Official Freewing F/A-18C Hornet 90mm EDF Thread

[TPS]

After some rough landings, the nose retract mount started to separate from the foam to the point where the retract no longer closed the spring-loaded doors. Using the included adhesive and applying a shim remedied that, but didn't seem like it was a lasting solution, so I installed a brace plate.

• Removed the retract from the housing and drilled a hole to fit a flathead #6 machine bolt.
• Took a piece of thick plastic with the same width as the mount, sanded the joint surface, then applied a thin layer of cyanoacrylate glue and clamped them together, applied additional glue at the seam to seep in by capillary action, then let it set. Then I continued drilling the hole through the additional plastic piece, then carved with an hobby blade so that the flathead sank flush to where the retract sits. The plastic block now provides additional strength and spreads out forces applied over a wide area.
• Because the foam "ledges" are uneven, I placed a wooden shim to make them even.
• Measured and cut a birch plate and epoxied cross-beams to stiffen it. Positioning it so that the screw would be centered between cross-beams, I drilled a hole to line up with the hole in the mount. I then slid the flathead bolt up through plastic and wood, installed a washer and bolt, and tightened.
• I then finished it with some blue threadlocker to resist gradual unscrewing from repeated shocks and vibrations.
• Test the retract to confirm the doors close, and did some final rod & clevis adjustments to completely close the door gap.

Fredmdbud,
Thank you for your inputs for fixing a weak F-18 nose gear mount. Your ideas gave me the motivation to fix my nose gear problems. I did it with glue instead of screws. I built a base plate from wood and cut out grooves in the foam on both sides of the plate. I glued all the flat plastic parts to the wooden plate. I used the glue that comes with most FW planes and it really works well. The plate stiffened the nose and is solid. This modification will allow me to do aircraft carrier landings. Thanks again.

[Hoomi]

Just for fun, how about the FA-18's older, somewhat smaller, brother, the YF-17? Built as a prototype for the USAF's Lightweight Fighter Program, the YF-17 lost out to the YF-16, partially due to the Falcon's use of the same engine as the F-15, meaning the Air Force already had spares, tooling, and trained maintenance personnel for the engines. Northrup took the basic design of the YF-17, enlarged it a bit, added more powerful engines, and refined some elements to produce the FA-18. The two planes are similar enough looking, that one could almost get away with painting an FA-18 model in the YF-17 scheme, and have a believable representation of the prototype.

[curlyculp]

Well, add mine to the "problems" file. Was a little wonky on first two flights. On #3, all of a sudden with full flaps it wanted to roll hard left. Took full aileron to counter, while I raised the flaps and fought it back to a safe landing. Couldn't duplicate it on the ground, so flew again with the stabilization off. Did a low approach landing, turned back downwind, at the 90 had maybe 45 degrees AOB, 10 degrees nose low and if froze there. Right into the ground. No response. Didn't act like a stall. (the nose didn't fall or a wing fall off) I thought it MIGHT be the stabilator got blanked. Model basically destroyed. A spare parts bin.

[curlyculp]

Just for fun, how about the FA-18's older, somewhat smaller, brother, the YF-17? Built as a prototype for the USAF's Lightweight Fighter Program, the YF-17 lost out to the YF-16, partially due to the Falcon's use of the same engine as the F-15, meaning the Air Force already had spares, tooling, and trained maintenance personnel for the engines. Northrup took the basic design of the YF-17, enlarged it a bit, added more powerful engines, and refined some elements to produce the FA-18. The two planes are similar enough looking, that one could almost get away with painting an FA-18 model in the YF-17 scheme, and have a believable representation of the prototype.

When I was in AOCS in 1978 they brought out the YF-17 for a flight demo at NAS P'Cola. On takeoff it did an Immelman to an Immelman to ANOTHER Immelman. Remember this was back when there wasn't anything with better than 1:1 thrust to weight. Max performance turns. It was a beast.

[curlyculp]

Fredmdbud,
Thank you for your inputs for fixing a weak F-18 nose gear mount. Your ideas gave me the motivation to fix my nose gear problems. I did it with glue instead of screws. I built a base plate from wood and cut out grooves in the foam on both sides of the plate. I glued all the flat plastic parts to the wooden plate. I used the glue that comes with most FW planes and it really works well. The plate stiffened the nose and is solid. This modification will allow me to do aircraft carrier landings. Thanks again.

I don't know about a weak mount, but mine augered in dirty and I was amazed how good the gear and mounts came out. I have a spare set now... god forbid I'd need it.

[davegee]

The tanks are scaled up half prints of the Napalm canister file on Thingiverse. 215mm long per half. Don’t use the half that has the flange. Just double the other one and glue them together.

Print in spiral/vase mode one half at a time to keep them light.

Thanks, JLambCWU. I'll try it out!
davegee

[Pete Lane]

I Dident build anything and the message is quite clear that its dollars over safety.

[curlyculp]

I tried to return mine because of all of this. I clear
coated it and then stopped as these were crashing
and put it in the box unassembled.

This was my response.


Thanks for contacting us on your f-18. With you building this and used clear coat It is not returnable. Thus being I could not sell as it's new. At this point check over the elevator tray and servo wires. The blue box was not the cause of 98% of the crash issue it was in the servo leads cut and the servo tray flexing do to not enough glue was used. If you find a cut wire I can replace the servo for you.

Thanks

------------------------------------
Brad
Customer Service
Motion RC
www.motionrc.com
www.hobbysquawk.com

The elevator runs off two servos and TWO wires, so for a complete elevator failure they'd both have to be cut. Not happening.

I've read some posts thinking the elevator servos weren't strong enough, and made the flyer unable to pull out of a high speed dive. I don't think so. I played with mine and pushed against the elevators and they seemed fine. That being said, aerodynamically, with the pivot point at mid surface, the wind isn't "resisting" elevator motion. Forward of the pivot point, it helps. Behind the pivot point, it resists. If the elevator were "hinged" on the leading edge, like an aileron, any motion would be resisted completely by air flow. The elevator's isn't.

[Evan D]

You were trying to return it as new, not a warranty issue. How happy would you be if you bought a new plane and they sent you one someone opened and messed with, not even talking painted? Or are you thinking they should eat the cost because you changed your mind?

If you think this way... well I’ll just say you modded it so it’s on you. I guess you could sell it at a swap meet but you’d be unhappy then too since you’ll probably loose a few bucks.

[curlyculp]

Thanks for contacting us on your f-18. With you building this and used clear coat It is not returnable.
Thanks

------------------------------------
Brad
Customer Service
Motion RC
www.motionrc.com
www.hobbysquawk.com

Mine is (was) 100% stock out of the box. So here ya go...

[Pete Lane]

Bingo. Clear coat is like waxing a new car at the dealership....said another pilot.

[Evan D]

Can’t return that one as new... what happened Curly?

[Pete Lane]

The crashed ones changed my mind Evan.

[Pete Lane]

My Buddies.
100 percent stock. Spiraled in after maiden
Take off.

[xviper]

Clear coating is not like waxing or using a polish. Clear coat is paint - just clear, with no pigments.

[Pete Lane]

I have a degree in Auto body and paint. Thanks.
It was a quote.

[Pete Lane]

What about the lipo and receiver that are usually
toast...should I risk that also.

[Evan D]

There are always “crashed ones”. If you think painting a car and waxing are the same... well I guess I have to be politically correct and say you’re wrong. You changed your mind so it’s all on you...

I was on on your side until you started all the bashing. Now you are about to be added to the Peter and Jan list.

[curlyculp]

Can’t return that one as new... what happened Curly?

Like others that have been reported. At the 90 in a landing approach, about 45 degrees angle of bank, maybe 10 degrees nose low, just froze up and stopped responding. Drove right into the ground.

Reading all the threads about the blue box, wondering why something as simple as flight controls are routed through it? I may buy another, but I'll bypass the box and go direct from receiver to Elevator, Aileron, flaps, Rudder.

But if the blue box fails will it cut power to the receiver??

[Evan D]

Good question... I could easily see a shorted retract affecting things connected to the MCBe. So you are thinking a blue box issue, not servos, BEC or receiver shading by the battery or other reception possibilities?

Like others that have been reported. At the 90 in a landing approach, about 45 degrees angle of bank, maybe 10 degrees nose low, just froze up and stopped responding. Drove right into the ground.

Reading all the threads about the blue box, wondering why something as simple as flight controls are routed through it? I may buy another, but I'll bypass the box and go direct from receiver to Elevator, Aileron, flaps, Rudder.

But if the blue box fails will it cut power to the receiver??