Cedar Hobbies Phoenix with 2 OS .65LA engines, 12-6 APC props.

Good flying twin. Nice straight take off. Very stable. Excellent handling. No bad habits. Good landing.

Only 1 flight as the connector to the throttle arm came off when I reduced to idle as I turned final. The carb rolled shut, killing the engine. I did not realize the engine had died until I saw it just before I touched down.

The LA .65s are good power. They ran well in flight until the connector came off. A pair of .91s would be better, but Flaps has my Saito .91s in a scale plane.

Next weekend I'll wring it out.

Here she is on final and touching town.

Good work Ed! Please keep us posted as you get some time on those sticks!

Ernie

I flew the Phoenix some more yesterday after we did some minor work on it. I changed to some larger main gear wheels so the plane sits level. And Flaps fixed the connector on the right engine throttle arm. In flight, the Phoenix looks great. Retracts would make it look better, but it still looks very good.

A couple of guys who didn't know the Tigercat has a high wing, thought it was one in civilial colors. In Navy blue with US national stars, it would fool a lot of people.

The OS LA .65s were singing, right together, and pulling well. After seeing the .40LA, many people discount the .65LA. Don't because it's as powerful as many ball bearing .61s, including the OS .61FX. Ask someone who owns both.

-The plane will do nice big loops easily. Plenty of power from the .65s. You would need .91s for extended vertical.
-Rolls on high rate are good, but slow on low rate. I need to seal the gaps and put in all the throw the ailerons will take.
-Inverted flight is good. Does require a good bit of down.
-Multiple rolls are easy, just full aileron and hang on.
-Cuban-8s remind me of the Dual Ace. The Phoenix, like the Dual Ace, looks really good performing a Cuban-8.
-Outsides are good, but I only did a couple.
-Landings are just great. Not even a hint of a tip stall. Comes in on the mains easily.

The elevator is fairly sensitive and the ailerons aren't so I am still working out the throws and expos to get them together. A lot of this is personal preference. I generally like a very high roll rate at full stick, but use a lot of expo. I don't mind a sensitive elevator, but it does make corrections in maneuvers look jumpy so I have been putting in a good bit of elevator expo. I usually takes me several flights to get a plane set just right.

ED
It is a really a very beautiful airplane and looks so nice in the air and on the ground, did it build easy, i have been flying for several years but not a great builder but i am improving, rollie

Rollie,

There's not much to do since it's an ARF. You need to glue the tail and nacelles on and install the engines and radio.

The wings are on tubes. The nacelles are bolted on to blind nuts pre-installed in the wing first. You mark the covering to cut away, remove the nacelles and cut the covering. Then you epoxy them in place, also using the bolts and screws at the rear tip. It's not a big project.

One thing I did is to replace the 5mm socket head bolts that hold the wing on with hex head bolts from Ace. Then I can use a ratchet box wrench. There isn't room for a 1/4" drive ratchet, but the box ratchet works great.

ED
Now i know what i will ask santa for, rollie

Ed,
As you know, I built mine with ST 45's just to see if it would work and it does. I am running 12X4's for more thrust. Take off is longer than I usually go for, but..IT WILL FLY and climb GENTLY on one engine. We wanted some pictures of it in flight, so naturally one engine dies..what the heck, let's try to see if we can keep it in the air. Down for a low pass and SLOWLY up and turn into the running engine. Level and sustained flight was accomplished with a good dose of rudder. FUN at such low power settings. No, but would it fly like that yes,,,,,no,,I am NOT going to try a single engine take off,,,not with 45's. Yes, it will roll single engine..Loops..Just call me Wuss!!!
Now with two engines..Take off is longer, as I said, than more power, but loops are flawless...Ok Ok as I can do. Rolls even. Horizontal figure 8's no problem..WITH rudder to engine mix knife edge will hold, but barely. Have not tried the spins yet. Fligth speed as you can imagine with 12x4's is not buring up the sky, but it does have pulling power.
My two cents..go with 60's, but if you have a couple of strong 40's or worn 45's it will fly rather well.

I have learned to use expo on my elevator and i use 35% what a difference in landing, no more up and down it just comes in so nice and i get to use my stick a little without being touchy, i use it on all of my planes even my lt-25 i was doing touch and goes the other day on a grass field while others were wondering how i set it down so easy every time, a little expo goes a long way, it has sure helped me to improve my landings, i have been flying for several years and i have made every mistake a beginner makes and it seems that every time i go to the field i am still learning something new and since i have been comming to rc universe i have learned even so much more from the pilots that have alot of experience, listen to them and learn, rollie

Great job Ed!
Not sure if this question has been raised, but could the Phoenix be fitted with retracts?
Thanks for your help, and I am a faithfull reader of your column in RCreport.

Take care,
Kerry

Hi Kmac
My two cents on retracts is yes. The spruce spare for the wing gear runs along the wing. Open the wing along side of this spar and add a second to mount the gear that would fold outward.
The nose area is open back to the wing root area, so folding like a P-38 should work fine.
Twinman

Based on what I've read here, I had to have one - just ordered it this morning. I have three possibilities for power - OS 60 FPs, OS 61 SFs, or Saito 91s. What do you recommend?

Hi Trent
I was thinking about two OS-55ax engines or two OS-60fx probably i will go with the 60fx, it states not to go any higher then a 60 sized engine or i would of gone with a os-90 two stroke, with a little suort i think that it would handle the 90 size engine, i have not checked the weight out yet but i bet there isnt much of a difference and you can always put the battery in the back near the tail, i have a jr sport 2700 size battery in my c-160, it is in the front but is a heavy battery and could go in the back if need be. rollie

The basic airplane, the fuselage and wing, were designed for up to a pair 90 two stroke engines. I have not seen the nacelles Cedar Hobbies has made for the plane, they would be the parts to worry about.

Bill.

Bill, where did you get your phoenix and would they not be the same plane, at cedar hobbies it stated not to use over 60 size engine
's but would'nt i really love to put a pair of 90's onto that plane and not for the speed but for the easy power the engines carrie, i like the little things like a nice loop but there isnt anything worst then to do a loop and not to have the power to make it rounded and over the top, what should i look for to see if it will hold a 90 sized engine, thanks so much for all of your help, rollie

After a quick check with Cedar, I'm leaning toward the saito 91s.

Rollie:

A few years ago EHFleming and I produced the Super Duellist 2/60 Mk II as a kit for 60-90 two stroke engines. The Phoenix is the same plane with the nacelles and empennage changed. This is how I know about the main structure

I do not have the Phoenix version, a flying buddy here does though. Reinforcing the firewalls should take care of any worries – pin them to the nacelle sides and add some tri-stock.

Bill.

Bill
I will do that and i just keep on reading and learning from you guys and i pay attention to what you guys say, if one listens to builders that know what there talking about you can pick up and learn so much and trust me bill i read and i listen to what all you guys have to say, for me building a big stick is so easy but when you get into a cap 232 or the new giles it is so nice that it scares me to try things on my own but i am learning and getting so much infomation just from you guys talking about different things, thanks alot bill and to all of the other great builders that have something to offer guy's like myslef, i will surely send you guys some pictures of how well it goes and a final picture of the finished product, my friend bought the 40 size giles 202 and the first landing one of his landing gear broke, he put the most beautiful pair of landing gear onto that plane he is just one of them guys that is really good at what he does and building is one of the nice things that he does i like to just watch him and i learn alot that way also, to me to watch a good builder build a plane or repair it is just so special to some one like me that is just a sport flyer but loves the hobby, when i lived in maine where i grew up i owned a piper colt 108 and a piper cherokee 140 and i have alot of time in the air but rc is not very popular there and it is something i have always wanted to do, i had no idea how far they have come with this sport and in the several years i have been flying the compatition is great between the companys and the planes just keep on getting so much better, thanks guys, rollie

There is plenty of prop clearance for an 18" prop on the Phoenix. The problem is gear length. You will need to make longer gear. I am running 12-6s on the OSs and in a cross wind with a wing low landing, I scraped the tip of the upwind prop. You'll just need to bend some 3/16 wire.

I had planned on using Saito .91s in mine, but my flying buddy, Flaps Laffert, has them in a not yet flown R4Q (Marine C-119) model of a plane that he flew in the Marine Reserves in the late 1940s & 1950s.

A point of interest:

Bill Robison and I are in the same club. I pass his place on the way to the field. We rarely see each other or fly together since I wake up at 5AM (sometimes I sleep in till 6), pick Flaps up (he's 84) and head to the field, while Bill flies late in the afternoon. Bill is one of those late night people and I crash at 9PM. We do talk on the phone.

I hate to go here, but anybody jump in on this. Given the tail gets assembled and the nacelles could be cowled in, just maybe could this guy be made to resemble a duellist? The vertcal stab reminds me of an army air corps experimental ship that didn't make it. I just want to sleek the ship up without negatively changing the flight charactistics. Open firewalls only look good on Stiks. Anyway go ahead, let me have it.

Roary:

This picture shows the prototype Phoenix on the left, and the Super Duellist 2/60 Mk II built by RCU member Blade47 on the right. B47 altered the shape of the nose a little bit, as drawn it would have been like the nose shown on the Phoenix.

The structure of these two planes is identical. If you build your nacelles and empennage to match, it will not merely look like the Super Duellist 2/60 Mk II, it will be one.

Bill.

The biggest reason I ask about this, is because while I do have a few Duallists in kit form(not to mention a pile of other kits and plans) the arf bug has something of a narcotic effect on my building; it's too easy to get one of these things ready in two nights versus the weeks or months for a kit.

Bill
What size fuel tanks do the phoenix have on them, rollie

Rollie:

I really don't know. Perhaps Ed Moorman will chime in again.

Bill.

As I recall, the stock ARF fuel tanks are 8 ounce. The instructions mention some optional tanks by Graupner and I ordered them from Hobby Lobby. They have a double chin (as opposed to the single chin on DuBro & Hayes) and fit perfectly, getting 14 ounces in the same space.