Official Freewing 90mm F-16 Falcon Thread

[Hugh Wiedman]

Oh what a sweet looking machine!

[Hugh Wiedman]

Nice little surprise...Callie's decals arrived today, so she's all done! A little before and after...

I'll bet after your first flight without the flaperons, you were thinking "I ain't going to waste my time with a repaint". How much do you think the paint and polycrylic will add?

[Aros]

Thanks Hugh! Nah, I was gonna paint her regardless of the first couple flights, lol...I don't think the paint/poly will add that much honestly. Not enough to be perceptible in the air IMO...Time will tell!

[Hugh Wiedman]

The only reason I asked was because when I did a full repaint of the F-4 to the blue angel, I feel that it flies slightly heavier than my camo F-4. Both fly with the 6000, have 4 coats of Spar Urethane and afterburners and the only difference is one had a full repaint. Can only really tell the difference when I fly one right after the other, and I fly the camo with missles (no drop tanks though).

Would love to copy you with another F-16 in the Artic Camo so keep us posted on the flight conditions of the redo. I do have a 2nd RC Geek afterburner with battery in mine, which probably weighs more than your extra paint, so doubt it will fly any different (actually didn't notice any difference going from a 5000 to 6000 either).

[Aros]

Roger that! I will report if I notice any difference...Should be able to fly this weekend...

[Aros]

Plan on taking her out after work tonight...Weather is fair, winds are calm...Will report back along with video...I don't anticipate any noticeable difference with the added paint/polycrylic but we shall see.

[Aros]

Meant to post this the other day. I took her out on her first "Arctic Camo" flight. I hate to admit it but she did feel more sluggish than the flight previous to the repaint. Now truthfully, I have no way of knowing if the paint really made any kind of difference (after all, I have been repainting my planes for well over a decade with no noticeable performance drop) or if it was some other factor. My buddy asked if I had calibrated my ESC and I said, "whoops!" Total brain fart on my part but I did forget to do that. So I did it right there...I didn't fly again but thought I could tell a little difference in thrust during the ground test. So anxious to try again. Didn't someone here mention they were having issues with power until they (re)calibrated their ESC? Obviously it's something we all should be doing when putting together any model but again I forgot this time around.

What wouldn't make sense is that flight I had before the repaint felt great. Power seemed adequate...Once I programmed the flaperons the takeoff roll was shorter, landing slower...This last flight the takeoff roll seemed too long again even with flaperons...Really did feel like a power issue. Hoping the ESC calibration solved it. Also going to remove all missiles for the next flight to see if there is any real appreciable difference as well.

[gooniac33]

Meant to post this the other day. I took her out on her first "Arctic Camo" flight. I hate to admit it but she did feel more sluggish than the flight previous to the repaint. Now truthfully, I have no way of knowing if the paint really made any kind of difference (after all, I have been repainting my planes for well over a decade with no noticeable performance drop) or if it was some other factor. My buddy asked if I had calibrated my ESC and I said, "whoops!" Total brain fart on my part but I did forget to do that. So I did it right there...I didn't fly again but thought I could tell a little difference in thrust during the ground test. So anxious to try again. Didn't someone here mention they were having issues with power until they (re)calibrated their ESC? Obviously it's something we all should be doing when putting together any model but again I forgot this time around.

What wouldn't make sense is that flight I had before the repaint felt great. Power seemed adequate...Once I programmed the flaperons the takeoff roll was shorter, landing slower...This last flight the takeoff roll seemed too long again even with flaperons...Really did feel like a power issue. Hoping the ESC calibration solved it. Also going to remove all missiles for the next flight to see if there is any real appreciable difference as well.

I usually recalibrate every flying session just to be safe... it shouldn't need to be done but it doesn't hurt either...

[Aros]

Yeah it may be overkill but like you say it doesn't hurt. Anxious to fly her again...Weather in the Pac NW in February is, well...Let's just say not very conducive for RC flying.

[Thehoker]

Hello All,
Looking to purchase this plane, enjoying the thread.
Im guessing that large turbine 16 shown earlier is 1/6 or 1/5 scale, 1/6th is 94" the 1/5th is little over 120", it looks like a 1/6th scale in the photo.
We have a couple around these parts- not mine.
Anyways, back to my question, the MRC site states the weight as about 7 1/2 pounds.
I see many posts stating the plane is "heavy", are your actual weights close to that stated on the site or heavier ?
Little over seven pounds doesn't seem super heavy for a plane this size, the F-16 is supposed to be a lifting body.
Im just asking, I have no experience with this airframe.
Thanks in advance for any response's
BK.

[Lcacing]

I just acquired a Thunder Bird F16, I’ve been doing lots of reading on this thread. First maiden will be this weekend. I did set up conditions to try stock control surfaces to tailerons and flaps.
I think the ventral fins will get in the way when transporting it, did not want to screw them on and off so ended up making them removable. I did the same thing on my F14 (idea from rcinformer) now I can set it on it’s belly flat. Just need to add some blue paint.

[Hugh Wiedman]

Hello All,
Looking to purchase this plane, enjoying the thread.
Im guessing that large turbine 16 shown earlier is 1/6 or 1/5 scale, 1/6th is 94" the 1/5th is little over 120", it looks like a 1/6th scale in the photo.
We have a couple around these parts- not mine.
Anyways, back to my question, the MRC site states the weight as about 7 1/2 pounds.
I see many posts stating the plane is "heavy", are your actual weights close to that stated on the site or heavier ?
Little over seven pounds doesn't seem super heavy for a plane this size, the F-16 is supposed to be a lifting body.
Im just asking, I have no experience with this airframe.
Thanks in advance for any response's
BK.

Can't verify the actual weight, but yes, it does fly "heavy", whatever that may mean to you. Even so, it is super stable and if you keep the CG around 120mm, it lands very nicely in high alpha. I fly mine with the upgraded in-runner and have also added the RC Geek afterburner, in conjunction with the included ring afterburner. I fly mine on the Admiral 6000 (giving me over 4 minutes of flight time) instead of the 5000, so with all that extra weight, I still love the way it flies. Definitely not as quick as the F-18, but get her going and she doesn't want to stop (kind of like a Winnebago). Has plenty of power (at least the in-runner does) and climbs well. I fly off of grass, and without flaps, it took a long run to get it up to V1. Added flaperons and she takes off super scale in 1/2 the distance, and flaps sure slow it down for smooth landings. I think this is a model that you either love or hate, and in my case I love it, but sure that it's not for everyone.

[Aros]

Had a nice flight yesterday. Starting to dial her in...Landings are becoming non-events which is always good, lol. Still need to find the right distance at the school I fly at for the base and final approach...Still bringing her in too hot but that will improve with more time with her. Refined the elevator mix with the flaperons so she's not ballooning any more. All good stuff.

[Aros]

This one is the first flight fully loaded with tanks. I was pleasantly surprised there was no real noticeable difference, so the tanks will be staying on...Just looks too badass not to have them on!

[DCORSAIR]

Nice flight, glad you like it with the tanks on, I sure could feel the difference with them on, tried several times to fly with them on and didn't like the way it felt, it does look good though, I am glad you gave this F-16 a scond chance, looks like you have it flying nicely.

[Aros]

Thanks DC, yeah if it wasn't for Jeff (Jeff RC) that painted his Arctic Camo and inspired me I wouldn't have this bird again. I was waiting for a new gen version but reading all the comments in here about how she wakes up with an inrunner, and coupled with knowing I would paint her the Arctic scheme I just had to grab another and I am really glad I did. After about 6 flights or so she's totally dialed in and flies fantastic. I too was surprised...I expected her to really be a slug with fully dirty profile but she wasn't. Those low, WOT passes look SWEET!

[Jdcrow]

Im about ready to add another 90mm to my hanger. Currently flying the F-22, T-45 and have the F-15 yet to maiden in 90mm. A-4, A-6, L-39 in 80mm. Was really leaning toward the F-18c when it came out, but the initial bugs really tamped down my enthusiasm.

Had considered the HSD 105mm F-16, but i fly grass ops predominately. So would likely be a really cost ineffective hanger rat, only driven by a little old lady from Pasadena to easter service.

So Im looking for experienced recommendation with regard to the latest High Performance F-18 vs the Super Scale F-16 High Performance

[Jets and Wings]

Im about ready to add another 90mm to my hanger. Currently flying the F-22, T-45 and have the F-15 yet to maiden in 90mm. A-4, A-6, L-39 in 80mm. Was really leaning toward the F-18c when it came out, but the initial bugs really tamped down my enthusiasm.

Had considered the HSD 105mm F-16, but i fly grass ops predominately. So would likely be a really cost ineffective hanger rat, only driven by a little old lady from Pasadena to easter service.

So Im looking for experienced recommendation with regard to the latest High Performance F-18 vs the Super Scale F-16 High Performance

Hello Jdcrow, with both you make no mistake, I have the F-16 with the Inrunner and the F-18 with the Outrunner. I will upgrade my F-18 to the High Performance version because I think with it, it will absolutly be a burner. The F-16 makes really fun to fly with the Inrunner.
When you talk about grass ops, the F-18 nose gear will be better than the one of the F-16 in my opinion. I have a paved runway but sometimes I land on the grass strip also and there the F-18 is much better!

[JamesonC]

Im about ready to add another 90mm to my hanger. Currently flying the F-22, T-45 and have the F-15 yet to maiden in 90mm. A-4, A-6, L-39 in 80mm. Was really leaning toward the F-18c when it came out, but the initial bugs really tamped down my enthusiasm.

Had considered the HSD 105mm F-16, but i fly grass ops predominately. So would likely be a really cost ineffective hanger rat, only driven by a little old lady from Pasadena to easter service.

So Im looking for experienced recommendation with regard to the latest High Performance F-18 vs the Super Scale F-16 High Performance

The F18 just now started coming as a high performance version with a brand new 9 blade inrunner. I haven't heard any feedback on that power system yet. My F18 has the 1835kv 12bl inrunner and it performs very well with it!

The F16 unfortunately does not have a high performance version yet, so you'd have to upgrade the PNP or buy the ARF plus whatever power system you want.

[Aros]

I wouldn't hesitate buying the F-18 now since this is the newer batch with the upgraded all digital metal gear servos and elevator supports strengthened and other known issues fixed. My second F-18 has been rock solid after I replaced the elevator servos with all metal gear. No hybrids. Completely dialed she is a blast to fly and that's the outrunner. I can only imagine how zippy she would be with the new HP version. The same goes for my 90mm F-16 with the inrunner setup. I wouldn't bother with it without running an inrunner setup. She is too heavy for the outrunner IMO. Both are fantastic scale jets with excellent presence.