Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > RC Jets
 Reaction 54 Jet Kit >

Reaction 54 Jet Kit

Notices
RC Jets Discuss RC jets in this forum plus rc turbines and ducted fan power systems

Reaction 54 Jet Kit

Old 12-01-2014, 09:31 PM
  #3226  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Kamloops, BC, CANADA
Posts: 1,023
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts
Default

Well, I am building my third R54. My first one was from an early run of kits..so I have a little experience on the R54. As a matter of fact, a president of the AMA, president of MAAC, a retired US Navy rear admiral, countless RC widows and hundreds of wannabee turbine modelers have been buddy boxed on my R54s. It is such an amazing airframe.

After having gone the heavy iron route this one will be light, KT 60 powered, electric Robart retracts and simple. Full circle....
Just the way Bruce designed it "all those years ago".

Dean W.
Old 12-02-2014, 05:53 AM
  #3227  
My Feedback: (48)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Plymouth, MI
Posts: 2,960
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by siclick33
I've just received my Reaction kit and It looks great. Very well packed and the manual looks very well done. I'm looking forward to getting round to this as soon as the building backlog clears!!

There's a post from Bruce earlier in this thread that says that the Reaction ARF Pro-Links are longer than the kit legs.
The Reaction ARF Prolinks are 1 1/4 inches longer than Bruce specifies, plus the retract units are larger. That's what I bought for mine. I'll make them work by modifying the mounts and relocating the wheel wells. I think the plane will look better sitting a little taller.

Joe
Old 12-02-2014, 01:37 PM
  #3228  
My Feedback: (2)
 
highhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 2,565
Received 93 Likes on 49 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BruceTharpe
"I'm not crazy. My mother had me tested." Sheldon Cooper

Hey Matt, it sounds like you've received some good advice. Sorry I'm not more help on this, but I'm going to look into this some more and really try to nail down the best alternative struts. For the record, one of the main design goals of the R54 was to keep it as affordable as possible for a turbine model. The Robart retracts with wire struts were chosen with that in mind. But wire is wire, so the strut length was kept to an absolute minimum to do the job without needing to be bent back into position after every landing. Overall, I think the wire struts exceed expectations and work really well. There's a notion that the wire struts do not provide any shock absorption. Well, they do have loops that allow them to flex aft, and the soft Sullivan wheels provide cushioning that you don't get from hard (and expensive) "jet" tires. Just thought you might like to know the thinking behind some of my design choices.
All excellent points. Thanks Bruce. It's obviously a well thought out airplane.

Regarding the the engine choice (22lbs) for mine, one aspect has nothing to do with "Massive verticals". Rather, it has to do with the ability to 1) use a shorter field, 2) use less fuel per lb/thrust than the notoriously thirsty P-60, and 3) having the option to make verticals from lower speeds, using power to get over the top rather than accumulated speed.

While the -60 was a great engine in it's day 10 years ago, it's worth noting that there are engines available now which make upwards of 50% more power at the same fuel flow (or burn a lot less at the same power settings), leading to better flight times without carrying more fuel (weight).

Thanks again for such a great airframe!

Don
Old 12-02-2014, 04:09 PM
  #3229  
 
Mike06659's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mercersburg, PA
Posts: 773
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Good luck to the guys building their new Reactions. You will not be disappointed. I've said it before and I will say it again. I miss my Reaction!!!! Don't sell them after a few years you will regret it. Also, I think I put the Boomerang Nano Struts on mine for those guys interested.
I flew this jet anywhere and everywhere. You will enjoy how versatile it is.
Mike
Old 12-02-2014, 05:36 PM
  #3230  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St. Catharines , ON, CANADA
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'm enjoy my reaction build it is my first big build, I'm thing of a king teach k100 the residual thrust can affect my landing speed I was going to with crow
,
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_20141116_191708228.jpg
Views:	432
Size:	1.40 MB
ID:	2051699  

Last edited by jim62; 12-02-2014 at 05:41 PM.
Old 12-02-2014, 05:57 PM
  #3231  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: AVONDALE, AZ
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Dec 1st 2014, Just got my Reaction via UPS from BTE. And the building will start.
Old 12-11-2014, 04:36 AM
  #3232  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Ken Park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ottawa, ON, CANADA
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

International order Ottawa Canada
Kit arrived yesterday Dec 10th - Ordered by phone was shipped out same day on Dec 1st - Kit arrived in excellent condition no damage

Five Star Service - Thankyou Bruce

Ken
Old 12-11-2014, 10:07 AM
  #3233  
My Feedback: (11)
 
Bob_B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Bluegrass State of Mind
Posts: 4,698
Received 85 Likes on 74 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Helijet
Well, I am building my third R54. My first one was from an early run of kits..so I have a little experience on the R54. As a matter of fact, a president of the AMA, president of MAAC, a retired US Navy rear admiral, countless RC widows and hundreds of wannabee turbine modelers have been buddy boxed on my R54s. It is such an amazing airframe.

After having gone the heavy iron route this one will be light, KT 60 powered, electric Robart retracts and simple. Full circle....
Just the way Bruce designed it "all those years ago".

Dean W.
Dean does this one look familiar?
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpg
Views:	225
Size:	1.77 MB
ID:	2054109  
Old 12-11-2014, 02:04 PM
  #3234  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Kamloops, BC, CANADA
Posts: 1,023
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts
Default

Whoohoooo!!

Look at all that pavement and blue sky. Oh so I wish I could be somewhere warm right now.
Well....one day I can retire!

Enjoy the flights Marv!
Thanks for the pic Bob...
Now to get back to building #3....lol

Dean
Old 12-14-2014, 08:48 AM
  #3235  
My Feedback: (48)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Plymouth, MI
Posts: 2,960
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

I've started building and have the wings in the bones so far. I'm planning on doing it in the Panther blue/yellow/red scheme and am changing a few things to make it look more like a Panther.

To accommodate my gear I made a new retract mount out of 1/4" ply. It spans 3 ribs and I added doublers to each rib. The wheel well is relocated due to the longer struts.

Servos will be side mounted inside the wings. The aileron servo is moved outboard one bay so that the aileron control horn can be attached near the middle.

Wing tips are more squared off to get away from the bat wing look.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01778.JPG
Views:	366
Size:	150.9 KB
ID:	2054951   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01783.JPG
Views:	358
Size:	148.0 KB
ID:	2054952   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01781.JPG
Views:	349
Size:	146.8 KB
ID:	2054953  
Old 12-14-2014, 08:51 AM
  #3236  
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Beaumont, TX
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hey Guys,

I'm getting to pretty close to the sanding phase on mine. It's been a good build. Dreamworks trailing ling on the mains, Robart on the nose ( pushed forward a little.)

Added a tank over the boattail 32oz. and uat in front of the main tank. Yes I've done some math on that. As the main tank is for the most part in front of the cg, the cg moves about .3 inches aft as it burns off and now mine starts out and ends at the same cg. As the rear tanks burns off the cg moves forward and then back as the main tank burns off. I will maiden with just the main tank filled and will incrementally add fuel to the rear tank to test the flight manners.

The current dilemma I face involves inlet area. I've read the entire thread a few times and while it's been lightly addressed I've still some concerns.

It seems that the first set of inlets that showed (mach1's I believe) were roughly 3x1.25 at the inlet lip. 9 sq inches total. It looks to me that they pinch down to roughly 6 sq in at the top of the wing.

I looked at the manual for my wren 75 jubilee and they ask for 16 sq in of inlet. That's the same opening they ask for with the 100. That's huge and I haven't seen many aircraft in this size class that have that large an inlet.

So you see I'm on the fence as to adding inlets.

Any comment from those who have and how the aircraft performed?

Les
Old 12-16-2014, 12:31 PM
  #3237  
My Feedback: (2)
 
flyinfool1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Cudahy, WI
Posts: 885
Received 9 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

I think that the difference in inlet area is that the turbine is not fully enclosed inside of the fuse. My inlets are a lot smaller than what you are talking about and there is no problem getting enough air. The P70 turbine can still suck air from the rear opening in the fuse. Unless of course you are adding a lot more to make the turbine fully enclosed, then you may need to open the front more. My inlets are more show than function.
Old 12-16-2014, 12:53 PM
  #3238  
My Feedback: (48)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Plymouth, MI
Posts: 2,960
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

I've got the tailfeathers done. The fin has been rounded somewhat and the stab made smaller.

Joe
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01786.JPG
Views:	347
Size:	147.6 KB
ID:	2055559   Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01788.JPG
Views:	326
Size:	144.9 KB
ID:	2055560  
Old 12-17-2014, 10:42 AM
  #3239  
 
oliveDrab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Georgetown, KY
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

[QUOTE=flyinfool1;11939295 My inlets are more show than function.[/QUOTE]

Do you have a picture of your inlets or maybe the picture is somewhere else in this thread?
Old 12-17-2014, 04:35 PM
  #3240  
My Feedback: (12)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: reisterstown, MD
Posts: 1,864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by highhorse
All excellent points. Thanks Bruce. It's obviously a well thought out airplane.

Regarding the the engine choice (22lbs) for mine, one aspect has nothing to do with "Massive verticals". Rather, it has to do with the ability to 1) use a shorter field, 2) use less fuel per lb/thrust than the notoriously thirsty P-60, and 3) having the option to make verticals from lower speeds, using power to get over the top rather than accumulated speed.

While the -60 was a great engine in it's day 10 years ago, it's worth noting that there are engines available now which make upwards of 50% more power at the same fuel flow (or burn a lot less at the same power settings), leading to better flight times without carrying more fuel (weight).

Thanks again for such a great airframe!

Don
Don, a friend of mine has a P-120 turned down to 18lbs of thrust. Flies fine but the residual thrust makes it hard to land without a long flat approach even will 60 degrees of flap and 1/4 " of crow. Mine and our other buddy has a P-70 in them and their a nice match for power and you still need crow as the first ones had Ram 500s and such for power. I think mine was the first one that Bruce sold a mount to fit a P-70 after I had a bearing failure on my first Ram500.
Old 12-17-2014, 04:57 PM
  #3241  
My Feedback: (2)
 
highhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 2,565
Received 93 Likes on 49 Posts
Default

Thanks Ron. I will make sure I have lotsa flap. Will shoot for close to 90 degrees and back off if I don't need it. Maybe a speed brake instead of crow.

Last edited by highhorse; 12-17-2014 at 05:16 PM.
Old 12-17-2014, 05:26 PM
  #3242  
My Feedback: (2)
 
highhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 2,565
Received 93 Likes on 49 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by oliveDrab
Do you have a picture of your inlets or maybe the picture is somewhere else in this thread?
Old 12-17-2014, 05:26 PM
  #3243  
My Feedback: (2)
 
highhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 2,565
Received 93 Likes on 49 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by oliveDrab
Do you have a picture of your inlets or maybe the picture is somewhere else in this thread?
Old 12-17-2014, 05:35 PM
  #3244  
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Ken Park's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ottawa, ON, CANADA
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Wing lights

Lots of guys using landing lights or wingtip lights - I Continued the holes from front of ribs so the holes go from W2 to W13

Been looking at all the guys in past doing the Fuse Side intake ducts as a modification - I noticed some had made a FG molded parts - Does anyone sell these? and or the Fighter pilot canopy's hatches
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Wingribs54.jpg
Views:	342
Size:	1.17 MB
ID:	2055998  

Last edited by Ken Park; 12-18-2014 at 04:40 AM.
Old 12-17-2014, 05:35 PM
  #3245  
My Feedback: (2)
 
highhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 2,565
Received 93 Likes on 49 Posts
Default

tried to post a pic from earlier in the thread, but am apparently doing immorally wrong. Help, anyone?

Old 12-17-2014, 10:02 PM
  #3246  
My Feedback: (39)
 
PaulD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Coquitlam, B.C., CANADA
Posts: 1,473
Received 12 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bob_b
dean does this one look familiar?
marv!
Old 12-18-2014, 07:26 AM
  #3247  
My Feedback: (2)
 
flyinfool1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Cudahy, WI
Posts: 885
Received 9 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Not the best to show the inlets but is all I have handy.
You can see that they get quite small over the wing. But the turbine is still able to pull air from around the sides.


Here is a post from much earlier in this thread by the original builder.
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/rc-j...ml#post5043231
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Air_Show_2012_002[1].jpg
Views:	586
Size:	2.13 MB
ID:	2056005  

Last edited by flyinfool1; 12-18-2014 at 08:01 AM.
Old 12-18-2014, 09:00 AM
  #3248  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borlange, SWEDEN
Posts: 258
Received 23 Likes on 20 Posts
Default

I have an old JetCat P-80 laying around in the workshop to no use and I would like to find a new purpose for it. Now, Bruce specifically say on his homepage that this particular engine is to large and heavy for the Reaction 54. And of course that is hard to argue about. But still, it looks to me that some of the models in the resent pictures in this thread has engines very similar to a P-80. Do you folks know of anyone who successfully has mounted a P-80 size engine in a Reaction? If so, does it work out or do you also advice against it?
And to Bruce if you read this. Is there any hope for a Super Reaction in the future, say 120%, just like there is a Super Flyin King?









Jannica in Sweden
Old 12-18-2014, 12:40 PM
  #3249  
 
oliveDrab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Georgetown, KY
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by highhorse
While the -60 was a great engine in it's day 10 years ago, it's worth noting that there are engines available now which make upwards of 50% more power at the same fuel flow (or burn a lot less at the same power settings), leading to better flight times without carrying more fuel (weight).
Don
I bought a P-60 to power my Reaction 54 but I'm wondering, for my next jet, what engines are available now which make upwards of 50% more power at the same fuel flow? What do you recommend?
Thanks in advance.
-oliveDrab
Old 12-18-2014, 01:35 PM
  #3250  
My Feedback: (16)
 
Instructor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Swoyersville, PA
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Hi Jannica,

I sent you a Pm. I didn't want to hijack this thread.....

Larry

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.