| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1700.1 | | VMSSG::FRIEDRICHS | Ask me about Young Eagles | Tue Feb 11 1997 09:14 | 15 |
| I would not bother with one....
They are certainly resiliant to landing and takeoff mishaps, but if
you drive it in at full throttle from 100', it is not going to
survive any better than anything else.
My second plane was a Midwest Stick plane. Nice and easy to build,
good performer, and fun. (BTW - These are now Great Planes "Big Stik"
line). I have even been considering building another one.. (before
I knew how to instruct (and before buddy boxes) I tried to teach my
dad how to fly and I was not high enough to recover his mistake....)
Cheers,
jeff
|
| 1700.2 | Go for the STICK | APACHE::BRADOR::ZUFELT | V12 @17.5K music to my ears | Tue Feb 11 1997 11:17 | 10 |
| I second the BIG STICK/Ugly Stick type plane. My second plane was a
Tiger stick ARF. Flew very well until I hit the hydro pole.
I went ahead and built the Big Stick but the snow won so I haven't flown
it yet. Plan to try for the winter fly in. Hoping for warm weather.
From want I've seen the Duroplane flies like a brick, not really good
for stunt patterns, plus your landings should be getting better ;')
Fred
|
| 1700.3 | one for the under dog | CBROWN::ONEILL | | Tue Feb 11 1997 13:02 | 13 |
| Well, I never thought I'd be saying anything good about dura planes
but, I personally know a guy that learned how to fly with one and
also has the sturdy birdi ( basically the same plane, diffent company).
Now, givin a choice, the beginer should go the high wing, 4 channel
trainer, but it sounds like your well past that part. I cant speak
about the dura bat beyond saying, if thats the one you want, go for it.
I heard alot of bad things about U.S.aircore planes too but I own one,
and it flies great even though I power it with a 12 yr old O.S..35 (
which is below the recomended engine size of .40-.50). I hated the kit
but now that it's done, it's o.k. I'd be interested to hear which kit
you go with and how you make out.
Jim
|
| 1700.4 | Aerobat go for it !! | ASDG::ELLIS | | Wed Feb 12 1997 08:16 | 10 |
|
I bought a Aerobat last season. The plane will take a beating
I flew it into the ground at a pretty good clip and it got up
and flew again. I started out with an OS FX46 good power no problem on
take off or landing. I now fly it with a Tower 40 it's not bad
just keep your eyes on it. It somtime hard to determine if it's
upside down or rightside up. It responds quickly.
John
|
| 1700.5 | Don't forget the Gremlin! | WMOIS::WEIER | Keep those wings spinning! | Thu Feb 13 1997 08:49 | 22 |
|
First let me say I agree with the previous replies regarding the
"Stick" series of airplanes. They are a blast and everyone should have
one in their airplane "stable".
Another coice, although harder to find a kit, is the Gremlin. It is
a hand launched, cheap, .25 - .40 powered, easy to build (10-20 hrs)
"flying wing" that begs you to try all kinds of new stuff ( ie;
aerobatics, inverted flight, very low level high speed passes, very
low inverted high speed passes....... well, you get the idea :).
It is rock stable in flight and many people have flown them
successfully even before they could solo on a trainer plane.
To summarize, these planes are a blast to just "throw around and
people have done many "stupid" things with them :)
They have a foam wing, are very resilient to crashes and are easy
to repair. They were originally designed ( and are still used for )
RC "combat", but make a great sport plane.
One disadvantage: No rudder, so the more sophisticated aerobatic
manuvers suffer/or aren't possible.
|
| 1700.6 | One more voice | WMOIS::CALDWELL_RO | | Thu Feb 13 1997 12:22 | 8 |
| I have been flying a Dura-plane 40 trainer for two years now. I have
cartwheeled it down the runway. Blasted it into the ground hard enuph
to require a new engine mount and bounced it off the runway more times
than I like to admit. It has served me well. It has hundreds of flights
on it and is actually quite acrobatic. It will never be confused with a
pattern plane of coarse but I find I will try things with it that I
wouldn't with my other planes. It is heavy so it makes a good plane on
a windy day. One mans opinion.
|
| 1700.7 | I'll give both a try | RDGENG::BRYANT | | Thu Feb 13 1997 18:31 | 18 |
| Thanks for the replies, I am going to give the Acrobat a try. The
kits are $60, which is about L36, and that seems quite reasonable.
As for the Gremlin, I am in the closing stages of building one. I
bought a copy of the plans from RCM, and made a set of jigs that have
been passed arround our club. So far we have 2 flying, 3 more to be
completed in the next two weeks, and the guy who cuts our wings took
7 orders for wings at the field last Sunday.
They do indeed seem to be a very stable and easy aircraft to fly,
and I am looking forward to getting mine in the air in a couple
of weeks. I would be flying it this weekend, but I am working in
the SHR until the end of next week.
Thanks for your help
Stewart
|
| 1700.8 | blown away | DECXPS::ONEILL | | Fri May 23 1997 11:11 | 6 |
| I'd be interested in hearing how things are going. Did you finally
purchase the dura-bat? It's been so windy here in Mass. I don't think
anyone has had much chance to start the flying season off right. If
it's not raining, it's sunny with a 30mph BREEZE.... give me a break.
Jim
|
| 1700.9 | Needs a bigger wing | RDGENG::BRYANT | | Fri May 30 1997 05:56 | 26 |
| Yes I did get the durabat, and built it with an OS46FX. I got one
of our club examiners to check fly it, and his view was that it was
OK but probably too much of a handful for me. There were a couple of
setting up problems however -
1) The control throws recommended in the instructions were MUCH too
high. I had full rates set as recommended, and low rates at 50%, both
with 15% exponential. I think that we ended up at half this.
2) I had to add rear weight to set the CoG where the instructions
specified, but ended up moving it further forward by reducing rear
weight.
So having descided it was much too much of a handfull, a club member
gave me a larger wing, formerly from a crashed low winger. This is a
similar cord, but about 9" longer, and with some dihedral. I fitted
this with a small cradle and banded it on, set the CoG, this time with
some nose weight. We flew it last weekend with the same instructor
check flying it first. The verdict was that it was now fine. I flew it
for three flights, and found that it was OK.
So the bottom line is that the dura-bat as sold is a bit of a handful,
but it appears that clipping on a larger wing produces quite a
reasonable plane.
Stewart
|
| 1700.10 | what ever works | DECXPS::ONEILL | | Fri May 30 1997 11:24 | 8 |
| Great!
I like your choice of engine. I recently purchaced a o.s.
.46 fx and I couldn't be happier. You have to take the dura plane line
for what it is. They're not floaters or trainners either, but they're
definatly not as bad as people make them out to be. When your ready for
the original wing, I'll bet you'll have a blast. Keep us informed.
Jim
|