jrf

My Feedback: (551)

Thought you might like to see my new low wing conversion. I used the RCM plans for converting the older, heavier Ultra Stick 1.20, but the differences aren't great. Adding dihedral was the only added chore. The plans are still available at www.rcmmagazine.com and the cowl, canopy and wheel pants come from Stan's fiberglass, specifically for this airplane.

The fiberglass parts add a little weight, and the OS 160 adds a bunch more, but it stll only comes in at 12 pounds and the wing loading is 22.5 oz/sq. ft. so it is a real floater. Of course the 1.60 gives it unlimited vertical.

I'm very pleased with the way it flies. Absolutely the best flying Stick I have flown. The next step will be adding floats.

Jim

jrbmoto

Looks cool Jim! Let me fly it some time!

sean sweeney

My Feedback: (8)

Jim,

What differences have you noted in the way it flies compared to stock? BTW it looks awsome! Much like an experimental homebuilt aircraft.

Thanks

Sean

jrf

My Feedback: (551)

Thanks Sean.

Pros--With the wing on the bottom, it has less "pendulum effect". Rolls are more linear and knife edge is more neutral. With the stab higher than the wing, it doesn't drop the tail at low speeds like a stick does.

Cons--It is heavier by about a pound, but with all that wing area, it is still much more of a floater than the old original Ultra Stick was.

If I had it to do again, I would shorten the nose a couple of inches for better balance with the 160 in it. I had to add 8 oz of lead to the tail.

Jim

sean sweeney

My Feedback: (8)

Jim,

So it flies better and looks better! What a deal. I just had to get mine out again after seeing yours and I will be converting it to a low wing as well. I have a PJS 8000 outrunner on 10s3p LiPos turning an APC 20X10 prop with about 2400 watts that gives it tremendous vertical. (limited only by eyesite)

Sean