Originally Posted by GWS4CEO

I knew that we had many Mig15 and F86 in the stores.

But shall we still make GWS version to show the differences of performance?

Yet, U2 will be the best Jet trainer, performance likes motor glider while with the attractive sound from EDF unit.

The U2 is a loser IMO for two simple reasons, one is the wingspan is huge and it will need to be disassembled to fit it most cars, something a LOT of us hate to have to do. I've already walked past 4 painted C-47 kits sitting on the shelf at the LHS for $70 and wingspan was one of the reasons that I kept on walking...

Second reason is it's not a fighter jet.

We don't need no stinkin jet trainers. We need fighters. preferably one that the overall airframe shape and size is such that it will fit in most midsize cars and runs on ONE fan unit that's well suited to brushless upgrade.

In other words a small, lightweight, single engined fighter that will fly on a stock brushed EDF-55 (or other), even if the stock recommended battery needs to be a lipo and its stock performance is floatly and un-jet like... The important thing is it be small, light, affordable, AND inexpensive to upgrade to brushless and turn it into a fighter with a jet performance envelope. I don't really care if it's a F-86, or a Mig 15, 17 etc., F-16 or whatever. As long as it's not made by saab, or french, I will probably be excited to buy one.

The only thing I really hate about my now porky and side lined EDF-50 A-10 is the fact that I have to buy 2 brushless setups for the damned thing.

Sure I could desperately try the high voltage EDF50 motors with my 3 series lipos for about $25, or upgrade it to EDF-55's for $30~70 depending on how much work I do but the only thing that will "fix" my A-10 into a jet is 2 himax-2015's in edf-55's and 2 CC phx-25 esc's... that's about $250 on a kit I already paid $90 for and have $200-250 into! I likely would need a new lipo pack for it as well.

After owning a A-10 I am really skeptical of any new GWS jets that come out. I have been a long time supporter of the stock EDF-50 A-10 and it can be a good "slow flying" plane, I never had any problems making it slowfly itself all over the sky. I'm not one of those "it could never, ever actually fly" whiners... I don't know what there problem(s) were / are... Mine just wouldn't fly like a jet fighter.

Mines a hanger queen due to a human / computer radio interfacing "error" (wrong model #) and a new heavier then expected nose from the tip of the cockpit forward... but I never was satisfied with its stock "slow fly" style.

I don't need a second A-10 fiasco, $90 kit, ~$100 worth of servos & receiver, plus I need another $250 worth of brushless motors, ESC's and fan units to get what I want out of it...

as cool as a F4 or a F-15, F-18 etc. would be it would just be the whole A-10 thing all over again. I remember waiting forever for the long, long overdue A-10 to come out and waiting for the next jet is just more of the same old GWS waiting game...

any jets that R&D are working on based on our suggestions is at least 1.5~2 years away from introduction, unless it's already been in the pipeline for a LONG time!

GWS is starting to remind me of the "All in the family" theme, "And I don't know just what went wrong, those were the days..."

i have never flown an A-10, but I have read mixed feelings about them....... Some like it and some hate it........ I think that it will be the same way if a fighter comes out..... MIXED FEELINGS

I voted for the F-14 in the hopes that the swept wing might articulate back and forth scale like.

That said, The F-4 looks like the winner, in both ease of build and room for the guts.

I would buy the F-14 or the F-4. A U2 would be real cool....even fit with a camera for scale missions!!!

Hey, and how come the SR-71 Blackbird wasn't mentioned.....all you speed freaks could almost re-create scale Mach speeds . I know I would be tempted.


Eh??

Got four EDFs lying around ?. How about a Junkers JU287 ? (just kidding). Gloster Meteor ?.

You could always cheat and start making clear plastic lexan polycarbonate props for "jets" so you'd have performance and the jet look in the air. Just watch your fingers.

The problem with electric model jets is the way the motor is inside the EDF unit, it takes up too much space. They ought to start making either a shaft driven, or belt driven EDF with the motor on the outside of the fan housing. If it was belt drive you could use different sized pulleys to change the "gear ratio" if you wanted to.

[QUOTE=Esso Bee] Gloster Meteor ?.
QUOTE]

Gloster meteor is another great choice. Good wing area and short motor ducts are both going to be requirements if you want it to fly well. And that airplane also has a great history, and is rarely modeled.

I'd be very, very surprised to find anything with "fighter jet performance" come out at a reasonable price.

Part of the A-10's problem in that area is that the *real* A-10 isn't a fighter jet! It's a slow, close support ground attack aircraft. And the model flies like one, it's nice.

I'll never buy a high speed jet. They're too much money, require too much field, and too much support equipment. That kind of hassel is why I fly electric now.

Another Jet of the same era as the Meatbox is the De Havaland Vampire. One engine , a lot of wing area, short ducts and, with the Australian built version, auxiluary elaphant ears intakes for more air to the fan.

If a larger intake and exaust ducts are wanted there is the De Havaland Venom which is of similar twin boom configuration.

Ken

I've seen that one before-- the kit that's out now is heavy and expensive. Mr Lin could make a cheaper lightweight one that might do well.

Originally Posted by p51flyer

i have never flown an A-10, but I have read mixed feelings about them....... Some like it and some hate it........ I think that it will be the same way if a fighter comes out..... MIXED FEELINGS

It's sensitive to a lot of things that seem to vary from builder to builder- incidence, CG, thrust line, weight... If you get all those things lined up just right, it's great. If you mismatch them, there's little hope. There seems to be some in-between space there, too.

Most of the jet models are going to have similar issues.

me-262

i like that idea...

Why not making the grandfather of the B2??

THE HORTEN

or these...

the ME-262 (the first produced jet in the world) or the HE162 'Salamander'

really nice planes

How about an MIG15 guys. with a silver fuselage. Although i want an F16 as well. with a brushless motor in it

You guys don't get it do you?

For those of you that have already read this - never mind. For everyone else, this is something to think about.............

This is getting out of hand.

I'm probably the biggest jet nut around, and would love to see more from GWS - BUT............................................... ...........................

You guys want a jet to scream around in at a cheap price, which isn't going to happen!

GWS builds cheap, foam, parkfiers. Jets, by their nature, have high wing loadings (if they are even near scale), which means they need more power, which means they cost more. You need a high efficancy fan like the wemotech - not the GWS ones. They are only good for planes with low wing loadings and big wings - like the A-10, U-2, and possibly T-33. When they brought out the A-10, everyone (almost) complained bitterly. They put bigger motors in it, and people still complained that it wasn't fast enough untill you put $300 worth of motors and controllers in it.

I have the EDF 50 version and a 7 cell nicad and it flies well for what it is (nice comfortable circuits in the park - will barely loop, rolls ok, but cruises just fine). For go fast I spent LESS money than a GWS A-10 kit, brushless motors and controllers, and have a RBC Mig 29 with a brushless motor, controller and minifan.

If GWS did make ...say....an F-16 - could you imagine the wing???? The plane wouldn't look anywhere near scale and still only have half ass preformance.

I like jets but come on................GWS is what it is, and I fear that no matter what jet they bring out the majority of people are going to be upset that they had to go out and pay 3 times the kit price to get it to preform - then complain that the airframe is weak, because of the weight, due to the equipment people put in it just to go 45 mph.

I tried to make a plane for the EDF-75, but the motor is the weak point.

Barely 12 oz of thrust at 12 volts and 13 amps???? To get a battery that would do that weighs 10.5 oz (I'm not convinced of lipo safty yet) Even with lipos - thats pathetic. I have the plane sitting on the shelf as I try to find ways to lighten it. It's rather large so the weight of 21 oz is pretty good, but the fan will not fly it. The kyosho fan or even better - the smaller wemotec fan put out WAY more thrust - even on cheap brushed motors.

Before a GWS (fighter) jet is a reality - the fans need to be more efficiant and the motors need to be redisigned or replaced.