I really wanted the F-14 but I held back due to price and a few perceived deficiencies. I didn't know about the servos. Glad I held off. A V2 would have to have very sturdy retracts (preferably trailing links). The V1 retracts appear to be very long and skinny and don't look like they'd hold up to rough and bumpy grass fields for long. Unfortunately, once you make the plane better suited for these types of runways, the "scale" guys will balk at it and call fowl. From the looks of the plane being flown off grass (smooth), it could use more thrust. The original "cautions" included in the Motion webpage for the product indicated an insanely long paved runway to safely get off the ground. That also put me off.
-
-
Actually it can get off the ground in about 100 ft on pavement. But 100% throttle makes it require MORE.
Tie the plane to a post with a fish scale. Slowly advance throttle to where the pull peaks. That is your max throttle for takeoff if you want off the ground in the least runway.
Appx 5 to 7 deg flaps.
SLOWLY advance throttle as it builds speed, pull up gear, then flaps while doing a shallow climb and building up speed.
Best to practice slow flight before seeing how short of a runway you can use to get off the ground. Take it high and find out how slow you can go without stalling.
Getting it slow enough to land and stay on the 300 ft runway is more difficult. Its a pretty heavy bird, so it needs some speed. It takes some space to slow it down after touchdown.
I have not run it off the pavement at high speed, so can't say how the gear would handle the rough grass when fast enough to fly. I'm certain the weak point of the mains will either be the mounting in the foam or the pin between strut and trunion. I'm fairly sure the weak point for the nose-gear would be the foam.
*********************
I'll let you know what happens with the mods I'm doing to try and improve thrust.FF gliders and rubber power since 1966, CL 1970-1990, RC since 1975.
current planes from 1/2 oz to 22 lbsComment
-
That's the part that has me worried, too. I have maybe 200 ft of "fair" runway. The 100 ft at one end is full of gopher holes and thistles that grow back within a day or so after mowing. The other end is a small hill that is also filled with gopher holes. In winter, we use it as a back stop for our belly landers but in summer, we try to avoid the hill.
My Freewing A-10 is also a heavy plane but it seems to have more than enough power to get off the grass in short order and landing with full flaps is not too long if I set up the flight path coming in just right. Paying a bit more for an upgraded V2 is expected, but modding a V1 to perform the way we want costs somewhat more.
Looking forward to seeing what you're doing with your plane.
Comment
-
Currently... stripping a bad repaint of the wings :p
Replaced the ESCs with Castle HV Phoenix.
Looking at changing the cheater hole intake grates with aluminum for less intake air resistance.
I may be making the cheater holes larger also. I think the fans are starved for intake air.FF gliders and rubber power since 1966, CL 1970-1990, RC since 1975.
current planes from 1/2 oz to 22 lbsComment
-
Lets see a V2 of the 80mm F-86. Beefier nose gear, and a new spot for the esc to accomodate moving the battery back, so the correct cg can be attained.
JimComment
-
I’d like to see the following airframes redesigned/upgraded because I enjoyed flying the original and would own another if updated:
- Freewing F-86 80mm EDF Jet: have it become a 90mm jet (I’m even okay with the 80mm EDF size, but with more streamlined ducting) with some more bells and whistles like a lighting package, much improved ducting, full nose gear door, stronger e-retracts and suspension struts, some cockpit detailing, improved electronics (servos, higher capacity ESC, higher power EDF/motor, etc.) redesigned battery bay to accompidate larger LiPo’s and a completely different ESC placement. Maybe even a Fury scheme also.
- Freewing F-15 90mm EDF Jet: enlarge the airframe size, improve the ducting without as large of a cheater hole or at all if possible, make it an E model, maintain the bells and whistles it already has but with dual afterburners, improve the battery bay size, and provide a great color scheme like the Tiger Meet.
- Freewing F-5 80mm EDF Jet: in either 80mm or 90mm EDF but with an enlarged airframe, larger battery bay for placement of higher capacity batteries, a lighting package, cockpit details, improved e-retracts and suspension struts, and a different paint scheme.
- Freewing F-18 90mm EDF Jet: I never owned this one because I don’t like the airframe design. I’d love to see a F-18C with today’s technology such as improved e-retracts and scale suspension struts, great scale airframe, air brake, cockpit detailing, enough battery room for at least 8S if one so chooses, EPO foam, and dual afterburners. This jet I would want the most and have been waiting to own a F-18 until they redesign it completely.Comment
-
Add an F9F to it and I would say complete list also 80-90mmComment
-
The only thing that concerns me on a "V2" of the older jets is the trend to go and glue-in servos to save weight and money. I don't like it. It's a pain if you have to replace a servo or heaven forbid have to re-position the horn. !@#$
Another thing that would give me pause on a "V2" is the trend toward 9-bladed fans. Don't like em. They are efficient and get the job done. But for me, I would have to buy after market 12 bladed units.
Granted, those are minor complaints. I'm sure a "V-2" remake would be very rugged. I know the F-4 is.
What I would like to see is a few more "super scale" jets in the tradition of the T-45 and F-16.
+1 on the F9...Panther or Cougar. If you want o be unique, do the TF-9 trainer ( a two seat Cougar)Meridian Aeromodelers, Meridian MSComment
-
I would like to see a F-14 park flyer. Something similar to the F-8 where it can be tossed in the air, fly on a 3S, and ok if it was fixed wing. Give up a little scale, features, and performance for smaller F-14 that still looks the part in the air. The F-14 is one of my all time favorite planes, but the current Freewing F-14 isn't the best for flying off a rough grass strip, and it cost and size prohibitive.Comment
-
This is an interesting proposition that I am sure would become popular if done right. But I don't think it would cut it for most as strictly a basic park flyer without landing gear.
As for the power system you have to take into account that the F-14's was designed around a twin engine layout that is spread far enough apart that leaves no room for a single EDF set up.
This would conclude that any F-14 model would have to be a twin EDF. So lets say a twin 64mm might do at the low end that would need two 3S batteries.
The next thing that would have to be a must would be for it to have the option to have retracts or none. As for the wings I can totally see it having a basic swing wing setup that can manually be locked into place in three positions.
Ideally there should be two versions a basic park flyer with no gear and manual wings and top of the line with retracts and servo actuated wings.Comment
-
There used to be one.
Comment
-
Yep, you are thinking along the same lines I am. The basic version is for no gear and fixed wings, optional pieces to install retracts or to move the wings.
As for the ArtTech F-14, everything I have read indicated it was a horrible flying plane. It had the right idea, but just failed in execution. I am wondering if it was just a little too big to be hand launched and it always seemed to fly like it was underpowered. That was my observations based on the flight videos. Freewing could build one that flies right.Comment
-
Yep, right where I am at as well. I love the concept of the ArtTech F-14, but it takes a lot of work to get it to fly right. That is why I think Freewing or Horizon (and their sub brands) could do a smaller F-14 correctly. I have even thought about an UMX F-14 that uses the internals out of the A-10. A larger park flyer would be nicer, but there is a fine point in which it can't be hand launched anymore. There are a few people at my club that love the idea of smaller EDF's that don't need landing gear since our field isn't paved. Throw it in the air and land in the grass.Comment
-
I filled the gaps between the top and bottom of the fuselage with spray foam for insulation, it is much stronger at a very low cost in weight. I Secured the nose landing gear support at the gear with a nut and bolt so it won’t pop off when doing its job. I also threw in F-15 struts and wheels in the rear. That made the plane as strong as needed at less than $40.
I also added the new “New as of this month” Inrunners and 80a escs. It went from being the hardest for me to fly, to the easiest. I fly with a 50c 6000mah pack
I will record a flight soon... all it needs now is lights.
I do have afterburners tooComment
-
If they make the SU-35 into a V2, I hope they keep the servo pockets. I love this jet as is. And I hope they keep the EPS.
Mine has lights but no burners.I got so many miles of wire in that thing already.Meridian Aeromodelers, Meridian MSComment
-
Yes F14 v2 should be a very nice option and gray delivery to choose many scheme customised option. Jolly roger top gun and so on will be easy to implement just paint some surfaces. I love this bird....
Comment
-
I would like to see the 1st gen of the 64 mm EDFs (Sabre, MiG, and Panther) with upgraded EDFs, a LG option for the MiG and Sabre, and a better color scheme on the Panther, either Gull Grey or the original Navy Blue.Comment
Comment