Official FlightLine RC 2000mm B-24D/J Liberator Thread

[Tom]

This is killing me. A great plane that I would love to have only to find out that it is not recommended for grass fields. It's just not fair feel like Santa just took away my Christmas present

The plane was designed with grass fields in mind. What we don't recommend is installing the optional nose gear door because it can get hung up in the grass. It will fly great from grass stock!

[carracer5]

I know this will be a great looking and flying model since it is from Flight line.
. But, why didn't the US Guys from Motion have them make it a silly 50mm longer in wingspan? That way it would be legal to fly in any "Scale Fly in including Giant Scale" Just a thought as it wouldn't have cost much more to make it more attractive to a whole nother group of fliers.
. JUST MY THOUGHTS,
. JERRYY

[Alpha]

Thank you! thank you! thank you! thank you! thank you! thank you! thank you!!!!!!! Been waiting on this one for a lifetime!

Preordered and subscribed.

Welcome to Hobby Squawk, Timbee! Thank YOU for your support!

Themudduck, we tested several props and motors for this aircraft. I talk about this a little in the podcast towards the end, skip to about the 2 hour mark, haha. Basically, the final prop is the best balance for this aircraft's size, weight, and interned flight enenvelope. It can fly more than four times faster than "scale top speed", yes, but it is still stable in slow flight, efficient in flight duration, with ample thrust to get out of sticky situations. We've flown it like a fighter for five minutes trying to clap the wings, and we've also left it at 50% throttle or less and windsurfed for ten minutes.

Flying with Tony's Apollo Warbird Squadron has been a privilege to appreciate designing a bomber that gives a bomber like flying experience --Slow, stable, and controlled. We just added a little pep in the B-24's power system, but not to where it killed the other handling factors. We're also anticipating some pilots adding 3D printed details, bomb bays, FPV gear, etc... So the stock power system can handle the extra weight and still fly confidently.

I hope this information helps. :)

[Alpha]

I know this will be a great looking and flying model since it is from Flight line.
. But, why didn't the US Guys from Motion have them make it a silly 50mm longer in wingspan? That way it would be legal to fly in any "Scale Fly in including Giant Scale" Just a thought as it wouldn't have cost much more to make it more attractive to a whole nother group of fliers.
. JUST MY THOUGHTS,
. JERRYY

Hi Jerry, fair question. We considered that in development, but we checked, and in fact sizing to 2050mm wingspan DID actually change the price, because at that slightly larger size our mold case would have gone up to the next size, which is more expensive. It's like having an 8x11 picture with an 8x10 picture frame... we'd need to use the next size up picture frame, like a 10x14, with extra cost for dead space.

Also, the shipping box size is a big consideration. Because Motion RC pays for Free Shipping, we try to stay under the maximal dimensions, above which shipping costs increase significantly. The way this B-24 is currently situated in its box, we don't have 50mm to spare, without sacrificing boxing durability.

Finally, I'd sincerely hope that if someone showed up to a Giant Scale event with a FlightLine RC B-24... the world's only PNP Liberator... that happens to be only 50mm shy of the rulebook... that the event CD would find it in his/her heart to let the pilot fly. I'd hope the attendees/audience would want to see it fly. Just my thoughts.

[eli5539]

The plane was designed with grass fields in mind. What we don't recommend is installing the optional nose gear door because it can get hung up in the grass. It will fly great from grass stock!

I was hoping you would say that. You have made me one happy camper

[MikeT]

Hands up all those who remember the B-24 balsa kit by Jack Stafford. This was a 90" model built up from balsa and ply designed for 4 X 0.19 size glow engines. I remember building one for a guy back in the mid-70s. After I'd finished it I always wanted one for myself but never had one until now. I've also ordered the "T" shirt from Bunker 27.

Martin.

I was actually on the fence about building one for some time. Stafford Kits are still being produced . This Flightline just saved me a ton of work and way over a grand. I holding off till the second run to get some projects completed and to get the printed parts once available..

http://leisurercmodels.com/jack-stafford-models-kits.html

Mike

[RCjetdude]

I was actually on the fence about building one for some time. Stafford Kits are still being produced . This Flightline just saved me a ton of work and way over a grand. I holding off till the second run to get some projects completed and to get the printed parts once available..

http://leisurercmodels.com/jack-stafford-models-kits.html

Mike

Could it be converted to electric?

[ryramZ]

Here are just a few of our shots from yesterday soon to be more in the site. Video coming soon for build and full flight. You guys will love how it feels flying. We already know how good it looks. It is truly just right as far as power on tap, presence and feel. Happy Thanksgiving friends!

[zorkahn]

It looks to me that the retractable ball turret is missing on the model?

[Alpha]

Excellent photos, thanks as always, Ryan and Mike!

Zorkahn, we omitted the retractable ball turret. It was a scale detail that required actual retraction (it would bottom out on the ground unless it retracted), which increased the cost and complexity above what we were prepared to ask people to pay. Not to mention, not all B-24s had ball turrets. After some teething issues, many B-24s went to simplified "tunnel gun" arrangements to protect the underside. The Sperry ball turret wasn't in universal use. Depending on the variant someone is modeling, they can opt to DIY it. I believe TiredIronGRB plans to DIY a B-17 ball turret into his B-24, which should arrive to him within the week.

[BRGT350]

concerning the ball turret, I have found references pointing to late-war B-24's not having the ball turret. This was in the Pacific, so I am not sure about the ETO. I prefer the ball turret, which is why my scale models have them even if they aren't correct. I lack the courage to install a retracting turret, so I will fly without it. I am pretty sure Cocktail Hour didn't have a ball turret or waist guns. She only flew for a few missions before the war ended.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

[Evoman]

going to pass on this one,now if came with suspension landing gear and lights for that price ya but not if i have to purchase better landing gear.our field is grass and not that smooth will tear up in no time without the suspension spring loaded gear.looks nice but for me the price is alittle high.

Even though this beauty does not interest me at this time I am still happy about it, because its the first PNP B-24 done in foam. To many here this will be the only option available of a B-24 without having to step up to an even more costly and time consuming balsa project kit. To them any other upgrade it may need is just a minor after thought because they know they are already getting a great quality product that will just fly well to start with. I am sure you would feel the same if the airplane of your dreams were to finally be made in a foam PNP regardless of what features it may have and price.

[Alpha]

I was actually on the fence about building one for some time. Stafford Kits are still being produced . This Flightline just saved me a ton of work and way over a grand. I holding off till the second run to get some projects completed and to get the printed parts once available..

http://leisurercmodels.com/jack-staf...dels-kits.html

Mike

Xplaneguy can weigh in here, but I believe the Stafford B-24 is what one of our guys at Apollo flies. He brought it out a couple times to fly with the Apollo Warbird Squadron, in formation with a gaggle of B-17s. He's running nitro, I believe. It's a big heavy bird that looks really great in the sky. Tony, do you have pictures of it? I don't on my computers here.

[Twowingtj]

Finally, I'd sincerely hope that if someone showed up to a Giant Scale event with a FlightLine RC B-24... the world's only PNP Liberator... that happens to be only 50mm shy of the rulebook... that the event CD would find it in his/her heart to let the pilot fly. I'd hope the attendees/audience would want to see it fly. Just my thoughts.

Very good point on the additional costs involved Alpha.

I'm the President of a club that was founded for the promotion of giant scale when it was not as common as it is now. We hold a very large annual giant scale event, going on its 33rd year, the Aeros' Festival of Giants. When we were under IMAA, the size rules were clearly defined and adhered to. With IMAA's demise, the rules went away too.

As an AMA Associate VP in my district, the guidane I give clubs is that there are no giant scale rules with AMA. So the individual club holding a giant scale event can establish the size criteria for their event. Our club did that with the Festival of Giants last year. We set the size for jets to 3m combined fuselage length and wingspan vs the IMAA 140". This allowed the Freewing A-10 to participate and it was well received. At my event a 2m warbird is welcome.

I've been trying to get a movement going to adjust the old IMAA rules to be more inclusive of the metric sized birds, 2m vs 80". It has met with some resistance with the "old guard IMAA folks". IMHO being a bit more inclusive of that size allows more pilots to enter the giant scale realm and participate in those kinds of events. There is a definate upside to clubs that do so.

[Topshot19]

I wanted to get the a10. But now this happens and I’m like shoot.....

[RCjetdude]

Very good point on the additional costs involved Alpha.

I'm the President of a club that was founded for the promotion of giant scale when it was not as common as it is now. We hold a very large annual giant scale event, going on its 33rd year, the Aeros' Festival of Giants. When we were under IMAA, the size rules were clearly defined and adhered to. With IMAA's demise, the rules went away too.

As an AMA Associate VP in my district, the guidane I give clubs is that there are no giant scale rules with AMA. So the individual club holding a giant scale event can establish the size criteria for their event. Our club did that with the Festival of Giants last year. We set the size for jets to 3m combined fuselage length and wingspan vs the IMAA 140". This allowed the Freewing A-10 to participate and it was well received. At my event a 2m warbird is welcome.

I've been trying to get a movement going to adjust the old IMAA rules to be more inclusive of the metric sized birds, 2m vs 80". It has met with some resistance with the "old guard IMAA folks". IMHO being a bit more inclusive of that size allows more pilots to enter the giant scale realm and participate in those kinds of events. There is a definate upside to clubs that do so.

TJ, I recently became a CD with the AMA and desire to help promote things such as this. Where could I find out more about it and how could I help fight for your cause? I am a member of two clubs in my area. One may soon be losing its field to a solar farm and the other just got a brand new paved runway. I am already looking to run an EDF event next year and have been thinking about what else I would like to do.

[petefoss]

Could it be converted to electric?

Assuming the kit is similar to the one I built 25 years ago, yes. I think you could put a speed control and battery pack in each nacelle. If you buy the kit and the thermoformed parts suck like mine did, let me know. I cast Dunham's water putty in the parts I received and created new molds.

Pete

[fhhuber]

TJ, I recently became a CD with the AMA and desire to help promote things such as this. Where could I find out more about it and how could I help fight for your cause? I am a member of two clubs in my area. One may soon be losing its field to a solar farm and the other just got a brand new paved runway. I am already looking to run an EDF event next year and have been thinking about what else I would like to do.

Simplest answer:

Call your event "Large Scale" and ignore the IMAA/IMAC people.

There will always be people complaining about changing the meaning of "Giant Scale" to allow 2 meter (1.7 inches short of IMAA/IMAC's definition) They complained a LOT when the rules were "bent" to deal with jets that tend to be longer than their wingspan.

[MikeT]

Simplest answer:

Call your event "Large Scale" and ignore the IMAA/IMAC people.

There will always be people complaining about changing the meaning of "Giant Scale" to allow 2 meter (1.7 inches short of IMAA/IMAC's definition) They complained a LOT when the rules were "bent" to deal with jets that tend to be longer than their wingspan.

I concur as a Club Officer I've always believed on alienating no one.

Mike

[TiredIronGRB]

Xplaneguy can weigh in here, but I believe the Stafford B-24 is what one of our guys at Apollo flies. He brought it out a couple times to fly with the Apollo Warbird Squadron, in formation with a gaggle of B-17s. He's running nitro, I believe. It's a big heavy bird that looks really great in the sky. Tony, do you have pictures of it? I don't on my computers here.

Here's both of the Apollo B-24s...