dw_crash

My Feedback: (6)

Hello CowboyLifesaver,

Very interesting point. It has a lot of merit from a certain perspective. I agree with the discrimination part. AMA or any other body , that I am aware of, does not test any product, for this hobby, to see if it's safe. There have been dude radios, engines, ARFs etc. over the years. NOBODY banned them or didn't approve them. So you point is correct about JJ.

The part I have trouble with, is the "dry lake beds and really wide open spaces". I, locally, have found that people who participate outside the hobby can cause problems with local, provicincial or federal authorities. A person outside the formal system is not bound by the same rules. And, if an incident happens, outside the system, it makes the papers etc. and causes problems for us all. Therefore, I encourage people to part of the organized sport and 'follow the rules', no matter how disagreeable, for the good of all of us.

If your flying jets, I give you the benefit of the doubt that you are a capable and safe flier. I speak only in general to your thoughts, not specifically.

DW_Crash

causeitflies

What point??

dw_crash

My Feedback: (6)

Causeitflies,

The point he made about discrimination against JetJoe for their early mistakes when it appears that they have rectified them in the last year or so. I have one that was a early version. After being upgraded, it worked fine the last two seasons. If I had stopped after my first experience, I'd have a very bleak view of JetJoe. But, they fix their Oopss, treated me well as a customer, and I have a running engine. I won't debate quality of this versus that...I'll let time tell it for me. I can compare it against my Behotec, Wren and Hawks. Then, I can accurately comment on quality. Till then, all I can say is that all my engines run when I want them to.

DW_Crash

causeitflies

The only people I know of discriminating against JJ is consumers. I never heard of any organization or body banning them or perpetrating any fraud against them...

GSR

My Feedback: (145)

Cowboy is hallucination with another flashback again. The AMA does not “sanction� approve or discriminate between ANY engine manufacturer or another. In the past they did have a approved list of turbines for use in the United States that would be covered by AMA insurance. This program was scrapped long before Joe even thought of buying a set of plans and parts from WREN for the 54 and stealing their intellectual property. Scott

friedclutch

I like that vortec 32. That would be an easy turbine conversion assuming you can get brakes for a plane that size. (I'm sure a quick google would locate some brakes.) A cheap sport jet that looks sweet with a simple configuration. I like the "stars" paint too.

rjbob

My Feedback: (8)

I have had several guitars stolen from me...I refuse to buy a guitar that I believe to have been stolen. No matter how low the price.

Jet Joe technology is flat out stolen. That is why I'll never consider buying a Jet Joe.

Kriptonic69

My Feedback: (1)

I wouldn't feel comfortable giving my money to a theif.......

Gene

i3dm

My Feedback: (51)

I agree. looks like a winner.
Just gotta make sure it can take the loads of jet flight.

Mace

My Feedback: (21)

javascript:void(You pay taxes, don't you?('',''))

MACE

j_rc_heliman

oh boy, here we go again.... Have you ever even compared a JJ to a wren internally? I happen to have a set of wren mw54 plans as well as a JJ-1400 and there are major dimensional differeces as well as construction differences. Sure, ther are a couple parts that are similar dimensionally, but that goes for all turbines of this size range. Crack open a Jetcat, AMT, PST Jet, SimJet, Kolibri, Lambert, TJT, Artes, etc and you are very likely to see a very simalar combustion chamber, diffuser and NVG. I've said it before and i'll say it again, WREN does NOT own any intelectual rights on the micro turbine, in fact if anybody should get such credit it would be Kurt Schreckling, or somebody that pioneered the microturbine.

If the Jetjoe microturbine was more expensive, and was not manufactured in China but instead in Germany, or England; everybody here bashing them would not have any problem at all. There are numerous small gas turbine manufactures out there (as mentioned above), and basically all of them are using the same design with very subtle differences. Micro turbines shouldn't be only for the wealthy and rich, but for anybody that has a passion for the hobby. I commend Jet Joe on their pricing, and I hope that it eventually drives down the cost of other turbine manufactures price gouging their customers, just because of the limited supply monopoly of the industry.

MathewFoxx

I think the real issue that most of us have with Jet Joe is the following:

1: It is a verified piece of crap engine

2: New turbine pilots who come to this site for advise may read the shills from JJ reps and actually end up spending hard earned cash on this junk, and then never get to actually experience the fun of turbine flight

GSR

My Feedback: (145)

Oh boy -yes I have- The 1400 was modified from the 54- The JJ 1200 was an EXACT copy of the MW54 Mk2 - THE PARTS WERE INTERCHANGEABLE. The only exception was either by stupidity or design or cost cutting he left out the bearing preload and that (among many other) were the reasons the first jet joes would not last more than a few runs, if they ran at all. One day WREN may tell the story of the startup of JetJoe, but I doubt it, they have too much class.
You are right WREN does not own the rights to the microturbine-but they do own the rights to the SPECIFIC design to their engine- The WREN design team are the ones who spent thousands of hours designing the internal parts-the diameter, spacing, position of vaporizer tubes etc for the combustion chamber to make it work. So you think it is OK then for Joe to buy a set of plans, a kit from WREN and a few months later the JJ 1200 pops up with an EXACT copy of the internals? If you dont see the moral, ethical and legal problems there that is unfortunate.
The best thing about the multitude of JJ threads on RCU that have come and gone is that it tells me who to never buy or sell to in the marketplace. Scotty

dw_crash

My Feedback: (6)

MatthewFoxx,

Those are harse claims. Can you provide backup? Point out a Shill doing as you say?

"Crap Engine", are you not discounting the posters that have engine that work fine?

Please support your claims before boldly annoucing.

DW_Crash

dw_crash

My Feedback: (6)

I understand that WREN didn't do everything by themselves. They had distributors and modellers assisting and suggesting improvements in their early days. So, the assertion that they did it all themselves may be a little bold.

The truth is probably closer to their engine, as other are, are the result of collaboration, user feedback, 'public' domain learnings and their own creativity. Not a well funded, black budget, R&D project.

DW_Crash

i3dm

My Feedback: (51)

Scotty,

I believe this statement is somewhat unfair.
I have dealt with JJ since im a true believer in cost reduction (without going into this issue too much) and i can tell you that you get what you pay for. it sure isnt a Wren ! but it works. the cost is accordingly.

Anyway, that doesnt make me a dishonest person, as you remember i bought a RAM 500 from you before and we had a great deal and both of us were happy, so your above statement is not fair. just my humble opinion.

Jgwright

I understand that WREN didn't do everything by themselves. They had distributors and modellers assisting and suggesting improvements in their early days. So, the assertion that they did it all themselves may be a little bold.

The truth is probably closer to their engine, as other are, are the result of collaboration, user feedback, 'public' domain learnings and their own creativity. Not a well funded, black budget, R&D project.

DW_Crash

[/quote]

You could not be talking more utter nonsense.

If you really want to know Mike Murphy designed the MW54 which was the first of a new category of engine and was at the time 'pushing the boundaries'. It proved extremely difficult to get running and Mike and I spent several weeks of utter frustration in test after test until finally one day I got it running. Incidentally the initials of MW are Mikes and my intials. Neither of us had any help from anyone and as I had more spare time in the evenings did the bulk of the frustrating tests until we had that eureka moment. There was no 'public domain learnings' that you refer to. It was just lots of hours of hard work by Mike and me. Once we had the engine running it was then possible to think of selling parts, kits and engines as the company was built up. The chamber was not 'copied' from anyone but designed from scratch by Mike.

The JJ 1200 engine was just a poor copy of the plans and 2 kit engines that he bought from Wren, luckily they have had very little understanding of how the engines work and made so little progress since despite copying all their products from other peoples hard work.

John

GSR

My Feedback: (145)

Hi Lior, Sorry for the broad brush-I really did not make my thoughts clear. I do not have anything against people who buy JJ- the market is the market- What I was trying to say ( I just did not take the time to say it correctly) is that the people that REFUSE to see that what JJ did was theft of another persons hard work and profiting from it is morally wrong and as such would make me very wary of dealing with them as their ethics would carry over into our deal. Sorry for the misstatement- Best regards, Scott

dw_crash

My Feedback: (6)

You could not be talking more utter nonsense.

If you really want to know Mike Murphy designed the MW54 which was the first of a new category of engine and was at the time 'pushing the boundaries'. It proved extremely difficult to get running and Mike and I spent several weeks of utter frustration in test after test until finally one day I got it running. Incidentally the initials of MW are Mikes and my intials. Neither of us had any help from anyone and as I had more spare time in the evenings did the bulk of the frustrating tests until we had that eureka moment. There was no 'public domain learnings' that you refer to. It was just lots of hours of hard work by Mike and me. Once we had the engine running it was then possible to think of selling parts, kits and engines as the company was built up. The chamber was not 'copied' from anyone but designed from scratch by Mike.

The JJ 1200 engine was just a poor copy of the plans and 2 kit engines that he bought from Wren, luckily they have had very little understanding of how the engines work and made so little progress since despite copying all their products from other peoples hard work.

John





[/quote]

John,

I concede that Mike and yourself did the specific developement of the 54 mm engine. It drew on learnings from the GTBA and the 66mm engines before it. It also incorporate learnings Gaspar made in ECU developement.

Yes, the 54mm design was WREN, 100%. Then, as I said, you incorporated learnings, from various places, as the designed evolved. Or, another way, the development was not done in a vacuum. Mike and yourself were aware of the work and progress of other trying to develope engines of their own. The 'industry' learned from each others success' and failures.

I give Mike and you full credit for having the initiative to develope a commercially successful design. I own one and it is a good engine.

DW_Crash

j_rc_heliman

I understand that the early jj-1200 did have problems, I infact had one of the first of the production engines joe produced. It indeed had accelleration, ramping and flameout problems. With subsequent feedback, joe corrected the engine and sent out all new replacement parts for FREE to update my engine to a jj-1400, which after 20 solid hours of running still runs exceptionally. I think Jet joe has been great with customer feedback to produce an affordable engine which runs just as well as a Wren. I didnt mean to get everybodys temper Im sure if you took a good look at other companies out there, you would find the exact same thing going on with just minor variations on the same basic design. If Wren is so mad about a company reproducing "their so called design" then they should have obtained the proper patents, or not sold the plans. In my opinion selling the plans of the MW54, is asking for trouble for a company to come along and mass produce the turbine at a cost savings.

HeliTB

After reading all this, LittlePiston di you get your JJJ yet? I'm not a hater or basher, just another enthusiast curious about this engine.

F106A

My Feedback: (2)

"which after 20 solid hours of running still runs exceptionally"

How many of those hours were on a bench and how many in the air?

Jon

Gordon Mc

My Feedback: (11)

Well, there we have it – directly from the horse's mouth.

(As opposed to 'from the other end', which is where much of pro-JJ spiel seems to have come from in the past.)

Gordon

Jgwright

Just to complete the picture the MW54 design was a development of Mikes engine from the first 2 shaft turbine helicopter engine. This was a 60mm engine, yet another first. It was not based on a 66 engine and was an original design of Mikes. Mike has always been an innovator and has striven to arrive at his own solution and not copy the work of others.

John

jason

My Feedback: (1)

And I can confirm this. About 6 years ago I bought a new on the market engine from a company other than Wren. Being a little inquisitive, the first thing I did was strip the engine to see how things were done. As it happened I was due to go to Wren later that week and I asked Mike if he would like to have a look inside this new offering his competitor. He refused outright saying it could influence the way he thinks and is not at all interested in how others are doing it.
Jason