I have been thinking that my Kingcat is a lot of fun with 29lbs of thrust, but I have an opportunity to upgrade to 48lbs of thrust, anything that should be done, that I would need to watch for with a bigger engine? I know they've been flown with P200's, and AMT Olympus's, but have they been dialed down at all, or run wide open?

Thanks!
Jeremy

I run mine with a P160SX at 36 pounds and have no worries. Might even turn it up to 39 pounds next season. 29 1/2 pounds dry.

Dave

Jeremy,

I've flown one with an Oly wide open. We were somewhat careful with the G's we pulled in the turns - just because it was a government airplane and none of us wanted to pay them back if it came apart, but it handled the thrust in a straight line just fine. We did wind up putting an additional 50 oz tank behind the normal 16 oz header to get some more flight time with that engine. Takeoffs were *ballistic*, even with full fuel!

Bob

Hi guys,
Thanks for the info, I'll see what happens, if I end up with this engine I may just go a little crazy :P

Redman flew his with a P200 for a while, but changed it out, it was just too much to throttle off of. It would go every where real fast, it was impressive, I saw it fly a few times, but I agree, it was too much, and took some fun out of it.

I flew mine with Titan's and Rhinos, the Rhino was the most fun I had with it.

Jeremy

Reminds me of the time, back in the early 80's, the USAF did an engine upgrade to the KC-135 tanker. Took out the old TF33-PW-102 engines (rebuilt from the old commercial 707's) and replaced it with the new CFM56 high bypass-ratio turbofan engines. They tried to land one of them at Grand Forks, ND in the winter of '82 and the residual thrust at idle was so great they were still 80+ knots over landing speed. After a couple of tries they just shut down two of them and finally landed. They sent that bird back to Boeing and got the bugs worked out so they could land with all four engines running. That residual thrust gets you every time.

Roy

The resudual thrust on the Oly or P-200 will be greater, no doubt. However, in the case of the Oly, its offset somewhat by the added weight of the engine itself. In fact, Kingcats land *much* better when they have an additional 10 lbs on board - especially in the wind. You can also increase the aileron crow a bit to help counteract the residual thrust.

Bob

I agree with Bob, I don't think the residual thrust would be any issue at all. Crow and/or cant the rudders you will have all of the drag you can stand (and then some).

As for the weight, the plane would weight about 3-7 pounds more depending on fuel load....big deal? don't know, maybe if you are doing stall turns or some other sort of low speed aerobatics...doubt you would be trying to win the club limbo contest with it :-)

Limiting factor, high speed.....aeroelasticity effects (flutter) and G loads, very easy to pull too many G's (ask me how I know)

And use a big elevator servo....big.

Hi Matt,
I have 8411's on the elevators now, should I put 8611's on if I put the bigger thrust in? As for the residual thrust, my PST1300R has 1.3lbs of residual thrust already, it's a bit tough to land with no headwind, even with 1/2" of crow, but it's not to bad.
Been thinking a little about putting it into my Super Bandit too LOL

Just go ahead and put 8711"s, better to have a stronger servo with the power you want to use. Joe C!!

Hello

My friend Zenon was the first to put a P-200 in the KingCat a few years ago ( there is a picture of him in BVMs website ). Bob Violet advised him against it back then but he proceeded anyway. He had carbon mounting plates for the turbine specially made for him. There were no problems at all and he never used crow braking for landing. It came in just like any other KingCat. He used to fly flat out all the time. Eventually he sold it on and the new user damaged it on a bad landing some time later.

You can see the picture here http://www.bvmjets.com/Pages/kingcat_hs.htm he is the third customer below the AMT KingCat picture.

Paul

Hey Jeremy,

I've got a few flights on P-200 KingCat's, and they have their fun and tough times. Landings were a pain until I found the right setting for the flaps, and crow. I ended up with 48 degrees of flaps at full flap with 7 degree's of up aileron for the crow. Made the plane act much like a standard KingCat on final and in the landing pattern. I had one of the first KingCat's and she is still around with over 780 flights on her. She now has a Titan SE on her again. About 450 of those were with the 200; I would have to check the log book to verify. I had the boom upgrades on and that was it. I never pulled a lot of hard G's, I just don't fly that way. I routinely fly way out and around. Fastest we ever saw mine go with a radar gun was 199.254 mph. I'll let you figure out the real number there. I have flown a KingCat for Boeing that has a turned up P-200 on it and is a bit on the porky side; 58 pounds dry, around 67 pounds full. She ran a couple of flights wide open for 7 minutes and we landed on fumes. Eagle tree system read 199.294 mph on the staright aways and 199.288 mph in the turns. Those two flights were the toughest of my life, a bit on the fast side and no fun at all. Felt like I was hanging on the entire time. The big key is to install the engine where you have the weight centered over the mounts, just like a regular engine installation. I had to cut holes in mine and the Boeing model for the starter to do this.

Give me a call if you want to talk.

217-778-7680.

WOW!
My P160SX at 36 pounds of thrust was radar clocked at 199.226MPH :-))

Dave

As you know Dave, that is plenty fast!! Going much over 200 on a daily basis is a bit tough on the body.

Gee, and I thought my li'l boomerang was slow at 199.110 mph! ...but I see I'm right up there with you big guys

Heh.. I remember a couple flights at Prado a few years ago where we saw 199.246 and 199.251 on the internal JetCAT GPS module as well.. I was always shocked at how much slower we all thought the airplane was going due to it's (then) large size.

Honestly I really don't think the basic speed of the airplane puts too much stress on the airframe, but at those speeds it's VERY easy to load the airplane up with more G than intended, and that ultimately causes the problems I think. That's one of the reasons I've never really been a fan of the super hard pulls, snap rolls, and other non-jet like maneuvers I see some people do.

I remember a coupel fo those flights there Dougy. You always treated her right, and today she still lives to fly whenever called upon.

How are you doing?

AND the eyes!

Dave

Hi
I flew my Kingcat with a Simjet Nexus, 36 pounds of thrust. I logged 411 km/h with the Weatronic GPS. Wish i never sold the plane!

Christian

Dave,
Just ask yourself "How much wood can a woodchuck chuck"?

Hey Captain! Hope all is well? Methinks the eyes are the limiting factor, not thrust! :-))

Seeya when the weather warms up...

Dave

Q: How much thrust can a Kingcat take?

A: Far more than David Gladwin would agree is safe!!!!

(Just teasing Dave, HNY 2009)

Regards,

Jim

Check this out. March 2004
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_16...tm.htm#1665389

also interesting
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_18...ey_P200/tm.htm