RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

Someone posted pics back in the thread that I can't find now of what appeared to be a smoke oil connection drilled into the Toc 53 muffler just after the exhaust opening. I think it also showed the tank(s) installed. Anyone remeber where that was and can the author comment on how well did it work? I go for smoke and would like to build it in from the start when mine shows up. I'm just waiting for the next shipment.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

That may have been in the thread for the 53cc engine. I think it may have been this page. http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_55...13/key_/tm.htm

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

I am thinking of getting this plane . However instead of buying a new engine I was wondering whether you folks think that I could use my Fuji 64EI ? It is definitely heavier than any of the current crop of 50 cc engines. It weighs 3.8 lbs bare engine and 5.1 lbs incl muffler, ignition , prop flange and bolt. tks

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

If you mount the rudder servo in the tail your Fuji would work just fine. There should be a cut out already in place for just such a purpose.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

Would the increased wing loading due to the heavier Fuji engine make the plane more difficult to handle ? tks

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

I suspect not; I have been running a 3mm TOC 53 Sukhoi that weighs in at 19 lbs (2 receiverbatteries and a canister set up) and she flies soooo smoothly through stalls that it is a joy to land. I am not much of a 3D type but the airplane handles manuevers at that weight very nicely.

I have seen a few posts that inidicate the need for reinforcement to the landing gear to keep them from straining the airframe structure; depending what your final all-up weight turns out to be, the loading on the landing gear and/or associated fuselage structure may be a concern.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

Here's my take on the bigger engine - having flown the WH Edge 540 with a seasoned G-62 extensively: IMAC all day, perfect. 3-D OK (but I'm no 3D expert). Get some heavier landing gear, or beef up the factory stuff. Use a single, strong rudder servo in the tail. It flew best on a Vess 23A prop FYI.

When I sold the G-62 and invested in the TOC-53 - I shed nearly two pounds total, and now this airplane is a monster. It will do stuff that I never imagined I could do with any airplane. I spent about $200 on props, landing gear, repairs, etc. trying to get what I wanted out of the '62 - and it never really got there. Looking back, I should have gone right to the TOC 53. When I made the jump, Tom gave me a very good deal on the engine, a couple of Bunny props and a new cowl.

You will love the thing with the Fuji. Get a lighter engine and you'll become downright obsessed.

My two cents.

ff

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

Of course increased wing loading always has an effect an any plane. The Sukhoi is well equipped to handle the load, though, the originals had 1410 sq. in. of area and the next batch will be 1440 due to increase of wing span to 87".

TF

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

Every one of the planes by any manufacturer on the market is designed to accept a wide array of usable engines. Weights differ substantially between one engine manufacturer and another in engines of the same size and class. Not one of the planes is designed around a specific wing loading and all of them will fly very nicely with a couple of pounds difference between them. The Sukhette is also one that is not limited to a single weight. Too many worry far too much over minor differences in weights when in truth sometimes the plane that weighs a few ounces more flies better than the lighter one. In tumbles the heavier plane performs better.

The difference in wing loading between the Fuji and another engine is not a factor. Your engine will be just fine.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

You will have a plane that is harder to land if the fuji goes dead stick, It will want to drop much faster so you will have to head for the runway as soon as possible. But if your not into 3D and just want a plane to stick that engine It can be done, I would not recommend it myself. I like them to fly the way they were desighned. If you went with the standard setup you would be much happier and if this is your first giant scale aerobat I think it would honestly be a big mistake.

I had a chance to fly the prototype model I had for about a week before my engine died in a hover and broke the fuse. I fell in love with the plane the very first flight. Every maneuver was rediculously easy and stable and the landings felt like my profile plane. All I'm trying to get across is weight dose not only affect power output, It also changes all aspects of the planes flying characteristics.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

Pat roy I can't beleive your last statement. All I have to say is I test fly mutiple models and engine combos at the different fields I fly at. You most definitly can feel a change between models and the different engines people install in them. The best flying and most responsive Giant Scale planes are always the ones that are lighter with high performance engines like the DA's ,ZDZ ,BME, 3W. And my thinking is if your going to spend close to 2Gees on a model I would think you would want that model to fly the best it possible can.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

Gee, to think I've been WASTING my time trying to build my aircraft as light as possible....

I'm glad you set that straight for me so I can put a cheap brick for an engine in my Sukhoi...

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

Hold on a second fellas, He HAS the engine and wants to use it. so cost of the engine is not a factor. He doesn't 3D so the extra weight isn't that big a deal.


I just flew mine for the first time. last weekend, Landings are dead simple....and always a bit tense for me the first few times with a new bird. all have been soft 3pointers...like it has sore feet. and it flys like a dream!

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

I'll argue this one all year long. A very large percentage of our aerobats as currently designed and built have wing loadings so low when ready to fly that they fall well below even average loading numbers. If you have a 28% plane with a wing loading of 28-34 ounces per sq. ft. then you have a plane that will fly quite well if it's set up in other areas properly, referencing the c/g specifically, with surface deflection amounts as a secondary.

Just because everyone desires the lightest wing loading possible does not mean that the lighter plane will fly better that a heavier one. Why do you think Carden aircraft (generally relatively heavy) are such great planes? It's a combination of many, many different factors that makes a plane perform as well as it can, not just the weight or the size of the engine. A friend of mine was a competitor in this past XFC that went for the heavier plane instead of the lighter for better performance in certain maneuvers.

As for being harder to land if the plane is a little heavier than the lightest one, well, yes and no. A pound or so over the lightest one will not be an issue at all for someone that knows how to fly, and land, and sets the rest of the plane up correctly. Myself and others been landing planes of all weights and sizes dead stick for years and damage usually does not occur unless I (ya know, me, the operator) make a mistake. I had an engoine quit in hover on an 18-1/2 pound 28% Extra at about 40' of altitude. End result was I bent the gear and broke a blade on the prop. Some might have smashed the plane at a lighter weight under the same conditions. Perhaps that's because I also flew gliders of various sizes and weights for many years, but none of them had an engine or motor. I've also flown planes with much higher loadings than 34 ounces a foot and they too flew quite well. Of course you can notice a difference between planes of different weights. You can notice the difference between a 14 and a 16 pound bowling ball but so what, they both do the job they were designed for?

You guys scare the daylights out of people with all that stuff about a plane being a little heavier or having a marginally higher wing loading as being difficult or having poor performance. If all you fly is "push the sticks to the corners" 3d then I might agree with you that the heavier plane will require slightly more skill, but I've flown 3D with a 20lb-28% Edge with a Brison 3.2 and had just as much fun as the next guy. It even landed good dead stick.

Dead engines in a hover is a good way to break any plane regardless of the weight. If you're not high enough then you don't have the room for the plane to maneuver into a position where the controls can become effective for controllability. The plane could have weighed half what it did and the results would likely have been the same. As for a model flying as best as it possibly can, well, that is totally in the fingers of the flyer and has been proven to many times over to be argued. Just watch someone with skills and talent fly somebodie's plane that they've never touched before. More often than not it is flown to a higher level of performance than it had before experienced.

What a lot of people really seem to want is a super light ballistic winged projectile, not an airplane. The fact seems to be that a whole lot of people learned to fly without ever learning how to manage energy and all they can do is use the propeller to direct the plane using overly generous surface areas and deflections. Manufacturers provide a weight range for a reason, and that's for the buyer to have a target weight to shoot for. It's not because the plane will not perform well a little over the higher number noted on the box.

BTW, the last time my total expenditures for a plane was only 2 "gees" was quite some time back. Believe that I like my planes to fly as well as they can, and so they do, but I'm not going to sweat big bucks to shave a few ounces, or even a pound or two on larger planes. If I have an engine that will correctly fly the plane I want to put it in, guess where it's going? I can move anything I'm putting on the plane to offset any c/g issues, so that one's out of the way. If you're only a "yank and bank" flyer then you will have more difficulty with a heavier plane. But if you know how to fly, and more importantly, land, then you won't have any problems at all. Will the plane fly differently than one a little lighter? Of course it will. But will it fly poorly or with difficulty? Not hardly.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

I flew a V1 WH Edge with a ZDZ 60 that madiened at 19 3/4 lbs, she flew decently, however was much more capable at 17 lbs. I also flew the WH Ultimate at 19 1/2lbs, and she as well flew much better at 17 1/2 lbs.
Now I have the V2 Extra at 16 1/4 lbs and it is again different, better yep, easier to land yep, but it is a different bird.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

I'm not going to tell the gentleman with the Fuji that the Sukhette will fly badly because his engine is heavier than someone elses. Nor will I tell him that the plane will fly poorly because his plane may weigh 8 or 10 ounces more than the other guys. It's not the least bit true.

All this "Oh my God!!", you're plane weighs a few ounces more than it could or should" stuff is absolutely ludricous. Go fly on a windy day and tell me how great that super light plane was to fly and land. Then go fly pattern. Now go fly a slope glider, or better, use a thermal glider on the slope without adding ballast. The plane that's truly limited is quite often the lightest one. Go back to the 1998 to 2002 Tournament of Champions and watch the planes fly. Just how badly did they fly with wing loadings of up to 40 ounces a foot? Yep, they're lighter now but did they fly badly then? Everything we are doing now is largely based on what was happening then, and operator skill has the greatest influence on the outcome.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

I am going through this very subject on a bird I own, the H9 Cap 232 33%, first flew her at 24 3/4 lb, changed out the NiMh batteries to Li-Ion packs and now working on CF goodies to go with it, she is currently down to 24 and I can tell a difference in its abilities.
However as mentioned it is not much, but I think a lighter bird (within reason, not to mention do we really want to take a $450 ARF and turn it into a $640 ARF) does the high alpha stuff much better, which is what I am learning.
I say fly what ya got and dont worry about it!!!!!!!!!!!! A day of flying will always be better than a day of work, unless you get paid to fly! LoL.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

Ounces No, Pounds Yes. If his fuji is more than 2pounds heavier than the recommended engine then he will probally need and extra half of a pound just to balance it out. It will fly but once again will he really enjoy it? Start off the right way with a GS aerobat and you will be very pleased. And know with the new string of light powerfull and descently priced 50cc class engine you can't go wrong.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

If everyone will please pay attention to the details that this fellow posted, you will see that the numbers are not all that extreme.

He says the bare engine weighs 3.8 lbs. The TOC-53 weighs 3.6 and a DA-50 is 3.1, so the difference is not all that great. It seems that the weight pickup is in the muffler, so I do suggest finding a better exhaust system to save a little weight.

Overall if the total weight is 5.1, this puts the engine RTF about 1 pound above the TOC-53. This is definitely well within the bounds of good sense.

It's hard to find a place to use some of these engines, it will work fine in the Sukhoi and even better if you can find a lighter muffler. In fact it might be quite remarkable, all that power should make performance pretty interesting.

TF

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

I do not fly just one type of plane and do not specialise in any one form of flying. I am generally what is called "Sportflyer" . I am looking for a good performing not too expensive 3D capable 50cc -60 cc plane which is not a YAK 54 ( too many around ) . This brought me to the Wildhare Sukhoi after some research . From what I read here it looks like this would fit the bill quite well , especially considering I already have the engine , digital servos , receiver and batteries . Just to be sure I reweighed the drive items. Engine , alloy muffler , ignition unit weighs 4 lb 14 oz.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

Your golden! Mount the engine and test fit all the bits for balance. if you need too put the ruder servo in the tail.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

I have a question for the seasoned vets. How did you all deal with the landing gear installation? Mine has mounting holes seriously misaligned. Will the brackets come out of the plane easily for re-drilling?

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

On mine all I had to do was cut the covering over the gear openings enough for the holes to align. What I at first thought was a drilling alignment problem turned out to be nothing more than enlarging the slots in the side of the fuselage a small amount. This was on one of the first six prototypes so I can't speak for anything current. I suspect it's the same thing.

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

I had to open the holes in the aluminum angles a bit....used a long drill bit

RE: 50cc Sukhette Build Thread, now in progress!!
 

Tom your right, I should have paid closer attention to his specific post to see this difference. I actually thought that the total weight of the engine itself was going to be 2 pounds heavier than a typical 50cc engine. I apologize to all whom I might have affended in my first post, Especially Pat Roy who was trying to help him out.
Once again I say that this sukoi is a total winner hands down and I would recomend it to anyone in a heart beat.