Gray Beard

My Feedback: (-1)

Have you looked into the, Where have all the kits gone thread?? I think I have posted a couple new ones there myself. For a first time builder it may be wise to stick with the old tried and true kits?? GP has some of the better instructions and photos I have run into though, getting a kit with nothing except writen instructions could put most any new builder off.

Alex7403

jship and graybeard, I'm sorry if I sounded offensive or too raw my intentions are good and for sure dont want to push.
I'm speaking from my criteria for a kit - 60 size airplane.
I read your post and I read mine and its just joking through tears, hey finally I can afford these airplanes so now they started disappearing...
Yes its true the two choices we are talking about are few decades design airplanes.

Alex

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

David,

Yea, right...!

Mind you, if it weren't for the lack of photos or instructions in English, an MK kit would make for a nice precise alternative. There have been a few 40 size MK sport designs on auction recently.

David.

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

I have to agree with "where are all the new kits" but I don't have issue with the fact that the planes suggested are 25-30 year old designs - on the contrary.

Some of the best designed non scale RC models date back to this era, especially in kit form, and in an age where kits are in short supply, it makes sense to build a design of that vintage. It also makes sense, as a first build, to build a fresh kit (US60) or, I'd say a laser cut interlocking kit (4*). These latter are considerably easier to assemble and align properly than the former designs which employed classic building techniques.

On second thought, the Tsunami might require a slightly more practiced hand given the lack of an interlocking design and step by step illustrated manual.

I'd go with the US. It is somewhat more involved than the 4* which will be good to learn a few techniques. The 4* is an extremely simple plane to build in my view given it essentially frames up without needing glue. The wing is a little more conventional if I recall correctly.

David.

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Getting back to the US-60, as far as build time goes: As I said before, I have gotten two on two separate Christmas' and had both ready by March - This while working a full-time job and building for a few hours each night.

So, I didn't count the hours, but you can easily have it done in a few months of working a few evenings per week and maybe a weekend now and then.

Right now, my mom is out of town so I've been charged with keeping my 88yr old dad company for the week. We're spending the week building a US-40. We started on Monday and already have the two wing panels done and the fuse framed up (minus the turtledeck)</p>

jrbmoto

Ken
Thats so cool..The last airplane I built with my dad was an Ultra Sport .60 He was her visiting for a week so I took a week off and we went to town on the US. He built the fuse and I built the wings...Good times!

maynardrupp

I built 2 US 60s in the past year. Both met unfortunate ends due to mechanical failures. I used an OS 75AX with 1/2" longer gear wires. These are the nicest flying airplanes I have flown. The sanding thing is not a big deal. I don't know why everyone is talking about shaping any of this stuff with sandpaper. I use a small Tower Hobbies plane and the whole thing takes no time at all. My sanding is minimal except shaping the elevators and rudder. I installed aileron servos in the wings with only the arm esposed. My mistake was mounting them onto balsa. You must use plywood for the plate's screws. I also used Robart pin hinges. If I build another I would use 2 elevator servos and not use the cross bar. Both of mine required the battery and rcvr. being mounted all the way back in the radio compartment for balance. I did have a single rear mouted elevator servo on the last plane so I am sure that 2 tail mounted servos would not create a balance issue.

jship

My Feedback: (4)

Building with My dad, now that would be PRICELESS . I can only dream of such a joy! My dad just happends to be the same age as Yours. What a joy You must be experiencing.

Eganwp

My Feedback: (1)

Well thanks again for all the responses guys. I'm almost finished my "repair the flying season's broken planes" first before I start any other projects. I also need to finish putting my 30% Edge 540 ARF together and make some A123 packs for it.

I think I'm going to go with the US 60 since I've wanted one for a long time now. The 4* 60 would be awesome as well, however I want something challenging and more sporty than a basic low wing deal.

Couple questions before I go pick up the kit from LHS. Is the wing removable on this puppy? I'm assuming it is for transport, but didn't check the plans. Secondly, would you guys recommend going the retracts route?

In flying this plane in the sim the US60 seems to grove and fly a whole lot nicer with retracts. Plus I'd reallly LOVE to have a plane with retracts. Our club's runways are mostly grass, with a small paved one for take-offs. Would a standard cheap mechanical retract setup work okay on grass, or am I just asking for trouble? I know it's a bit much to do retracts for a first build, but I think I'm up for the challenge if it's not overly complicated, other than the wire bending setup. Flying on grass is my concern.

Cheers!

Insanemoondoggie

Check thid thread out. Minnflyers US 60 build http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_6822225/tm.htm

doxilia

My Feedback: (3)

Eganwp,

installing retracts into your very first build might not be the best idea but if, as you say, are up for the challenge, then go for it.

Although mechanicals are the least expensive, they are also the trickiest to setup in order to operate properly. If I were you, I'd go for a nice trike set of Springair or Robart pneumatics. Although you also have to be careful making sure you install all the plumbing properly so that you don't have leaks, I think this is the best path. Electrics are nice and easy to install but rare, a little heavy and expensive - best suited for a classic pattern aircraft.

I look forward to seeing your US60 build.

David.

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

I really prefer Mechanicals. They may be a little more difficult to set up, but they don't require the constant re-filling of pnumatics (not to mention you don't have to worry about air leaks)

As for putting them in an Ultra Sport... Definately!

One of the tricky things about ANY retracts is that the rails they mount to must be parallel. The best way I have found to do this is:

Eganwp

My Feedback: (1)

Thanks for the info. If I do end up deciding on going with mechanicals (would prefer mech on this plane I think) would these be the best for the money? I assume they're heavier duty than the great planes version.

[link=http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXMJJ9&P=7]http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXMJJ9&P=7[/link]

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

They look ok.

FallDownGoBoom

My Feedback: (1)

Those are the Robarts I used in my US. They will work OK, but be aware, they are made from some type of hard plastic, and will shatter under less than perfect landings.

Didn't 3dx hobby shop have some mechanicals that were totally made from metal?

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Get these:

http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...odID=HAN242011

I just used these on the H-9 P-51 Blue Nose and they are fantastic. The down side is, they each require their own retract servo, (and they are on backorder right now) But they are insanely cheap for what you are getting.

I would expect to pay $100 - $200 for a set of retracts this good but they are only $36

stevenmax50

My Feedback: (1)

I have built (then sold without ever flying) a Seamaster 60, Super Aeromaster, and Super Decathalon. I have built and flown the Great Planes PT 60. twice. Immediatly after xmas I will be building the Tiger 60. After much debate I have decided on installing retracts as well. What I havent decided on is which retracts. I could go trike. Or taildragger. I have looked at theSpringair website and have also looked at Robarts. Decisions, decisions. At least I have a few weeks to pull a Bret Farve.

EscapeFlyer

My Feedback: (1)

Trike retracts won't work with the US, unless you are good at re-engineering. The kit even says not to use trike retracts.

Tail dragger looks the best. Of course, that's just my opinion.

Brian

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Yea, the problem with trike gear in many planes is that there is no room under the tank for the gear to fold into.

Eganwp

My Feedback: (1)

So guess what I got today? A NIB Ultra Sport 60 kit!!!! Best part is, I got it for $80 from a guy (plus a few bucks shipping that we split). I'm grinning! It will be my first kit build based off your recommendations. Thanks for all the good replies btw.

The only big decision I have left is what style gear to go with. I think for this first one, I'm going to not go retracts as so many people I read wished they didn't build it with retracts for all the hassle and bending they do. Our field is grass and a little rough, so I'm thinking it would be a real pain. (Would love em tho!)

So tricycle or tail dragger? All of my planes that I've ever owned are tail draggers, so don't really have experience with trike gear planes other than 1 or 2 other peoples planes I've taken up for a flight (didn't really try taxiing at all either). We do get a bit of wind here generally, but there is the odd calm day. And yes, I did read your gear guide Minn, thanks!

Which type do you guys prefer on the US 60? I love the flared landings of the US 40 on RealFlight (tri gear there), but I'm sure the tail dragger would flare just as nicely?

Egan

outdoorhunting

Tail dragger !!!! The only thing is, on a rough field ya gotta use a little elevater to keep the rear on the ground until you get your airspeed.

MinnFlyer

My Feedback: (4)

Ditto... tail dragger!

FallDownGoBoom

My Feedback: (1)

Part of the landing gear decision may be dictated by your engine choice. If you're going with a 60 sized engine/prop, you could build it with a trike set up. But if you're going to put in a 75 2S or 90 4S, you're almost forced to go with the tail dragger to get adequate prop clearance with a 13" prop, especially on a rougher field.

Like the other folks, I'd probably go with a tail dragger.

EscapeFlyer

My Feedback: (1)

Unless the gear is taller than the trike gear, there will not be any diferrence between the two. As the airplane rotates, the tail lifts to nuetral and you are at the same stance as the trike. The prop clearance issues stay the same.

Brian

Alex7403

I built the US60 as a trike and its very tight at the motor compatment, looking back i'de build it as a tail drager for sure.