So what you are saying is that you ain't up to a TC/BV verbal ***** whuppin' right now.....probably somehow related to the RED-BUTT aftermath of eating 15 lbs of cayenne-seasoned mudbugs on your plate last Saturday??

I say, grind out a set of Titanium Depends and go for it.....

Tom

i was there....and tom`s tank busted the landing light clean off it`s mount....and the hustler flew the next weekend after a little glue and painting

in fact it took more to fix the light than the plane

and our c-arf eurosport would of been toast too

and eddie that hustler you were flying also passed the altiutde test.....i think when it becomes a dot...thats high enough

btw

we own a firebird and its tuffer than tuff too

There ain't nuttin' wrong with the looks of an Iso. Each one is beautiful (in its own way!).

Sir, Can you post the "100" good items about, either airframe? Lets go the other way! Last I heard you are a weatherman, is that correct? Thanks WHMC

Naaaah, Eddie is a "meteorologist", this guy is (was!) a weatherman:


http://www.ebaumsworld.com/weatherdork.html

Would either of these airframes be suitable for the JetJoe 1200 miniature aeroturbine?

Eddy i'm reading you here since a long time, i respect you and your building/design skill, but i have to say that your last post is totaly useless. You want people to beg at you or what???...

Nah, he's totally right, it's just not worth it, some subjects just are not worth the trouble.

But I think the lack of an answer on my last question is because NEITHER of these airframes can handle the AWESOME power of the JetJoe.

The angled thrust line has absolutely no affect on the Kingcat when throttling up or down. There is no pitch effect at all, it is very smooth and for the life of me I cannot figure out why people keep bringing this up in these threads. There are no poor flight characteristics as a result of the thrust angle so why does it even matter?





Jeremy, I'm not sure why you say this but the Kingcats are easily capable of the 200 mph speeds that are allowed here in the U.S. so anything beyond that is useless for most of us anyway.




I also looked at buying one of the Hustlers when I purchased the Kingcat but for me the deciding factor had the most to do with where I intended to fly my new jet. I saw Kingcats making very short landings at events and then accelerating to 200 mph, and what I was looking for was something that I could fly at my local field with a 20 x 600' paved runway. This is not much runway for a jet to land.

At all of the jet meets I attend each year I had never seen a Hustler make a short landing approach like the Kingcat. I am not saying it is not possible but I have never seen it done.

My point is think about why you are buying the new jet and make the choice based on that because they are both very high quality planes and I think you would be happy with either of them. I have around 125 flights on my Kingcat so far and have been very happy with both the reliability and performance. I am sure I would have been just as happy with the Hustler but I am not sure I would have been able to fly it from our 600' runway.

Keep in mind that it is a requirement that you land on the runway every time you fly, not every other time. And, if you have a short runway where you want to fly then you need a plane that is suited to landing in that distance because it does not really matter how well the plane is built, eventually you are going to destroy the undercarriage or worse by either missing or overshooting the runway. The faster the landing speed, the greater the potential for damage.

Deciding where you want to fly this plane may help your decision. Gary

Since the JMP Firebird can be flown from 600', I'm sure that the Hustler would work fine also from that size or smaller runway.

Just a thought, but:
If I were to try to market a prop driven sport plane that flew fantastic in all respects, but the engine sat in the airframe with as much down thrust as a KingCat, I have a feeling that I would not sell very many. It would not bother some guys, but others would be totally turned off by it. But, if I had a reputation similar to Mr. Violets', I bet I could sell all of them that I could manufacture.

I fly out of a field thats 600 X 80 and the Hustler has no problems flying in and out of if. In fact a Firebird been flown out of that field along with a BVM F100 and most other jets I can think of without problems.

Both the Hustler and the Kingcat are great flying planes, its just a matter of what you like. I personally like the way the Hustler is constructed vs the Kingcat. I hate maintenane of planes and that includes how gentle or not I have to be when transporting, securing and general handling.

Sung

Gary, I guess I still don't understand? If a plane has such exceptional flight characteristics, as the Kingcat does, why would people care about the design specs. The first question someone always asks you after the maiden flight is "HOW DID IT FLY" and not " How did it fly with that engine angled all funny"? We are end users, not designers, so all we should really care about is how it flies. Is it just that you don't like the looks of the engine at that angle or ??

I do agree that BV has a very good reputation for building superior quality planes but far more important is the fact that you see a lot of them at the events. As I mentioned above, that is why I bought mine and the reputation was secondary I think. Since I had already owned several BVM planes I already knew they produced quality airplanes from an engineering standpoint. The specific flight characteristics was what I was looking for and was able to see for myself at the events. Seeing is believing and I think that is far more likely to sell airplanes than anyones reputation.

I was not able to observe these characteristics with the Hustler and at $4-5,000 for a finished kit it is a lot to ask I think to just "assume" that it had the flight characteristics I was looking for!!

I also would not "assume" that just because the Firebird can land on a 600' runway that the Hustler is also capable of this as well. I guess you are referring to the other post (mentioning the 600' landing) which also shows the modifications to the leading edge slats on the Firebird, so I am not sure that is fair statement if the slats also have any effect on the landing speeds. Just my opinion, Gary

But why was the thrust angle necessary? Regardless, it does fly nice, but it's not a dead true airplane, not by any stretch. My biggest complaint with the Kingcat's flight characteristics are in rolls. It doesn't roll dead true, not the one I flew, not the ones I've watched fly. But it's not designed to be a pattern ship either. The biggest issue with all that down thrust is the engine is going to get damaged if you have a gear failure or something like that.

If the plane flies well, and is slow enough/fast enough for everyone, who cares where the engine is thrusted??

Also, the number of a specific type of airplane you see at a meet has more to do with marketing strategy than anything else. At least half of those birds I've seen were being flown by reps.

The KingCat does require mixing tweaks.....it does have proverse roll when applying rudder for knife edge as well as canopy push.....easily mixed out with rudder/aileron:elevator mix on the 10X........

It also needs differential on the ailerons to get rid of the barrel on the rolls......you can get it to do a very nice axial roll quite easily......

Actually, my Rhino clears the ground if the mains stick up, as do most KJ-66 engines if you have the engine mounted correctly.....Peggy's do grind some asphalt so must be protected with plates like Barry fashioned for Buck Garza......

I have seen BV and others do some impressive pattern flights with the KC......only thing it lacks is a real clean entry and exit to upright (+G) spins and flicks due to the wing planform......same deal with the BobCat and Bandit using a similar wing planform, but outside (-G) spins and flicks are clean.....

As far as downthrust, have to ask BV, or Bob Parks, or some other aero engineer to spell out all the force vectors on the bird at full throttle, idle and all points in between to answer your question.....my answer, it works....plane is dead neutral in pitch from idle to full throttle......only complaint is that it does scorch our grass field quite a bit, but only browns the grass blades.....alway come back green after a little rain.....actually, the Bandit is almost as bad with it low-set pipe outlet....


Tom

Tom

Its strange but I have had two twin boomers, an IAD Serpent and my current Jetco which both need quite a lot of downthrust on the turbine to fly on a neutral elevator. David Gladwin reckoned it was the efflux gas from the turbine creating suction on the underside of the elevator making the model pitch up unless substantial down thrust was added to avoid the efflux affecting the elevator.

Not to bash anyones flying abilities but it is very possible to do a very nice slow roll with the Kingcat the length of the airfield in a perfectly horizontal line from end to end. I am not the best pilot but I know this can be done because I have been practicing slow rolls with the Kingcat for some time and have become very accomplished at slow rolls. I think it one of the best looking maneuvers available to us as model pilots. As for proverse roll, I have not experienced this either.

The non-axial rolls are likely due more to lack of being use to the particular plane or just not enough practice doing slow rolls. It could be improperly trimmed or any other number of things that have nothing to do with the flight characteristics of the plane itself.

The only issue with knife edge that I noticed is that you must do it at higher speeds but I think this is only because the plane is very heavy and just does not have the power to maintain knife edge at slower speeds.

Gary

Bingo! The efflux from the turbine creates acceleration of the air passing over the bottom surface of the stab, and Bernoulli's theory goes to work! You could solve it with downthrust, or by raising the stab. Since the parts are molded.. downthrust is the answer.

I don´t know if the bernoulli effect is the sole responsible for the turbine angle issue, this plane
has the elevator well above the jet stream, unlike the KC and the Hustler, and it needed too a small shim (you can see in the pic) to correct slight pitch changes with different throttle settings... I think that is more likely to be the plane´s force arrangement and its variation at different speeds.

Enrique

Gary:

I agree that at high speeds, you can do some pretty nice knife edge and slow rolls without even using the rudder.....it's when you slow it down for a nice rolling or knife-edge show center pass that I find I need all the rudder, and then some to keep the nose on line....that's when I find the need for the mixes....but actually, the aileron and elevator I have mixed in is quite minimal at that.....

The rudder is very effective....I have cranked in all I can get, and at full power I can climb in knife edge quite sharply when I have burned off about 1/2 the fuel....almost can do the top 1/2 of a knife-edge loop, although it does get quite high at the apex.....


Tom

I dont really mind saying what i saw. My friend had to land gear up, loss of air pressure. The engine being angled the way it is caused his engine case to be really messed up (dented and scratched bad). I guess if you choose the one aircraft (with the thrust angle), since we are being discrete, i guess you better hope you dont have to land gear up.

The one aircraft has skin hinging on all flight surfaces, at least on the rudders this skin has binded no less than 3 thimes causing stripped gears in the servos. The hustler uses large robart control point hinges, very nice installation indeed.

This person who said that the modeler is the one to ensure a design is fit for flight is IMO way off. It doesnt matter if its a CRJ or a avistar, it is up to the manufacturer to design and supply an airworthy aircraft. ESPECIALLY IN THE DAY OF ARFS. I would never fly a real aircraft again if they told me i was the test rat that was going to make sure it was ok to fly. Just my opinion.

Pantherflyer,

I hope your not refering to my post...
but this is what I said...

"In the model aviation industry it's the pilots job to make sure the aircraft is worthy of flight. This means range checks, battery checks, structural integrity checks..... you know the drill. If something dosen't look right or feel right, don't fly."

I did not say the consumer should ensure a design is fit for flight. That would be wrong, unless the modeler knew he was a guinea pig.

Anyways there is no question in my mind the both the KC and Hustler are proven designs. Their respective manufacturers see to that. The manufacturer places limits such as VNe's and thrust limitations. If you choose to go over these recomendations you are now considered a test pilot.

Now both companies inspect their products before shipment. When you remove the aircraft from it's box and if you are unhappy with the construction or techniques, im sure the company can handle that situation, if you are reasonable.

I do beleive that I am ultimately responsible for making sure my plane is ready for flight. If I accidentally, while in a hurry to go fly after work, bump the door frame of my house with the aileron of my airplanes wing. Subsiquently two flights later my aileron servo strips, and I loose my plane to flutter. I by no means can blame the company who provided a basic service of general construction. Probably a bad example, but im sure it happens.

About those rudder servos. Probably should talk to the manufacture of them; find out why they made a servo that would strip it's own gears at stall torque. I find it hard to believe that metal gear servos would fail under a surface bind/stall load. I feel they would have to have an impact load applied, or maybe they where not the recomended servos by the airplane manuf.

I hope everyone takes these threads in good fun. There are some valid points, but most of this thread is stuff blown way out of proportion, or taken and twisted out of context, or a one in a thousand problem, you be the judge.

At the end of the day you can be proud to own either one of these planes. Your friends may make fun of you, but you'll get used to it!

This has my curiosity aroused, who wants to lend the sticks of a hustler??? Ill trade some airtime on a KC, but I land my own plane, you land your own plane.

Keep the rubber side down on landing...

Dustin,
A friend of mine has one and you are more then welcome to fly it. For that matter anyone else who would like to compare the too you are more then welcome (some might be on the buddy box[X(])
If anyone would like to make a trip to do some flying on both aircraft let me know. If not just look me up at the next event I am at.

My bad dustin, makes more sense now. Wasnt hammering you, just wanted to get that straight.

On the Kingcat, and some of the composite ARF planes, you have to heat up the flap that overlaps the surface and deflect the surface to it's maximum throw. Hold it in this position until it cools, and that shold keep them from binding.
We had a Kingcat that got damage to the elevators, when the heat from the engine caused the elevator to bind while giving down elevator commands. 8611 servos can really tear up your stab, because they go where you tell them to regardless of the fact that something is binding. Kingcat rudders are inboard, so maybe the thermal effects are a factor.

Dan