|
|
|
Discussion
Which'd you choose; a Great Planes J-3 Kit...or....Dynaflite Decathlon 1/5 kit?
Tower offers the 90" Great Planes J-3 Cub, or, the 89" Dynaflite Super Decathlon for about $5 difference. If I can believe my RealFlight simulator, the Decathalon has the slight edge in smoother eorobatics and also a slower landing. HOWEVER, what peaks my curiousity is that both these kits are 89"-90" , yet the J-3 builds out 4 to 6lbs lighter at 9 1/2 to 12 lbs, with a 19-24oz wing load, while the Decathalon builds out to 16 to 18 lbs with a 30-33 oz wing load!!!. ( However the Decath also has 114" more sq. in. of wing area at 1237 vs 1123) While I prefer the aerobatic advantages of the Decathalon, the immensely lighter Great Planes J-3 numbers are hard to ignore!
I'd like to hear your take on that comparison, and if the heavier Decathlon kit is possibly still a better choice inspite of it being 4-6 lbs heavier. J-3 Cub http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...&I=LXJ569&P=ML Decathlon; http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin...?&I=LXYXJ7&P=0 |
|
|
|
|
Thinking you'll find that the extra weight of the Decathlon airframe will allow it to be beat up on while in the air to a much greater extent than what you might try with a Cub. Same regarding power. The Decathlon will handle about anything you feel comfortable with. Maybe not so much regarding the Cub?
If your rudder skills are lacking, either will gleefully remind you of that without blinking an eye. Both demand your full attention on the take off run, while the Decathlon requires it on both take off and landing (especially in a cross wind!). It's a pilot's plane..... demanding full attention, all of the time - in return for a plane that's just so-so regarding acrobatics - when compared to Extras, Yaks, etc. which all fly WAY better. If you're looking for a serious acrobat (something beyond loops and rolls, occasional knife edge), I'd pass on both of them. That's me though. -Al |
|
|
|
||
|
Quote:
The Realflight simulator must not be too accurate, because the J-3 and Decathlon both take off in a short run with hardly any rudder correction, nor is much rudder reqired to fly them well even on the high dual-rate setting. I also find 5 -7 MPH simulated winds easier to fly the planes because they can be slowed almost to a hover vs the faster and harder landings with calm conditions and no wind at all. (in the simulator.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OMG +1,
I have the GP Clipped with a like new 91 , might go with a DLE 20 but no more |
|
|
|
|
|
Up to a 35 is recommended fo the Dynaflite.....while the GP J-3 info provided by Tower doesn't even mention gas at all. ( so yes, a small 20 DLE makes sense) This likely goes into play to show that the Dynaflite is indeed a good bit heavier plane and so needs a bigger engine! The input thus far on this thread makes me feel better about the Decathlon, and not be concerned it's a heavier plane. I guess it simply is just not the same class of plane as the J-3. (as suggested by dmrcflyer2)Perhaps that it is heavier and beefier might let it translate into a sturdier plane for me if I'm not quite the accomplished pilot yet.......compared to the feather light J-3.
I have been kind of leaning to the Decathlon over the two planes. I guess if it flys great the way it is, then I shouldn't be over analizing its weight to a J-3. |
|
|
|
The manuals are online. Look at the
construction differences to help you decide. Jenny |
|
|
|
||
|
Quote:
When using the RealFlight simulator on the higher dual rate, I really can't tell too much difference between these two high wing planes.....except that the Decathlon lands slower and softer. For somebody moving up from a trainer, they both do more then I could want. On youtube you can't get a hint of the true potential aerobatics of these two planes to be able to compare and see the real potential between them. On youtube it doesn't matter if it's a warbird, a cub, or a Telemaster that is being flown.....all anybody ever seems to do is go round and round in big circles with MAYBE a slow motion roll or loop during the 6 minutes of flight....if they even do that! |
|
|
|
|
Randall, I think you're in for a lesson regarding RealFlight and the real world.....
Sims are great, but unless you're flying one that cost millions, you can likely expect to find major differences between sim flying and a model. And Youtube? All that does is prove an airplane flies. The planes and the guys at the sticks can be so vastly different from what you actually experience that you can expect to gain pretty much nothing by watching them. If you watch a youtube video of a guy flying 3D with what is obviously a trainer, do you honestly believe you might have a chance of flying like that? The average beginner will likely be a couple of years just learning how to set the plane up! Not trying to blow holes in your thinking or what you've seen. Just trying to temper it with a reality check. You've posed a very good question, and you're getting some great advice from some pretty experienced pilots. |
|
|
|
||
|
Quote:
I'll tell you what though........the Realflight simulator has definitely convinced me what planes are difficult for me NOT to want to try anytime soon. The Great Planes 101" Stinson is one of them. And for another example, while I find the Top Flite simulated P-47 somewhat easy to fly (as many say the P-47 is for a Warbird) I find the Spitfire tricky to fly in straight strafing runs, and the P-51 difficult to land. But, I do everythinmg well enough with both the J-3 and the Dynaflite Decathlon on the Simulator to want to come here and ask about them. Again, they will be for my step up from the trainers. Awww heck..... Tower's bargain price's on these kits are enticing.....but I guess I don't have to buy one. |
|
|
|
|
Randy, if you are near a flying field go out and see what's going on. Then TRY to see if you can find someone that will put you on a buddy box for a flight on a REAL model plane . You NEED to see the difference between a real plane and a simulator . Utube, movies simulators etc. don't give you a true picture of flights.
My reference above was trying to tell you that the cub was a slow baby buggy type plane and the Decathlon is more of an aerobatic trainer plane . What type you get after your trainer pretty much depends on your skills and what you are interested in doing with it. Personally I wouldn't recommend a cub after a trainer ( maybe an electric cub ) as cubs require a finer touch in some respects ( taxing , take off's etc . ) then a Decathlon or other type plane . Also you will find a lot of difference between electric ( foam ) and glow / gas wood framed planes . Anyway good luck . ENJOY !!! RED |
|
|