I see many complaints about them, but H9 is just as bad, and I always got thier planes to fly Anyways, looking at the 69" YAK, has anyone built and flow one ? Is it any good ? Is the kit decent ? Apparently it is a knock off of the QQ 69"....just wondering if anyone has successfully built and flown the NITRO 69".

Yep, here's one. Excellent ARF quality and a great 3D performer at 8 pounds 6 oz with a YS 1.10S.

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_8050040/tm.htm

I'm looking at getting one too! Glad to hear of another satisfied flyer for this plane...Rocketman. I intend to put a pumped OS 120 Surpass in mine. Jon

Rocketman, can you give more details on quality and flyability of the plane? How about the covering...I have a CMP Giles 202 whose color trims are falling off. I am REAL interested in your input because I went to your gallery and see a wide variety of good quality planes. I normally consider the source, and your airforce (including engine choices) leads me to believe your thoughts on the Nitroplanes 69" Yak would be very useful. Your first response already has me leaning towards hitting the BUY button already! Thanks. Jon

Rocket Man, does it fly well ? Meaning does it track straight, all surfaces (wing, stab, tail) seem straight (not warped) ? I have a few spare CF wing tubes from some crashed H9's, perhaps one might fit. Nice weight, will pull like the space shuttle with my OS120AX at that weight

There is a locked thread about this plane being a copy of QQ aircraft. In that thread, this plane was quoted to be the best ARF that the posters had seen. I just bought one last night. I would buy one ASAP before they are gone!

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_71...tm.htm#7118523

The directions were also apparently copied, so not typical Nitroplanes instructions. You do get typical Nitroplanes service, whatever that means...

It means almost non-existent service. Just try calling the some time. I've bought a few lipos from them and some of their planes actually aren't bad. You sometimes get what you pay for though.

As for the Yak being an exact copy of the QQ 69" Yak, that's really a shame IF it's true. There are tons of great, reputable companies in China but a few others that are pretty underhanded. I've seen exact copies of Fluke multi-meters, Honda and Briggs & Stratton engines, pallet jacks, clothing, shoes and even a copy of Nissan Frontier truck. These copy-cats don't have any of the development and other costs associated with the product and the similarities are generally only skin deep. Quality between the copy and the genuine article are often not the same although they can be close in some cases. It is a big problem for legitimate developer/manufacturers in the US, Japan, Europe and other places. To profit off another persons hard work is criminal.

It is actually very easy to copy something these days and have that copy come out to be exact. I've seen digital 3D measuring devices that interface directly with drafting software to easily create drawings of an object. You can then play with those digital drawings and cut exact duplicates on a laser table or other type of tool.

Also look at the administrators statement in the thread you linked too. He stated that the evidence showed Nitro Planes (or whoever supplies this plane to them) copied QQ's copyrighted design and manual. He also asked that no other threads be posted regarding this plane due to this.

maukaonyx and nappy99,

So far the Yak's covering and decals are holding up well but like many ARF's I kind of expect it will start lifting sooner or later. I've had some planes that peel on the first flight. The covering was very well shrunken when I received the plane but acquired a few small wrinkles on the fuselage after setting in the hot sun. They shrank out easily with a covering iron. Some how I nearly got a hole poked in a wing and it left a rippled indentation but the covering iron made it disappear completely.

The structure is lightweight and an intricate assemblage of interlocking parts that hold together even if a glue joint fails. An example of this was discovered when a nosey friend wiggled my control surfaces to see how much play there was in my servos and linkages. There was some excessive play in the elevator servo and I found that the servo tray glue joint had failed (probably due to the jack hammering and shaking by my problematic YS. The engine is OK now.) Anyway, there was no way the servo tray could have come out without breaking the fuselage.


And yes, it does fly very well and it tracks straight and all surfaces, wing, stab, tail are straight (not warped). It is a 3D airplane and it does that very well. It flies on its side very well, meaning it can do slow knife-edges without wobbling around and can do consecutive knife-edge loops. It is easy to hover. I can only vouch for the quality of the model in my possession but I would be willing to buy another one, especially at the price if $199.

The one weakness that I've found in this model is that the aluminum wing tube will bend under the high stresses of 3D flying. I haven't had anymore bending since I hammered a 12" piece of Oak dowel from Home Depot into the 22.5" aluminum tube. Nitro Planes has no plans to replace the aluminum tube in the ARF kit with a carbon fiber tube but they offered to send me a new aluminum tube and for some reason I accepted it. What was the point? Probably because it was free I couldn't help myself.

If you have a carbon fiber tube of that same small diameter you could try it but if it should break there will be no second chance.

The recommended engines for this 69" Yak 54 are the YS 1.10S and the OS 120AX and they both do a great job. Anything bigger would be a waste.

By the way, thanks for having confidence in my evaluations of the model. I’ll present the facts as accurately as I can.

Thanks RocketMan....for $199 it is worth a try , and your review helped !

Ditto to Rocketman from me!

To the moderator, it's kinda hard for subsequent readers to know an original thread was locked on a particular subject. Searching is not always that successful. Just a friendly suggestion...maybe a sticky is needed if you really want later readers to observe the "lock".

And I apologize if I misunderstood the point of the lock - I thought it was more about what was going on in that thread, not to stop conversation on the plane completely. I don't see how that is possible on a free speech, international website.

LOCK ?

Here is an excerpt from the post by RCAdmin that terminated the thread in question: "The manual as well as the design and CAD drawings are all copyright to Somenzini and unless we receive information which contradicts our findings above we will keep this thread locked and ask everyone kindly to please not start a new thread on this Nitromodels Yak 69" here on RC Universe. We take copyright's seriously as they are a significant part of the protection afforded to manufacturers for their personal investment to bring a design to the marketplace."

Yup, RCU wants nothing to do with copyright infringements. Its dirty pool.
If anybody wants the carbon wing tubes for the 69", get them from Quique.
Adam

OH [X(].....I agree the copyright is an issue, however I started this thread only to ask how it flies and builds, nothing to do with how it compares to others THANKS FOR FEEDBACK !

They build and fly great. You are going to get the same response from the NP AND Quique owners.

The US bill of rights guarantees freedom of speech in general but RC Universe (or a parent company) owns these forums; it is not technically "public". If RCU does not want a discussion that promotes a product associate with illicit manufacturing, they are well within their rights. It's just like a group of friends at my house. They can talk pretty much about anything but if they begin promoting things I am against such as terrorism, illegal drugs, racism, mimes, etc. I can make them to change conversation or leave.

After having seeing many product knock-offs first hand, I really appreciate the fact that RCU took a stand in the original thread.

As nappy99 pointed out, he was just curios about the plane. He didn't know about the issues associated with it.

Thanks for clearing that up; makes sense.

I am deciding between a Saito 1.25 and the 120AX for this plane. Probably 6 of one half dozen of the other. I'm thinking the four stroke would be nice to make it even more different from my Venus II with the 120 AX, although I just love that plane and engine...

This Nitroplanes Yak is actually a bit modified from traditional Yaks - the wings are placed a bit lower, and the tail seems to be slightly longer. Should be a nice 'hybrid' of 3D and aerobatic flying. I've been working on pattern flying, so this will be a nice transition into more 3D style flying, though I'll probably fly mostly IMAC/Pattern.

I'm psyched for this plane!

You probably can't go wrong with either engine. Personally, I'm partial to 4-strokes though.

yeah I don't have a four stroke yet - would be a great plane for first four stroke. I'm assuming it would use less fuel too.

Hmmm, lower wing and longer fuse. I wonder who designed the plane. I wonder if it is the same as Qiuque's. Buy one and tell us how it flies.

I DID buy one, and you can be sure as sugar I'll be bragging about it next summer

I had the OS 120 AX on Wildcat 20% with APC 17x4W prop in Funtana x100 and Showtime. The Funtana was 9.4lbs, the showtime was 10.3lbs (both dry)....in both cases the plane could pull vertical like the space shuttle. In the funtana (being 1lb less), I noticed a huge diff in the hover. In fact, it was hard to get "into the hover", as the power/weight ratio made the funtana "float"...where as showtime was heavier with less wing area, so when you pulled "full up ele", the showtime went into the hover better. But once the Funtana was in the hover, it held at 1/3 power. When you nailed it.....it just pull out of sight in less than 5 seconds . With the NP at 8.5lbs, it will be amazing to see how this pulls out of hover. I post pics of my showtime hovers with 120AX

You'll see the low hovers, and even a tail touch, again the OS120AX had ample power even in 10 + lb plane to hover low with pull out power to spare

one more pic of showtime. My funtana crashed on 2nd time out. I upgraded servos to HT digital hi-speed/torque, and found out hard way that (4 X 14min) flights was all the juice a 2700 NICAD RX was able to deliver....and I watched it gracefully do a "rapid uncontrolled decent" (yes a crash)....plane was W/O. I have since upgraded to 9100 RX failsafe pack with 2 battery (2x2700mah) , and will put the guts into new plane for the OS 120.