I would argue with you on this one here. I LOVE flying my Slow Poke in very windy conditions. I've flown in winds up to 35 mph and had a blast with it. Sometimes when the winds are up 20-25 mph my Slow Poke is the only thing I will fly. It's a total blast to lift off the runway, climb vertically to about 100' and then come back down and land on the runway without ever crossing the end of the runway!!!! Don't be fooled, the Slow Poke is a great wind plane.

Ken

You're just a darn good pilot, Ken. What can I say? With MY current skills, I'm sure it would meet its expiration date a bit prematurely in a strong gust.

NorfolkSouthern

Norfolk,
I wasn't trying to imply that you weren't a good pilot. I just wanted to point out that the Slow Poke can handle wind very well. When I first got mine I was afraid to fly it in the wind as well, I just figured it wouldn't do well in the wind. But after flying it once in the wind I quickly changed my mind. I just didn't want people to walk away thinking that this plane was only a "fair weather flyer". Sorry if you took it wrong.

Ken

Ken, I knew you weren't saying I'm not a good pilot. Maybe I have a habit of underestimating myself. I must admit, I was a bit shaky with mine last Saturday before one of the local jet jocks checked it out. We had to point it into the wind because it wouldn't turn on its own. It is a really nice flying plane, but mine had that tendancy to windmill. So, we pointed it directly into the wind and it flew OK. Landing for me was difficult, but he did help coach me in (nose down, steady... a little more throttle, OK, now hold... Keep the nose down... just a LITTLE up elevator now... Very nice, good job!). A little hard on the mains, but otherwise unscathed. The next day was calm, and it handled GREAT. It took some getting used to, but my experience with other planes and the help from others at the club really paid off for me.

I would agree: everybody should try at least ONE Slow Poke eventually. It's a lot of fun to fly, and the spectators enjoy watching it. It'll do 10 foot loops easily. It'll turn on a dime and give back change. Upside down, it doesn't require much elevator. The thing can just about swim like a fish. It looks just about like a wild turkey in flight!

NorfolkSouthern

sdg666, Ijust recovered my slowpoke arf. Had a Evolution 45(trainer motor). Probably a couple hundred flights on it. Just got a gift after i recovered it, a Evolution 60! ( Thanks to fatherinlaw). Couldn't decide what to do with it though. Thought about putting it in my twist ,but think it would barely fit + os46 seems just fine in there. The slowpoke had to have nose weight with the 45. Soo im thinking it will balance close with the 60. Will have to check balance,prop clearance,throws and will be good to go. Might test fly this weekend, if it doesn't snow to much, or get ski's. Ive overpowered a couple of my planes with this motor and have been pleased: Lt-40, Sig 1/5 cub.will try to post pics. i usually just read on here.

A slow poke does very well with a 60 as long as there is no flutter.

man i have a tough time posting pics.
[img][/img][img][/img][img][/img]

Looks like you got the job done.

Nice plane and family

Dignlivn (10/18/2007),

It looks like no one is able to answer your question about electrifying a Great Planes Slow Poke. That's probably because I don't think it's been done much - yet.

However, I am currently building a Slow Poke of my own (the 3-ch version, not the larger 4-ch Sport 40) with a Rimfire 35-30-1450 motor (GPMG4600), a 45A ESC (GPMM1840), and an APC 9X6E prop. I haven't decided on batteries yet but by the way everyone talks about the inherent tail-heaviness of the Slow Poke design, I'll probably have to put a John Deere battery in the nose to compensate for the light Rimfire motor.

It will be awhile before mine is ready to fly but there's a guy on WattFlyer who's building the same combo and his may be flying by now. (I haven't heard from him in a couple of months.)

Everyone here talks about what a fine plane the Slow Poke is and I'm expecting my electric version to fly just as nice. I'm electrifying my Slow Poke because I don't want my neighbors to lynch me but I do have to agree with RC Ken in that this plane would sound best with 4-cycle power.

Good luck,

Harvey

5487


Glad some one is trying Elec. If you have 2 SP's you
could get that 4 stroke too lol. Have you pondered about
adding ailereons ?? Then there's retracts .
Keep in touch.

Bob


dignlivn

Well, Bob, if the truth were to be known, I DO have two Slow Pokes. The first one is the smaller (3ch) Poke and is the one I'm electrifying. I won't be adding retracts to this one but I am considering converting it to a trike to give it a Culver Cadet look. And no, I won't be adding ailerons to it because the ailerons and polyhedral wing would fight each other. The solution would be to flatten the wing out but then you might as well just get the 4ch Sport 40 version - which I also did.

After reading all of the posts here about how the Sport 40 is the "perfect" sport flyer, I went out and got one as a follow-on to my first Poke. This one WILL have a 4cy (thanks to the constant brainwashing by RC Ken! ) and I've already picked up a set of Robart's mechanical retracts for it. (I'll be sticking with conventional gear on this one.) However, the Slow Poke's spar layout is going to make adding retracts difficult but that'll be part of the fun of the build, right?

Yeah, I'll keep you posted on my Electric Poke but don't look for rapid progress - I'm still trying to get my Stearman finished and flying. THAT build is entering its 9th year! It's a "Boeing kit.") It has a 4cy too.

5487


I'll look for your post in the future. BTW that is good
looking 9 year old project lol. Stay with it.


Bob

That looks like a 985 not a 1340 like it says on the airworthiness certificate?

I'm sure you will enjoy your Slowpokes .

w8ye, you looked my N-number up on the FAA website. That's quite resourceful.

Actually, it's an R-755 - a 275hp Jacobs from a Cessna 195. (But I'm expecting someone to ask me what size Saito Golden Knight it is. )

It's been 40 years since I was around a 985 or a Jacobs. The main thing I remembered was that a 600hp had 9 cylinders and I was thinking a 220 Continental had 5. There were a lot of different engines in Stearmans.

One day this past August someone was shooting touch and go's in a Stearman while I was flying my Slowpoke. It was fully cowled with wheel pants. Seemed to have plenty of power. I assumed it to be a 450. I had to land the Slowpoke to watch the biplane. We were on different runways.

I've flown a Slowpoke ARF ever since they first came out. I have one kit that is not completed and two other ARF's still in the box. I haven't worn out the first one yet.

The ARF is engineered a little different from the kit but the external shape is close.


The tail heaviness is about the same.

Jim

Jim,

The 220hp Continental and Jacobs engines have 7 cylinders while the 220hp Lycomings and 450/600hp Pratts have nine. You might be thinking about the 5 cylinder Kinner engines that were on the little Ryan monoplane trainers.

I have trouble ignoring a Stearman too. I can watch one working a farmer's field all day. A good duster pilot makes it look like a fine ballet.

Harvey

5487 , that is awesome , if we lived closer , I`d give you a hand. Very nice work , the 9 yrs shows.