LGM Graphix

My Feedback: (22)

I'm wondering what the draw is to the nano turbines. I really appreciate the technology of them, I think it's kind of neat, but I guess I wonder where the draw has come from over the past year. I thought the MW44's wouldn't really catch on and they did, I can kind of understand those, they're still big enough to use in the JHH kits from the past and such, but with so few airframes available for the nano engines, and the big cost, what is the draw?

I love my jets, and I love the sound and smell, but I can't understand putting a 3K + engine on a foamy, I can't understand putting it on a plane without gear. Surely people aren't literally looking at these as turbine powered park fliers, those twinjets look like they're still well over 100mph with those Kolibri engines.

I guess I kind of see it as going back to half A flying after you've flown giant scale.

Having said that, I am not bashing them, there is a place for everything, and if these engines were inexpensive I suppose I would understand more, granted, you can put an airframe together for very little more than the cost of the engine, but it just seems like a huge investment to strap to some foam.
Maybe I need to fly one to get it LOL.

Again, not bashing, just wondering, so for those of you who have them, or are planning to get one, what is the reason behind it?

SinCityJets

They are really a lot of fun. I mean really, you can throw it in your trunk, pull it out and toss it in the air.....jet powered foamy (or small composite aircraft).

For me, the engineering marvel behind them is the most amazing part. I know you THINK they are small, but until you hold one in your hand and feel just how light and small they are, it is really hard to comprehend.

They are not for everyone, but for the person that has done and seen it all, they are a nice addition. Yes, they are expensive. Frankly, it actually costs more to produce a small turbine than it does a large one. The tolerances are even closer and more crucial.

Fly one Jeremy, you just might like it. Now quit bashing them!!

Chad

SpiderJets

I have more fun with the planes with a Kolibri (either it be a foamie, an EDF, or a hotliner) than with the big jets. The build, complexity, and most of all the maintenance and care you have to spend on a "big one" is also fun but rather exhausting compared to the "foamies".
Don't be fooled by the number of posts here on RCU about this sudden interest for nano turbines : it is not in proportion whatsoever to the number of pilots actually having one or will be having one.
Most people will eventually still opt for the most common turbine size.

Only negative point I am facing with, with the small turbines : we fly on grass fields and take-off with those tiny wheels is far from evident. Apart from that : I can see that I make double as many flights with the small jets than doing with a big one during an afternoon.

Nicolas.

jason

My Feedback: (1)

One of the reasons I like them is that I like the idea of strapping them to a cheapo foamy. I don't think there’s a valid argument that just because you have an engine that’s costs thousands then you also need an airframe that costs thousands too. I'd prefer to spend say £1500 on a small engine and fit it to £200 worth of airframe than £3000 worth. You can have a lot of fun with them and if you crash them the chances of breaking the engine is way less than anything else. I had a bad hand launch on my JJJ powered funjet and it did 5 cart wheels across the grass at 240k rpm and tore the nose off the funjet. I taped it back on flew it for the rest of the day. Unfortunately that was the only days flying I got out of that engine...Also take the MW44 for instance, I've seen plenty of planes crash with these engines in over the years and the engines always seem to get away with it. It must me down the lower inertia but you pile anything else in and the engine in most cases comes out squashed[&o] It's also just a case of throwing the model in the back of the car with half a gallon of fuel and going flying for the day.

Jason

747drvr

My Feedback: (5)

As Jason said , yes the engine is still expensive but it's the cheapest jet I own . The Kolibri has been extremely reliable and easy to operate . A day's flying done on a splash of fuel is nice . It definitely is a novelty but this is a hobby . It's about our amusement and my 173mph Twinjet amuses me !

Marc

LGM Graphix

My Feedback: (22)

That's cool, I appreciate the answers, maybe one day I'll have the opportunity to fly one, I don't understand the draw to electric ducted fan either haha, at least nano turbines are still turbines, they sound and smell correct!!

Boomerang1

A friend has a Kolibri in a foamie (catapult launched).

While the engine is a little gem and super reliable and the model flys great the nano turbine concept doesn't grab me either.

I think smaller jets are a compromise between economy and convienience versus excitement.

To my mind the Wren 44/P-60 size models offer the better compromise, much like there are lots of great smaller glow powered models, but the most popular size is '40' size for exactly the reason above.

There are quite a few 'cheapie' airframes for the 44 size engines around as well.

Each to his own though, if a Nano turbine suits you go for it. But do yourself a favour & buy a good one! - John.

Doug Cronkhite

My Feedback: (34)

I think I'd be more inclined to build an electric airplane than a micro-turbine airplane personally, but I can see the interest in the small stuff from both a technological standpoint, as well as an ease of transport/operating cost issue.

craigdyer

I am waiting for Mr Lambert to bring out a turboprop version....Baby turbo raven here we come

BRG, Craig.

SinCityJets

He's working on it....