MaladroitFL,

The maneuvers I mentioned were simply routine training and/or combat maneuvers for WWII fighter pilots. They are completely scale when performed correctly, and they are not in any way considered to be 3D flying. To make them look scale, you need enough speed & power to carry-through the maneuvers. A tight, lopsided loop does not look scale. A nice, big round loop does look scale. A hammerhead in which the plane only goes vertical for a few fuselage-lengths before running out of airspeed does not look scale. A hammerhead in which the plane does a graceful, extended vertical climb before pivoting & coming back 'downhill' does look scale. These little foamies have a ton of drag, and they lack the momentum of the larger-scale models. This makes it more difficult to execute graceful, scale-looking aerobatic maneuvers. Lacking momentum, speed and thrust must be used in the proper combination to make the maneuvers look scale with a UM ship.

When a full-scale F4U does a loop from war-emergency power speeds over 400 MPH, the loop is thousands of feet in diameter. When it does a zoom-climb @ war-emergency power following a WOT diving pass, it will climb nearly straight up for a few miles.

When the pilot executes a hammerhead to reverse a situation where the enemy is on his six, the plane would be balls-to-the-wall...ripping through the sky at well over 400 MPH....the big, unmuffled R-2800 at red-line, screaming as loud as a Top-Fueler at the big-end of the track...the prop shrieking as the tips go supersonic. The pilot hauls the stick back and rockets straight up for a couple of miles before slamming in full-rudder, pivoting on the yaw-axis, and then bringing his guns to bear on his enemy - engine still screaming at full war-emergency power.

3D flight is a type of flying in which model aircraft have a thrust-to-weight greater than 1:1 (typically 1.5:1 or more), large control surfaces with extreme throws, low weight compared to other models of same size and relatively low wing loadings. These elements allow for spectacular aerobatics such as hovering, 'harriers', torque rolling, blenders, rolling circles, and more, maneuvers that are performed below the stall speed of the model. The type of flying could be referred to as 'on the prop' as opposed to 'on the wing', which would describe more conventional flight patterns that make more use of the lifting surfaces of the plane.

Regarding bigger batteries & motor life - those of us who have been flying these UM ships since HH released the original Sukhoi have found that there is no correlation between motor longevity & battery capacity. Of course, a higher c-rating cannot shorten the life of the motor, as a higher-c battery simply guarantees that the motor receives the proper voltage. This reduces current, which makes the motor run cooler. If anything, a higher-c battery will extend motor life, since the higher voltage will cause the motor to run cooler at a given power setting. You make the assumption that most pilots fly @ WOT, or nearly so. Aside from takeoffs, certain power maneuvers, or during windy conditions, I rarely go beyond 75% throttle on my micros. With the XP, I usually cruise at 50-60% throttle, and only go to WOT for vertical uplines. With the SP motor/5043/Hyp 240, my Champ only requires 50% throttle on takeoff, and it cruises @ 25% throttle. It climbs briskly @ 60% throttle. The reserve power is for short-field takeoffs when she's carrying the 15g camera, and for windy conditions. Regarding the F4U - with the 5043 & Hyp 180, ~50% throttle provides a scale cruising speed - with enough reserve to gracefully perform the scale dogfighting maneuvers I mentioned.

I have two original Sukhois, three XPs, two Beasts, a Champ, Mossie, F4U, mSR, and mCP X. I've been flying with Hyperion UM cells since they were first released. A number of the P-51 motored planes have 200+ flights, and the motors are still going strong. According to static RPM testing, the power is down maybe 5%. On the other hand, I have had P-51 style motors fail before they made it to the runway, or fail after the first flight.

Motor variability is the primary contributor to differences in motor longevity. Any difference that could possibly be attributed to battery capacity or c-rating would be completely below the statistical noise caused by the large variability we have seen with these motors over the past few years.

Joel

Originally Posted by Haggerty00

Here are the replacement parts for the wing servos:

http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...dID=SPMAS2000L
http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products...ProdID=SPM6832

Either the whole servo, or just the mechanics

Thanks! I picked up a servo at the lhs today, as they didn't have the long throw mechanics. I installed it tonight and made some servo protectors. I hope to have it back in the air tomorrow.

Originally Posted by Aloha Flyer

Aloha:
I believe you will need the LONG THROW MECHANICS for the Aileron servos. Since this model does not come with the AR6400L (Long throw) for the ELEV or RUDD, the short throw mechanics is for that. HH should have made this clearer in their parts listing. I hope you know how to soldier small electronics when using those throw mechanic parts!

Hope this helps

I have plenty of experience soldering, but admittedly nothing this small. Other than putting a new tip on the iron and hitting the solder briefly, I wouldn't guess there'd be much of a trick to it. As I mentioned, I didn't get a chance to try. Thanks for your help as well.

Again, had a beautiful winters day. Dad, Wayne, Chris and Col all brought corsairs (Yes, once they took mine out, they were inlove, so now there are 6 in our fleet) and all flew, in formation. Olivia, Col's daughter was chasing them and eventually was quiet, and the quiet humm of 6 8.4mm motors flying around in formation would be so brilliant! I managed to get a pic, but my camera deleted it! >.<

Wow, to bad about the pic. That must of been cool to see six little corsairs buzzing around.

I had a heck of a time getting my hands on one but it got here last week.
I have the cockpit upgrade available on the Website now. I went with an open cockpit as a personal preference so the instrument panel can be seen better. There may be a thread on how its done later but for now all you need to know is the instructions are on the site under the banner and you don't have to split the fuselage to get it done.
I had a blade of grass strip out one of these servos on another model so I made covers to prevent it on this one.
They come in the upgrade kit too.
Not bad for $6

www.parkflyerplastics.com

I just want those servo covers. And I want 4 of them. The gearbox gear on my Champ had a quick lunch of the inside of the fuselage, spat a little foam into the fuse. Around the same time my rudder servo started to stick a lot. I cleaned it out and it works fine now... but I want my servos covered!

Originally Posted by Afraidtoregister

I just want those servo covers. And I want 4 of them. The gearbox gear on my Champ had a quick lunch of the inside of the fuselage, spat a little foam into the fuse. Around the same time my rudder servo started to stick a lot. I cleaned it out and it works fine now... but I want my servos covered!

I posted back a while how to make simple servo covers from plastic penny wrappers. Cheap and simple to make and work well and are perfect size.

Guess it was in the other thread I posted my DIY servo covers - http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...&postcount=893

Originally Posted by sparks

I had a heck of a time getting my hands on one but it got here last week.
I have the cockpit upgrade available on the Website now. I went with an open cockpit as a personal preference so the instrument panel can be seen better. There may be a thread on how its done later but for now all you need to know is the instructions are on the site under the banner and you don't have to split the fuselage to get it done.
I had a blade of grass strip out one of these servos on another model so I made covers to prevent it on this one.
They come in the upgrade kit too.
Not bad for $6

www.parkflyerplastics.com

Won't the open canopy affect flight characteristics??

I'm sure it disturbs the air over the fin some but I really can't tell.
Maybe the air flow over the windshield makes a dead air pocket there.
I was more worried about the canopy acting like a scoop and flying off.

Schooner has a good point. There are many formed plastic wrappers around to make a servo cover.
I'd sell the covers alone but it's hardly worth the time to make the shipping label and pay for the envelope.

Originally Posted by sparks

I'm sure it disturbs the air over the fin some but I really can't tell.
Maybe the air flow over the windshield makes a dead air pocket there.
I was more worried about the canopy acting like a scoop and flying off.

Schooner has a good point. There are many formed plastic wrappers around to make a servo cover.
I'd sell the covers alone but it's hardly worth the time to make the shipping label and pay for the envelope.

If you could make something that looked like bombs or droptanks to cover the servos they may be worthwhile to make and sell. If thet could give a semi-realistic look and act as covers as well.

Originally Posted by sparks

I'm sure it disturbs the air over the fin some but I really can't tell.
Maybe the air flow over the windshield makes a dead air pocket there.
I was more worried about the canopy acting like a scoop and flying off.

Schooner has a good point. There are many formed plastic wrappers around to make a servo cover.
I'd sell the covers alone but it's hardly worth the time to make the shipping label and pay for the envelope.

I was thinking about the scoop thing too, but i was thinking that it would catch air and slow the plane down or something. Probably not a big deal. Also the pilot and everything else included will add some extra weight which will make the plane even more underpowered.
Sorry sparks, might of just trashed the whole canopy kit. Looks great though.

Hey Guys!

I've written down every paint formula for the Hobbyzone and Parkzone UMs and have decided to sell 'em cheap to whoever needs them.

The only thing I couldn't match was the exact shine. Gloss was too glossy and semi-gloss was too, but Satin finish was a tad too flat, so I even played with that as well in a very, very thin matching clear coat.

All of these are water-based - including the sealer coat: EZ water clean-up.

I'm asking $2.50 for the .5 touch-up jar -- pre-matched colors.
And $5.50 for enough for a full-repaint -- 1.5 oz. jar.
Also, if you want a larger 2 oz. squirt cap bottle, it'll be $7.00
I recommend a .5 oz bottle of "Mac's Exact-Sheen Clear Coat" protective coating. It will cover an entire plane! And it's only $2! Order it for your existing plane for extra protection!

Plus shipping on these...shouldn't be more than a couple of bucks.

Mac

Mac,

Cool!! I'll be hitting you up for a few colors soon! Do you also have the XP & Beast colors?

Joel

Originally Posted by turboparker

Mac,

Cool!! I'll be hitting you up for a few colors soon! Do you also have the XP & Beast colors?

Joel

Not yet, Joel. I have to have one in-hand so I can correctly match the color(s). I'll be looking for a used one soon. I want to see if these catch-on and make it worthwhile to drop the additional $$ on more PZ's.

Thanks!
Mac

I'll also be matching Airfield Warbirds soon.

Thanks!
Mac