koolhand11

For those of you who have posted this or asked this question I'm sorry for beating a dead horse...For those of you who dont mind giving me your opinion I appreciate it greatly...Which model in your opinion do you believe to be the best of the 2 KMP with 86" ws or the VQ with 83?

Thanks

kochj

I would go with the one the has the shift idle speed knob installed. That is most difficult thing to due first!

Good luck

twinman

My Feedback: (2)

Depends upon what you are after. The KMP is MUCH less scale, but much less expensive. VQ is MUCH more scale, with landing gear doors, actual working flowler flaps,,and yes, costs more. KMP is mostly composite, the VQ is built up for the most part.
KMP early on had an ususual elevator arrangement useing one servo from the center boom and up to 4 degrees of positive incidence in the elevator,,,I do believe these issues have been solved.
NEITHER is a beginner twin trainer. I have owned five P-38's..three still alive, but it IS NOT a trainer. High wing loading, wide spaced engines, small rudders, all combine for a night mare in engine out. Night mare is described as an almost instant snap roll.
I run two gyros in mine and now the twin sync is available...GOOD MOVE!
Good Luck,
Twinman

koolhand11

twinman thanks for the response...I'm gonna put 2 gassers in it to help with the engine out problem, not that its a guarenteed fix but it will help with the reliablity...Ive flown a few planes with high wing loading and am used to the flying them in instead of floating em in like my Ucando a windy day...

twinman

My Feedback: (2)

At the extreme risk of getting on a soap box..Gaser's are more reliable, BUT, I would still consider using TWO HELPERS, the vertical test. Three years ago a guy had a Brand New Yellow Aircraft P-38 and G-38's..Lost an engine on FIRST FLIGHT on rotation. You do not want to see the result.
When you get whatever going, send pictures here on RCU and RC Warbirds...Not enough of us crazy enough to do P-38's. We should show off our excentricity!!
Good Luck,
Twinman

koolhand11

LOL thanks twin and i will, Im debating between g20s or the evolution mvvs 26gt whatever there called now. Friend of mine is building the f7f and he wants someone to fly twins with so i guess im the sap or dupe...

kram-RCU

koolhand:

My buddy RV Man and I wrote up a long RCU thread two years ago about the VQ vs the KMP. It may be a little out of date now if the KMP stab incidence problem has been fixed, but there's a wealth of opinion and pictures in that thread.

Everything Twinman says is true. I built the VQ (a total of four of them now), so I have a lot of brand loyalty. I think they look very authentic and fly very nicely. Once you get the elevator-flap mix dialed in, they are the sweetest P-38 to land you will ever see. And they are very sleek-and-mean fast in the air with all the appendages tucked in.

RV Man is loyal to the KMP. It was a much cheaper build for him. The KMP handles much "lighter" than the VQ overall...doesn't really tuck and cut and run like the VQ, and he flew it pretty hard for four seasons before retiring it in one piece (pretty rare honor for a P-38!). He has another one ready to go this spring.

In addition to Twinman's great advice about the engines, I'd like to offer some about the gear. Both of us found the kit gear, even special Spring-Airs, insufficient for flying the VQ or the KMP off a smooth grass field. Adding the Robart 630/639 combo costs a little over $300 more, but made a HUGE difference in terms of being able to fly them every weekend instead of constantly messing with the gear. Some might say it has to do with the quality of my landings rather than the gear, which I DENY.

mt

kram-RCU

Oh, and did I forget to mention?:

These planes are a BLAST to fly!! A lot more challenging than your average weekend doodle-bug, but people will stop and gawk when you fly, and your heart rate will take a while to settle after each flight.

Do It!!

mt

koolhand11

awesome kram thank you...I really enjoy the look of the gear doors, to me its just something else that sets you apart from others besides flying warbirds....Im leaning towards the evolution/mvvs 26s just becuase they are tall with the carb in front...Less cowl to cut helps keep the look better...Right now im flying the hangar 9 1.50 p-47 with a bme 50 , lol ya i know not enough power up front right...I recoverd it in OD green painted the cowl and marked it up in 78th fighter group, 82nd fighter squadron...They flew out of duxford during the war...It was the same fighter group that the Big Beautiful Doll P-51 flew with, but oblivously the p-47 flew first then transitioned to the Stang...

Me and a friend have to done up like this mine is MX-X his i believe is Mx-M both have the correct serial number on the tail and all...I dont know if im gonna go down that same line of recovering it and getting vinyls done...I might I have to get it here first...Im gonna look into the gear issue, but i fly from an asphalt runway so the only issue im gonna have is setting her down nice and gentle...

nemesis4u

My Feedback: (77)

koolhand11,

Twinman, Kram-RCU and all others are right on the money... THE P-38 is the most challenging P-38 to fly... BUT darn GORGEOUS...
I think Gassers are great....Not necessary but great... Personally if you are going with gassers may want to consider the ultracompact BME G.90 Gassers... I had one and bench ran it ... I almost bought a 2nd one to mount in the VQ P-38.. But I opted to stay with the simple 4 Stroke GLOW..... and I will be running onboard glow/ engine Sync by twinsync.... Otherwise keep it simple!!


here are those links.....
Please take time to watch the VQ fowler flap videos:
http://www.vqwarbirds.com/videogallery.html

here is more great info on the VQ P-38!!
http://www.rcwarbirds.com/morrisp38page1.htm
Here is KRAM-RCU's VQ vs KMP duel..... thanks mark for your great assemblies and reports!!!!
VQ P-38 vs KMP P-38:
http://www.rcwarbirds.com/P38dual.htm

online assembly of the VQ P-38! THanks Samparfitt for your online assembly..... great stuff....
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_901790/tm.htm

CHEERS!!! and thanks to all you great modelers who have assembled and flown and contributed to these great reviews and threads!!

-KEEP THEM FLYING!!!!!!!!!!

=TOMAS
VQ WARBIRDS/ KMP / RCV ENGINE DEALER
http://www.vqwarbirds.com/aircraft.html
[email protected]

koolhand11

Thanks nemisis awesome info

nemesis4u

My Feedback: (77)

JUST FYI.... You guys and gals almost forgot to wish VQ WARBIRDS a Happy Anniversary...
No worries... WARBIRDS DON'T want any flowers..
But I will say this....
Better check out the VQ WARBIRDS Main page and check out the ANNIVERSARY Specials on the models....
www.vqwarbirds.com

Only Valid until May 31, 2007... special unique savings on each model... best browse all the Warbirds....

WE ALSO CARRY KONDOR MODEL PRODUCTS "KMP" AND RCV ENGINES!!

Happy Landings all the way!!! [sm=thumbup.gif]


-TOMAS
www.vqwarbirds.com
[email protected]

Spitster

I have an unfinished VQ and I'm ready to take it, engines and shindin retracts to the dump. If the wood were any drier it would just turn to powder when you tried to drill it. Maybe I'll assemble it enough to take it to the rifle range and see what a 338 lapua can do to it. It is a total waste of money. Ed

kram-RCU

Crash Dummy 12:

I can relate a little to your complaints. I built one VQ-38, now fly two more that I had built for me by friends, so I have a refined palate as to what their problems and attributes are. I think the wood was dry and brittle for some applications, in fact we reinforced the servo screw holes for every servo with a little plate of 1/8" ply and used my favorite 2-56 Nyrod reinforcers for a lot of the screw point attachments. Also, I think the only way to go with retracts is the Robart 630/639L set with 7/16" struts.

All that said, however, it speaks volumes that I own and fly the heck out of 3 of them. I love the way they look and fly and I even have the landings dialed in to where it's (I hate to say this) almost easy, which is remarkable for a 38. I put O.S. 61 2strokes on two of them, .71 FS's on the other. The only one I crashed was due to pilot stupidity (staying up too long for a squadron flight and running out of gas).

For a live video, go to www.youtube.com and search for mark taylor p-38. That plane, their green version, has more than 50 flights on it THIS SUMMER.

I cannot vouch for the KMP-38. My buddy Rich built his second one last winter, fought problems with the stab incidence and overweight and lateral instability and weak gear and finally gave up on it last month


mt

Glacier Girl

My Feedback: (4)

Ditto what Twinman, Kram, and Tomas have said. And if you do go with the VQ get it from Tomas, you won't find a better supplier out there. He's gone more then overboard for me.

I'm in the midst of building mine now. And me being me, mine will be electric.

CD, if you are going to trash it, keep the motors, I'll take it, I'll even pay the shipping if you're going to get rid of it.

Rv man

Go with the VQ, You'll be alot happier, Don't even think about KMP, I had nothing but headaches with their P-38s.

Rich

flyboy12

My Feedback: (57)

Hey guys, I have been flying Warbirds for about 4 1/2 years now.Mostly P-51,s and P-40,s and most recently a Corsair and some areobatics.
I have been looking at getting a P-38 and I was just wondering just how much expertised do you need to fly the P-38? Thanks flyboy12

kram-RCU

flyboy12:

I hate to be the first to chime in, but....

P-38's are (all rolled into one) the most exciting and the most dangerous of all warbirds to fly.

Probably bad luck for me to say it, but if both engines are working and the landing gear is strong and you keep the landing speed high enough, they're not that hard to fly! I would rate other warbirds, esp. the Corsair, as trickier to land.

Most of the sad stories you hear about P-38 crashes have something to do with engine-out. Sometimes the timeline between engine-out and pick-up-the-pieces is only a few seconds and if you aren't fortunate enough to have a video, you won't have time to remember what happened.

It seems easy: all you have to do to keep them flying is keep them in perfect running condition and allow for high landing speed and steep glide angle.

Well, it's not that easy. Most decent scale models have 13-14 servos, 2 engines, 2 fuel systems, spindly, unforgiving landing gear and a host of other things that can malfunction. Even minor malfunctions can have bad consequences, since a P-38 NOT in perfect working order can quickly become very difficult or impossible to fly. Likewise, since they are so complex, they take longer to build and fix, they are expensive to replace. Put that all together and it can mean a lot of time and expense to keep a P-38 flying. I think that's why you don't see them very often at shows, NOT because they are particularly hard to fly. P-38 nuts like Twinman and me will admit in private conversations to have owned several, lost some and expect to lose more.

But I think that's part of the thrill of flying them.

Example in Point: My favorite 38 this summer was a little VQ with proven O.S. 61's that I put more than forty flights on this summer. It almost didn't make it to summer, though. My third flight of spring, one of the engines lagged and it failed to rotate....went into the young corn at the end of the runway and broke the nose. I was really mad! Turned out it was a really good thing. The nose was fixed nicely with one night of inventive fiberglass work and after what seemed like hours of engine and fuel system testing, I discovered the cause of the intermittent engine lagging: a little brass shaving the size of a baby's eyelash trapped in one of my re-fueling valves. I've grown accustomed to looking for such things, but it still stunned me to think such a tiny thing could have downed my 38 if it happened in the air instead of on the runway.

Good Luck! They're addictive!

mt

tofly

My Feedback: (2)

I quess I will chime in I have KMP it is a brick but having said that have had engine out on climb out was able to land just fine.Ipersonally didn't see were it was that much of a handful maybe just lucky either way they are fun to fly and look great in the air.

jditton

Time for another vote for the KMP (ESM in Oz). I have a version2, and yes I had the horiz stab problem, and still have the landing gear issue to cover yet. Mine flys with 2 OS46AX's, at just 7kg performs well.
I've made a new nose gear driven by a retract servo, and am in the process of making new mains. This will shift the wheel location fwd to a more scale position and reduce the load on the nose wheel. And make takeoff easier, and the landing less "positive" on the nosewheel.............. I'll also make the wheels retract fully.

Without seing a VQ I'm quite prepared to believe it has positive points over the KMP, but the value for the for the kMP was/is good for me.

Cheers
JD

flyboy12

My Feedback: (57)

Thanks Kram and you other guys. Sorry it took som long to get back to this, I finally got a KMP 38 at a steel. I plan on putting 2 saito 82 strokers in it with on board glow and run 2 rec, on it. I had a near fatal stunt with my corsair but brought her in safly. I had HUPA (head up pilots butt) . thanks again for the info. If you got more let me know. Thanks flyboy12

Munk Dog

I have a KMP P-38 ARF, new in the box, with Robart retracts, if any one is intrested.