Cermark F16
 

I should be getting my Cermark F16 on Monday I will put a new Wren 54 in here (bought the wren kit to build) I can't see much interest in this jet can any of you direct me to a build thread or will I have to do one on here ?

Dennis

www.densplanes.co.uk

RE: Cermark F16
 

it's a very simple setup even for an ARF so there isn't allot of building. no gear doors, just mount the turbine/radio/pipe/fuel system and fly.

RE: Cermark F16
 

Do a search on Tams f-16 a couple of years ago....lots of info there

RE: Cermark F16
 

I had one with a p60 in it and I found it to be a bit of a slug. The p60 made a 13.5 lbs of thrust. I talked to a guy that put a 54 in one and it was flat out sick (not the good type) in the air! All it could do is get off the gound and not much else. If I was to do it a again I would go with a p-70.

Send that airframe back or get a p-70.

Sorry.

RE: Cermark F16
 

I have the Tams version with an MW-54 in it, and it flies awesome!! Do a search on you tube.....

RE: Cermark F16
 

I had a one of the original Tamjets F-16s with an old kit built Wren MKII in it. In fact, it was the FIRST AMA approved kit-built engine to fly here in the U.S..............Anyway, it was old! The airplane flew fine. It was no a rocket, but it did everything that I wanted it to. Big loops,verticle four points etc. Right up until about this time last year when it went into hold and auggered in on the downwind.[:@] With a P-70, you are going to need the third tank.................

Tailwinds,

John

RE: Cermark F16
 

Something is not right here. A properly running Wren 54 (14.5 lbs thrust) will fly the pants off a P-60 any day. Of three Boomerang Intros in my club the one with the Wren 54 is at least 20 mph faster than the two with P-60's in them. That's what helped me decide to go with Wren. I have two now and am very pleased with the performance.

Joe

RE: Cermark F16
 

can someone post some picks of the front side of the intake please?

RE: Cermark F16
 

Of the F-16, or the Wren ???

RE: Cermark F16
 

I have one with a ram 500 and it flies fine. I have had problems with the air plane in other areas like reinforce the tail and problems with the gear and pipe. I also have a problem with the main tanks that I can not get it to use all of the fuel. Other than that and maybe some other little thing it is good for the price.

RE: Cermark F16
 

My mistake. I was thinking of a wren 44 that I saw in one.

RE: Cermark F16
 

That makes more sense cos if it was a 44 and not a 44 gold that it had in it the 54 should have double the thrust

Dennis

RE: Cermark F16
 

i was speaking about the F-16 cermark.. i was wondering how the intake opening looked compared to the exhaust,, thanks

RE: Cermark F16
 

Flew 2 of them with RAM 500 - awesome plane ! we love them here..

RE: Cermark F16
 

question for you I seem to have trouble picking all the fuel in the mains only when installed in the airplane do you or any body else have any idea why? Out side the airplane pick up is fine when installed I leave about a 1/4 tank in the mains and my uat is going empty. I believe to have check all that I know lines being even, the clunks are fine no air bubbles.

RE: Cermark F16
 

Flew the hell out of mine on an 12 lbs (on a good day) Simjet 1200. It was fast, agile and a breeze to land.

Your clunks seem ti be installed incorrectly. Also, just using the mains is not a lot of fuel. Try installing a Sullivan 16 or larger oz tank right above the inlet behind the cockpit. Drain the mains first.

David

RE: Cermark F16
 

Guys,

Has anyone ever flown the Cermark F-16 on Tailerons rather than elevators and ailerons ?? im thinking about doing this on my new one which is being repainted soon anyway. what do you think ?

RE: Cermark F16
 

Just got my F16 today but didn't get the instructions has anyone got them electronically if so would you e mail them to me at [email protected]

Thanks

Dennis

RE: Cermark F16
 

rcjets12,

Do your clunks reach to just off the tank bottom? If so you could have a split or pin hole in one of your clunk lines. When the tanks are full it will draw fine. When the fuel level gets low enough to expose the split it will draw air instead of fuel. I suggest replacing the clunk lines. Also closely inspect the brass tubing for any splits. Usually the least amount of grief in the long run is to just replace all of the plumbing in the tanks (clunk, lines, tubing, and stopper).

Additionally when installing the tanks I always make sure that the front of the tank is slightly higher than the back. That will insure that in straight and level flight that the clunk is submerged. That's especially critical if you have a long flat tank.

Joe

RE: Cermark F16
 

HOLD THAT THOUGHT! There are notable differences. If the model has ailerons by all means use them.

RE: Cermark F16
 

So anyone got that set of instructions ?

RE: Cermark F16
 

I've had 2 with Wren SS, AWESOME! Light and fast, easy to land. Used felt clunks on all tanks, first tank empties first. Can't go wrong with this plane, the others come out many pounds heavier and don't fly the same.

joe

RE: Cermark F16
 

FalconWings, Can you elaborate ??

RE: Cermark F16
 

Well, I wish I had more experience with tailerons (just two flights yesterday). OK, I madiened an F-16 with tailerons yesterday. During normal flight the model flies just like it would with ailerons, actually the roll rate was pretty damn good.

The difference was noted during a very long slow roll (love to do those). OK, when I rolled inverted and added some down elevator to trim, the roll rate changed somewhat. If you try it to the right the roll rate slows a little, if you roll to the left it increases (when down trim is added). Again, I wish I had more stick time to make any formal conclusions. Other than that, no notable differences. Next weekend I'm trying some more aggressive manuvers such as spins and snaps to see how it behaves.

During high alpha approaches, the tailerons were awesome. Airplane was rock steady.

Let me do some more testing before you lock out the ailerons. :D

David

RE: Cermark F16
 

tailerons work great, they IME/IMO have no disadvantages, on the plus side it's simpler to setup, uses less channels on the radio, less servos, less weight and you've got MUCH better slow speed roll control. David, if your only complaint is the roll issues, use rudder only, every F-16 I've flown does a spectacular long slow roll opposite of the rudder input.