I recently purchased a Harlock Viper Jet 140 from a hobby shop in Israel called Skytoys RC. When I received a copy of the UPS invoice of what was actually paid by Skytoys RC for shipping charges, I had been overcharged by $100.50. There is no justification of the extra $100.50. My point to the community is to be sure if you buy anything from Skytoys RC that you pay the shipping charges, directly. Also, get a delineation of all shipping charges. Therefore, you get to see all the charges and justification. In my case I trusted them to be honest with me. However, when I received a copy of the Air Waybill from UPS and saw the actual total shipping charges, and the amount I paid was a $100.50 more, I questioned these charges. However, after many weeks of non answered emails I am still out the $100.50.I hope this note helps others avoid the grief and time I have spent trying to get this overcharge issue settled.

Shipping & Handling is more than just the cost to ship; I think a lot of people forget this. Handling often includes the cost of the packaging materials such as boxes and protective foam so your item arrives unharmed (UPS often isn't kind to boxes) as well as the labor that goes into packaging up your item in said box(es), setting up shipments and printing out labels. All that takes time and someone needs to do that work and get paid for it.

Yeah, and when it’s all said and done $100 will be a drop in the bucket.

Not that $100’s don’t add up, but I’m not sure starting a thread about it....

If you agreed to price shipping included. There should be o complaint. You should not be worried about the bottom line of the company your dealing with you should only concern yourself with if you got the deal you agreed to!!!!!!

I hear what you are saying. However, Skytoysrc never could account for the reason for the extra $100.50. They tried to blame UPS. However, UPS charges only showed the $232.50 and not the $333.00 that I was charged. All I was asking for was an accounting of the $100.50. Skytoysrc never did justify these charges, such as saying this was for packing materials, etc., or whatever. They tried to push the blame on UPS. Anyway, it just sounded dishonest to me. There very well may be other charges, as you guys stated. But at least they could have given me a reason for the charges, and not the no response that I received.

I appreciate the comments. This was my first dealing with an overseas vendor. I would not have done it if I was not desperate to get the jet. There were no Harlock green 140 VJ available in the US. I bought the original jet from Greg Alderman. However, beign a nugget, we removed the engine hatch on initial start-up. I wish there would have been a bold note stating not to run the engine with the hatch off. Of course, this disturbed the cooling through the turbine bay, since the hatch is on the bottom and not the top. Consequently, the thin metalled exhaust pipe collapsed and raw engine exhaust destroyed the rear of the fuselage...including the elevators, and elevator and rudder servos(HV69s). Then to really finish it off the PVC insulation melted and shorted the rear harness, and caused massive electrical damage, including destroying a REX 12 Assist Rx, a DSM 10 swich, and MUI 30 current and voltage sensor. So, that was my first jet experience! I guess that is why I scrutinized the cost. Anyway, after much pain and anguish, the VJ #2 is almost ready to go! So, I am feeling much better now. Thanks, again!

That's nothing man...Wait until you're charged hundreds of dollars to replace a undamaged compressor on a brand new engine with less than 10 flights. Sorry wrong thread lol

Yea, your right! Keep it simple...::LOL!

The hatch on the Harlock VJ 140 is on the bottom, and not the top This is why I am told that the engine should not be ran with the hatch off. Maybe it could be ran on the ground if the airplane was inverted and sitting in a plane carrier...so the radiant heat could escape upward. Also, the exhaust pipe is a single wall design. The turbine conversion instructions call for the grooving of the rear fuselage exit to form cooling vents around the exhaust pipe and the inner skin of the fuselage, When air is injested into the jet some of the air flows around the engine and out the vents. When the hatch is off the radiant heat goes upward into the rudder/elevator cavities and does not have any ram air forcing cooling around the engine and out the vents. The engine is just injesting air from the atmosphere and not through the model air inlets. Also, on the first VJ I painted the turbine bay and fuselage areas around the exhaust pipe with BVM ceramic paint. But I did not add any radiant heat protection to this area. The servo harness from the rudder and elevators was first ran through black nylon sleeving, then ran through a high temperature fiberglass sheath.. However, when the tail pipe collapsed this wiring was destroyed in seconds. However,this time I am running the rudder/elevator wires, first with the nylon sleeving, then through the Dreamworks cool tube, as they pass through the turbine bay.. Also, I will cover the cool tube and surrounding fulelage composite with one layer of Dreamworks ceramic blanket. Then cover everything with the Dreamworks gold high temperature tape in the turbine bay cavity. I hoping this will do it. And also, of course, will not remove the engine hatch.

Chances are the pipe was going to collapse soon anyway with the hatch on or off.I never use the stock pipes, I have all mine built to spec

Hatch on or off, pipe should have been happy camper if it would have been strong enough ..

It's really not a hatch location issue, it's more that the "pipe" is not a "pipe" - it's a heat shield, and a weak one at that but it apparently is affected by running the turbine with the hatch off. If you look at the numerous builds of this plane, the "pipe" ID is larger than the turbine housings themselves, and the turbines are tucked down inside of it instead of spaced out ahead. With the engines so far to the rear of the airplane, it appears the heat shield is just there to protect the fuse, and is therefore not built to actually withstand the exhaust gasses and velocities that a typical pipe would be built to handle.



https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rcu...f99fa5643.jpeg

So when run with the hatch off, the turbine tries to pull air from the hatch instead of just the inlets, and that intake air collapses the shield.

Not defending, just opining.

Nice pic!

And completely correct