Official Freewing Twin 80mm/90mm A-10 Thunderbolt II Thread

[Elbee]

hhamzeh, I understand your thinking, I would add, I bought mine during the original pre-order and it's all OEM stock. She's a rock-solid flier with faster than scale performance. I only swapped RH MG for LH MG and vice versa (a recommended mod) as I recall. It comes with 90mm upgrade foam parts for the nacelles if you want more performance. I can only guess that MRC figures what else could we do and keep the price point reasonable. My suggestion is find a buddy who has one and take a test drive. I can't believe, you'll be disappointed. Best, LB

[hhamzeh]

I think FreeWing and MRC should consider releasing the V2 version of this jet. Perhaps small changes like inrunner motors, already available upgraded struts installed and a new paint scheme. All in all the cost and efforts will be minimal but I guess these days the marketing philosophy of most companies is "if it is selling, do not do a damn thing". Unfortunately, eventually someone else will come with a similar A-10 with more "up-to-date" components and then MRC and FreeWing will start to react. I fully appreciate it is a business for them but sometimes saving small costs and efforts will result in large losses down the road.

[xviper]

The description at MotionRC and RC Castle say they are 9-bl outrunners, which is what they've always been. I have no information that they have changed.

[StevenR]

Hey Guys!

l’m considering the Freewing A10 80mm for my next EDF!
can anyone tell me if the current models come with the inrunner or outrunner motors?

thx!

[xviper]

duplicate.........

[xviper]

Thanks for the heads up on c.g. I don't like flying nose heavy planes. People around here think I'm nuts.

More and more these days, I am seeing a change in philosophy when it comes to CG. I recall a time when the most widely spoken adage went something like, "A nose heavy plane can be flown with some effort. A tail heavy plane can be flown once." It's getting more clear now that there were once a lot of people married to "old wives" and those old bitties talked way too much and the husband's just kept listening. These days, it seems people are calling it something like this:

[Ks.jetflyer]

I fly off grass as well and originally put the trailing link nose gear in. Occasionally, in rough grass, the suspension sometimes depresses all the way and the tire actually gets stuck against the rear nose gear door. Talk about slamming on the brakes! Happened a couple times on landing, not a big deal, but it did it once on take-off after hitting a clump and it started to skid somewhat. I immediately swapped back out to the original nose gear and no issues since then and it operates just as well on the grass, at least IMO. Have heard of only a few others this has happened to, so maybe it's not a universal issue.

After over 100 flights on mine, I've decided it's definitely one of the easiest EDF's to fly and land. Just make sure on landing you keep the nose up and you won't experience the bucking bronco (and resulting mishaps) that some have experienced. It helps to balance it 90-93mm instead of the 78mm point the manual recommends. At least that's my opinion.

Thanks for the heads up on c.g. I don't like flying nose heavy planes. People around here think I'm nuts.

[xviper]

Hugh Wiedman You're not the only one. When I fly mine off grass, it does the same thing. When I first got this plane many years ago, I got that horrible kangaroo bounce on landing. I swapped out the stock nose gear for the trailing link hoping it would help. It only helped a bit. I've learned to land it much better now and I'm thinking of putting the stock one back on, if I can find it.

[Hugh Wiedman]

I picked one up this last weekend. From what I've read it has a good reputation. Have no concern about being discontinued. Did order the trailing link nose gear for it. Looking forward to getting it in the air.

I fly off grass as well and originally put the trailing link nose gear in. Occasionally, in rough grass, the suspension sometimes depresses all the way and the tire actually gets stuck against the rear nose gear door. Talk about slamming on the brakes! Happened a couple times on landing, not a big deal, but it did it once on take-off after hitting a clump and it started to skid somewhat. I immediately swapped back out to the original nose gear and no issues since then and it operates just as well on the grass, at least IMO. Have heard of only a few others this has happened to, so maybe it's not a universal issue.

After over 100 flights on mine, I've decided it's definitely one of the easiest EDF's to fly and land. Just make sure on landing you keep the nose up and you won't experience the bucking bronco (and resulting mishaps) that some have experienced. It helps to balance it 90-93mm instead of the 78mm point the manual recommends. At least that's my opinion.

[Bill b]

Ya I ordered same thing! 😆

[Ks.jetflyer]

I picked one up this last weekend. From what I've read it has a good reputation. Have no concern about being discontinued. Did order the trailing link nose gear for it. Looking forward to getting it in the air.

[Bill b]

Ya I Kno, but I got a p51 from motion then they stopped carrying it right after I got it. Now only got 1 style of p51... Why I was asking about this model, I am pretty sure going to get one!

[xviper]

One can never be certain about the future of this or any other model. Manufacturers/sellers won't generally venture to reveal such information. I'm going to take a stab at a guess. Since this plane originally was introduced with the potential for upgrading to 90mm, I think it will be a long time before they would consider an "updated" version. I also believe that this product has sustained generally moderate++ interest throughout its existence and it isn't likely to suddenly disappear once current stock runs low. Initial interest and popularity would likely mean that there are plenty of these "out there". Parts have also been fairly "available" and aside from specific body parts, things like servos, retract bodies, motors, ESCs are common and shared with other products. I'm sure others will have a different take on this.

[Bill b]

Another reason I am asking is be my luck they discontinue this model come out with an upgraded one. Something parts won't fit from this one to updated one! 😂 Well it's a lot of money to get this one then have em discontinue it. 😆 Then I have get newer one lol be divorced for sure! 🤔 That's good idea been thinking about a way to do that! 👍

[Bill b]

Hey there not going to be getting rid of this plane anytime soon are they??? I want one but afraid they may stop selling in near future then I won't be able to find parts!

[Evan D]

They are on the F-104 and Avios MiG-17. I crashed my first F-104 using them, they were very effective and on one approach using them I didn't keep enough throttle in to keep her airborne. It was coming head on and I couldn't tell that it had slowed as much as it had.

On the flip side I use them on the MiG and love them, they work absolutely great.

[jetpltrich]

From memory the A6E and TRAM had the dive brakes inactivated, earlier models and the KA6D had them working.

That is correct, the mission changed no longer needed. My post was to be as simplistic as possible and to shed some light on why the brakes do what they do. I was going to include the High and Low speed engine setting in the 737 but that is far fetched. Just a little insight on the real thing. I'm no expert especially when it comes to these Foamies, so I'll Keep It Simple Stupid because if I had those big aileron brakes on my A-10 I'd get in big trouble when using them.

Richard

[Evan D]

From memory the A6E and TRAM had the dive brakes inactivated, earlier models and the KA6D had them working.

[jetpltrich]

[QUOTEAfter seeing the B-2 with the drag brakes. I have since wondered if it would be possible for Free Wing to develop an update to the A-10, to add the drag brake setup with the ailerons would be a great addition to this Fighter][/QUOTE]

The B-2 incorporates what's known as a "Split Rudder" out at the wing tips. This system keeps that plane flying straight, and I would also suggest it provides drag to slow down the plane much like a speed brake does, however, don't hold me to that, I'm not a B-2 expert. If the B-2 didn't have this system it wouldn't go too awfully straight. Northrop's flying wing also had this system but I doubt it was computer controlled. I'm sure there are more well informed experts on this forum when speaking of the B-2 such as GG.



If we take a look at the A-6 the split devices at the wing tip are there to create drag on final to spool the engine up to a certain percentage N1 or maybe EPR should the aircraft bolter (go-around). Without that drag on final the engine would take time to spool up and go in the drink. The system is designed to close them when the throttle is advanced when they do bolter so they are not penalized for airspeed. The A-6 has dive brakes on the side of the fuselage aft of the wing. When I was in the Navy these dive brakes were bolted shut on some aircraft and never used. Over time the aircrafts mission profile changed from the original diving style bombing to low level ingress to a higher level bombing profile of dropping LGB's (Lazer Guided Bombs). Gone were the days of dive bombing. My son who's now in the Marine reserves flying the F-18 said his time over Iraq he dropped his JADMS from a higher altitude 18-20K and from a distance.



Dual use Spilt Aileron/Speed Brake. If you've ever seen the F-15 and A-10 on final they have the Brake deployed for drag, on the top of the fuselage in the case of the F-15, and the Split Ailerons in the case of the A-10. Again this it to have the engines spooled up on final just like the A-6 in case they may have to go-around. Since I'm not privy to the system and or limits/operation I can't give you much information.



In the 737 I fly we have Flight Spoilers (air brakes) and Ground Spoilers. Only a small number of flight spoilers deploy when you want to limit speed and or get down out of altitude without exceeding airspeed. It's affectionately known as the Colonel stick and they are pretty much useless in flight. Ground Spoilers are a different animal, they are designed to spoil the lift upon touchdown (main wheel spin up) and they work as advertised. Ground Spoilers and Flight Spoilers both deploy when touchdown occurs and one can feel the squat the plane takes when they do deploy. And for those who complain about hard landings? sometimes a hard landing is necessary such as in rain or snow... this is primarily done to dissipate energy. Landing hard can be a good thing at times.

My personal preference is to leave well enough alone. I do enough go-arounds with my little fleet of airplanes that stowing a brake is too much to do in a dynamic environment and not doing so could cost me valuable airspeed needed to climb out. Additionally in a dive I may forget to stow the brake on the pull up. That said I would like to have the ability to dissipate energy after touchdown to slow the aircraft and prevent long rollouts, would be useful for strips that have grass at the end to contend with.

Just my two cents.
Richard

[Elbee]

This is the end of the work - the cockpit is finished.

RF, Bravo Zulu, Sir. Very nicely done. Diggin' the HUD. Best, LB