Staggerwing by Dynam or FlightLine

[OV10]

The Waco by Dynam has been in my books a phenomenally fun biplane to own and there has not been any REAL issues in my 100 sorties with it nor any I've seen that have been posted. I was part of the handful of the original requestors back in mid 2014 to ask Motion to bring this into the sales line of the Dynam line that was planned to be added and those that have followed since the Waco.
http://www.hobbysquawk.com/forum/mot...=5077#post5077
It is a MUCH better value than the Rochobby Waco because of price and size. With that being said, I would snap up a 50" wingspan Staggerwing in the same price range of $180 in a instant if done either by Dynam or the upcoming contender of foam prop planes.......FlightLine.
Speak up pilots if you concur so that Motion can hear that this would be another marketable venture to move forward on.
Best regards,

[Hippie 64]

I'm there with you . The Dynam Waco has become one of my favorite planes . Great size and the price point is fantastic . A stagger wing would be a great addition to their line .


Bryan

[boomer108]

Although I have the Roc Hobby Waco, I am also going to get the Dynam Waco and would love to see a stagger wing by Dynam or Flightline. I love biplanes.

Roy B.

[Iowa54]

Throw my hat into the ring.... The Dynam Waco and Tiger Moth are my go to birds for a nice relaxing day and they both can "rev" it up some also for that let your hair down moments... That is if I had any hair!!!

[FLTRI]

The Roc Hobby Staggerwing is probably one of my favorite planes. Flaps, retracts, lights and superb fit and finish. It's 1030mm, so smaller that what you are asking for, but only by ten inches. It is $180 and wasn't affected by the recent FMS price hikes...

[OV10]

The Roc Hobby Staggerwing is probably one of my favorite planes. Flaps, retracts, lights and superb fit and finish. It's 1030mm, so smaller than what you are asking for, but only by ten inches. It is $180 and wasn't affected by the recent FMS price hikes...

But only 10 inches smaller is a BIG difference. The 40" Roc Waco is no comparison to the 50" Dynam Waco in flight performance and presence, and that is why I asked for a 50" Stagger because the 40" by Roc just don't get it done. ;)

[FLTRI]

Yeah, agreed. It sometimes strikes me as odd how a "little bit bigger" can be a really huge difference. My 980mm P-40 looks tiny compared to the 1200mm Sea Fury, and flies completely different. Those wingspans are "only" 8 ½" apart...

Still, I do like my Staggerwing. It's one of the few planes I have that if I were to total it, I'd have a new one ordered before the end of the day...

[BILLY BOY]

I have two FMS staggerwings. The FMS blue and yellow and the Roc Hobby Red. I love them both. I also have the Dynam Albatross which has not as yet been flown. Just today I received the Roc Hobby Waco. I am making some changes to her. I enjoy the smaller wingspan aircraft as space is a big concern for me. The 980mm FMS P40 seems to be the perfect size for me. With this size I can take six or seven airplanes to the field with room to spare. My intention was to dress up my WACO in the same livery as the Red Baron Squadron. I just ordered the Red Baron Pizza logo decals from Callie. It should be interesting. I know the Red Baron Squadron were Stearmans and there are striking differences between the WACO and the Stearman. I am not that fussy and after all. This is for fun and that is what I am having.

[rifleman_btx]

I waited too long to pick up the 980mm P40. Looks like they have axed them like the P39 I have. I would love to have to a staggerwing as well.

[fhhuber]

I have two FMS staggerwings. The FMS blue and yellow and the Roc Hobby Red. I love them both. I also have the Dynam Albatross which has not as yet been flown. Just today I received the Roc Hobby Waco. I am making some changes to her. I enjoy the smaller wingspan aircraft as space is a big concern for me. The 980mm FMS P40 seems to be the perfect size for me. With this size I can take six or seven airplanes to the field with room to spare.

Dynam Albatross suffers from significant adverse yaw. Its also very easy to have it tail-heavy. That combo can have you apply right aileron, nose turns left and points straight up before you know what is happening. Then with it being tail-heavy, stall recovery is not easy. If you get in that condition, give it full rudder to point the nose down,then let it build speed before pulling out. DO NOT let it spin while tail-heavy...

[BILLY BOY]

I waited too long to pick up the 980mm P40. Looks like they have axed them like the P39 I have. I would love to have to a staggerwing as well.

Do you think the 980 mm p-40 could be successfully hand launched? I can't think of any reasons why it would not work just like the wildcat. Comments? Suggestions? Thoughts?

[BILLY BOY]

Dynam Albatross suffers from significant adverse yaw. Its also very easy to have it tail-heavy. That combo can have you apply right aileron, nose turns left and points straight up before you know what is happening. Then with it being tail-heavy, stall recovery is not easy. If you get in that condition, give it full rudder to point the nose down,then let it build speed before pulling out. DO NOT let it spin while tail-heavy...

Thanks for the heads up.

[rifleman_btx]

If you throw it really hard, of course mine runs on 4s so it is really heavy. On 3s I haven't tried flying it that way, but would assume much lighter and in that case I don't see why it wouldn't hand launch.

[FLTRI]

Do you think the 980 mm p-40 could be successfully hand launched? I can't think of any reasons why it would not work just like the wildcat. Comments? Suggestions? Thoughts?

I've hand launched mine several times, after a gear failure at the field and not wanting to go home with charged batteries. It was surprisingly easy...

[rifleman_btx]

Are you running 3 or 4s? I guess I do have to keep in mind that I fly mine on 2700 4s packs :Silly:

[BILLY BOY]

Are you running 3 or 4s? I guess I do have to keep in mind that I fly mine on 2700 4s packs :Silly:

I am using 3200 3s.

[fhhuber]

Going from 4S to 3S is a tremendous reduction in power and the reduced weight may not be enough to allow hand launch since the battery is just a percentage of total RTF weight.

Results vary as to which is more important in the hand launch: Power or weight.

Most often you can hand launch either way if you are prepared.

The heavier plane might just need a slight "push" from the person launching with the increased power giving the needed airspeed rapidly (possibly even allowing vertical climb straight from the launcher's hand), where the lighter, lower power model may require a much better control of launch angle and a better prepared pilot to deal with a plane short on power and near stall.

I'm certain my Dynam P-51 would hand launch into vertical climb on 4S 3000 mah but would be a tricky model to hand launch on 3s 2000 mah (with 3S 2000 mah being the OEM recommended battery)
The Tiger Moth (same motor and ESC as the P-51...) would be the exact opposite, with the 3S being an easier hand launch because the airplane is slow and draggy and doesn't need as much airspeed. The added power would be unlikely to overcome the drag rapidly enough.

Without having the Staggerwing, I couln't easily predict real results.

"Throw really hard" is usually a formula for a crash. A smooth throw at a well chosen angle is far better even if power is marginal and the airplane is heavy.

I've hand launched Sig Kougars, built heavy and fiberglass finished, with the prop removed for slope soaring. (about like adding 2.5 lbs of lead to the Dynam P-51, with the heavy battery and no prop.) You do that right or you have a "re-kit".

[BILLY BOY]

Going from 4S to 3S is a tremendous reduction in power and the reduced weight may not be enough to allow hand launch since the battery is just a percentage of total RTF weight.

Results vary as to which is more important in the hand launch: Power or weight.

Most often you can hand launch either way if you are prepared.

The heavier plane might just need a slight "push" from the person launching with the increased power giving the needed airspeed rapidly (possibly even allowing vertical climb straight from the launcher's hand), where the lighter, lower power model may require a much better control of launch angle and a better prepared pilot to deal with a plane short on power and near stall.

I'm certain my Dynam P-51 would hand launch into vertical climb on 4S 3000 mah but would be a tricky model to hand launch on 3s 2000 mah (with 3S 2000 mah being the OEM recommended battery)
The Tiger Moth (same motor and ESC as the P-51...) would be the exact opposite, with the 3S being an easier hand launch because the airplane is slow and draggy and doesn't need as much airspeed. The added power would be unlikely to overcome the drag rapidly enough.

Without having the Staggerwing, I couln't easily predict real results.

"Throw really hard" is usually a formula for a crash. A smooth throw at a well chosen angle is far better even if power is marginal and the airplane is heavy.

I've hand launched Sig Kougars, built heavy and fiberglass finished, with the prop removed for slope soaring. (about like adding 2.5 lbs of lead to the Dynam P-51, with the heavy battery and no prop.) You do that right or you have a "re-kit".

Thanks for the great advice.

[Alpha]

Really good advice, Fhhuber, thanks for sharing!

I like testing the model in the hand before launching, and move the throttle until I find a power setting where I can feel the aircraft wanting to leave my hand and fly out. A throttle setting slightly above that setting almost always results in a successful launch (provide toss and angle are good also). Learn the model, listen to the model, give the model what it needs. Nothing more, nothing less.

[rifleman_btx]

Yeah I keep forgetting how hard I actually throw all my planes, as I use to throw batting practice for most of my life up til I joined the army. When I throw my 6.5 ft wing when it leaves my hand its already doing 75mph according to the airspeed indicator.