Hello, A friend of mine, my Cello teacher, gave me a very special present a couple of years ago, a DC3 Dakota kit from Royal, I did not start building it yet, because I do not have the engines, and I do not know how complicated is to build and fly a twin. Someone can tell something about it? What about the engines? On the box says, 40 to 60, I think on that years, did not exist the 4 stroke engines. the plane is the same size than the one that Top Flite sells, but works on the same 25-40 engines suggested by Top Flite? Any suggestions to push me to start bulding it are welcome.

Royal made some really fine kits, but are truly "craftsman" kits, meaning that you should be an experienced builder to tackle it. It's sort of "glue all the wood together, and carve away anything that doesn't look like a DC-3".

It probably comes out heavier than the Top Flite kit, which is why the engine recomendation is for larger engines.

Lastly, if you have no, or very little, flying experience, a twin would be nearly impossible to successfully fly. If you're really interested in flying, start out with a simple trainer, build and learn to fly it, and hang on to the Royal kit for much later.

A friend built the Marutaka DC3, also sold as Royal. His had two Enya 30 2 stroke engines in it which made it take off like a rocket but it crashed on it's first flight suffering a small amount of damage.

It reappeared repaired & in civilian markings many years later & the local pattern ace test flew it. This time it almost crashed only saved by the pilot's extraordinary skill.

Further research showed the balance point was incorrectly marked on the kit plans. With the balance point fixed it was a fine flyer from that point on. - John.

Hi!
I started building my Marutaka DC-3 (Royal was the importer in the US) in 1980. Got it ready two years ago.
Mine is powered by two OS FS .26 four strokes, swinging 3-blade, 10x5" carbon fiber props.
Weight is 3,6kg ready to fly .
The DC-3 flies just as well as a high winged trainer,nice and slow. I have lots of wash-out built in the wing tips (1,5-2 degrees).
It takes of at just over half throttle so it got power to spare.

Do not power yours with too big engines if you want a good flying characteristics and keep the weight down.
I would recommend .30 four strokes engines max. Anything bigger would just make it into a pattern plane.
The engine recommendations on the plans is not right.They are a thing of the distance past...
C of G is correct on the plans though!

Thank you very much for the comments, but what about using two Thunder tiger .46 2 stroke? I trust a lot that engine, works perfect on my first trainer, years ago, and now I´m usin g it on a Sig Fourstar 40, that engine never stop in the air, not a single time. Just perfect!
Also If I have good experience on low wings, can I fly it with no problem? Or need a twin trainer?

Thanks
Andres

Hi!
.46 will be way way too much power and weight.
It is vital with all airplanes that you build them light.Using large .46 two-stroke engines will only make it fly like a pattern plane and not like a scale DC-3, that is my experience from 33 years in this hobby/sport,flying both pylon racing as well as scale and sail-planes.
When I want to fly fast I race pylon racing . But in scale you have to fly on the wing! That mean building light and use the lightest equipment possible. And four stokes makes a much nicer sound when flying a scale plane.

Large engines demands larger tanks, larger motor mounts and beefier structure to hold the engines. A weigh increasing spiral.
Using smaller engines on the other hand permits the use of lighter structures, less fuel (I use tin soldered tin can tanks of 110cc) and makes the engines less visible to the eye. Vital is also to have engines that give a smooth power acceleration when you give power.
These small four strokes do just that...they give a smooth ride. .46 engines wont deliver that. The power comes more like an explosion with .46 two strokes. Not good when you fly a twin scale model.

I have engine nacelles in glass fiber and carbon fiber scale props available if you are interested.

Hello Jan, thank you for your comments, but only one thing, we fly here at 1800m above sea level (almost 6000 ft) we put an extra power to all our airplanes, i.e. if in a plane manufacturer recomends .35 -.50 engine, we need to go on the .50, with that in mind, do you think I can use the ones you recomend? Thank you.

Andres

Hi Again, what about the covering? It is OK to use monokote? I read something about fiberglass, paint, fabric, what is this all about? sorry no experience on this. All my planes are covered with monokote, years ago, when my father flies control line, he uses to cover the planes with paper an a thing called "dope", still using it?

Thank you.

Hi!
OK ! I see! I fly a sea level. But The power with those OS FS .26 is so great that I belive that an OS .30 and my 10x5 carbon props will work even at your altitude.
Monokote is ok but Oracover (Ultracote to you Americans) is much better.
My DC-3 is covered with chrome Oracover, first wet sanded on a sheet of glass with 1200 paper to get that aluminum look and then applied to the fuselage with an iron.
The text is painted using 2 part Sikkens automotive lacquer.
Dope and tissue or silk /nylon is still used but Solartex or Oratex is soo muck easier to use .

The elevators on my DC-3 are covered with Oratex and the side rudder with silk and dope.

Hi Again, I´m seeing your retract system, is functional? it seems to be home-made, can you explain how you did it? the sanded ultracote was a excellent idea, but why you did not use the chrome finish, like the real one? My kit have the cowlings in aluminium, should I use that, or they are too heavy?

Thank you
Andres