Just wondering if I can hang on the prop with a .46 OS on this LT-40? Going to buy an engine soon and I am doing my research on them now.

Also, the guy at the hobby shop said he's got an LT-40 with a .60 in it. Didn't have to modify anything. Thats a lot of power. Should I do this?

Probably won't hang with a .46, might with a .52. .60 might be a bit much unless you built it and modified or made some things stronger. You will probably rip the wings off with a .60 eventually.

Might not hover anyway. Not really designed for it. I don't know what it will do when you stop the wing from flying. The propwash won't be over the ailerons as much like on a mid wing bird. Think you will loose effectiveness fairly early.

Yes, with the right size hook on the wall or ceiling it can be hung from the prop. I think most, however, hang their planes from the tail.

Seriously....

If it is built light and the 46FX of AX is running strong with a 12x4 ot 12.5x3.75 it might.... near full throttle... barely. But, it is not a plane that is intended for that kind of maneuvering, as fun as it may be.

My unsolicited suggestion is that you take the plane and enjoy the pleasure of executing perfect takes offs, touch and goes, landings right in front of you every time, perfectly round loops, nice stall turns, etc. If you can do all the basic stuff really well with that plane then you've accomplished something. Or maybe you are already there. Dunno.

I'm agreeing with Jim on this. A trainer is not the plane to even consider trying stuff like hovering with, and the chances of you getting good enough to hover before your trainer is replaced is highly unlikely.

Enjoy the trainer for what it is, then move on to something made for 3D once you have the experience and ability.
Dennis-

I had an evolution 46 on my lt 40. I wouldn't go as far as to say it would hang on the prop, but it was close.

It would hang there and slowly drift down.

Makes for a nice tail slide.

Get a profile next and let the fun begin!

I have two evolution 46's, They are reasonably priced and I am very satisfied with them. I have read that they are very comparable to an fx.


Wings

no

I also have an Evolution .46 on my Lt-40. I haven't tried to go vertical with it yet but now I've got to try it ! With all the power it has, I might be able to keep it there for a moment.

Has anyone ever (successfully) tried to hover a trainer before?[sm=confused.gif]

I have a good running Thunder Tiger .46 Pro with 11x7 prop on my LT-40 and it will hang on the prop. I have even gotten it to torque roll a few times. This isn't the type of thing you try if you are still learning to fly. I have completely mastered my LT-40 and still love to fly it. Once you get really good with it you can max out the throws and have fun getting it to do crazy things you never thought a trainer could do. To prop hang you basically get some speed going and pull straight up until it starts to slow down. If your engine has enough power you will be able to hold it there for a bit before it starts to fall. Lots of fun. This plane can definitely handle a .60 but the added weight will hurt the good flying characteristics and make it harder to fly. I don't suggest it if you are just starting off. I had an OS .70 four stroke on mine for a little bit for break in purposes and the plane would take off in about five feet. It was a blast to fly with all the power but overall it didn't fly as well or as easy as with the recommended size engine. Much more of a handful. You wouldn't hurt the plane at all to put a little more power on it such as a Webra .50 - this plane is as big as most .60 size trainers so it can handle it. Just be careful that whatever you choose is in the same weight range as the typical .46 size engines that are recommended for this plane so you retain the great flying characteristics.

I've had two seperate occasions where my experience with a particular engine did not match up with what others were saying. The first was with an ultra stick where some guy said it had unlimited verticle with a TT46 pro. The second was with a pacific aeromodelers edge 540. This guy said he could maintain a hover with a .46 fx. (6lb plane)
Just so I am clear, I want to explain what my definitions are of the the words hover and unlimited verticle.
If I am wrong in my understanding of these words, please correct me.
1. Unlimited verticle - Person holds the plane by the tail and the plane will climb from a dead stop. (Not a buzz the runway at 80mph and pull up and watch it go)

2. Hover - The plane is oriented in a verticle position (not sorta verticle like a harrier) and the engine will maintain it's altitude.

In the case of my plane based on your definition I would say Hover yes, Unlimited vertical definitely not. I can get it to hang there but can't pull out vertically. Like others have already said, if easy torque rolls and unlimited vertical is what you are looking for then go with another plane. If you are still learning to fly you are lacking the flight time and experience to be trying these types of maneuvers - but the LT-40 is a great place to start.

My suggestion... put a Webra .50 or Irvine .53 on the LT-40 and fly it until you know it better than the back of your hand and have the ability to try and hang it on the prop without getting into trouble. Then go out and buy a Hangar 9 Twist or a U-Can-Do .46 and transfer the engine from the trainer to the new plane. You will be able to hang on the prop and have unlimited vertical.

The manuever referred to as hovering (as in 3D) means that the plane will "hang" on the prop indefinitely, and then pull up out of the hover by adding throttle. No LT 40, or any other 40 size trainer I've ever seen or heard of, will do this on a 46. And if someone says their's does, I'd be very skeptical to say the least. (Unless they managed to build it at 4 pounds or under.)

Unlimited vertical means just that. The ability to take off, pull straight up, and climb until the plane can't be seen anymore. Hovering, as described above, requires unlimited vertical at least.
Dennis-

Exactly

zetor, go back and look at your own post. A planes abiltiy to hover and its ability to pull out vertically are two separate things just as you stated. Going vertical is a matter of engine power. Just enough engine power for a given weight plane will allow you to hover for a short period of time. How much excess power a plane has determines how long it can hang there and whether or not it can pull out vertically. Every time a new 3D fun fly plane comes out guys go out and buy it then start talking to each other in these forums about what engine to use to get enough vertical.

I just bought the new Hangar 9 Twist 3D a few weeks ago and went through this very discussion with others who had bought this plane. One guy takes his plane out for its maiden and happens to be running a .40. He tries hanging it on the prop and is able to get it to hang motionless for a short period of time but doesn't have enough to pull out vertically. He then comes back to these forums and says the .40 isn't enough since it doesn't have unlimited vertical - even though he was able to get it to hang on the prop. Another guy happens to put a .72 four stroke on his Twist and finds that it will go vertical out of sight and hovers very nicely. Like I said it is a matter of engine power. Whether or not a hover can be sustained for an extended period of time is determined by the design of the plane. That is why you can put the same engine on two different planes and one one will have just enough to hover but not pull out and the other will hover and pull out vertically.

DBCherry, what my LT-40 does is hang on the prop (hover). It isn't falling backwards and it isn't a tail slide. What it does is it eventually wanders to the side out of the hover because the control surfaces on this plane just aren't big enough to keep it pointed in the correct attitude to sustain the hover. When it does this it is neither gaining nor losing altitude and also not wander to the side for a period of time. When the prop is no longer pointing straight up the thrust is now pushing the plane sideways and no longer supporting the weight of the plane. This is when it starts to lose altitude. If you fly a light 3D plane in a hover and don't keep the nose pointed straight up it will do the exact same thing - it will wander to the side and lose altitude because the prop thrust is no longer supporting the weight of the plane. Even if you add power the plane isn't going to automatically pull out straight up. That will only happen if you give it the propper control surface deflections to keep the plane going in the right dirrection. Like I and others have already said, if you want a good hovering plane an LT-40 really isn't the proper plane to do it with. The ability to hover well is a combination of the design of the plane and the power to weight ratio.

I guess where we disagree is in how we define hovering. To me it is getting the plane to hang without gaining nor losing altitude or wandering off to the side for a period of time. The amount of time it stays there doesn't determine if it should be referred to as a hover. Granted I do think that there is a minimal amount of time that the plane needs to hang there before it should be considered a successful hover. Just because the plane wasn't able to pull out vertically doesn't mean it didn't just hold a hover for a measurable amount of time. Like I said, hovering and unlimited vertical are two different things. In this case maybe zetor is really more interested in having unlimited vertical. I still think an engine like a Webra .50 would be interesting on this plane. It would probably give it the ability to pull out vertically but once the plane is allowed to fall off to the side too far there still couldn't be enough control surface to pull it back into a vertical hovering position the way a true 3D plane will.

Well I went back and re read my post. I thought I must have had a typo when you suggested I go back and read my post but that wasn't so. I don't have anything to add or retract. It's pretty simple really. If a plane will maintain it's altitude in a verticle position, it will hover. If it can't do this, it can't hover.

Bryris

In my opinion NO, not designed to do that type of thing.


Highlander

This is a yes or no question that the answers should be based on facts not opinions.

Many many things do things there were not designed to do.

I had an LT - 40 so I can speak from facts, not opinion.

Mine darn near hung on the prop with an evo 46. So I am confident that it will hang on the prop with an engine a tad more powerful than an evo 46, and will come close enough with an evo 46.

No, the LT-40 isn't designed to be a 3 - D plane. It is not a 3- D plane. But this was not the question that was asked.

Went vertical with my LT-40 today just to see what would happen. Well, it went up but I think I turned the maneuver into a stall turn. At almost full throttle I couldn't quite keep it up there. I think that if somebody had a .52 or higher that it could be done though.

You hit the nail on the head Wings, I agree 100%. These types of maneuvers really are best saved for a future purpose-built plane. To focus on what the LT-40 can't do is a bit of an injustice since it is such a terrific plane - both to learn on and later on when you have developed your piloting skills and want something a little more laid back to fly. The only real negative I would give this plane is its handling characteristics in the wind. This, however, is true of any plane with dihedral which includes just about every trainer out there. I haven't flown an Avistar, but with its flatter, more symetrical wing it would probably handle the wind a little better than most trainers. I would still put the LT-40 in the lead for someone just starting out.

That lt-40 is a big plane for a 40 size. A 46 isn't going to prop hang any plane that weight regardless of the design. It may look as if it is hanging 200' up but I'll wager that if it was down on the deck, you would see it sinking like a rock. I think the lt 40 is the best 40 size trainer out there because of its size. But as others said, it isn't designed for that.

How much do you want to wager?

I hand it practically hanging on the prop 30 foot in the air? On purpose? No. But it did.

I wager ya.

Yup, mine will prop hang too. Mine has a well broken in Thunder Tiger .46 Pro on the nose. This engine has more power now that it is broken in than when it was new so I wouldn't expecte from any TT .46 but a well running .46 or .50 size motor should do it. You aren't going to get this plane into a prop hang down close to the deck simply because it doesn't have the maneuverability of a 3D style plane. It isn't possible to hold it in a hover for too long for the same reason. Once it starts to drift off to one side or the other its pretty hard to get it back. Sure is fun to play around with though! Not a bad way to test out your skills before moving to a full 3D plane. Just be sure to keep plenty of altitude so when it falls out you have plenty of room to maneuver!

Answer: Yes!!! I started trying different things on my own after I passed my wings test. I found out that I was able to hang my LT40 on the prop at about 3/4 throttle and then start climbing at full throttle. This was with an FX 40 engine with a MAS 10-5 prop! It should be even easier with an 46FX.