Ron Farkas
Apr 01, 1997, 01:00 AM
<html>
<head>
<title>The Aerocraft Apache</title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<h2>INTRODUCTION</h2>
<table border="0" cellpadding="5">
<tr>
<td><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/aphead2.jpg" width="302" height="338"></td>
<td>The Aerocraft Apache is aimed right at intermediate and advanced level flyers who have
either graduated from an electric powered glider/trainer model, or who want to have an
electric model that is closer to the performance level of glow powered airplanes. By
closer, I mean in speed, climb and responsiveness. The Apache succeeds in this regard when
mated to a suitably strong power system. It would be a mistake to power the Apache with a
weak "05" motor that originally came out of that old electric glider. <p>I've
actually done a bit of motor swapping in this airplane. I have been very satisfied with
the Astro 05, Kyosho AP36 and the SR Max-7 motor that is currently installed. I've been
disappointed with the Graupner Speed 600, and Hobby Lobby Strontium 150, just not enough
guts.</td>
</tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellpadding="4">
<tr>
<td>The Apache is a sleek looking low wing four channel sport and aerobatic model. Its
lines are reminiscent of a North American P-51 Mustang fighter, primarily in the tapered
wing, bubble canopy and underbelly scoop. This removable scoop is ingeniously designed to
hold the seven cell motor battery pack without intruding on the fuselage interior, nor
requiring removal of the wing to change packs. An added benefit is that cooling air flows
into the scoop, over the pack and out through the bottom of the fuselage.</td>
<td><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/aphatch.jpg" width="423" height="307"></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p>The Apache has a 44" wing span with 340 sq. in. of area and a 38 ounce target
weight (including power battery). The actual weight of the review model was 50 ounces. The
airplane has a fairly low frontal area, except for the scoop. The nose cowl is nicely
shaped to mate with a spinner. Air enters the cowl behind the spinner and through an
opening below it, and exits through a recess in the forward fuselage bottom. The airfoil
is relatively thin, also for low drag, and is mostly flat bottomed with a raised entry at
the leading edge. I've found it to have a wide speed range and gentle stall
characteristics.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2>KIT CONTENTS</h2>
<p>The kit consists of die-cut ribs and fuselage sides, sheet and strip balsa, some
plywood parts and vacuum formed plastic cowl and canopy. Wood quality was good, but a few
of the die-cut ribs required the stroke of a hobby knife to release from their sheets.
Formed landing gear wire, aileron torque rods, hardwood mounting blocks and an ample
supply of assorted hardware items are supplied. There are clearly drawn and accurate
rolled plans and a well-organized 12 page instruction booklet. This booklet includes an
itemized parts list and diagrams of the die cut sheets to assist in locating parts,
although some of the diagrams have been accidentally printed as reverse images. There are
no assembly photos or drawings, but that is a minor issue since the construction is quite
conventional.</p>
<p>Considering the importance of weight savings in electric powered models, Aerocraft's
choice of wood density and quality was quite good. I think their target weight of 38 oz.
is unrealistically low, but the model has proven to be flightworthy at 50. The long tail
moment can make this model susceptible to tail heaviness. Even though I added an optional
steerable tail wheel, my Apache still balanced properly by mounting all of the radio
equipment as far forward as possible and stuffing a 500 mah pack behind the firewall. The
instructions and plans could be improved by being more explicit about equipment location
for those builders who don't plan ahead on their own.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2>CONSTRUCTION</h2>
<p>Although this is a entirely built-up airframe, it assembles rapidly because almost
every part fits perfectly. The bottom of the tapered wing is flat behind the main spar,
and thus is to be built directly on the plans. The main spars are first made from
laminations of 1/16"x1/4" and 1/8"x1/4" balsa strip stock. This yields
3/16"x1/4" spars that are stronger than a single piece of stripwood. The bottom
main spar is laid on the plan, followed by sheet trailing edge stock, a pre-tapered
trailing edge spar, most of the ribs, shear webs, the top spar, and a 3/16" sq.
leading edge spar. Trimming the shear webs to fit between the top and bottom spars was a
little more time consuming than just gluing them to the back of the spars. Neither leading
edge sheeting nor capstrips are used, but the wing has two top and two bottom full span
sub-spars located between the leading edge and main spar. These provide sufficient
additional strength and also serve as support for the covering material.</p>
<p align="center"><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/apconst2.jpg" width="495" height="208"></p>
<p>After both wing panels are built, they are joined with a 1/8" light ply dihedral
brace and a single center rib. The center section sheeting is then added, and the aileron
servo is installed. I saved a little time here by relieving the root ribs for the servo
before permanently joining the wing panels. Next is trial hinging of the tapered aileron
stock. The grooved hardwood main landing gear blocks are installed now, unless the builder
opts to leave the gear off to save the weight and drag. However it is probably wise to
install them anyway, which only adds an ounce or so but still leaves the final choice
until later. </p>
<p>The stabilizer is built up from 3/16" x 3/8" strip stock, with a sheet center
section and some reinforcing gussets. The center section incorporates a slot to capture
the fin. The elevator halves are pre-shaped sheet balsa, glued to balsa strip leading
edges and joined by a plywood strip. This results in a strong and warp-free elevator
assembly. The vertical fin, its dorsal fin, and the rudder are pre-shaped 1/8" sheet
balsa.</p>
<p>The fuselage sides are prepared by gluing the 3/32" sheet balsa forward and aft
sections together and laminating the 1/8" light ply nose doublers to the inside
faces. These doublers extend from the firewall to the back of the wing saddle, and have
large lightening holes. Next the fixed air scoop sections are added to the sides. The
light ply F1 firewall must be fitted with a motor mount. Aerocraft recommends, and I used,
the Sonic Tronics adjustable width mount. The firewall and main light ply formers are then
added to one fuselage side, followed by the other side while maintaining squareness. The
sides are then joined at the tail, and the aft formers installed, while aligned over the
top plan view.</p>
<p>While the fuselage is still open, it is time to fit the wing. This involves the
installation of the leading edge dowel and trailing edge hold-down plate with a wing
retaining screw. I substituted a 6x32 nylon screw for the supplied 4x40 steel screw, to
provide the typical breakaway feature in a landing incident. With the wing mounted, the
removable belly scoop is built to fit in place. One requirement is that the front
centerpost be already installed into its wing center section cutout. The scoop front and
rear faces are temporarily clamped into position, and then joined by the scoop side parts.
Provision is then made for a front mounting screw and a rear dowel peg. The framed-out
scoop is then removed and the bottom is sheeted with one piece of 1/32" ply. As
designed, the front centerpost is susceptible to landing damage, and I recommend
substituting aircraft grade plywood for the supplied light ply.</p>
<p>The forward fuselage top is sheeted with 1/16" balsa, and the aft section is
shaped by stringers. In the sheeted area, the designer has thoughtfully included strips
that get glued to the upper interior edge of the sides and provide a ledge for the sheet
to fit onto. This aids in alignment as well as strengthens the joint. At the fuselage
tail, the fillet blocks can be tack-glued in place for shaping, then removed until
installation after the tail surfaces are installed. At this point I installed flexible
plastic pushrods with suitable cross braces in the fuselage aft section. The addition of
1/16" cross-grained bottom sheeting completed the fuselage construction.</p>
<table border="0" cellpadding="4">
<tr>
<td>Final assembly includes permanent installation of the tail surfaces and fillet blocks,
mounting of the plastic cowl and trial fitting of the radio and power system. Note that a
hole must be cut in both top and bottom wing sheeting for the battery leads to pass
through. The builder should plan for the speed controller wire to be long enough to drop
through the hole so the connector is accessible externally with the wing on but only the
scoop removed.</td>
<td><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/apconst1.jpg" width="262" height="226"></td>
</tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellpadding="5">
<tr>
<td><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/apside1.jpg" width="441" height="256"></td>
<td>I had already seen several white Apaches with blue and red trim so I wanted something
different. I covered mine overall with red Carl Goldberg Models Ultracote, and trimmed it
with orange and yellow. I did, however, stay with the attractive trim pattern that was
shown on the box top. I painted the cowl with Coverite 21st Century red in the spray can.
For mounting the canopy, I cut away a 1/8" wide strip of fuselage covering around its
perimeter, stained the bare wood with a red felt tip marker, and glued the canopy on with
slow Jet CA.</td>
</tr>
</table>
<p>Here is how my radio equipment is arranged so I could get the model to balance at the
indicated location. The Futaba S-133 rudder and elevator servos are mounted to the
fuselage sides, all the way forward in the normal radio location above the wing. Even in
this location they clear the aileron servo and linkage in the wing. Everything else is in
the compartment ahead of the wing. The receiver is placed against one side, a 500 MAH flat
battery on the floor and a Jomar SM-4 speed controller tucked into the remaining space.
Hook-and-loop fasteners keep things from shifting. The SR Max-7 motor is among the lighter
ones I tried, so using any lighter weight radio components would have required some nose
ballast in my model.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2>FLYING</h2>
<p>I have been flying the model for over a year now, and have become quite familiar with
its behavior. I think it flies really well. My favorite prop for this motor is the
Graupner 8x4.5 folder. It produces about 11,000 RPM at 34 amps of current, but I don't
need it all for just cruising around. Flight times are 3-5 minutes. Set up this way, the
Apache will easily ROG from pavement, or fly cleanly away from a hand toss. The hatch also
makes a good hand-hold for the launch. Due to its low drag, it seems to go a long way on
the landing approach. It looks really nice coming in for a two wheel landing and roll out.
</p>
<p align="center"><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/aphead1.jpg" width="376" height="224"></p>
<p>With the recommended control travels it has a moderate roll rate and responsive
elevator without being touchy. Top speed is comfortably fast, and very groovy. I would
rate the slow speed handling as good, with adequate control authority right down to the
stall, which is pretty gentle for this kind of model. Loops from level flight are a little
sloppy but nice and round when preceded by a shallow dive. Insides and outsides are about
the same. Stall turns are easy, so are spins and continuous inverted flight. I have not
been able to hold knife edge, though, maybe there's not enough rudder throw or area. This
is a neutrally stable model with good aerobatic characteristics, just as was intended.</p>
<p>I have also flown it without the landing gear. This really does make a difference.
Without the weight and drag, the Apache is faster and has better vertical and looping
performance. This is a good choice for grass fields, where the landing gear would just get
hung up anyway. However, the hatch is vulnerable on very rough ground, and sometimes picks
up debris through the air inlet holes. Well, it is the pilot's choice on this one. It
looks even more like a warbird with the gear removed.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2>RECOMMENDATION</h2>
<p>I highly recommend the Apache, for anyone who is ready for this performance level. The
kit quality is very good, and it is easy to build. It's a great flyer. There aren't many
kits of this style to choose from. The well known Electro-Streak would be its primary
competition. Like the Electro-Streak, the Apache can easily handle the power of a 15 class
motor, but would have to be modified for the extra cells. I bet that underbelly hatch
could be stretched to the wing's leading edge to hold the extra cells. I plan to try that
some day, but I hate to do surgery on a plane that already gives me so much enjoyment.</p>
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" width="100%">
<tr>
<td><h2>ADDRESS</h2>
<address>
Aerocraft<br>
432 Hallett Ave<br>
Riverhead, NY 11901<br>
(516) 369-9319
</address>
</td>
<td><p align="center"><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/apqview2.jpg" width="539" height="201"></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><big><big>Correction via the editor, February 1998</big></big></p>
<blockquote>
<p>I received the following email from Albert Wahrhaftig which I forwarded to Ron Farkas
for a response.</p>
<div align="center"><center><table border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="90%">
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="50"><p align="center"><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../labels/emaillab.gif" width="42" height="126" alt="emaillab.gif (1621 bytes)"></td>
<td bgcolor="#E8E8E8"><strong>Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 00:05:37 -0700<br>
From: Albert Wahrhaftig <a href="http://rcgroups.com/shared/nospam.php?u=wahrhaft&d=metro.net"><font COLOR="#0000ff"><u>wahrhaft(at)metro.net</u></font></a><br>
To: <a href="http://rcgroups.com/shared/nospam.php?u=jbourke&d=ezonemag.com"><font COLOR="#0000ff"><u>jbourke(at)ezonemag.com</u></font></a><br>
Subject: Aerocraft Apache Review</strong><hr>
<p>Dear Jim,</p>
<p>I liked the photo of the Aerocraft Apache in Ron Farkas's review, so when the
opportunity came to pick up a kit at a good price I bought it and stashed it away. Having
had a little spare time for a change, I just finished the plane, though I haven't flown it
yet, and I find serious problems with the review which should be corrected or at least
ammended by following up with a note from me. </p>
<p>In his review, Farkas says, "The Apache has a 44" wing span with 340 sq. in.
of area and a 38 ounce target weight (including power battery). The actual weight of the
review model was 50 ounces." Later, he continues by saying, "I think their
target weight of 38 oz. is unrealistically low, but the model has proven to be
flightworthy at 50. The long tail moment can make this model susceptible to tail
heaviness. Even though I added an optional steerable tail wheel, my Apache still balanced
properly by mounting all of the radio equipment as far forward as possible and stuffing a
500 mah pack behind the firewall."</p>
<p>I simply can't imagine how Farkas ended up with such a heavy plane. I built mine
strictly stock (though, like Farkas, I added a steerable tail wheel) using only the
materials supplied with the kit. I installed an Astro cobalt 035, Astro 211 speed control,
270 ma. Rx battery, Futaba Rx and mini servos. With a 7 cell 1000ma. pack, as specified on
the plans, and film covering, and landing gear installed, mine weighs between 38 and 39
oz. It is not tail heavy and did not require a 500 ma. Rx battery to balance it. I do have
3/4 oz. of lead in the nose, but with an Astro 05, the plane would probably balance with
no additional weight.</p>
<p>I have no reason to think that this weight is not typical since the materials in the
kit did not seem unusually light. In fact, I was surprised at how much lite play is used
in the fuselage.</p>
<p>Maybe Farkas has a bum scale. Mine is brand new and I calibrated it with a set of lead
fishing weights, so I know it is reasonably accurate. Anyway, I think your readers should
have the benefit of this clarification.</p>
<p>I just hope mine flys as well as Farkas says his did. It looks like it will fly very
well.</td>
</tr>
</table>
</center></div><p> </p>
<p>And here is Ron's reply...</p>
<div align="center"><center><table border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="90%">
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="50"><p align="center"><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../labels/emaillab.gif" width="42" height="126" alt="emaillab.gif (1621 bytes)"></td>
<td bgcolor="#E8E8E8"><strong>Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 20:38:07 -0500<br>
From: "Ronald J. Farkas" <a href="http://rcgroups.com/shared/nospam.php?u=RonFarkas&d=compuserve.com"><font COLOR="#0000ff"><u>RonFarkas(at)compuserve.com</u></font></a><br>
To: Jim Bourke <a href="http://rcgroups.com/shared/nospam.php?u=jbourke&d=ezonemag.com"><font COLOR="#0000ff"><u>jbourke(at)ezonemag.com</u></font></a><br>
Subject: Apache weight</strong><hr>
<p>Albert’s email got me to re-weighing my Apache and thinking of what differences
there are between our two planes to account for an 11 ounce difference in weight. Back
when I built my Apache, I weighed it on a mechanical 10 lb. kitchen scale. This time I
weighed it on a Pelouse digital 5 lb. office scale. The total flying weight came to 47.6
ounces instead of the original 50, about a 5% error but not as much as Albert would have
thought.</p>
<p>His AST 035 might be 1 ounce lighter than my SR Max 05, his AST 211 speed controller
might be 1 ounce lighter than my Jomar SM-4, his 270 mah Rx pack 1.5 ounce lighter than my
500 mah pack, and his 7 cell 1000 mah motor battery at least 2 ounces lighter than my SR
1500 mah battery. That amounts to a 5.5 ounce difference in the way the models are set up.
So the arithmetic shows that 11 - 2.4 - 5.5 = 3.1 ounces are still a mystery. I would have
to guess that differences in materials, covering and workmanship could be that much, even
on such a small plane. At 38 to 39 ounces, Albert’s Apache should fly very well with
a geared AST 035 on 7 cells, although it’s probably too much airplane for an 035 on
direct drive.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, I'm putting a direct drive Aveox 1406/3Y in mine for a performance boost.</p>
<p>Ron</td>
</tr>
</table>
</center></div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
<head>
<title>The Aerocraft Apache</title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<h2>INTRODUCTION</h2>
<table border="0" cellpadding="5">
<tr>
<td><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/aphead2.jpg" width="302" height="338"></td>
<td>The Aerocraft Apache is aimed right at intermediate and advanced level flyers who have
either graduated from an electric powered glider/trainer model, or who want to have an
electric model that is closer to the performance level of glow powered airplanes. By
closer, I mean in speed, climb and responsiveness. The Apache succeeds in this regard when
mated to a suitably strong power system. It would be a mistake to power the Apache with a
weak "05" motor that originally came out of that old electric glider. <p>I've
actually done a bit of motor swapping in this airplane. I have been very satisfied with
the Astro 05, Kyosho AP36 and the SR Max-7 motor that is currently installed. I've been
disappointed with the Graupner Speed 600, and Hobby Lobby Strontium 150, just not enough
guts.</td>
</tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellpadding="4">
<tr>
<td>The Apache is a sleek looking low wing four channel sport and aerobatic model. Its
lines are reminiscent of a North American P-51 Mustang fighter, primarily in the tapered
wing, bubble canopy and underbelly scoop. This removable scoop is ingeniously designed to
hold the seven cell motor battery pack without intruding on the fuselage interior, nor
requiring removal of the wing to change packs. An added benefit is that cooling air flows
into the scoop, over the pack and out through the bottom of the fuselage.</td>
<td><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/aphatch.jpg" width="423" height="307"></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p>The Apache has a 44" wing span with 340 sq. in. of area and a 38 ounce target
weight (including power battery). The actual weight of the review model was 50 ounces. The
airplane has a fairly low frontal area, except for the scoop. The nose cowl is nicely
shaped to mate with a spinner. Air enters the cowl behind the spinner and through an
opening below it, and exits through a recess in the forward fuselage bottom. The airfoil
is relatively thin, also for low drag, and is mostly flat bottomed with a raised entry at
the leading edge. I've found it to have a wide speed range and gentle stall
characteristics.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2>KIT CONTENTS</h2>
<p>The kit consists of die-cut ribs and fuselage sides, sheet and strip balsa, some
plywood parts and vacuum formed plastic cowl and canopy. Wood quality was good, but a few
of the die-cut ribs required the stroke of a hobby knife to release from their sheets.
Formed landing gear wire, aileron torque rods, hardwood mounting blocks and an ample
supply of assorted hardware items are supplied. There are clearly drawn and accurate
rolled plans and a well-organized 12 page instruction booklet. This booklet includes an
itemized parts list and diagrams of the die cut sheets to assist in locating parts,
although some of the diagrams have been accidentally printed as reverse images. There are
no assembly photos or drawings, but that is a minor issue since the construction is quite
conventional.</p>
<p>Considering the importance of weight savings in electric powered models, Aerocraft's
choice of wood density and quality was quite good. I think their target weight of 38 oz.
is unrealistically low, but the model has proven to be flightworthy at 50. The long tail
moment can make this model susceptible to tail heaviness. Even though I added an optional
steerable tail wheel, my Apache still balanced properly by mounting all of the radio
equipment as far forward as possible and stuffing a 500 mah pack behind the firewall. The
instructions and plans could be improved by being more explicit about equipment location
for those builders who don't plan ahead on their own.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2>CONSTRUCTION</h2>
<p>Although this is a entirely built-up airframe, it assembles rapidly because almost
every part fits perfectly. The bottom of the tapered wing is flat behind the main spar,
and thus is to be built directly on the plans. The main spars are first made from
laminations of 1/16"x1/4" and 1/8"x1/4" balsa strip stock. This yields
3/16"x1/4" spars that are stronger than a single piece of stripwood. The bottom
main spar is laid on the plan, followed by sheet trailing edge stock, a pre-tapered
trailing edge spar, most of the ribs, shear webs, the top spar, and a 3/16" sq.
leading edge spar. Trimming the shear webs to fit between the top and bottom spars was a
little more time consuming than just gluing them to the back of the spars. Neither leading
edge sheeting nor capstrips are used, but the wing has two top and two bottom full span
sub-spars located between the leading edge and main spar. These provide sufficient
additional strength and also serve as support for the covering material.</p>
<p align="center"><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/apconst2.jpg" width="495" height="208"></p>
<p>After both wing panels are built, they are joined with a 1/8" light ply dihedral
brace and a single center rib. The center section sheeting is then added, and the aileron
servo is installed. I saved a little time here by relieving the root ribs for the servo
before permanently joining the wing panels. Next is trial hinging of the tapered aileron
stock. The grooved hardwood main landing gear blocks are installed now, unless the builder
opts to leave the gear off to save the weight and drag. However it is probably wise to
install them anyway, which only adds an ounce or so but still leaves the final choice
until later. </p>
<p>The stabilizer is built up from 3/16" x 3/8" strip stock, with a sheet center
section and some reinforcing gussets. The center section incorporates a slot to capture
the fin. The elevator halves are pre-shaped sheet balsa, glued to balsa strip leading
edges and joined by a plywood strip. This results in a strong and warp-free elevator
assembly. The vertical fin, its dorsal fin, and the rudder are pre-shaped 1/8" sheet
balsa.</p>
<p>The fuselage sides are prepared by gluing the 3/32" sheet balsa forward and aft
sections together and laminating the 1/8" light ply nose doublers to the inside
faces. These doublers extend from the firewall to the back of the wing saddle, and have
large lightening holes. Next the fixed air scoop sections are added to the sides. The
light ply F1 firewall must be fitted with a motor mount. Aerocraft recommends, and I used,
the Sonic Tronics adjustable width mount. The firewall and main light ply formers are then
added to one fuselage side, followed by the other side while maintaining squareness. The
sides are then joined at the tail, and the aft formers installed, while aligned over the
top plan view.</p>
<p>While the fuselage is still open, it is time to fit the wing. This involves the
installation of the leading edge dowel and trailing edge hold-down plate with a wing
retaining screw. I substituted a 6x32 nylon screw for the supplied 4x40 steel screw, to
provide the typical breakaway feature in a landing incident. With the wing mounted, the
removable belly scoop is built to fit in place. One requirement is that the front
centerpost be already installed into its wing center section cutout. The scoop front and
rear faces are temporarily clamped into position, and then joined by the scoop side parts.
Provision is then made for a front mounting screw and a rear dowel peg. The framed-out
scoop is then removed and the bottom is sheeted with one piece of 1/32" ply. As
designed, the front centerpost is susceptible to landing damage, and I recommend
substituting aircraft grade plywood for the supplied light ply.</p>
<p>The forward fuselage top is sheeted with 1/16" balsa, and the aft section is
shaped by stringers. In the sheeted area, the designer has thoughtfully included strips
that get glued to the upper interior edge of the sides and provide a ledge for the sheet
to fit onto. This aids in alignment as well as strengthens the joint. At the fuselage
tail, the fillet blocks can be tack-glued in place for shaping, then removed until
installation after the tail surfaces are installed. At this point I installed flexible
plastic pushrods with suitable cross braces in the fuselage aft section. The addition of
1/16" cross-grained bottom sheeting completed the fuselage construction.</p>
<table border="0" cellpadding="4">
<tr>
<td>Final assembly includes permanent installation of the tail surfaces and fillet blocks,
mounting of the plastic cowl and trial fitting of the radio and power system. Note that a
hole must be cut in both top and bottom wing sheeting for the battery leads to pass
through. The builder should plan for the speed controller wire to be long enough to drop
through the hole so the connector is accessible externally with the wing on but only the
scoop removed.</td>
<td><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/apconst1.jpg" width="262" height="226"></td>
</tr>
</table>
<table border="0" cellpadding="5">
<tr>
<td><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/apside1.jpg" width="441" height="256"></td>
<td>I had already seen several white Apaches with blue and red trim so I wanted something
different. I covered mine overall with red Carl Goldberg Models Ultracote, and trimmed it
with orange and yellow. I did, however, stay with the attractive trim pattern that was
shown on the box top. I painted the cowl with Coverite 21st Century red in the spray can.
For mounting the canopy, I cut away a 1/8" wide strip of fuselage covering around its
perimeter, stained the bare wood with a red felt tip marker, and glued the canopy on with
slow Jet CA.</td>
</tr>
</table>
<p>Here is how my radio equipment is arranged so I could get the model to balance at the
indicated location. The Futaba S-133 rudder and elevator servos are mounted to the
fuselage sides, all the way forward in the normal radio location above the wing. Even in
this location they clear the aileron servo and linkage in the wing. Everything else is in
the compartment ahead of the wing. The receiver is placed against one side, a 500 MAH flat
battery on the floor and a Jomar SM-4 speed controller tucked into the remaining space.
Hook-and-loop fasteners keep things from shifting. The SR Max-7 motor is among the lighter
ones I tried, so using any lighter weight radio components would have required some nose
ballast in my model.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2>FLYING</h2>
<p>I have been flying the model for over a year now, and have become quite familiar with
its behavior. I think it flies really well. My favorite prop for this motor is the
Graupner 8x4.5 folder. It produces about 11,000 RPM at 34 amps of current, but I don't
need it all for just cruising around. Flight times are 3-5 minutes. Set up this way, the
Apache will easily ROG from pavement, or fly cleanly away from a hand toss. The hatch also
makes a good hand-hold for the launch. Due to its low drag, it seems to go a long way on
the landing approach. It looks really nice coming in for a two wheel landing and roll out.
</p>
<p align="center"><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/aphead1.jpg" width="376" height="224"></p>
<p>With the recommended control travels it has a moderate roll rate and responsive
elevator without being touchy. Top speed is comfortably fast, and very groovy. I would
rate the slow speed handling as good, with adequate control authority right down to the
stall, which is pretty gentle for this kind of model. Loops from level flight are a little
sloppy but nice and round when preceded by a shallow dive. Insides and outsides are about
the same. Stall turns are easy, so are spins and continuous inverted flight. I have not
been able to hold knife edge, though, maybe there's not enough rudder throw or area. This
is a neutrally stable model with good aerobatic characteristics, just as was intended.</p>
<p>I have also flown it without the landing gear. This really does make a difference.
Without the weight and drag, the Apache is faster and has better vertical and looping
performance. This is a good choice for grass fields, where the landing gear would just get
hung up anyway. However, the hatch is vulnerable on very rough ground, and sometimes picks
up debris through the air inlet holes. Well, it is the pilot's choice on this one. It
looks even more like a warbird with the gear removed.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2>RECOMMENDATION</h2>
<p>I highly recommend the Apache, for anyone who is ready for this performance level. The
kit quality is very good, and it is easy to build. It's a great flyer. There aren't many
kits of this style to choose from. The well known Electro-Streak would be its primary
competition. Like the Electro-Streak, the Apache can easily handle the power of a 15 class
motor, but would have to be modified for the extra cells. I bet that underbelly hatch
could be stretched to the wing's leading edge to hold the extra cells. I plan to try that
some day, but I hate to do surgery on a plane that already gives me so much enjoyment.</p>
<table border="0" cellpadding="4" width="100%">
<tr>
<td><h2>ADDRESS</h2>
<address>
Aerocraft<br>
432 Hallett Ave<br>
Riverhead, NY 11901<br>
(516) 369-9319
</address>
</td>
<td><p align="center"><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../images/apqview2.jpg" width="539" height="201"></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><big><big>Correction via the editor, February 1998</big></big></p>
<blockquote>
<p>I received the following email from Albert Wahrhaftig which I forwarded to Ron Farkas
for a response.</p>
<div align="center"><center><table border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="90%">
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="50"><p align="center"><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../labels/emaillab.gif" width="42" height="126" alt="emaillab.gif (1621 bytes)"></td>
<td bgcolor="#E8E8E8"><strong>Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 00:05:37 -0700<br>
From: Albert Wahrhaftig <a href="http://rcgroups.com/shared/nospam.php?u=wahrhaft&d=metro.net"><font COLOR="#0000ff"><u>wahrhaft(at)metro.net</u></font></a><br>
To: <a href="http://rcgroups.com/shared/nospam.php?u=jbourke&d=ezonemag.com"><font COLOR="#0000ff"><u>jbourke(at)ezonemag.com</u></font></a><br>
Subject: Aerocraft Apache Review</strong><hr>
<p>Dear Jim,</p>
<p>I liked the photo of the Aerocraft Apache in Ron Farkas's review, so when the
opportunity came to pick up a kit at a good price I bought it and stashed it away. Having
had a little spare time for a change, I just finished the plane, though I haven't flown it
yet, and I find serious problems with the review which should be corrected or at least
ammended by following up with a note from me. </p>
<p>In his review, Farkas says, "The Apache has a 44" wing span with 340 sq. in.
of area and a 38 ounce target weight (including power battery). The actual weight of the
review model was 50 ounces." Later, he continues by saying, "I think their
target weight of 38 oz. is unrealistically low, but the model has proven to be
flightworthy at 50. The long tail moment can make this model susceptible to tail
heaviness. Even though I added an optional steerable tail wheel, my Apache still balanced
properly by mounting all of the radio equipment as far forward as possible and stuffing a
500 mah pack behind the firewall."</p>
<p>I simply can't imagine how Farkas ended up with such a heavy plane. I built mine
strictly stock (though, like Farkas, I added a steerable tail wheel) using only the
materials supplied with the kit. I installed an Astro cobalt 035, Astro 211 speed control,
270 ma. Rx battery, Futaba Rx and mini servos. With a 7 cell 1000ma. pack, as specified on
the plans, and film covering, and landing gear installed, mine weighs between 38 and 39
oz. It is not tail heavy and did not require a 500 ma. Rx battery to balance it. I do have
3/4 oz. of lead in the nose, but with an Astro 05, the plane would probably balance with
no additional weight.</p>
<p>I have no reason to think that this weight is not typical since the materials in the
kit did not seem unusually light. In fact, I was surprised at how much lite play is used
in the fuselage.</p>
<p>Maybe Farkas has a bum scale. Mine is brand new and I calibrated it with a set of lead
fishing weights, so I know it is reasonably accurate. Anyway, I think your readers should
have the benefit of this clarification.</p>
<p>I just hope mine flys as well as Farkas says his did. It looks like it will fly very
well.</td>
</tr>
</table>
</center></div><p> </p>
<p>And here is Ron's reply...</p>
<div align="center"><center><table border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="90%">
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="50"><p align="center"><img src="http://static.rcgroups.com/articles/ezonemag/1997/../labels/emaillab.gif" width="42" height="126" alt="emaillab.gif (1621 bytes)"></td>
<td bgcolor="#E8E8E8"><strong>Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 20:38:07 -0500<br>
From: "Ronald J. Farkas" <a href="http://rcgroups.com/shared/nospam.php?u=RonFarkas&d=compuserve.com"><font COLOR="#0000ff"><u>RonFarkas(at)compuserve.com</u></font></a><br>
To: Jim Bourke <a href="http://rcgroups.com/shared/nospam.php?u=jbourke&d=ezonemag.com"><font COLOR="#0000ff"><u>jbourke(at)ezonemag.com</u></font></a><br>
Subject: Apache weight</strong><hr>
<p>Albert’s email got me to re-weighing my Apache and thinking of what differences
there are between our two planes to account for an 11 ounce difference in weight. Back
when I built my Apache, I weighed it on a mechanical 10 lb. kitchen scale. This time I
weighed it on a Pelouse digital 5 lb. office scale. The total flying weight came to 47.6
ounces instead of the original 50, about a 5% error but not as much as Albert would have
thought.</p>
<p>His AST 035 might be 1 ounce lighter than my SR Max 05, his AST 211 speed controller
might be 1 ounce lighter than my Jomar SM-4, his 270 mah Rx pack 1.5 ounce lighter than my
500 mah pack, and his 7 cell 1000 mah motor battery at least 2 ounces lighter than my SR
1500 mah battery. That amounts to a 5.5 ounce difference in the way the models are set up.
So the arithmetic shows that 11 - 2.4 - 5.5 = 3.1 ounces are still a mystery. I would have
to guess that differences in materials, covering and workmanship could be that much, even
on such a small plane. At 38 to 39 ounces, Albert’s Apache should fly very well with
a geared AST 035 on 7 cells, although it’s probably too much airplane for an 035 on
direct drive.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, I'm putting a direct drive Aveox 1406/3Y in mine for a performance boost.</p>
<p>Ron</td>
</tr>
</table>
</center></div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p> </p>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>