-EXTRA-

I got the landing gear put on that was all i got done for today,but here's the pic's comment's are welcome....

-EXTRA-

The rest of the pic's..

LT-40

My Feedback: (2)

Looks like a nice ARF. Good luck on the build.

LT-40

-EXTRA-

thanx its my first real plane to build so hopefully gonna go together nicely..

a65l

My Feedback: (17)

Shhhhsh! you wanna start a flame war or something? Gotta watch using the words "ARF" and "build" in the same sentence......



Nice plane..... hard to go wrong with anything from Hangar 9. Good luck with it!

Andy

-EXTRA-

Thanx,but as you cans ee i never said ARF in that sentence lol.

bigtim

My Feedback: (13)

looks like a sweet plane to assemble,easy to see in the air, what engine are you intending to put in it.

-EXTRA-

Thanx,and a tower .75 that should fly it pretty nice..

agexpert

My Feedback: (1)

I wonder if it would balance witha Saito .82 ....That would be nice!!

-EXTRA-

Lol,what the .75 or the plane?cause i read on here ppl put saito .91's on the 50!

agexpert

My Feedback: (1)

Well,

That would be even better, although the .82 might be better PW compromise. I'm pretty sure it would pull out of a hover with reasonable authority. I guess you would need to check the specs...and the price.

The goal here is STOOPID power without adding weight to the plane at all, and keeping it as light as possible...and with proper prop-clearance etc...etc. A .91 would be a maximum...and most .91's would likely be too heavy.

That much power would require some experience with throttle control. I would bet that you are able to fly it, but in, 'recovery-mode', it's easy for a plane like this one to get away from you.

Take it slow.

-EXTRA-

Yea i read with the .82 it would hover at 3/4 throttle and with the .91 its straight up as far as you can see,im thinking about a magnum .91,and yes def im takin it slow..

agexpert

My Feedback: (1)

Just a hint....Magnums are good engines, but they are HEAVY, good engines. Think light, you will be glad you did...if it means waiting and doing a few extras to earn the money, do it. Good engines are worth it for many planes to come.

You have a sort of, 'beginning' performance aircraft there. If that is the road you stay on in this hobby, you will be happier with a lighter engine.

Just another unsolicited opinion. Things usually cost more for a reason, especially if there are a lot of substitutes on the market.

-EXTRA-

Alright i didnt relize they were so heavy,what would be a good cheap 4stroke,in the range of an .82-.91?

agexpert

My Feedback: (1)

A Magnum, but if you want lighter, it will cost more.


Good Luck!!

rowdog_14

My Feedback: (5)

An os off of tower hobbies. They always have extra discounts you can use on there products. I bought a OS 1.20 w/o a pump for my GP GeeBee and they gave me 40 dollars off and I am not bsing. I love my os better than my saito 100, it runs a whole lot smoother and the idle is smooth too. On my saito the idle is crap. I have been trying to get my needles set on the saito but it still knocks like crazy. Right now I can get the os to idel as low as 1800 without any knocking and the saito idles at around 3000 biiiig difference. I still love the saito though, I would buy another but right now I would get an os before a saito.

somegeek

My Feedback: (2)

Good luck on the assembly.

somegeek

-EXTRA-

Yes i know,but im 15 and 200+ dollars for a good 4-stroke is hard to come by...i looked at the spcs on the magnum .91 and the saito .82 and the saito is light by 8 ounces would it be that much of a difference as far as the preformance of the plane???

-EXTRA-

And thank you rowdog and some greek,my dad told me yesterday it might be a few week's before it's done because he wants to make sure it's put together the best way it can be...

Sneasle

about the extra wieght of the engine.

Look around at other thread about the plane. If people are using a certain engine, look at the weight of that engine and then see what they had to do to balance it. If they had to add tail weight when they were using an engine that was lighter then the magnum, then Dont get the magnum. If they had to add nose weight, check how much and then compare that to the weight of the magnum.

Overall, you want to add as little weight as possible to a plane.

If a plane is notorious for needing nose weight, then people can get away with a much larger engine then spec and have a wonderful powerhouse of a plane. If the plane is notorious for needing tail weight, then adding a larger motor will just make the problem worse. There is not point in adding a larger motor if you have to add more weight to the plane to get it to balance.

-EXTRA-

Yea,that's true ill look around.

acam37

My Feedback: (16)

EXTRA, a guy at our club has one of these. Very nice flying plane, just beware that if you decide to use the side force generators they will hit the ground no matter how good you land. We fly off of an asphalt runway and the bottom ones look like they were run through a belt sander.

-EXTRA-

Dang i didnt know that,i wasnt going to use them but thanx for then info now i know i really wont use them!

agexpert

My Feedback: (1)

You really should try to use the SFG's at least once.

It flies like a plane with three rudders because, essentially, it is. I have flown mine many times with the SFG's, and on the larger model, they do not hit the ground at all

I think they were a gimmicky sort of thing that was kind of fun to try. I have ALL of the rudder throw I can get, so being able to KE with less rudder is not all that exciting because I have plenty. Plus, High Alpha KE's are actually harder with the SFG's, at least for me.

The SFG's slow your roll-rate significantly, the plane tracks better and KE's are effortless. BUT...on the downside, you have to put them on and take them off. I simply can't be bothered


HAVE FUN!!

-EXTRA-

Yea,i might try it once,does anyone have any videos of them flying there showtime 50's i would really enjoy watching them..