Originally Posted by tclaridge

I think doing the warbirds with a brushed motor and 1S lipo setup is the right comprimise to keep the size in ultra micro. Otherwise, you are looking at a "mini" plane like the new Carbon Cub which is going to be awesome, just not "ultra micro!"

I made a VERY nice 20" CMW Corsair 3 or 4 years ago without nearly as nice of components as HH has available today. I am almost certain that the CMW airframes with the guts from the Gee Bee would be an incredible micro. It would be significantly lighter (about 25% savings) than I managed and would still have plenty of power (abet less than my 50 watt system).

20" would be inline with the size of the GB

Sadly I am half looking forward to destroying one of these UMX planes as I have 2 spare cmw that would I would love to test my theory with.

You can see a little bit of the ASK-21 in the latest Horizon video (about 1/3rd) along with Cub, Spit, Mig, and Cub.

HorizonHobby.com On the Horizon - 2-9-12 (53 min 30 sec)

Kool video.

Originally Posted by brushless55

I agree man...
some just want to play at the park with minimal cash

So do I. But I do not wish to compromise true warbird performance in the process. To me, an RC warbird should perform like a true warbird - regardless of scale. Anything less is not fun for me to fly. Nearly all WWII fighters were hopped-up, ultra-high-performance, fire-breathing, screaming machines. At the time, there were few things on Earth that could match the raw power & sheer mechanical violence of a warbird operating @ war-emergency-power. A number of those engines were running at specific output levels that are still impressive today.

The top-performing fighters back then were not lethargic, slow-to-accelerate planes. Rather, they were the pinnacle of hot-rodding. I'm not sure about the Spit, but I know that hitting WEP in a later P-47 slammed your head against the headrest like nailing the throttle in a drag-car. My dad described it like this: "Engaging water-injection in the Jug felt like getting kicked in the ass with a freight-train. It pinned you to the seat."

The top-performing WWII fighters were capable of miles-high vertical zoom-climbs. They did not struggle to do loops from level flight. Most were highly aerobatic. Some even had faster roll-rates than many purpose-built aerobatic planes of just 20 years ago. Some were easily capable of pulling 10+ Gs during pullouts. Crewchiefs routinely hopped them up in the field. For instance, it was not uncommon to see hopped-up Thunderbolts running 150 inches of manifold pressure @ WEP. That is nearly 75 PSI of boost! In contrast, modern Top Fuel dragsters "only" run ~45 PSI. I have no doubt that RAF crewchiefs also did similar things with the Spit. These are planes that literally shake the earth during low passes @ WEP. Being close to one during a pass is an experience I will never forget.

If an RC warbird can't deliver similar performance for its scale - I'll pass. I do not want yet another UM "warbird" that is actually a sport-plane in disguise. If I want to fly a sport-plane, I already have a few from which to choose.

I really hope that the new Spit has the performance of a true warbird, as I'd love to add one to my hangar. However, it needs to perform far better than the UM P-51 or F4U to have the true warbird performance I'm looking for. We shall see....

Joel

The Wholesale Trains Member Price is $86

Order 2 and shipping is $2.

The parts seem pretty cheap for someone wanting to build a non AS3X Spifire:

UMX Spitfire Parts

They don't have the 4 blade prop listed, yet.

Originally Posted by electricrc68

you got that right! im one of those people.

Right on buddy!
some could just care less about some who actually want to play without spinding more than needed....
specially if they are new and will crash

Originally Posted by turboparker

I really hope that the new Spit has the performance of a true warbird, as I'd love to add one to my hangar. However, it needs to perform far better than the UM P-51 or F4U to have the true warbird performance I'm looking for. We shall see...

I'll bet it won't be any faster than the UM P-51, but what about the AS3X receiver? That could be very interesting. (I have a 2S brushless power system standing by in case it isn't fast enough )

This looks very sweet. I have been dreaming about UM Spitfire, Nine Eagles has one, but it has no rudder, somehow the shape looks not spot-on, and the canopy is not clear.

Kyosho has a better looking one, but quite expensive, and not sure how it flies, didn't find any good vids of it yet.

This PZ version looks sweet, and seems to fly very well. Will be hard to say no against...

Originally Posted by brushless55

Right on buddy!
some could just care less about some who actually want to play without spinding more than needed....
specially if they are new and will crash

exactly! not everyone has a large bank to blow on rc planes!

Originally Posted by electricrc68

exactly! not everyone has a large bank to blow on rc planes!

Exaggerating things just a bit, I see.

Flying a 2s UMX plane surely does not require a large bank account. The difference in price between the Spit & the AS3X-equipped, 2s brushless Gee Bee or UMX Mig 15 EDF is $70. That's like what - just over a tank of gas for the car? An evening out with the better-half? Surely, those are not things that require a large bank account.

I simply stated my opinions as others have done. I am not fond of using cheaply-made, intermittent-duty pager motors with inconsistent output as powerplants. And, I prefer warbirds that fly like warbirds - not like sport-planes. One of the main reasons I fly warbirds is to sharpen my flying skills. I find no challenge in flying a warbird that behaves like an aileron trainer or sport-plane. Also, when I'm flying a fighter, I want to be able to fly it like a fighter. Which means having the power & speed of a fighter (in scale terms, of course). I'm more of a function over form guy with most things in life. First, get the function part right - then work on the look. To me, having the look without the function is pointless.

Joel

Geez guys
this is how a thread gets to be 200 pages before a plane is even released!

Live and let live I say....
I prefer BL
I prefer saving $

We are all right

Speaking of warbirds being warbirds... how long before we'll have another channel for simulated MG noises?

With that, I am unsubscribing until this little gem is released

I'll start reading again at page 201

Originally Posted by electricrc68

exactly! not everyone has a large bank to blow on rc planes!

Yeah, I'm thinking about the neewbies or kids who don't want to spend the extra cash for brushless and know that this one will work just fine with its price pointe...

Originally Posted by turboparker

Also, when I'm flying a fighter, I want to be able to fly it like a fighter. Which means having the power & speed of a fighter (in scale terms, of course).

The top speed of a Spit IX on the deck under WEP is 320 mph.* The PZ micro Spit is 1/28 scale. So to be scale, it should do 320 mph / 28 = 11.4 mph. In the video it appeared to be easily exceeding that. In fact, I suspect the low end, ie the stall speed, would be almost that fast.

Scale performance is the one aspect of the RC hobby that I don't like: because of physics, nearly all scale planes, especially small ones, fly way too fast and way too jittery. At least the AS3X tries to help the jittery part.

*the speed at high alt is 417 mph

Originally Posted by turboparker

Exaggerating things just a bit, I see.

Flying a 2s UMX plane surely does not require a large bank account. The difference in price between the Spit & the AS3X-equipped, 2s brushless Gee Bee or UMX Mig 15 EDF is $70. That's like what - just over a tank of gas for the car? An evening out with the better-half? Surely, those are not things that require a large bank account.

I simply stated my opinions as others have done. I am not fond of using cheaply-made, intermittent-duty pager motors with inconsistent output as powerplants. And, I prefer warbirds that fly like warbirds - not like sport-planes. One of the main reasons I fly warbirds is to sharpen my flying skills. I find no challenge in flying a warbird that behaves like an aileron trainer or sport-plane. Also, when I'm flying a fighter, I want to be able to fly it like a fighter. Which means having the power & speed of a fighter (in scale terms, of course). I'm more of a function over form guy with most things in life. First, get the function part right - then work on the look. To me, having the look without the function is pointless.

Joel

the thing is....$70 is a lot to me since im still under the driving age.

Originally Posted by brushless55

Yeah, I'm thinking about the neewbies or kids who don't want to spend the extra cash for brushless and know that this one will work just fine with its price pointe...

yup. i would be one of those.

Originally Posted by TP715

The top speed of a Spit IX on the deck under WEP is 320 mph.* The PZ micro Spit is 1/28 scale. So to be scale, it should do 320 mph / 28 = 11.4 mph. In the video it appeared to be easily exceeding that. In fact, I suspect the low end, ie the stall speed, would be almost that fast.

Scale performance is the one aspect of the RC hobby that I don't like: because of physics, nearly all scale planes, especially small ones, fly way too fast and way too jittery. At least the AS3X tries to help the jittery part.

*the speed at high alt is 417 mph

Scale speed doesn't work that way. A 1/4-scale plane needs to fly at half the full-scale speed to look right - not 1/4 the speed. It's a geometry thing. The full-scale traverses your field of view in a given amount of time. Put the 1/4-scale model at a distance where it appears to be the same size as the full-scale, then make it traverse your field of view in the same amount of time. You will find that the 1/4-scale model needs to travel at half the speed of its full-scale counterpart.

A 1:28 scale plane needs to fly at 1/14th the speed of its full-scale counterpart to look scale. But speed isn't the whole story. For scale performance, the UM Spit should be capable of performing 150-175' diameter loops, given that the full-scale executed loops that were more like 5000' in diameter. So far, none of the UM warbirds have been capable of executing scale-sized loops.

Regarding scale planes flying too fast - in general, I agree with you. At the club field, I often joke about all of the 'turbo-Cubs' as I call them, flying tail-high around the pattern. However, that is not typically the case with these UM warbirds. For instance, I don't know any experienced pilots who think that the UM P-51 or F4U perform anything like true warbirds. Given that the Spit is heavier, uses the same motor & gearing, and given that it uses an even less-efficient prop than the F4U's scale three-blade prop - I think my concerns are justified. I hope that I'm wrong - but the laws of physics are on my side in this case. At any rate - we shall soon find out. I suppose I could always drop a Bravo SX motor in it. They're good for a 30-40% increase in thrust over the stock motor - provided that a top-quality battery is used.

Joel