LDS Turbinator 44 build
09-29-2016, 04:23 PM
#26
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Stuart, Fl.
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no material list, and no build notes other than whats on the plan. I found a construction article online with a material list but it's for the full size. If you use it there will be left over wood, but hey, you can use it for the next build. The K60 is too much for this plane. you would need a ton of nose weight.
09-29-2016, 06:12 PM
#27
Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The K60 is not too much for this airplane. The web specs say it weighs 1 lb 14 oz. The Ram 500 manual says it weighs 2.4 lbs. MY 83% Turbinator has a Ram500 with servos in the tail. It needs 1 pound of weight in addition to the 4 batteries I run. While it may seem heavy (15 lbs), it does not fly that way. It flies great! It accelerates good, slows down about like a pattern plane, and has no tip stall tendancies at all. Even the full size Turbinators need nose weight.
Per other Turbinator builds and my experience with the full size one (Jetcat P80), I moved the notch in the forward engine bulkhead up 1/2 inch for more down thrust. If you build one, you'll see exactly what to do and I'll gladly share photos if you need them. You could move the wing back a bit. Be careful with wood selection in the tail too. I might consider a flat tail like the Reaction or JetMach to try to save weight back there. In the end, if you have to add nose weight, it shouldn't noticeably affect the performance.
Over my 40 years of RC including Pattern, Pylon racing, Scale, IMAC, and over the last few years, Jets, it flies about as good as you could expect. Fast, Slow, Responsive, and Stable. What more could you ask for?
I was going to buy a new K60 until a club member offered me a used Ram500. I thought I would try it and if didn't work out, I would buy the new K60. I couldn't be happier. I can't remember seeing any other flying 83's except mine so I'm looking forward to Scootergenie's build and flying
Besides, more power is always better and too much power is just about right....
Per other Turbinator builds and my experience with the full size one (Jetcat P80), I moved the notch in the forward engine bulkhead up 1/2 inch for more down thrust. If you build one, you'll see exactly what to do and I'll gladly share photos if you need them. You could move the wing back a bit. Be careful with wood selection in the tail too. I might consider a flat tail like the Reaction or JetMach to try to save weight back there. In the end, if you have to add nose weight, it shouldn't noticeably affect the performance.
Over my 40 years of RC including Pattern, Pylon racing, Scale, IMAC, and over the last few years, Jets, it flies about as good as you could expect. Fast, Slow, Responsive, and Stable. What more could you ask for?
I was going to buy a new K60 until a club member offered me a used Ram500. I thought I would try it and if didn't work out, I would buy the new K60. I couldn't be happier. I can't remember seeing any other flying 83's except mine so I'm looking forward to Scootergenie's build and flying
Besides, more power is always better and too much power is just about right....
Last edited by Scott Todd; 09-29-2016 at 06:58 PM.
09-29-2016, 07:16 PM
#28
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Stuart, Fl.
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too much power is just about right........I like that ! I suggested the K60 was too much because before I ordered this short kit, I emailed Bob at LDS and asked if a P60 would fit in the air frame. He told me it was too much, and that it would take too much weight to get the CG. And then he told me it was designed for the Wren 44. My target weight is 12 lbs, but I don't Know if I can get there with glass and paint. I could shave a little using monokote I suppose.....I just don't have any idea what kind of performance to expect from the K45 with this plane. From all my years of building, experience tells me if the target is 12 lbs....more then likely it will be more like 14 lbs .
09-30-2016, 06:52 AM
#30
Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you will be happy with the K45. I'm slightly jealous...
Be conscious when building the tail parts and hardware selection. Even at 14 pounds, the K45 at nearly 10 pounds of thrust should be fine.
I think the Ram500 I'm flying is only about 11 pounds of thrust. I'm only at full throttle for take-off and then I hardly ever get over 1/2 - 2/3 for regular flying.
Well, except for those burner passes on the deck
Be conscious when building the tail parts and hardware selection. Even at 14 pounds, the K45 at nearly 10 pounds of thrust should be fine.
I think the Ram500 I'm flying is only about 11 pounds of thrust. I'm only at full throttle for take-off and then I hardly ever get over 1/2 - 2/3 for regular flying.
Well, except for those burner passes on the deck
10-02-2016, 02:02 PM
#32
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Stuart, Fl.
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I had some time today to re-dowel the fuselage sides. Also sanded the crutch in preparation for the glue up. The notches in the sides for the aft formers needed to be sanded a little so that the formers will fit properly. a Starbucks stir stick with sand paper attached worked perfectly since the holes are so small.
10-02-2016, 05:55 PM
#35
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Stuart, Fl.
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have to order balsa, and basswood sticks, Hardwood for the landing gear rails, as well as sheeting for fuse, tail feathers, and wings. here is yet another example of the many problems assembling this crutch. these are supposed to be identical parts...can anyone spot the problem ?......more work. Another thing I don't like about this kit is all the plywood parts have been punched out already. So instead of looking on a sheet for the part I need, I have to go fishing through big Ziploc bags full of little pieces. And I have no drops that you would normally have from
the sheet leftovers.
10-03-2016, 06:43 AM
#36
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Palm City,
FL
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you planning on using any spruce as called out in the plans, or are you using basswood/hard balsa instead? Did the plan reduction also reduce the cross sectional slots for the lazer cut ply or balsa pieces where the sticks go? If so, that amount of rework may be beyond my patience level.
Keep up the great work on this thread.
Keep up the great work on this thread.
10-03-2016, 07:58 AM
#37
Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tony,
Its mostly 3/32 balsa sheeting and spar stock. Things like the gear rails you may have already. I probably spent $100-150 on the wood.
Some accuracy was lost in some areas due to plan reduction. Someone had to go in and adjust notches manually to use the same call out wood. For ex: 1/4 stock at 83% becomes 0.21. of course you would still want to use 1/4 stock for that so the notches need adjusted. I think I had to 'massage' about 1/3 of the joints to make the stock I was using fit. It wasn't a big deal and really didn't slow me down much. I just accepted it as a result of the shrunk plans. The originals were hand drawn so there was a few slight errors in there anyways. Overall Ziroli did a good job with the design making all the parts fit well. I like the 'crutch' concept as it makes a simple sturdy fuselage that's easy to assemble and build straight.
I used whatever I had as far as spruce/basswood. You could probably use hard balsa if you hand selected it. Its pretty over-built as it is. I've been known to grab a 1x2 or 2x4 laying around and go to the table saw to rip what I want off it. Its quicker than going to the Hobby store. In 5 minutes I have exactly what I want.
I thought the value I received from LDS was good. They provided all the complicated parts saving lots of time from a scratch building point. I tossed some of the parts due to errors, in the plan reduction or original design. I think notable was the sheeting provided for the fin transition. Still, it was a good value and I would do it again. The quality of the wood provided by LDS, the completeness, and packaging were all very good.
I often complain about building but in the end, I like things done my way. That just means building sometimes. I keep thinking about a JetMach Super Sport. I don't need one but want to see how it goes together. Since its designed and built by them, it should fit much better than the Turbinator. I also look forward to a complete kit vs the scavenger hunt scratch building often requires.
Scooter, On the fullsize one my friend built at my house and my 83%, we made the main hatch longer in the front stretching it to the next bulkhead. It allows better access to the batteries, nose weight, or whatever. Its an easy mod and I recommend it
Its mostly 3/32 balsa sheeting and spar stock. Things like the gear rails you may have already. I probably spent $100-150 on the wood.
Some accuracy was lost in some areas due to plan reduction. Someone had to go in and adjust notches manually to use the same call out wood. For ex: 1/4 stock at 83% becomes 0.21. of course you would still want to use 1/4 stock for that so the notches need adjusted. I think I had to 'massage' about 1/3 of the joints to make the stock I was using fit. It wasn't a big deal and really didn't slow me down much. I just accepted it as a result of the shrunk plans. The originals were hand drawn so there was a few slight errors in there anyways. Overall Ziroli did a good job with the design making all the parts fit well. I like the 'crutch' concept as it makes a simple sturdy fuselage that's easy to assemble and build straight.
I used whatever I had as far as spruce/basswood. You could probably use hard balsa if you hand selected it. Its pretty over-built as it is. I've been known to grab a 1x2 or 2x4 laying around and go to the table saw to rip what I want off it. Its quicker than going to the Hobby store. In 5 minutes I have exactly what I want.
I thought the value I received from LDS was good. They provided all the complicated parts saving lots of time from a scratch building point. I tossed some of the parts due to errors, in the plan reduction or original design. I think notable was the sheeting provided for the fin transition. Still, it was a good value and I would do it again. The quality of the wood provided by LDS, the completeness, and packaging were all very good.
I often complain about building but in the end, I like things done my way. That just means building sometimes. I keep thinking about a JetMach Super Sport. I don't need one but want to see how it goes together. Since its designed and built by them, it should fit much better than the Turbinator. I also look forward to a complete kit vs the scavenger hunt scratch building often requires.
Scooter, On the fullsize one my friend built at my house and my 83%, we made the main hatch longer in the front stretching it to the next bulkhead. It allows better access to the batteries, nose weight, or whatever. Its an easy mod and I recommend it
Last edited by Scott Todd; 10-12-2016 at 01:15 PM.
10-03-2016, 12:48 PM
#39
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Stuart, Fl.
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scott...I like your idea of stretching the top hatch. What did you guys do, make new H1's and F4A/B's. The stock H1's don't fit that well anyway. I have a boatload of Juniper at work, I was going to use that far all the stringers aft of the cg. Its harder than balsa, but just as light.
10-03-2016, 01:25 PM
#41
Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't recall the details but it was pretty straightforward. Here are the results. Red nose is full-size one and black one is 83%. Funny how you NEVER have enough clamps Keep going!
Keep going!
Last edited by Scott Todd; 10-03-2016 at 01:32 PM.
10-03-2016, 03:30 PM
#42
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Stuart, Fl.
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the pictures Scott. I don't know if I would gain anything by doing that because F1, 2, and 3 will be occupied by my retract tank. I don't see a tank in yours...are you using electric retracts ?
10-03-2016, 03:39 PM
#43
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Palm City,
FL
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-08-2016, 04:00 PM
#46
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Stuart, Fl.
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-10-2016, 01:39 PM
#48
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Stuart, Fl.
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Getting ready to stick the fuselage now. I ripped my 1/4 inch stock to 7/32 so it would fit in the grooves in the formers. Also cut the top hatch stingers at a 7 degree bevel on the table saw.
10-25-2016, 04:26 PM
#50
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Stuart, Fl.
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still working on the fuselage. wing mount bocks, servo mounts, top hatch, etc. Took a break and rode the motorcycle to Lakeland to attend 12 oclock high. A lot of nice scale jets there, and one Turbinator ! Met Frank Tiano and crew....what a nice bunch ! Made me feel very welcome at the awards dinner. Check out the pics.
