picard1

My Feedback: (2)

CRJDriver,

Looks fantastic!!! Did you use paint ? What engine did you go with?

CRJDriver

My Feedback: (57)

The finish is all monokote. The only painted parts are the cowling, canopy, gear doors. etc. It is powered with a Zenoah G45. IMHO, a perfect match. I swing a Xoar 20x10 prop - more than enough power.

tony-howard

My Feedback: (224)

Looking really good CRJ - also kudo's for using a correctly sized pilot. That really helps the overall appearance.

Ron101

My Feedback: (22)

Look really nice.. still working on mine. great job

Not to be picky, but Tony that isn't the right size pilot. The last one I built I went with the same pilot. It's 1/6 scale.. the plane is 1/5 scale.
It always bothered me and look to small this time I'm going to use 1/5

Ron

CRJDriver

My Feedback: (57)

Thanks for your comments both Ron and Tony. Actually, the pilot is really close to the scale size. Our Mustangs are actually 1/5.6 scale. Close enought to 1/6 for me. Cheers,
Chris

gtobil

Not to be really really picky but I actually think it is 1/5.5 scale! Ijust finished my ARC. Ihave not flown it yet. That will be a nail biter. DLE 55, fiber glass. Iwould like to add a scale exhaust and some other details as money permits.

tony-howard

My Feedback: (224)

Hey I really didn't mean to start an argument! But maybe a discussion would be interesting. As regards the scale I'd suggest that the scale depends on what you use to calculate the scale. I maintain a database of the wingspan, wing area, fuselage length (long with other data I need for my kits) for all the Mustang kits I'm aware of that are over 40 sized.

None of them listed have all three dimensions of equal scale compared to the full scale Mustang. Often the deviation is quite large.

The most common deviation is to increase the span and/or wing area as compared to the fuselage scale - often by quite a bit. The reason for this is obviously to improve the flight performance. Who can argue with that?

I believe sport scale is first and formost a matter of overall presentation. Does it look right? Does it have the right outlines and contours? The right details? I've collected alot of Mustang documentation but when I see a picture of a Mustang model the first thing compare it with is a poster picture hanging on my office wall. That's what I tend to use as reference, not the published scale of the model or the pilot figure. (Note that both pilots are wearing hard helmets which makes their heads look larger than if they were wearing leather or cloth helmets.)

In the end it's what looks good to you.

CRJDriver

My Feedback: (57)

Well said Tony! I like your print/painting BTW. Where did you find it?

Chris

gtobil

Hey, Iwas just joking not trying to start anything. I think depending on which particular measurment used, the scale is smaller than 1/5th and larger than 1/6th.Using wing span for instance by my calculationsthe scale wouldbe about 1/5.3. I actually like the look of a larger pilot although in the real plane the pilot looks pretty small in picutures Isee. I realize this plane is more sport scale than actual scale. When Ifirst got into this many months ago I didn't see any of the little details. Now I am seeing more and more.
Iwould like to do another plane and add more scale details such as:
correct shape/size spinner, scale exhaust, scale cowl with the proper shape, elevator placement, antenna, lights, wheels, really nicely done and accurate panel lines, mildweatheringand I'm sure I will think of more. But, when I stand back 6 feet and look at the plane I think it looks great.

Ihave used this forum quite a bit and am glad to see it still going.

tony-howard

My Feedback: (224)

I got it a few years ago as a promotion for a warbird magazine subscription. I don't recall which one. It's too bad - it's about 24 X 36 inches and the quick shot I took of it doesn't do it justice.

Ron101

My Feedback: (22)

Hey Chris.. didn't want you to think I was being a jerk because your mustang looks really nice my friend. I'm so close to done with a TF P-47 then it's back to my half finished GS TF P-51..
I built one a few years back with a DA-50 and a Dynamic Balsa cockpit and to me the 1/6 pilot just didn't look right. I bought a 1/5 scale aces of iron pilot and a 1/5 valley full body and will scab them together to make a 1/5... I tried this on my smaller 60 sized TF P-47 and the results were pretty good. I'll take more time on the next one. If it doen't work out I have a shelf full of the 1/6 dragon pilots I collect them and have one of each on the american WWII and some modern fighter pilots... there hard to beat.. very nicely made.

I'll attach my GS TF P-51 and cockpit so you can see what I mean about looking small ..also a Pic of my tester frankinsten pilot for the TF P-47 (60 sized)
The dynamic balsa cockpit does have you cut the seat area back to open it up and that could be what made mine look even smaller... I sat my pilot really high to make him look bigger also

CRJDriver

My Feedback: (57)

Looks great Ron, keep up the great work!

mihelone

Very nice job.
one question: how have you fixed the gear doors?
Happy flying!!!!!!

CRJDriver

My Feedback: (57)

I simply went with the instructions for the kit.  They have held strong for 4 years now.  I used 30 minute epoxy mixed with a little less hardener to keep it from becoming brittle.  The doors themselves are screwed into the basswood posts.  Very easy to do.

mihelone

Thanks a lot, I asked because I want to put them on and wonder how to do it apart from the way described in the manual...

andernamen

My Feedback: (3)

....

whatiwork4

My Feedback: (51)

Hi,
I just obtained an older arf kit with the plywood laminated joiner and have seen where it has been replaced with a hardwood joiner.have there been any issues/failures with the earlier joiner?

mihelone

Here is one photo of me and my baby from last Sunday...

FBaity

My Feedback: (2)

This thread continues to be a wealth of good information on the GS Top Flight P-51. I assembled mine several years ago from a ARF kit and this thread was of great assistance to me in component selection, assembly hints, tips etc. All of the hassles of the ARF, IE, the covering, wing fillets, landing gear structure, procuring scale components, all proved to be well worth the effort. I was advised to be ready with considerable right rudder on my first take off which was sage advise. I have come to love flying this aircraft. The Top Flite 84" GS P-51 with ample power, once off the ground, flies like a big pattern plane. As I said be ready with right rudder on take off, add the power slowly letting the tail come up and let the aircraft run on the mains until it wants to fly. I don't use flaps on take off but do use half flaps on landing. Furthermore, I was pleasantly surprised in my early flights to learn that the aircraft doesn't pitch up or down with flap, gear extension and elevator control is good even down near stall at high angles of attack providing your CG is correct . The loops, point rolls, slow rolls etc are beautiful. Landing requires advanced skills and some experience with flaps and airspeed management will prevent landing gear damage.

Frank Baity
AMA 38026

mihelone

I went for flying today with the Stang and faced something that I cannot explain. This had also happened in the first two flights one month ago but today after a whole afternoon of flying I came to some conclusions.
First of all I fly off tarmac which is important from the point that the model rolls after landing for much longer than landing on grass.
After every touch and go the model tracks straight and when I apply throttle to take off I also apply right rudder to track straight and everything is ok. I have to say that there was no crosswind at all.
When I want to make a full stop landing, approaching with full flaps, the model touches down and tracks initially on a straight line. After the speed is reduced from a certain point, with the tail wheel still on the air, the plane begins to turn to the left. I tried to correct with right rudder or raising the flaps so that the tailwheel touches down and have better steering but the result is always the same: the model steers to the left bouncing resulting to a bent strut. I use Robart retracts.
Any ideas? I have changed the wheels toe in, landed with minimum airspeed but nothing.... Any help on this??? Has anybody experienced something similar?

Spychalla Aircraft

My Feedback: (34)

Mihelone,

I have done the same as you with the TF P-51 on blacktop several times. We call it a "Ground Loop". Bent a strut once and ripped a gear through the top of the wing another time. I cannot say that I have the answer but I will give you some ideas.

Two thoughts. 1) You have set the wheels toe-in. Great. But are you sure they are aligned accurately relative to the tail? They may be toe-in relative to each other or to the wing, but you should check them accurately to the fuse. You may find that your wing is installed slighly off or that you have the RH gear straight and the LH gear too much toe. 2) Check the friction and lubrication on your tire axles. Does each wheel spin freely the same or is that left wheel sticking?

Leo

eugene

In order for a plane to land, it must be out of flying speed.....just a suggestion, but use full flaps and hold it off till it's totally out of flying speed and settles on it's own in the three point attitude.... The tail draggers have always had this bug, from the Piper Cub on up, and training stressed the " three point landing"

mihelone

Dear Leo,
thanks for your reply.
The wheels are from Sierra and both spin the same. I'll check your first idea since this seems to me more likely to be happening.
any options to replace a bent strut apart from Robart?

FBaity

My Feedback: (2)

mihelone.

I believe Leo's post has merit and should be investigated by measuring from the fuselage center line to each wheel's longitudinal center line. That being said, it seems apparent that aerodynamically your P-51 tracks good from your description of the touch and go directional control. Considering the aerodynamic tracking is true, you measure the toe in to be correct ,I would suggest more aggressive rudder deflection(increased rudder travel) and aggressive application of rudder until the tail wheel has authority. I personally fly off of grass and touch down with 1/2 to full flaps in a nose high attitude, however I can imagine your challenge when landing on a smooth hard surface. I know from full size aircraft experience that many tail wheel aircraft lose rudder efficiency, as airflow diminishes over the rudder, before tail wheel control is established. In this case in a full size aircraft you can use differential braking to control heading until the tail wheel is effective, of course we don't have this control feature in most of our RC aircraft. The Top Flite GS P-51 has a small rudder.........I suppose it is somewhat scale but never the less small as 84" RC aircraft go.

mihelone

Dear Fbaity,
I 'll look into the toe in matter and keep all of you informed...as far as it concerns the more aggresive rudder application I have also tried it resulting to a ground loop as described above and a bent strut. From an answer I got from Darrell (Sierra Ginant retracts) Robart struts are too thin to do the job for such a heavy model with so long struts. What matters is that I cannot find another replacement for the bent strut...