Need a new aircraft - Page 78 - RC Groups
Thread Tools
Mar 14, 2013, 08:24 PM
Registered User
I just put together the starmax f16 with an HET typhoon 2610 on 6s , Its just plain violent, but flies beautifully and the new air retracts work like a charm. Love the plane
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Mar 15, 2013, 09:48 AM
Houston. .we have a problem.
FOX ONE!'s Avatar
I was just cutting the boom strengtheners out of a sheet of ply in accordance with the details here: and thought I'd draw up some plans for additional parts to cut in order to strengthen the elevons.

Searched for the bag that contains them, in the box. Nice surprise - it's already been done by the manufacturer! Having read the thread a few times, I didn't realise Starmax had tried to address the weaknesses in this area already. I'd seen a few pics of what I thought were some of your (very neat) efforts to strengthen the elevons, and I thought I'd do the same.

I think it's removed my ability to build the planned anhedral into the elevon fixing rods (ripping them apart would create weakness in the structure), but it's saved me a couple of hours, so I'm pretty happy!

The other weak points, the linkage box, possibility of brittle servo arms and bending control rods will be addressed with the ply strengthener, an upgrade to Hitec HS-85MG's with nylon arms and beefier control rods (with CF tubes if necessary).
Mar 16, 2013, 01:21 AM
Registered User
To get anhedral you have to mount the pivot blocks downwards at 10deg approx.
Easy to do when first building....
Mar 16, 2013, 05:32 AM
Houston. .we have a problem.
FOX ONE!'s Avatar
Yeah, that's the only option now.
Problem is, to do it properly requires the removal of foam, which I'd rather avoid. The booms need shaving to produce the angle, so that the strengtheners and the boxes can sit flat against each other.

If the booms aren't reshaped, the boom strentheners that are going to sit "flat" on the bottom of the booms wont have as much area of contact with the boxes, as the boxes will be angled and the strengtheners wont be.
Mar 16, 2013, 09:10 AM
Registered User
Oh, of course you would match the booms to the pivots..... 15mins of sanding.... hehe
Mar 16, 2013, 12:32 PM
Houston. .we have a problem.
FOX ONE!'s Avatar
Yeah, if only I had an electric sander that worked. Someone borrowed mine & burned it out a few months back!
Mar 17, 2013, 09:55 AM
Registered User
I modified my 70mm F-16 from a fixed tailplane to an all moving tailplane with anhedral today..... more work than the Starmax seeing I had make all the elevator pivots shaft, and pivot 'box' etc for it - not just cut, sand, move some already set to go bits.
It took about 3 hours.

The Starmax F-16 should only need one hour or so.
I would remove the elevator(s).... Do one side first, to have the reference to work off for the other side later..... cut off the plywood face plate that mine has fitted.... cut out the pivot block.... sand the boom face to the required angle and re-glue (epoxy) the pivot block to suit..... and then replace the ply face plate.
Then match off the other side.....

You could actually do it without sanding the boom face.... either by fitting a ply face plate at the sloped angle anyway, filling behind it with epoxy.... or doing nothing at all and just having the elevator spaced outwards enough to not foul the boom (the dodgy way to do it! LOL)..

I will do mine next weekend......
Mar 17, 2013, 10:50 AM
Houston. .we have a problem.
FOX ONE!'s Avatar
Nice mods Peter! It's going to wind me up if I don't do it myself now!

Did you mean to close that thread?

Looks like it's just you & me here!
Last edited by FOX ONE!; Mar 17, 2013 at 11:17 AM.
Mar 17, 2013, 05:54 PM
Registered User
Yeah, in my Blogs I just close them and add/edit as required.. aiming to get one outline of a plane build in its best form, without the earlier 'errors' and things that were not as good as things done later. (havent cleaned that one yet).
But I also have the same full thread in the normal posting area, so people can respond (they can via PM anyway).

I was going to do the Starmax too, but I have some tests I want to do first... and the weekened weather was horrible for all of it. So once I get to record some things I want to try, I can have that info as reference to see if anhedral changes anything too.
Mar 19, 2013, 07:16 PM
Houston. .we have a problem.
FOX ONE!'s Avatar
I realised today that the V3's undercarriage is much shorter than the V2's, probably because of the air retract system's inability to raise heavier, longer legs.

This would tie in with the fact that the V3 comes with sub-standard struts and a puny wire nosewheel.

If you check out the pictures in this thread, it's glaringly obvious, especially when the gear is retracted. On the V1/V2, the nosewheel retracts to a position "in line" with the main gear, hence the retract wells almost touch each other.

Now look how far apart the wells are on the V3. The gear legs are MUCH shorter.
Last edited by FOX ONE!; Mar 19, 2013 at 07:25 PM.
Mar 19, 2013, 07:34 PM
Registered User
I think mine is a V3....
With the new legs etc all made up, I still use the stock 'length' of the wheel bays, so I guess the leg lengths are similar to what they supplied. I set mine up to be very much the same as per the real F-16 (scale) height off the ground.
Those V1/V2 might have been a bit 'stilt-like', hehe

It is hard enough to keep it tracking upright as it is, with its quite narrow track and short wheelbase! Being even 'taller' would probably make things even worse, even though gaining a bit of track width then.

It will be good when some more intricate landing gear leg designs are ever made for "smaller" aircraft like these! eg Proper pivots and compressions etc. You really need 30mm sort of range, with decent/appropriate compression AND tires with some 'give' also.
So they can absorb the landing, and ground undulations, and 'porpoising' tendencies properly!
That would also improve grass/dirt handling massively too!

NOT having overly good landing gear solutions.... that is the BANE of model aircraft!!! lol
Mar 19, 2013, 08:28 PM
Houston. .we have a problem.
FOX ONE!'s Avatar

Which legs did you use? I can see them in the photos you posted earlier. Do you have a link to them at all please? Did they come in a set of 3, or did you use a different nose strut?

I'm just in the process of fitting the electric retracts, I think I have the same ones as you, the HK-15090. I've used them on a few models, never had a problem with them.

Mar 19, 2013, 09:11 PM
Registered User
Info here:
Mar 20, 2013, 05:12 AM
Houston. .we have a problem.
FOX ONE!'s Avatar

Great, thanks! Hadn't seen that thread before. Lots of useful info there!

Thanks again.
Mar 20, 2013, 05:36 AM
Registered User
As soon as I get some decent afternoon weather I will do the tests I want to do on teh F-16, and then it gets the "elevator anhedral mod" done.
Mornings have been great, so that is OK for other aircraft at the main park area I fly, but larger ones I need to go to a school area and their big carpark which is no go in morning before school there!
So hopefully, at worst, Saturday morning....... or Sunday morning.....

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sold F-16 and F-5 B Rocka Aircraft - Electric - Jets (FS/W) 13 Nov 12, 2009 11:00 AM
Wanted 64mm f-15 f-16 edf greatplanes Aircraft - Electric - Jets (FS/W) 3 Aug 29, 2009 09:05 PM
Discussion f-16 of pilot deaddrop Fuel Jet Talk 0 Aug 24, 2009 12:32 PM
Discussion New: big Kyosho F-2 (Japanese Air Self Defense Force variant of F-16) with 79mm fan Smokescreen38 Foamy EDFs 19 Oct 29, 2008 12:24 AM
Video Big F-16 with e-flite PARK 480 Hans-Joachim Electric Plane Talk 12 Apr 17, 2008 07:27 PM