Official FlightLine RC 1600mm Spitfire Mk. IX Thread

[Evan D]

Huh? What’s the difference between 72 and 2.4 for dual rates and expo.

And just because a “real” plane doesn’t have it we shouldn’t? I guess we should put hydraulics in our planes if the “real” one has it??? I’m with John, I’ll do my planes how I like, thank you.

[RRHandy]

Argument against Dual rates and expo. If the premise is to make it a successful flight I argue all you are doing is making it more complicated. Real aircraft do not have expo or dual rates.
I spend many flights getting the cg correct and the adjusting the the throws so the model flys the way I perceive it should based on my experience as a pilot.
Against dual rates ... unless its a maiden.. otherwise adjust the controls so the airplane behaves in a manner you can handle. Feedback loop. How are you going to learn the airplane if you have 2 or 3 different control modes? Your not. Right now the Spit has enough elevator to depart at any speed. If i yank on it its departed. I am more than capable of handling that but if your not then dial back the elevator throws so it gets close to stall but wont go.
Dynamic pressure = .5xdensityxVel ^2... Velocity^2 is your expo. As you decel to land you want linear feedback from tx. If you cant see the decel you can feel it. If you have 25% expo you are not getting linear input to the elevator. Somewhere in the flare or approach there is non linear input. Flight controls systems are linear in a static and dynamic stable airplane.
I would make an effort to simplify your Tx switchology.. You want to have to reach for a dual rate switch when your battery all of a sudden starts to die on you?
If the controls are too sensitive the adjust the throws down until it flys like trainer or whatever your skill level is. Dont use expo and dual rates to solve the twitchy bird syndrome.
There is zero reason to have 3 dual rate for any airplanes that FW sells. Simplify your set up . Set it to where it flys to your skill level then dont mess with it. As you build time with the model and want more responsiveness then add control throws. Keep you hand eye coordination linear.

Aman brother, I tell many members and my students that dual rates is leftover from the 72mhz days, set up you throws and dial in expo till you have a one to one movement, I want 100% of the movement when I need it.

[ICM]

I like to fly scale avoiding maneuvers the real plane could never do, so I usually settle on mid-rates with some adjustments after the maiden and a few more flights. I also usually reduce expo to around 10% just to minimize the effect of slight off-axis stick movements. Works for me.

[kallend]

Argument against Dual rates and expo. If the premise is to make it a successful flight I argue all you are doing is making it more complicated. Real aircraft do not have expo or dual rates.

Blah blah blah
.

Fly your planes how you want and let others fly like they want.

[barneyb]

Argument against Dual rates and expo. If the premise is to make it a successful flight I argue all you are doing is making it more complicated. Real aircraft do not have expo or dual rates.
I spend many flights getting the cg correct and the adjusting the the throws so the model flys the way I perceive it should based on my experience as a pilot.
Against dual rates ... unless its a maiden.. otherwise adjust the controls so the airplane behaves in a manner you can handle. Feedback loop. How are you going to learn the airplane if you have 2 or 3 different control modes? Your not. Right now the Spit has enough elevator to depart at any speed. If i yank on it its departed. I am more than capable of handling that but if your not then dial back the elevator throws so it gets close to stall but wont go.
Dynamic pressure = .5xdensityxVel ^2... Velocity^2 is your expo. As you decel to land you want linear feedback from tx. If you cant see the decel you can feel it. If you have 25% expo you are not getting linear input to the elevator. Somewhere in the flare or approach there is non linear input. Flight controls systems are linear in a static and dynamic stable airplane.
I would make an effort to simplify your Tx switchology.. You want to have to reach for a dual rate switch when your battery all of a sudden starts to die on you?
If the controls are too sensitive the adjust the throws down until it flys like trainer or whatever your skill level is. Dont use expo and dual rates to solve the twitchy bird syndrome.
There is zero reason to have 3 dual rate for any airplanes that FW sells. Simplify your set up . Set it to where it flys to your skill level then dont mess with it. As you build time with the model and want more responsiveness then add control throws. Keep you hand eye coordination linear.

[sngecko]

I just picked up this Flightline Spitfire 1600 from a club member who never flew it. Installed a Spektrum AR620 rx and now have to set it up on my DX9. After doing a search for rates in this forum it seems that many find the manual's high rates twitchy and fly on the recommended low rates. I typically set up high/mid/ low rates so I'm considering the following : Ail Ele Rud Expo High 100 100 100 35% Mid 80 75 80 25% Low 70 65 70 20% I intend to maiden at mid rates with manual's cg at 90mm +/- 5mm back from leading edge and manually dial in 2mm up ele per manual. I'm reasonably sure the plane won't be twitchy at mid rates but unsure if the 75% ele rate is enough to avoid avoid nose overs on my 1-1.5" well kept grass field. What say you with experience on this bird? Since the manual only provides mm settings for flaps and up ele mix I'll guess and measure unless someone can provide %'s. Thanks in advance for any advice or suggestions.

I just maidened my 1600mm Spitfire yesterday and eventually settled on rates similar to davegee above. I used a three-position switch for taxi, take-off, and then flight rates. "Taxi" had A/E/R rates of 60/120/120, "Take-off" rates are 60/60/100, and "Flight" rates are 50/50/90. I initially had much higher rates on the elevator and boy did that make for some exciting take-offs: pitching up early, wing-stalling and barely recovering. This plane was much more sensitive to elevator, even at slow speeds, than I had imagined. Although I only barely escaped unscathed (this is my first warbird), it was fun dealing with asymmetric wing stalls for the first time -- keeps me on my toes.
Lands like a dream on our club's grass field. I let it settle down into a three-wheel landing (~50% throttle descent), as the grass was uneven and a bit chippy.

I need to look more at balancing as it felt very nose heavy in the air and on the ground. I have a 6000mAh Admiral battery in there and I initially had it as far forward as possible. I rode the elevator for that whole first flight, then trimmed it out a bit on the second flight.

[barneyb]

Been flying the Spitfire off my golf course, its really a good flyer. I have a 12 channel rx so I have Ail and Flaps on separate channels. One thing I did was mix crow on the ailerons. I only use it after touchdown, as soon as the mains touchdown and the power is at idle ailerons deflect up full and the elevators go full up. Works great cause if you try and taxi without backstick its likely to tip on the nose.
Great flyer! Use the published Cg and you dont need expo. I did add about 6oz of lead to the nose.

[davegee]

Thanks very much davegee for your settings and advice. Given your flap/elevator mix I assume at 90mm cg your plane is somewhat nose heavy.

Maybe a little bit, but I just adjusted the position of the battery in the bay to be around the book recommended position. It seems to fly pretty well there for me. I haven't tried playing with the CG position all that much on this plane. The flap/CG mix positions might have something to do with the fact I use more flaps than the book recommended values, I don't know. I set them about 5 years ago when it was new and haven't really looked at them much since, as it flies fine like that.

[ICM]

Thanks very much davegee for your settings and advice. Given your flap/elevator mix I assume at 90mm cg your plane is somewhat nose heavy.

[davegee]

I just picked up this Flightline Spitfire 1600 from a club member who never flew it. Installed a Spektrum AR620 rx and now have to set it up on my DX9. After doing a search for rates in this forum it seems that many find the manual's high rates twitchy and fly on the recommended low rates. I typically set up high/mid/ low rates so I'm considering the following : Ail Ele Rud Expo High 100 100 100 35% Mid 80 75 80 25% Low 70 65 70 20% I intend to maiden at mid rates with manual's cg at 90mm +/- 5mm back from leading edge and manually dial in 2mm up ele per manual. I'm reasonably sure the plane won't be twitchy at mid rates but unsure if the 75% ele rate is enough to avoid avoid nose overs on my 1-1.5" well kept grass field. What say you with experience on this bird? Since the manual only provides mm settings for flaps and up ele mix I'll guess and measure unless someone can provide %'s. Thanks in advance for any advice or suggestions.

Hi ICM: I can only relate what I use on my Spitfire. I have had it 5 years now, have a ton of flights on it. Banged it up a bit on occasion, but still all original parts. Haven't had to trade out any of the major parts yet. I have only flown it from hard surfaced runways, never on grass yet.

I CG at the book value of 90mm.

For what it's worth these are some of my settings:

Aileron: High 80 Mid 75 Low 46 Expo 20%
Elevator: High 80 Mid 70 Low 47 Expo 25%
Rudder: High 110 Mid 100 Low 90 Expo 20 %

I usually use low rates for my flying, and mid to high for rudder.

On my flaps, I use full flaps at the scale position of 85 degrees down (almost straight down.) I have a mid-flap position, about half of that amount that I use occasionally, but I almost always land with the full 85 flap down position, with some power and almost always use a wheel landing, but if I mess that up, I can either go around if it's a real bounce, or just reset up for a three-point, which works well, too.

In my Flap System on my Spektrum DX18, I use a flap to elevator mix of: flaps up: -7%, Mid Flap: -20%, and full flap -20%.

That's just my particular settings that I use. As I say, this plane is still around after 5 years of flying, so it works for me, and looks fairly realistic. I always try to fly all my warbirds in a scale fashion, and fly only maneuvers that they were capable of and expected to do in flight and combat (NO 3D stuff!).

These settings might give you some ideas how you want to fly your plane. I think for the maiden, we used the stock book recommended values, and I think you'd be fine there for your first flights,, to adjust as you wish after you feel comfortable with it.

Good Luck!

davegee

[ICM]

Anyone?

[ICM]

I just picked up this Flightline Spitfire 1600 from a club member who never flew it. Installed a Spektrum AR620 rx and now have to set it up on my DX9. After doing a search for rates in this forum it seems that many find the manual's high rates twitchy and fly on the recommended low rates. I typically set up high/mid/ low rates so I'm considering the following : Ail Ele Rud Expo High 100 100 100 35% Mid 80 75 80 25% Low 70 65 70 20% I intend to maiden at mid rates with manual's cg at 90mm +/- 5mm back from leading edge and manually dial in 2mm up ele per manual. I'm reasonably sure the plane won't be twitchy at mid rates but unsure if the 75% ele rate is enough to avoid avoid nose overs on my 1-1.5" well kept grass field. What say you with experience on this bird? Since the manual only provides mm settings for flaps and up ele mix I'll guess and measure unless someone can provide %'s. Thanks in advance for any advice or suggestions.

[paladin]

my son and i have everything from 1/12 to 1/4 scale warbirds. we flew the 1/12 in combat till the scale combat planes started looking like open combat planes. now we fly them for fun, can't fly them together cause we always end up mid-airing. we have a cat for the glass and ply planes that always draws a crowd, but mostly we fly them in the winter, early spring and late fall, maybe twenty flights a year each. they are fun because we can do things we wood never do with a bigger plane.

the bigger planes just look nicer in the air and on the ground and are much more of a challenge. the big fight here is not living the axiom "the number of flights a plane gets is inversely proportional to its cost." i would always go with the bigger plane. but you have to decide for you, what ever you decide have fun!

Joe

[AndrewF]

They both fly almost the same. I could say things like maybe better ground handling with the big one, but that's probably just wheel size and weight. Maybe the big one flies better because it's bigger. But really nothing significant in difference to report. I couldn't decide, so I own them both. I like flying them both. I've even flown both on the same flying day numerous times. Which sounds ridiculous even saying it. Maybe the small one is faster but I have no way of checking and it is probably just a visual illusion due to size. At least you could flip a coin and not be disappointed either way. If you've been dreaming of a big warbird, the big spit does not disappoint.

But owning the batteries already is a consideration. And being able to throw it in the backseat without pulling the wings off...

Thanks for the info! After destroying the little lippisch I decided to move onto something else lol

[SanExup]

They both fly almost the same. I could say things like maybe better ground handling with the big one, but that's probably just wheel size and weight. Maybe the big one flies better because it's bigger. But really nothing significant in difference to report. I couldn't decide, so I own them both. I like flying them both. I've even flown both on the same flying day numerous times. Which sounds ridiculous even saying it. Maybe the small one is faster but I have no way of checking and it is probably just a visual illusion due to size. At least you could flip a coin and not be disappointed either way. If you've been dreaming of a big warbird, the big spit does not disappoint.

But owning the batteries already is a consideration. And being able to throw it in the backseat without pulling the wings off...

[AndrewF]

Alright guys, I can’t decide between this plane and the 1200mm version. I like the smaller one just as a “throw in the car” fun plane, and I have a handful of 3300 mah 4s packs that need to be used. But bigger warbirds are cooler… 😂 how do they differ as far as flight performance? Flight times?

[paladin]

Great, that’s very helpful. Thanks for your replies.

it will be my grandsons first flap warbird. my son has one two, or is that three?

[Simon Bee]

Great, that’s very helpful. Thanks for your replies.

[mshagg]

I think a lot of people are used to setting spits up with a tonne of elevator so they can keep the tail planted on the ground when taxiing and taking off.

The flightline has such good ground handling manners that this is not needed. I'd always recommend high rates for a maiden, just in case, but assuming all goes well you can really dial things down the pitch for a stunningly smooth flyer.

Also spitfires are really sensitive to CG in terms of pitch response. So getting that battery forward can really help calm things down.

[Hugh Wiedman]

I’d love to get this Spit but the guys at my club are putting me off because of tip stalls and being tricky to fly.
Not been flying for long (about 3 months) but I’m flying quite comfortably EDF jets (Habu, Rebel and Avanti). How do people find this aircraft??

I'm with Evan D and kallend . I know you're just starting out and those EDF's take-off and land nothing like the Spitty, but with that said, if you're interested in a prop tail dragging warbird, the 1600mm Spitfire is the one to start with. Never had a problem with tip stalls but once in the air this one flies like a dream. I'm getting over 10 minutes of flight time on an SMC 6200, but a 5000 works well also. You need to get the CG close to the manual, although I like mine about 5-8mm further back. To get there, you will need some weight in the nose, which is why I'm using an 814 gr 6200. DO NOT START TAIL HEAVY!!

What you will need to do is master the take-off and landing. Like all tail dragging prop warbirds, this one immediately begins turning left at the start of take-off (due to the counter-clockwise airflow coming off the prop, swirling under the fuselage and back around to hit the left side of the vertical stabilizer). To counter that, you still need a bit of up elevator at the start to keep the tail wheel down and be ready to input right rudder. After the tail lifts, make sure you keep the fuselage level (reduce the up elevator) so the aircraft can get enough ground speed to reach rotation speed. To do this, on take-off advance the throttle nice a slow and do not "punch" it. That will exaggerate the left turn and give you lift off before you get enough speed. This one, just like the Corsair, will get airborne almost too quickly before you have enough air speed and that's where you'll run into a wing stall and she'll dive to the left and roll into the ground. You also can't let the nose dip too low or you'll grind the prop. With your EDF's, you can just punch it and lift off when you want, but not with these (which may be the genesis of the comments from your club-or they're just jealous if you get one). So you'll need to get smooth and proficient with the throttle, the rudder and the elevator on take-off (unlike those EDF's).

When it comes to landing, that's also a little different than your EDF's. The 3 you have will almost float in on landing with little to no throttle. Those EDF's need to land nose up with the mains touching first. With the Spitfire (and other tail draggers) you need to land with a little bit of power (NO CHOPPING THE THROTTLE BEFORE YOU"RE ON THE GROUND) and come in with an almost perfectly level attitude. To do this, once lined up with the runway I reduce power to about 35% throttle, fly it to about 20 yards of the runway, reduce throttle to about 25% and leave it as I ease it on the runway, perfectly level, with the mains just coming down softly, then let it roll about 10 feet and reduce throttle to 0 and the tail slowly sets down. You really don't want to do any 3 point landings with this (although you can and many do) as you want to get proficient with a scale landing.

Other than that, she's a DREAM. Hope I haven't soured you on getting one, I got a P-51 for my second plane (very similar take-off and landing issues) and I eventually got it right, but initially thought I had to do 3 pointers. Landing with power is actually much easier because you do not have to worry about getting too slow and having it drop out of the sky in a stall. Just leave it at 25% throttle and fly it to the runway. The Corsair, being a bit heavier and landing with extreme flap deflection (because it looks cool) requires me to keep the throttle at 40% approach, and then 35% throttle until it's rolling on the runway (never have to worry about a stall there!)

Don't get me wrong, but the FW 1600mm Spitfire has enough lift and power that you could advance the throttle quickly on take off, it will jump off the runway and possible roll a little left, you correct it, and you're up and flying. You can also plop it down on landing in a 3 pointer and the main gear are touch enough to handle it (but you may break the tail wheel- which I did before changing my landing technique). But this is the perfect prop warbird to learn and become efficient at take-off and landing that will help you fly virtually any prop tail draggers. Other Spitfire models, especially larger gas powered, don't have sufficient thrust to take off like that (which of course the real thing didn't either) so that's why you see a lot of videos of Spitfires crashing on take-off and landing. In this case, airspeed is your friend and low speed kills!