RCU Magazine Review - Cermark Breeze -EP
07-19-2004, 04:45 PM
#1
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (24)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Medina, OH
Posts: 505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RCU Magazine Review - Cermark Breeze -EP
[link=http://www.rcuniverse.com/magazine/article_display.cfm?article_id=367]Read RCAdmin's review and watch the video here![/link]
08-26-2004, 07:35 AM
#2
RE: RCU Magazine Review - Cermark Breeze -EP
Very nice review. Looks like a great plane.
I have a couple of questions for Marc Vigod, the reviewer.
For reference, I fly 2 and 3 meter thermal duration sailplanes and parkflyers. I am not much of an aerobatic flyer and don't have an electric sailplane yet. However this one looks like a good candidate for my first.
I notice that during much of your video you have the flaps deployed while you are doing your rolls and such. Is there a reason for that?
You didn't comment much on the soaring ability of the plane. How well does it thermal? Being accostumed to unpowered sailplanes that are much lighter than electric sailplanes I wonder about how well this one thermals. It certainly rolls and loops nicely.
Finally, you gave it very high marks for quality and ease of assembly, but in the article you note the fuselage was not built properly with the motor incorrectly positioned and the wing mounts requiring modification to work. Was this a prerelease model or should I expect such things on a plane from Cermark?
I am not much of a builder. My planes are all RTF, ARF or were purchased from other club members who did the building. I don't know if I would have recognized a motor angle that was off a little bit, but I am sure the plane would fly badly if I left it like that.
Just trying to understand your review and the rating system.
Still looks like a very nice plane.
I have a couple of questions for Marc Vigod, the reviewer.
For reference, I fly 2 and 3 meter thermal duration sailplanes and parkflyers. I am not much of an aerobatic flyer and don't have an electric sailplane yet. However this one looks like a good candidate for my first.
I notice that during much of your video you have the flaps deployed while you are doing your rolls and such. Is there a reason for that?
You didn't comment much on the soaring ability of the plane. How well does it thermal? Being accostumed to unpowered sailplanes that are much lighter than electric sailplanes I wonder about how well this one thermals. It certainly rolls and loops nicely.
Finally, you gave it very high marks for quality and ease of assembly, but in the article you note the fuselage was not built properly with the motor incorrectly positioned and the wing mounts requiring modification to work. Was this a prerelease model or should I expect such things on a plane from Cermark?
I am not much of a builder. My planes are all RTF, ARF or were purchased from other club members who did the building. I don't know if I would have recognized a motor angle that was off a little bit, but I am sure the plane would fly badly if I left it like that.
Just trying to understand your review and the rating system.
Still looks like a very nice plane.
08-26-2004, 09:54 PM
#3
Banned
RE: RCU Magazine Review - Cermark Breeze -EP
The plane is nice but I am unsure if they sold out of the original Breeze by now and I do know the Breeze II is on its way to replace it. Supposedly the Breeze II is mostly the same but the CF wing tube runs longer to withstand more stress and some other minor variations.
As far as the ease of assembly it was a piece of cake. The bad fuse was a single unit defect so they replaced it with a new fuse which was fine except the units are matched wing to fuse so some slight alteration was made to get the wing peg dowels to line up. On most units this was not a problem but goes to show you that mfg's don't hand pick stuff they send us.
I suggest you wait for the Breeze II. I will be doing a follow up review once they come in on that one and compare the two.
As far as the ease of assembly it was a piece of cake. The bad fuse was a single unit defect so they replaced it with a new fuse which was fine except the units are matched wing to fuse so some slight alteration was made to get the wing peg dowels to line up. On most units this was not a problem but goes to show you that mfg's don't hand pick stuff they send us.
I suggest you wait for the Breeze II. I will be doing a follow up review once they come in on that one and compare the two.
11-22-2004, 12:35 PM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Dallas,
NC
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: RCU Magazine Review - Cermark Breeze -EP
One question about the amount of wing area and wing loading. Did you calculate the wing loading for your Breeze? When I use the numbers on the website, they do not add up.
52oz/5.18 sq ft != 14.5 oz/sqft
I wanted to know what the real numbers were for comparison to other gliders.
Thx
52oz/5.18 sq ft != 14.5 oz/sqft
I wanted to know what the real numbers were for comparison to other gliders.
Thx
