Square Nozzle

My Feedback: (1)

R-54 ugly! I don't think so, but I do think that the color scheme has a lot to do with it's appearance. With the proper paint scheme the R-54 can look long and sleek. Add on some intakes ala Tommy Watson and you have a very attractive plane, in my estimation. The one I have pictured is no longer. I lost it in the sun and put it straight in but I am building a new one that will be a twin of the first because I liked the plane so much.

BruceTharpe

My Feedback: (1)

Thanks to Tommy and John for sticking up for the R54. That "ugly" post goes back a couple of months. Had to bite my tongue at the time, then kinda forgot about it. I'm waiting for the poster to show us his all-wood jet design so we can all bask in its glory.

Picard1 asks "Since I am a newbie to the jet world, where can I find info on all the internal gear: fuel line, festo, UAT, Shut off valve, Fuel plumbing, Propane system, External taxi tank plumbing, etc?" A lot of that info will come in the manual with your turbine. I think you can download JetCat manuals, and probably others as well. Searches here on RCU are also helpful. There are a lot of good people who follow this thread who would be happy to answer questions right here. Look through the items at Dreamworks and Tamjets - they are geared towards selling, but you can learn a lot just from the descriptions of the products.

Welcome to the Reaction family!

cjshaker

John:

I really like your Swiss paint job! Looks great!

Chris

Square Nozzle

My Feedback: (1)

Thank You Chris. I appreciate your comments. Glue is drying on the stab sub assembly and the right wing bottom sheeting. My Patrouille Suisse R-54 will rise from the ashes!

TommyWatson

My Feedback: (1)

John,

Your Swiss R54 looks terrific. get the new one flying soon. When I first saw Bruce's prototype R54 I immediatly wanted one. After looking at Kangaroo's and Rookies, I was desparing at finding a jet trainer that looked like an aeroplane. The R54 looks good and flies better.
Regards

Square Nozzle

My Feedback: (1)

Thank You Tommy. I'm working feverisly on R-54 Two. Like you, I looked at a lot of Entry Level jets and saw nothing that I liked till I saw the R-54. I'm a builder at heart so I wasn't interested in an ARF. I am real happy with what I chose. Being building season up here on the top of the globe, I'm going back into my shop to put ribs on the last wing panel.

Have a wonderful Holiday

TommyWatson

My Feedback: (1)

I am doing a refurbishment on my Reaction 54. (fixing the dents and some repaint)

I have had it for a few years now and it has collected a bit of "Hangar Rash". During this work I needed to remove the landing gear. While doing this I thought I might retrofit some sprung struts.

My questions to all you Reaction owners that have struts are:-

1. Does fitting struts make a lot of difference to the ground handling on landing (I fly off smooth grass)?

2. If you have fitted struts, then what brand and type (straight or trailing link)? I really don't want to modify the wing cavity too much so perhaps trailing link would not be suitable.

3, I want to keep the original Robart retracts.

3. Any other comments on struts on the reaction.

Regards

speedbrake

Tommy,
I use the same retracts but use Robart 660 struts. The strut cutout in the wing will need to be modified for the scissors, not too much though. I used Trim brakes but any brake that will fit the robart strut will do. I used the 660 yoke strut on the nose...some modification required on the strut.

I think the nose strut made the most difference. The steering is now on center line and I feel it is a lot better. The cut out for the nose gear will be a lot slimmer without the electric brake on the strut. The mains make a difference on a rough surface...maybe not so much on a smooth one. What is lost going to struts is the fore and aft movement of the wire strut. However, I'm completely satisfied using struts. You will be very pleased with the power of air brakes. Even if you don't use them often....when you do they are very effective.

The best is the trailing link strut. Those will require a bit more cutting on the wing to make them retract correctly.

Hope this helps,
Keith

racer8297

My Feedback: (13)

Tommy,

I fly off of a smooth grass field with a Reaction. It has well over 200 flights on it so far. This is the jet that I learned on. It has small Prolink main struts and a small Prolink nose strut installed in Robart 530 retract units. This setup has been flawless. The model drives like a Cadillac on the grass. The landings are consistantly perfect every time. When the airplane touches down it's as if velcro was holding it to the runway.

Unfortunatly you do need to do a mod to the wheel well position. It needs to be made 1 inch longer and offset 1/4" to the rear. If you are refinishing the model or recovering it this modification is a piece of cake.

Good luck with the refit,
Jim

TommyWatson

My Feedback: (1)

Thanks Guys,

I have decided to take the easy way out and use the 660 robart struts. As much as I would like the trailing link struts, I don't have the time or the inclination to modify the wing for them. So I have orderd the 660 struts for the mains and a 661 offset strut for the nose. I have a really nice BVM sport wheel and brake for the nose. I don't really need a brake for the grass field but sometime we go to jet events on a bitumen runway, so a brake is necessary.
Now I just need to wait for Tower Hobbies to deliver the goods.
Thanks for your comments.

Regards

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

Hi Tom, the biggest advantage to struts is pavement ops. I first flew my R54 on wire gear and later added Robostruts and retrofitted a new Dreamworks trailing link strut to the nose gear. It certainly, to some extent, takes the shock of bumps and cracks out of the airframe and makes ground handling just so much more civil. I think you will appreciate the difference, but I have not operated my R54 from grass so it may be more different than I think. Have fun!

Boomerang1

Tommy, would have to agree with Eddie P. Craig's Vigilante (the one he bought from David Gladwin) is very jumpy on tarmac with the piano wire legs, even difficult to steer taxiing due to the bouncing but the tires are rock hard. He has now changed to some struts, Robart I think. My bigger plane on wire legs seems o.k. but it's heavier & the tires are soft & spongy (it's actually the R54 wheel & brake kit I bought from Bruce).

When you look at the new trailing link struts that are designed to go into standard wheel wells the link angle is so sharp that there is no direct up & down springing anyway, it's only when the wheel travels back that the spring works, not much better than wire legs really. Full size aircraft with trailing links usually start at about a 45 deg angle.

A hard choice really, for grass wire seems the best option & struts for sealed surfaces. Could you have two sets & swap to suit? - John.

TommyWatson

My Feedback: (1)

G'Day John,

To tell the truth, the wire struts have never been a problem on my Reaction. I took the nosegear out to prepare for painting and thought of a sprung strut. No real reason, I just wanted a change I suppose.
Anyway I have ordered the Robart struts so I will see. The wire legs can go back in if I am not happy with the struts.

I am still waiting for my supersport to come back from Wren. I am getting new bearings. The engine is going well but the bearings are getting a bit noisy.



regards

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

Hi Tommy, I have a Supersport in another airframe, great engine! How much time did you have on your SS before the bearings started to make noise?

TommyWatson

My Feedback: (1)

Hi Eddie,

I have had it for at least two years now. It is one of the first Supersport engines without the FOD screen. I don't keep a log but probably at least 25 hours. It has always been a little noisy when spun by hand, but always runs and starts perfectly. It pushes the old reaction very fast.

Regards

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

Great little engines aren't they. 25 Hours seems pretty reasonable for bearings. Thanks!

TommyWatson

My Feedback: (1)

Hi Eddy,

Yes they are. I have only ever owned Wren engines so I can't comment if they are better than other brands, but I love mine.
I built my first Mk2 and it ran perfectly. I have a 54Mk3, a 54 Turboprop, a 44 Gold and a Supersport.

Regards

jetrichie

You must have a white stick if you think the reaction looks good, the Boomerang is no stunner either but a much better all round flyer than a reaction

jetrichie

You want to try AMT i have a few jetcats which are great and just bought a AMT pegasus hp and the difference in quality to the others is day and night also the throttle response is incredible, was looking at the wren 160 but when you compare it with the AMT there is no contest.

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

Some people's kids... I tell ya!

TommyWatson

My Feedback: (1)

Jetrichie can spend his money any way he likes, it's his money.

I know what I like and it is made of Balsa and Ply and is called a REACTION 54 and is powered by a little green engine called WREN Supersport. I am building a small one for a WREN 44.

Perhaps we Reaction owners ARE all blinded by the beautiful, sleek lines of the Reaction.

Regards

ww2birds

My Feedback: (14)

I've flown both. Maybe he hasn't. No comparison for me.

Both are good trainers, but the Reaction excels as a sport jet too, most of the Boomerang owners I know are selling/trading and moving on after learning on them.

Dave McQ

rcguy!

My Feedback: (69)

Very well said Tommy!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Years!

I've under Reacted, just plain Reacted and I even over Reacted!

Dave Rigotti

bobparks2

My Feedback: (1)

over Reacted? Is that the new version with the engine on top?

Merry Christmas everyone!

Bob

TommyWatson

My Feedback: (1)

Thanks Dave, I hope you have a good Xmas too.

I think we just need to ignore the Reaction knockers and continue to enjoy the performance, handling and beautiful sleek lines of the Reaction. I guess there are some people that just wish they had a reaction.

Regards