Just curious, what's the all up weight gonna be on your Astrohog?

I happened to be in a hobby shop when he brought it in (in the bones) and it was very nice and aso very well built.

I dont remember how he said that the plans were enlarged. The work was first class.

It should fly fine. It has gotten me to get interested again in enlarging a set of Zoroli BV-141 plans (54" up by 1.5 to 81").

BTW I happen to have the GP Spacewalker with a OS91FS and it is a great flyer. one thing that I found out about is that if you move the CG back to where you only have to think flare on landing then it will be ablle to do a Lomchevok and almost do a great flat spin as well. I know this is not an Extra but it is a great way to do areobatics and still keep the heart rate down.

Take care Jim

Go with the Space Walker,
Oh and counting the wing tips, the SpaceWalker from GP has a 83" wing span
just so you should know.

Enlarged Astro Hog eh? I was going to make a 'standard' one a bipe.....but was warned it may never land!!!!!!!

Jerry

Stick Jammer;

I built this Hog via a trip to kinkos, and a delivery of a big box of wood sticks from Lone Star. It's 125% blow-up of the original 71" Astro Hog. This tail dragger has a take down wing tube,a perry pump, nelson glo-driver, redundant battery system, and Koverall with 7 tons of butyrate dope, spray primer, light spackle filler, and Rustoleum paint. I'm expecting it to finish up at about 17.5- 18 lbs dry. Add a 32oz.tank, and it won't be a light weight. April 12 was 1 year, and I'm still filling, sanding and priming! (Now you see why I'm switching to ARF's!) But I guess it's all worth it because I've made my mark in this hobby by improving greatly on the original design; It'll be the first Astro Hog that won't float past the runway! Still think the Moki is too much engine?

Paul Terry,
I'm surprised that the spacewalker isn't advertised as 83"instead of 79". It seems every other model I've owned, the manufacturer had the plastic wing caps figured into the advertised wing span.

Great Planes is known for doing that,
I know a friend named Jim Long and his Ryan STA wing was a couple of inches longer too.

I built my Spacewalker without the plastic wingtips, and it came out to a little under 76". I'm surprise that those wingtips can add more than 7".

RandallM, I don't think you'll be bored with the two planes. The 90" Astrohog is going to be quite a bit larger than the Spacewalker and closer to a "real" giant scale model. The guys I fly with swears by the Astrohog for the all-around do-it-all sport plane. Enlarging it from 71"? to 90" would only make it fly better, I would think. Sounds like this could turn out to be your pride and joy. If it were my labor of love, I would for sure reserve it for times when a gorgeous day calls out for that special plane.

OTOH, the Spacewalker will make a great Sunday (or for that matter, everyday) flyer. I 'd say you should definitely get it if you're already thinking about it. I too currently fly a Hobbistar 60 MkII and love it. It's fairly extensively modified.

RandallM.
Well, I've seen planes over 20 lbs. with Moki 1.8's and not lacking for power. That 2.10 is gonna be a lot of motor for 18 lbs.

Volfy,
Seems you have my problem: You just gotta bash a kit do ya? Yep, I added flaps to my Hobbistar too. Flys with authority with the .75 Tower engine. Monokoted the bottom of it in hot pink too, so I have no orientation problems. (My eyes aren't what they used to be with them Houston overcast shadows up there).

Now my Tower 40 Trainer resembles more of what I saw in your photo: After a minor crash I totally stripped it and rebuilt it. I also did flaps, bolt on wings, and I also removed the plastic end caps on all surfaces. Must admit I'll probably never use the flaps again on the Tower 40. Tried it once....talk about floating in with a balloon landing!

Which club you frequent? Spacecity, NW, Sparks, Scobee ???

Stick,
Just for arguments sake, don't forget to add another 2 lbs of fuel to make my plane 20 lbs. ready-to-fly. You're right that the 2.1 Moki should handle THIS plane just fine. (Precisely why I sold my brand new unrun Saito180 GK I originally planned on using and deliberatly chose a 2.1 Moki instead) But if this Moki were to be put in a 20lb aerobartic plane, I doubt the maneuvers would be unlimited. I would have preferred a little more powerfull engine to provide an extra margin of thrust, but didn't want to go to a gasser for this model. Anyway, I'm glad we're in a debate on how well it will perform, instead of how poor it won't. Ok, your turn. But please leave out the subject matter, and just start arguing about nothing, then I'll be much more comfortable. (-Cause then it'll be just like being home with the wife. But I'll promise not to call you Shirley)

Randall,
Yap, even though these days I barely have enough time to assemble ARFs, the builder in me just won't leave well enough alone. For a while there, I was putting quad flaps on every ARF I touched. I get a kick out of programming my 9C to do all sorts of quad flap mixes (CROW, AIL->FLAP, ELEV->FLAP, etc.) For the price of a couple more servos and a bit more work, they sure are fun. I power my Hobbistar 60 with a Super Tigre .75. I didn't like the shelf paper covering so the first thing I did after I got the kit was the rip it all off and recover with Monocote. The wadded up ball of shelf paper weighed about a lbs!

By the time I got to the Spacewalker, I was trying very hard not to go nuts with the mods. Still, I did away with the wing-mounted wire gear and bolted a set of GP 1/4 Giles gears. I also replaced the tailwheel with a Ohio Superstar unit and mounted dual elevator servos under the stabs. G23 is the latest choice of power plant. Here's a pic of the progress so far.

I'm a member of both Fort Bend RC Club and Southwest RC Club. FBRC has by far the better field, but SWRC is closer to home and much less crowded on weekends. Of the fields you mentioned, I've only been to Scobee, but even that's more than an hour drive.

Volfy,

I'm such a glo kind of a guy, (cause that's all I'm used to) that it never dawned on me to use a gasser in a 79" wingspan plane. I've got this fixation in my mind that one only needs to buy a gas engine when a plane gets too big for a glo engine. Putting a G-26 in a new spacewalker could be a good opening and introduction to gas engines for me, as I eventually plan on building big warbirds.

Let me know how your Spacewalker finally flys.

I'm expecting finally to finish it a couple of weeks from now. I originally had a Magnum 1.20FS mounted on the Spacewalker, but by the time I added the weight of the motor mount to the 1.20 FS, the G-23 converted to CH-Ignition only weighed a few Oz. more.

The Spacewalker typically needs nose weight anyway, and even with the plastic wingtips left off, the wing area has over 1,000 sq.in. At estimated 10lbs RTF, my Spacewalker should still have a fairly light wing loading of around 23 Oz/sq.in. - not too bad. As of now, the plane balances perfectly with the 2 elevator servos mounted at the tail.

However, I'd have to say using a gasser in this size model is borderline okay. The Spacewalker worked because it has such a short nose moment. I will let you know when it's finished.