Another way to fly from a grass field is a technique called "soft field takeoff." We full scale pilots learn and use this technique.

-Hold full up-elevator and increase power to full; continue holding full up-elevator
-As soon as the airplane breaks the runway, release some elevator pressure, level off, and allow the airplane to accelerate in ground effect
-Climb out as normal

I had a trainer with the OS .40 FP with the same problem. In the muffler there was a "cone" shaped thing to help reduce noise. Once I took that goofy thing out, I had all the Power I needed. Hope this helps.

(Sorry if I got off the kit vs. ARF topic )

Didn't know there was a name for it, bit I've used that technique quite a few times to help someone get a plane in the air when the grass was too long, or their wheels were too small. Not always for the faint of heart with an RC plane though.
Dennis-

Same technique here, especially if the nose wheel is digging in. I relax up pressure as the plane begins to get light on the wheels most of the time.


As for ARFs being so good that builders can't improve on them- believe whatever you wish but pardon my laughing. Personally, I've never seen an ARF that didn't need something done to correct things. There are countless messages on RCU from ARF buyers who found no glue, hot glue, hinges never glued, wood never glued, etc. There are quite a number of stories of ARFs with wings folded in flight, fuselage bottoms ripped out on slightly bouncy landings, and retracts breaking on the maiden taxi out for takeoff. Yup, some are decent but a lot are safety hazards waiting to crash....which they do within the first few flights.

My trainer is an ARF, so I'm not totally against them. The plane I was going to train on crashed and this was all there was at that moment. I was stuck with a transmitter, someone to train me, and no suddenly no plane. There happened to be a used ARF trainer for sale at the same time. It needed a lot of work done on it to survive. Reinforced firewall. Fuel proofing as there was none anywhere. Reinforced attaching gear for the tail and elevator as the supplied gear was crap. Nylon bolts for the main gear instead of flimsy, little screws. Real ply for the fuselage bottom for the main gear instead of single sheet balsa. Correction of major down thrust problems. Foam for the fuel tank. Builders stuff that was done to keep the plane from falling apart.

Well my long take off problem didn't stay fixed for long. Went flying again last night and on my third landing the big oak tree at the approach end of the runway reached out and ate my plane. I was told that almost everyone in the club has lost at least one plane to that tree. My thought last night was to go home and get my chainsaw!!

Guess I might have to get an ARF to get up flying again until I have my Four Star finished

C'mon stop misquoting me. I said there are plenty of good quality arf's out there that a builder would be hard pressed to improve upon. That is a FACT. Another little fact. If a product is bad, people will NOT buy it for very long. You are clumping ARFs into one pot when some are different as night and day.

Bad news, Connery. Maybe somebody at the club has one to sell at a good price. I know what you mean.....

Interesting, I thought the full-up elevator technique was pretty common for most grass fields. I use it all the time at the fairly rough (for R/C models) grass strip I fly out of, although never a "textbook" soft-field takeoff.......no need to stay in ground effect immediately after liftoff, usually just haul back and let it climb. Come to think of it, I guess I didn't use this technique as much on the smoother field I used to fly from, at least not at first. These days I typically hold full-up elevator when taxiing as well, in both tricycle and taildragger models.

Both of my "conventional" 4-channel trainers were ARFs. I thoroughly enjoy building though, and frankly I doubt I'll ever own another ARF. But I got nothing against them, they're just another way for folks to enjoy this great hobby.

There are plenty of reasons to build, but probably the main motivation for many people (certainly for myself) is that it makes the plane more "mine". You see firsthand exactly how the plane is constructed, you select just what kind of glues, techniques, hardware, etc go into the model, and have assurance that it's done the way you want. How often do you look at a completed job (like building or repairing something, or creating something like music, writing, art, whatever) and don't see at least some small detail you'd have done differently? It's not necessarily an inferior method, it's just not "your" method.

But for other folks, this stuff isn't a big deal. If you don't really enjoy building, and don't get finnicky about the kinds of things I mentioned above, then it probably doesn't make much sense to build, unless of course the plane you want is only available as a kit.

I do admit the increase in ARF models kinda annoys me sometimes........occasionally I see an ad for a plane that I want to model, only to find out it's an ARF! Bleh. [sm=tongue.gif]

-Matt Bailey