What New FlightlineRC or FreeWing Model would you like to see come next!

[F106DeltaDart]

I'd buy one immediately!! Much cooler than the Mirage.

Absolutely!!

[Tanguy51]

Always Rafale for me. It isn't a mirage with canard....Rafale is really more agile and large flying area. YF 22 pilots' are impressed by this plane. After alpha jet should be nice in PAF to have a nice jet with my F16 thunderbird to make a great show!

[DR. Joy]

I will keep suggesting: F-84 in any size or an F-101 in any size. It would also be nice if they would come out with a reliable Gloster Meteor.

[Grossman56]

ANYTHING!!
With a 1600mm wingspan and a prop on the front
or
An 80 mm EDF.
It's been a while since we've seen a new Flightline bird, since the Spitty which was announced in the Winter of 2017.

Grossman56

[OV10]

ANYTHING!!
With a 1600mm wingspan and a prop on the front
or
An 80 mm EDF.
It's been a while since we've seen a new Flightline bird, since the Spitty which was announced in the Winter of 2017.

Grossman56

Oh Danny boy, we gotta work on your memory skills LOL
The Libby came Nov 2017 after the Spitty which was Jan 2017
And yes on another 1600mm bird but with 2 props.....................:ov10

[Boots Whirlygig]

Two props, LOL! LOL:ov10

[Woodcock]

Well my vote is for a really nice 2000mm C-130. If you want one of these today all you can do is scratch build one, not gonna happen, for me at least. I cannot understand why we got B-17's, B-24's, heck we even have PBY's, (Dynam of course. No landing gear, LOL). But no nice C-130, "for crying out loud".
Yes there are a few short kits around, but you have to have a dedicated trailer to move them around. Where is the fun in that. Also you'll spend 2 years building one of them, then OMG if you have a miss hap. So I vote for "Freewing" to do this, as it is in fact jet powered, jet powered props that is.

Variants of the C-130 have been operating since the late 60's. They have been used as attack aircraft, bombers, cargo haulers, troop carriers, and many, many other rolls I can't even think of. Been in service for more than 60 years, still in service today and widely used by many nations in the world.

Now in case anyone's interested I use to fly these in the Air National Guard many moons ago. I also knew more than my fair share of Phantom Jet Pilots. The air frame, (on the real C-130's) is magnificent! The aircraft is very controllable, much, much more controllable than a Phantom Jet. As a matter of fact many National Guard C-130 pilots were indeed former Phantom Jet Pilots, (I was not a former Phantom Jet Pilot FYI).

My point being, in my opinion, you really need to be an accomplished RC pilot to even attempt driving an RC Phantom jet. But a much lesser accomplished RC pilot could easily fly a nice C-130 RC model. Even those who have scratch built them always rave about how well and predictable it is to fly.

SO why doesn't anyone make one? Your guess is as good as mine, can't help but wonder about this. There is even a company that skipped over the C-130, and made a C-17, LMAO. Yes you can buy a C-17 right now, but no C-130.

This is clear evidence that the group think mentality is alive and well in the aircraft model industry. This is moronic to say the least. So why do we have a B-17, B-24, C-17, and even an Airbus A-380, and no C-130? I you can answer this, with an answer that makes sense I'll salute you. For me, I just think no one is paying attention.

LISTEN to me carefully. If you make it, they will come.

Best Regards
Woody

[Grossman56]

Oops, you're right, I never paid too much attention to the B-24 so she slipped my mind. Besides, you know what I mean. We need a single engine mate to the Spitfire, like a Hurricane. Twins, spells OV-10, has to be, too much demand for it not to.

Grossman56

[goosekiller1]

Ok call me strange would love to see a Flightline copy of Erwin Rommel's Storch say 1450mm in trop.Camo! 4s I can dream :):Drooling:LOL

[rifleman_btx]

The speed 4s would produce would rip the wings clean off that plane lol

[goosekiller1]

The speed 4s would produce would rip the wings clean off that plane lol

Like I said I can dream LOL My FMS 182 trainer can handle a 4s 2200mAh at about half or so throttle with out burning up or ripping wings off 40ampESC just a though.

[rifleman_btx]

Hahaha yes indeed :)

[Apache Jets]

How about a Mitsubishi F-1 or T-2 ..

[spec450]

How about a Mitsubishi F-2. Just a bigger F-16 with more wing area and LEX.

[Woodcock]

No your not mistaken, That is a, "US Navy Locheed C-130" sitting on the deck of a US Aircraft Carrier. It was landing and taking off, doing touch and go's to prove the viability of operations off of an aircraft carrier.

Best Regards
Woody

[Seniorflyer63]

I want a scale 1700 mustang that flies aggressively.The current one lacks power periodDo any of the 1700series fly well...

[fhhuber]

We always want more power...

You can always add more power too. But be sure to stiffen/strengthen the aircraft when you do it.

There is the loss of low speed performance when you add the power because you are adding weight. For general sales, the models need to have reasonable low speed performance, because the average RC pilot never learns to handle take-off or landing of a heavy warbird.

(Often not even the people that build and fly them...)
At a local annual scale big bird event, there was a guy who brought a P-51 every year for 7 years that I attended. Every year he taxied out to the runway, hammered the throttle and cartwheeled the airplane. He never learned and would never listen.
You just can't handle a heavy scale warbird like a lightly built 50CC 3D aerobatic aircraft.

Be careful what you ask for... you might get it.

[rifleman_btx]

We always want more power...

You can always add more power too. But be sure to stiffen/strengthen the aircraft when you do it.

There is the loss of low speed performance when you add the power because you are adding weight. For general sales, the models need to have reasonable low speed performance, because the average RC pilot never learns to handle take-off or landing of a heavy warbird.

(Often not even the people that build and fly them...)
At a local annual scale big bird event, there was a guy who brought a P-51 every year for 7 years that I attended. Every year he taxied out to the runway, hammered the throttle and cartwheeled the airplane. He never learned and would never listen.
You just can't handle a heavy scale warbird like a lightly built 50CC 3D aerobatic aircraft.

Be careful what you ask for... you might get it.

Exactly

[Evoman]

Well my vote is for a really nice 2000mm C-130. If you want one of these today all you can do is scratch build one, not gonna happen, for me at least. I cannot understand why we got B-17's, B-24's, heck we even have PBY's, (Dynam of course. No landing gear, LOL). But no nice C-130, "for crying out loud".
Yes there are a few short kits around, but you have to have a dedicated trailer to move them around. Where is the fun in that. Also you'll spend 2 years building one of them, then OMG if you have a miss hap. So I vote for "Freewing" to do this, as it is in fact jet powered, jet powered props that is.

Variants of the C-130 have been operating since the late 60's. They have been used as attack aircraft, bombers, cargo haulers, troop carriers, and many, many other rolls I can't even think of. Been in service for more than 60 years, still in service today and widely used by many nations in the world.

Now in case anyone's interested I use to fly these in the Air National Guard many moons ago. I also knew more than my fair share of Phantom Jet Pilots. The air frame, (on the real C-130's) is magnificent! The aircraft is very controllable, much, much more controllable than a Phantom Jet. As a matter of fact many National Guard C-130 pilots were indeed former Phantom Jet Pilots, (I was not a former Phantom Jet Pilot FYI).

My point being, in my opinion, you really need to be an accomplished RC pilot to even attempt driving an RC Phantom jet. But a much lesser accomplished RC pilot could easily fly a nice C-130 RC model. Even those who have scratch built them always rave about how well and predictable it is to fly.

SO why doesn't anyone make one? Your guess is as good as mine, can't help but wonder about this. There is even a company that skipped over the C-130, and made a C-17, LMAO. Yes you can buy a C-17 right now, but no C-130.

This is clear evidence that the group think mentality is alive and well in the aircraft model industry. This is moronic to say the least. So why do we have a B-17, B-24, C-17, and even an Airbus A-380, and no C-130? I you can answer this, with an answer that makes sense I'll salute you. For me, I just think no one is paying attention.

LISTEN to me carefully. If you make it, they will come.

Best Regards
Woody

A C-130 is definitely an airplane that needs to come the RC foam market. It is just so versatile and there have been so many variants of it.
By the way a few months ago one of the 3rd party developers for my favorite flight simulator DCS World had posted a question on their Facebook page asking people what none combat airplane would they like to see come to DCS.
And the most requested airplane was some sort of C-130 variant. This would be for a full fidelity simulation complete with a fully clickable cockpit controls. So this would be something also to watch for if your a fan of the C-130.

As for an RC C-130 I think this Coast Gard variant would be the most visible in the air.

[Grossman56]

I want a scale 1700 mustang that flies aggressively.The current one lacks power periodDo any of the 1700series fly well...

Most guys get the 5060 KV 360 that is in the FMS Pitts and drop that in for some more power

https://www.motionrc.com/products/fms-5060-kv360-motor

There was mention on the size of the battery and that if you use a 3300, you're better off because you're not adding a lot of weight.
A couple of avenues to explore.

Grossman56