discusmike

My Feedback: (2)

I noticed the QQ yak has like 1380 square inches of wing a.The bme yak has 1450,and its only two inches wider on the wingspan,does that make the bme a better floater?or are the numbers off?i hear people say the QQ is the better flyer,i dont know what to think.I'm trying to decide which to buy.Thanks.

DENNIS C

My Feedback: (99)

Get the QQ Your not going to notice the 70 sq "

JohnVH

My Feedback: (38)

Go with the BME yak, you will not be dissapointed, all their aircraft fly awesome! The yak is spectacular

shakes268

Check different threads. Some of the 87" Yaks have been reported to come in actually at 85" due to the manufacturer not accounting for the part of the wing that goes into the fuselage recessed. That could also throw off wing area number too if true. I don't know if the BME was one of them but it would be good to read through the threads.

I have the QQ, it is indeed 85".

Rcpilot

My Feedback: (78)

I think that the numbers quoted for wing area on a lot of these planes is very subjective. You never know if they are including the fuse area as part of the calculation, or if it's just wing area.

I would like to know ONLY the wing area. Then we could actually make accurate comparisons. The area in the fuse----well, it is what it is. Fuse width and depth varies so much in all these different planes. I don't think it should be included in the measurement. It could add a lot of area to the posted numbers--but then when you get the model and actually measure it--your dissapointed with the wing area.

I know that the fuse actually does contribute to flying area, but as I said, it's so subjective and ambiguous.

Give me the actual wing area.

aviti

My Feedback: (54)

I agree with rcpilot. The one time I tried to calculate wing area on a plane, the figure I came up with was quite a bit short of the manufacturers claim. I'm sure they would have said the fuse portion was included in their figure. I think just the outside dimensions of the wing would be helpful but I doubt they'd ever go that route.

Mark Dennis

My Feedback: (4)

One thing to remember if one manufacterer starts measuring only the wings and all of the others don't then what, As soon as people see the wing area numbers posted by the company that dosent count the fuse then his plane is JUNK here on rcu. Just something to think about. One other thing to remember is that wing area only masks a heavy airplane and once you get to a certain point the plane begins to become to floaty and dosent fly right.

Rcpilot

My Feedback: (78)

If all the manufacturers would just do the same thing--it wouldn't matter.

Or, if your going to advertise the wing area--then indicate that it is ONLY the actual wing area. Then give a seperate figure/number for the total area with the fuse included.

I can't believe that it's that difficult to add these numbers to a website. These manufacturers spend thousands of dollars to design and R&D a product. They have thousands of them built all at once in a factory in China. Then they maintain websites and have internet shopping and ll the technology that goes along with that whole aspect of being a distributor.

But, it's too much trouble to actually give the modeler--the consumer--the numbers that we want to see?

Why so ambiguous? Why not just have your web master put the actual numbers up for everyone to see? If one distributor does it--they will all follow suite. Or, they'll spend hours and hours answering phones and emails from people wanting to know the information. Thats lost productivity, and it's monotonous after about a week of answering the same questions over and over.

Mark:
Be the leader. Start the trend towards TRUTH. Put your wing area numbers up on the site and include the fuse area as a seperate number. They will all either follow suite--or lose their business to you for being honest.