3D2AT

After crashing my 4 Star 60 today when i dead sticked someone told me that the plane floats too much!whatever that means.I was told to cut 2'' off each end of the wing and this would make the plane more stable and roll faster somehow i dont think i agree so i ask the many airplane wizards out there for your opinion.what do you think?

RC MANIAC119

My Feedback: (14)

Tell that buddy of yours to chop up his planes....and leave yours alone!!

That 4 Star 60 is a great all around bird.....will do anything you ask it to!! So just leave it alone..........
you'll both feel better in the morning, your bird....and you!!!

jetmech05

funny I've heard this before but i've never seen it done. the only thing id do is add winglets made from light ply. Why ????? well cause I could and you don't see many winglets in RC..... I did it to my LT-40 flew great until a student got it on his solo.
besides you want a plane that floats when your dead stick...next time your dead stick just fly the plane think about what it needs not what you normally do to fly.
good luck

Insanemoondoggie

One of the guys at our feild has one with no dehedral and the last bay taken out of each wing. Converted to electric. Drops like a speeding rock on landing. Electrics bore me to tears, so I did`nt pay attention to how it handled. I did notice him having problems on landings, as he had to make several attemps to get it down.

Scar

My Feedback: (3)

While it's true the 4*60 is a floater, I fail to see how clipping the wings would benefit you.

Yes, the roll rate would increase, and yes, it would still be a quite capable plane for an experienced flyer.

Since you had a crash with the full-wing version, that tells me you're on the learning side of sport flying, rather than the experienced side. After you have advanced to the wild side of sport flying, then you might think about clipping wings - if you still feel like flying the 4-star.

Good luck,
Dave Olson

CGRetired

My Feedback: (1)

Just get the center of gravity set up properly, then set the control surfaces according to the manufacturer recommendations, put the right engine on board, and fly the thing. The servo's and the battery (4 or 5 cell RX battery) you use are also going to make a difference on how it performs. Those larger low wing sport planes are not designed to roll like a 3D or a pattern plane, nor a flying wing, so don't try to make it into one unless you are sure of what you are doing and why, and are capable of flying it.

I have a Tiger 60 which is basically the same plane as the Four Star 60 (don't try to tell me they are not because I owned a Four Star 40 and it was pretty much identical in flying characteristics to the Tiger II). It will roll with the best of them, but not snap around like a 40 size aerobatic plane.

The Tiger 60 also floats on dead stick, but I have made some of the best landings with that plane in dead-stick. If you want an aerobatic 3D plane, then build one.

(yeah, moondoggie, some of the electrics bore me to death too, but some are pretty neat, but very expensive. A friend has a Tiger II that he built specifically for electric power, did some modifications to the build like removed a wing bay from each side, used light weight components where he could, but the batteries cost almost 300 bucks each and he has two!! A 60 Amp ESC is not cheap as is the motor he is using. Not for the faint at heart when expense comes to mind, that's for sure).
DS.

Insanemoondoggie

Let me rephrase that. I should have said. {Eletrics don,t hold my interest.}
I have seen some very nice electrics, the craftsmanship was top notch, the planes were as nice as any you will find. And they are clean. And engines can be a total pain in the neck.
I`m a retiered aircraft mechanic and the smell, sound and the mess of a combustion engine, just fells like home for me.

Major Pain

Hi Guys: I removed the outer bay on each wing on my 4* 60 and it improved the flying. The plane did fly great before but once in ground effect it would float forever. The landing speed increased a little but not enough to cause problems. The plane performed much better in the air. I also put a OS 90 on the plane. I would still recommend a little more experience before you cut your wing but I don't think you would regret it. I also cut my buddys wing and he is very pleased with the way it flys. --------Revver Bro #164

CGRetired

My Feedback: (1)

Yeah, Moondoggie, and add to that is the consistent power of the fuel engine. I've flown my electrics and have been left wanting more as the flight duration continues.. but don't have what it had at the beginning of the flight. And, the durations are really limited to only 5 - 10 minutes for most of the electrics (yep, here comes the contradiction from those that fly them on a regular basis). Problem is, I've heard it all and have the benefit of the experience to know that they just don't perform as my good old glow engines do, for the entire tank of fuel... not so with batteries.

And I don't mind cleaning up the wing and tail feathers. All part of the bull-session time at the end of a flight or a series of flights.

I will keep my electrics, they have a definite place, but will probably fly my glow's more. I can only charge one or two batteries at a time, and at that, it takes an hour. I can fly my glows as fast as I can refuel and get it back in the air, and with 1200 - 1500 mah batteries in the RX, well, that means an awful lot of flying on one charge.

DS.

Insanemoondoggie

I did.nt clip the wings on this one. it was to be my second plane, but ended up flying my Cubs so this will be my 4th plane, but still consider myself very much a newbie. No way I could handle it with a 90 lol. I have a Saito 56 I was going to install, but I also have a Saito .72 I got off E-bay. The .56 should be plenty. what do you guys think?

a65l

My Feedback: (17)

Saito 72 is a great all around engine for a .40 sized plane. Wouldn't work in a 4*60 very well, though. I flew a Twist with a Satio .56 for quite a while and thought it was a great combination.


A