Thread Tools
This thread is privately moderated by PeterVRC, who may elect to delete unwanted replies.
Dec 22, 2018, 04:40 AM
Registered User
Thread OP
Build Log

A-10 Warthog - Freewing Twin 80mm (Rating 11/10 !!!!)

Another A-10 Warthog ?
Who needs TWO ?

The first thing about the Freewing Twin 80mm A-10 Warthog is the 1700mm Wing Span. So it is bigger..... but not by much really. The LX A-10 being 1550mm already.
It is all the details of it that make it 'better'....
The offset, to scale, nose wheel.
The Wing Gear Pods smaller (than the LX)
The 4 Flaps
Detailed cockpit and pilot
It is just a lot more scale all around.

Another thing is that the Twin 80mm use a 'battery each', whilst my A-10 runs from ONE 6S supply. That means much higher Power demands (Current/Amps) from that one battery, and a 'total energy' of 6S 5000mAH for the LX, versus 6S "10,000"mAH effectively for the Freewing. All whilst 80mm EDFs are more efficient too.
SOME of that energy has to go to moving a larger jet and mass. But that 'double energy total' is still a lot more even including that.

My LX A-10 is not too bad overall, and sit them side by side on the ground and whilst the Freewing will be clearly 'better' - more scale etc - the LX is still a pretty good version of an A-10. But ALL those above things added up (more energy, more efficient, more scale, bigger) and the FW A-10 is a lot better in real terms. But at a LOT higher cost!!
Mind you, with my 'good bits' in the LX A-10 it is a grand total of towards AUD$700..... versus the FW A-10 at AUD$1030

Last edited by PeterVRC; Dec 26, 2018 at 09:59 PM.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Dec 22, 2018, 05:09 AM
Registered User
Thread OP

Color Scheme change

To help this A-10 be different to my LX, which is the typical all grey scheme, I will repaint the FW A-10 to be.... ummmm.... I am pretty sure I will do an "Arctic Aggressor" scheme. I have not decided 100% yet, but that leads the way so far....

The various 'greens' are a bit blah and plain.....
The "Desert Aggressor" is another good one - which I like better than the "Arctic Aggressor" - but that needs the whole underside repainted then also. The Arctic Aggressor can leave it in the stock grey = much easier!
Then there is the "Peanut" scheme.
But.... I am still thinking it over....

Dec 22, 2018, 05:28 AM
Registered User
Thread OP

Battery leads

I am not exactly sure why Freewing make the Twin 80mm jets with INDIVIDUAL battery leads per battery.....
The F-14 Tomcat and the A-10 Warthog both do this.

Personally I prefer PARALELLED batteries if you use more than one, and it is not a pair aimed to have higher Voltage (eg 2x 4S for 8S).
If you have them individual then one could go flat faster than the other. Paralleled you keep the average Voltage and even if one gets a bit 'sick' the system still runs very well. Not one motor dying....

To wire this up you just need to "X" each battery lead (Pos, Neg). On large wiring gauges (like here) the easiest way is to pair up each pair of the 'direction' they will head. Like the two Positives from the ESC's - join those two together, side by side. They do the two that head on to the batteries. Then join those two sets to each other.

For the SBEC voltage source, I just add a JST lead that is soldered to the "X" point,. Then heatshrink the lot.....
I use a JST connector so that you can unplug the connector and then power the SBEC/RC portion of the plane with a 2S or 3S battery - just to test things etc. (No need to connect a larger flight battery)

It took a bit of effort to work out the wiring lengths, as you have to install the Nacelles and feed the wiring through - which is a bit of a nuisance - then mark/note the lengths and remove it to solder it externally. Then put it back in with the battery lead lengths longer so you can check and mark those for cutting... remove it all again.... solder on battery connectors and then put it all in the plane AGAIN.
Three times of feeding the wiring through......

I am also MOVING the Freewing Control Unit from its stock position, because it is just in a terrible place that wastes space and room for installing other things. Such as an RX !! And more so if you wanted to add a Flight Controller also - or later.
I have to make up a mount system, and the control unit will go vertically inside against the inner LEFT fuselage side.
The battery wiring will run along a groove in the RIGHT inner fuselage.
Thus the RC wiring, and the Power system wiring are on opposite sides of the aircraft!
The RX, and Flight Controller if desired, will go onto a platform mounted right near where the control unit originally was. Biased to the left fuselage side. (the "RC side")

This also leaves a large open and clear area for the battery placements. As it comes, there is a bit of a rats nest of wiring in that rear end of the battery compartment.

Last edited by PeterVRC; Dec 23, 2018 at 08:18 AM.
Dec 22, 2018, 05:39 AM
Registered User
Thread OP

Battery location

The A-10 is set up to have one battery 'high up' in the nose, above the nose gear bay underneath, This makes it VERY high up in the plane! So high that it comes very close to hitting the cockpit underside! Or worse.. it DOES hit it!

A 5000mAH 60C battery, when sat into position, JUST allows the hatch to close. But if you had Velcro under it - on the aircraft floor in there, and on the battery, it would be too high!
If you use the supplied 'rubber mat' - which is quite thin, much thinner than velcro... or velcro x2 - then it is all clear EXCEPT the battery strap adds height to it all and it again hits the cockpit underside first!
OMG what a setup.....

But a 4500mAH 40C has more room for clearance - but once the 2x Velcro height, and battery strap, are used, it just fits ok.

This means something "universal" has to be done so the 5000mAH 60C ALSO fits fine!

I want to use Velcro = 2x Velcro height.....
I want a strap......
Hmmmmm, how to do that? Unless the 5000mAH battery is mounted more rearwards - which is somewhat possible, and probably necessary as 2x 5000mAH weighs 200g more than the 2x 4500mAH.....
I think people are somewhat "Stacking" the 5000mAH batteries, by moving the forwards one more rearwards to sit OVER the rear 5000MAH battery.
But I need to check all that out once assembled, to work out the true battery position for CofG....

Someone else moved all the RC stuff to the NOSE - over the nose gear bay - but that needs a LOT of added RC wiring to reach forwards. Plus it might NOT allow getting the CofG right.
I can't really test this until it is all assembled.
Plus it needs to be PAINTED, WBPU'ed (clear coat) and assembled!! So that the true final parts weights are there, and then it is a true final setup for checking the CofG !!
So PAINTING the A-10 has to be the first/next thing done!!

Dec 23, 2018, 08:23 AM
Registered User
Thread OP

Control Unit/RC item positions and mounting

Considering that the A-10 has a "LOT" of internal space, it doesn't really.... most is the front area for batteries, and any other stuff needs to go well down the rear which is under the rear deck then.
The stock Control Unit position is right after the battery, on the floor, but that leaves no other space to fit anything easily - or in any way at all pretty much!

So I made up a 3D Printed mount to have the Control Unit on the inner left fuselage side, and displaced well rearwards. You don't really ever need to get to its wiring, but it is a screwed in mount that means you can get it out quite easily if need be.
The RX goes on another 3D printed mount, pretty much where the Control Unit had been originally. It is also screwed in for easy removal at any time.

The battery wiring goes down the inner right fuselage side, and the SBEC is Velcro'ed to the same wall just under that hefty battery lead wiring.
This is keep it away from the RX and RC wiring.... at least as much as possible. There is a bit of a rats nest of wiring in the A-10 !!

This all left the entire forwards areas open and clear for any battery types or placements.

Last edited by PeterVRC; Dec 23, 2018 at 08:32 AM.
Dec 23, 2018, 08:32 AM
Registered User
Thread OP

RC setup

I connected up all the pushrods, set up a new Model in the TX for the A-10, and did all the setup/tuning of things.

I sent the two Elevator servos DIRECT to the RX on their own channels. This is because they use a 'normal' and a 'reversed' servo in the tailplane, and the arms cannot be matched off anywhere near 'equally' for left/right Elevators. If you left it as it comes, via the Control Unit one arm is leaned forwards and the other is leaned rearwards, and no servo arm spline positions can improve that. This means that the 'arcs' of travel form different drive 'curves' to the Elevators!
Thus I moved them to their own channel so that they CAN be set up to operate perfectly equal...

I also ran the Nose Steering on its own channel so that it can be adjusted/tuned separate to the Rudders, and can also have a 'no steering unless the nose leg is extended' mix.

I reduced the Limits (Outputs) on all channels that needed that, to stop binding....
And fine tuned Triple Rates to give the two recommended throw setups, and also a much lower Rate (which might never get used....).
The HIGH Rates on the Elevators is a huge amount of throw! It looks like it would be a ridiculous amount to even have - but I set it up as per the manual's values and will see which Rate/s are truly useful when it flies.....

All RC is done and ready for flight.
In terms of stuff it needs to FLY, all it needs now are the battery bits done - the velcro flooring, and new better straps.
And I still have not decided on a PAINT SCHEME !
Dec 25, 2018, 08:54 AM
Registered User
Thread OP

Battery positions and straps

This is a little bit of an annoying plane..... as it has a "lot" of hatch area, but still struggles to give good battery placements and flexibility.
The main issue is the forwards battery, seeing it must go over the landing gear, but under the cockpit 'floor'. This causes severe limitations to 5000mAH (or larger) battery placement.

If you use the "rubber mat" they provide for under the battery, it all works JUST viably.... but that is not a good system to keep the battery in place. it is almost good enough, but not quite....

If you use Velcro you really need to add some 'floor' to that nose area, so I added a piece of 1.6mm plywood. Which then needs the floor piece of 'hook' Velcro and an under battery piece of 'loop' Velcro, then that extra height brings the 5000mAH battery right up to the cockpit foam above. Which would be ok if you do not use a strap also. You can't use a strap for the 5000mAH battery then.
As it turns out, seeing the battery is against the cockpit floor above, that will hold it firmly down against the Velcro floor anyway. So it does actually end up ok - BUT the battery must go in a VERY narrow range of position, which is effectively ONE position only really. Or it hits the cockpit floor in places with less leeway.

This means any CofG adjusting must be completed with only the rear battery moved - and that might not be enough range to get that right.

For 4500mAH batteries there is plenty of room so there are no limitations in placement positions. Plus then a forwards strap can be used and it ends up that a strap on that battery then brings it to hit the cockpit floor again.

I am not sure if the 180g LESS weight of a 4500mAH battery pair will make it impossible to set the CofG correctly with just those. It might need added weight - lead - for that. I will check that soon.

So all in all it is now all 'fit for purpose' and ready to fly.....
I will pretty surely fly it from GRASS the first time out.

Dec 26, 2018, 12:32 AM
Registered User
Thread OP


Well it ends up that I ASSUMED Freewing made the battery, hatch, cockpit, shapes so that a 5000mAH battery could JUST fit into the spot that it all forms. I am pretty sure they DID design it for that purpose BUT only for "30C" 5000mAH that will then weigh about 700g or so!
My 60C are 805g and thus it all ends up WAY too nose heavy!
Those batteries need to both go miles more rearwards. Another 30mm into the RX mount area, and the forward battery overhanging the 'ledge' (rear end) that the nose gear bay creates.

That is do-able.... but a new RX mount / battery tray extended plate needs to be added after the main lower battery tray. So that the battery can go rearwards that 30mm (or more!) than the end of the stock tray. So I designed a 3D Printed piece for that, but I might make it out of 2.5mm Basswood Ply because it is mainly a BIG rectangular plate.

Meanwhile, the 6S 4500mAH 40C batteries DO fit the expected stock positions perfectly, for a perfect CofG also! These are 700g each.
I will still add the tray to allow 5000/6000mAH batteries to be used also, but I will fly it on the 4500mAH batteries. That 200g 'savings' will help its AUW remain lower.....
I am sure I will still get 4.0mins flying time from 4500mAH.

I also added some 'sewing pins/heads' for CofG Markers. These are put into 0.5mm drilled holes in the Wing plastic end plate piece and are CAed in. I put them at the 80mm point - a bit aft of the manual listed 78mm as I expect to be using 80mm to 85mm sort of CofG range. I put them in the plastic because you don't want to be CofG'ing a HEAVY FOAM jet by holding it on FOAM on your fingertips! It will dent !
They are a great position and it works just as planned....

Dec 26, 2018, 12:40 AM
Registered User
Thread OP

Fuselage Stand

I was getting ready to load up the van and head out with the A-10 when I realised I needed a way TRANSPORT it safely!
On A-10's the Fuselage is always the tricky part....
I like my LX A-10 method, but that does not really suit the way the Freewing A-10 has its Wings attached so I needed to make up a new idea.

I decided on using the two Wing Spars as the main support points, and then a 'block' under the fuselage more rearwards of that. All done by a 'frame' setup...
This frame can also be used a the "Wall Hanger" to put the A-10 fuselage up vertically on a wall for storage. (Nose upwards)

It is wide enough so that it could not 'roll over' in transport, and its length is also made to stop that being possible in the fore/aft direction also.

You just put (or leave) the rear 8mm spar in the fuselage and place that into the "U"s made for that. The fuselage rear underside will rest down onto the rear 'block' that has foam on it to stop it marking the fuselage. You could just leave it as this.... but better is to feed through the 12mm spar as that 'totally locks' the fuselage into place on the frame, so that it can't rock forwards to be nose down. And more so if hanging on a wall, so it definitely could never fall down!!

It took an hour to think about and make... and it was getting windy fast anyway, so taking it flying had been aborted anyway....
Maybe flying tomorrow!

Dec 26, 2018, 09:42 PM
Registered User
Thread OP

Scale Exhausts - Thrust Tubes

"Dirty Dee" made up some new Thrust Tube 3D files so you can replace the Stock 'not scale' exhausts.
They look really good... on 'paper'... and when printed... AND when in the A-10 !!!

Their aim is to LOOK scale... but also to add some UP thrust.....
I printed a set in Silver/Grey and that looks pretty good, though they tend to be a bit more Black/darker. Yet not Black....
From various/many pictures it is hard to even know WHAT color they really should be!

I am not really after more Up Thrust, but more the SCALE looks! And they do look WAY WAY better than the stock exhausts!

Dec 26, 2018, 09:59 PM
Registered User
Thread OP

Maiden Flight - success, great !!

I took the A-10 out this morning for its Maiden Flight... and then two more flights....

The A-10 is awesome!! Just as it was sitting on the table.. but then also as FLYING! And running across the ground.... and coping with all factors you could encounter.....

It may as well have been my LX A-10 as they fly identically. Fantastically!!
So that is three A-10 types I have had and they are all the 'same' and awesome flying aircraft!! Obviously inherent in its "Piper Cub-like very basic design".

It flies so slow, so well that I just forgot to focus on landing to a more scale speed, so it was too slow in the final flare which meant it only just had enough energy to do the flare and then drop.... BOING BOING..... DOH. The same mad bouncing, kangaroo'ing()!), that the LX A-10 can do sometimes too!
It didn't hurt anything but it messed up the perfect flight/maiden.....

The next two flights I landed a bit faster so they were both excellent nose up touch downs, and it is so easy to do those in heavy aircraft (my LX A-10 also).

Takes offs from the grass were EASY, it has way 'too much' Power.... but that is fine, you do not HAVE to use it! And on grass that power makes for ability to have a nice scale decent speed(!) take-off too! On hard runway you might only want to use 50% throttle (or that sort of region) at most really.
The 9 blade EDF's sound PERFECT for it. I had already heard that in videos, but videos don't get sound 'right' anyway.... these two EDFs are perfectly balanced and only 'whine' with their mix of "9 blade not as whooshy as 12 blade" perfectly suited sound.
It is not a TF30... but it is as good as an EDF will get to that!!
You wouldn't want 12 blade fans in it!

BIG loops....... thanks to the abundance of Power on hand.
"50 Amps" to cruise around to scale..... versus my LX A-10 using about 40 - 45 Amps... so that is right in line with being linear to the size difference (10% larger). Though you could likely cruise around and still be fine per scale at as low as 40 Amps really. (And as per the LX can do down to 35Amps before heading to being marginal also).

I got 6 minutes 20 seconds from the 4500mAH's !! That is Power On time, which starts from going to WOT for the take-off run, until total power cut after landing. It is VERY Frugal on energy!

On the second flight I flew around brisker - but only to what I considered a 'faster than cruise' and not some 'sport jet' silly airspeeds(!), but it included two large loops, a pair of Split S or variations, many/most gun runs type paths.... swooping in, then climbing out, rolling etc.... and that got 4mins 30 seconds.
Telemtry information gives me the ability to land/finish with very narrow tolerance rage, so all flights were 3400mAH to 3550mAH used. (3 flights)
Thus 4500mAH is plenty! I won't use any larger capacities, seeing the 4500mAHs sit in perfect 'easy' positions, with no hatch interference, good airflow spacing, lots of wiring room, and give more more rearwards space for.... ????... umm, no need.....
I am so happy with these Zippy 6S 45000mAH 40C batteries!! Extremely CHEAP, yet work perfectly for the L-39, A-10 and F-14 anyway! Seeing they are all only "100Amp maximum" demand setups anyway.

I took note of the Thrust Line on the passes, accelerating to then climb out, but I did note notice any 'push down' due to it. I was using 80mm CofG - within 1mm, checked each flight. That made me think having the added Up Thrust could be a negative..... but I do think it will be so little in effect that you won't even tell either way, so I will still change those Thrust Tubes out later today.

After the TERRIBLE sequence of the F-14 Tomcat - ALL of what it had to go through to fly - and how it flies like a dog anyway(!), the A-10 was a welcome PLEASURE - quite the opposite of the F-14, it is a pleasure in every way! And very much like the FW L-39 which is also a fantastic jet that EVERYTHING was perfect about right as it came! (Well, too heavy for scale flying, but if you ignore that small aspect....)
So A-10, L-39... 11/10..... F-14 Tomcat 5/10.....

Flight three had the full ordinance on it and that caused a notable roll to the right, plus a bit of a Pitch "pull down". I guess some items have enough drag difference to cause that Roll result....
And strictly it must have been YAW from the drag difference that then produced the Roll.
So maybe some thought/testing over what ordinance to put where would be of use. (just the 'inequal' type items)

The nose leg is SO SLOPPY.... it seems like the retract pin in the trunion is a terrible fit and causes that. It doesn't bother the operation but I will check that out later to see what is going on there. Maybe it needs replacing with a 'proper fitting' pin....
Last edited by PeterVRC; Dec 28, 2018 at 07:20 AM.
Dec 28, 2018, 07:20 AM
Registered User
Thread OP

Maiden Flight Video

1080P 60FPS long videos..... 3GB to 4GB.... long uploading time....

A number of people are saying that swapping the left and right main gear landing gear, to 'reverse' the folding/suspension action it has, cures the Bronco Bucking landing cases. I can't see that would solve it, but many say it does....
On the LX A-10 it can do the exact same thing, but it has OLEOS already.
I think it occurs when the NOSE gear is hit into the ground - no matter what sequence causes that to happen, once it does it then bounces up off that! For example, you could stall a bit and flop nose first to hit the nose wheel.... or you could hit the main gear first, which then flings the aircraft upwards and then the nose gear hits 'first' next. Many sources can cause it.... pilot error, bad ground... all that matters is IF it does come down hard on the nose gear at any stage.

Thus the true fix is to have compliant NOSE gear.....
But compliant MAIN gear also tie in with the Nose gear ever getting 'hit' also, so they need to be suited too!.
I began to find out a while ago that if the landing gear ONLY JUST supports the AUW statically, then it will provide Super Compliant Suspension... thus a 'ride' that WORKS!
Swapping the main gear left to right basically ends up LOCKING the main gear from even having suspension. This will stop it causing a bounce off them - but you also have no suspension then! It is not the truly correct fix..... and the aircraft COULD still hit down on the Nose gear and it will bounce up off that then anyway!

Another fix a few people have done was to add an RC car shock absorber to the main gear suspension. This is a true fix, but only for the MAIN GEAR. You still need to fix the Nose Gear also! Just a softer spring there.

Anyway, on with the video show! And the Bucking Bronco ending!.....

A-10 Warthog - Freewing Twin 80mm - Maiden Flight movie (10 min 42 sec)
Last edited by PeterVRC; Dec 28, 2018 at 07:37 AM.
Jan 02, 2019, 04:39 AM
Registered User
Thread OP

Repaint - The "Peanut" Scheme

The scheme was chosen, and the repaint is well under way. Almost all done now.

The AFRES 76-0552 "Peanut" scheme of the one off camoflage test done in 1995.
(still on display at Barksdale AFB... maybe still... but it has also been repainted to a different 'green based' form of the same scheme!)
There are very few pictures of it in the 'Peanut' scheme. I have only found three....

I have not added the 'nose' (white) yet, as I did not like it that much (LOL). But I am painting the A-10 to the 'clear coat' done stage, and then can test out the white nose art on top of that - in case I want to get it back off! I will have to freehand that part.... it is just white paint, with two black paint nostrils.

There are TONS of models, from RC to plastic, wit this scheme - and 100 different paint color and detail variations!! So I guess virtually no one has all the information of the real one! The RC Turbine version below is the closest, most accurate, I have seen.... so I copied off that one.
The three REAL pics are half useless to determine colors from as the lighting totally changes those!

For once I used a spray can for the Clear Satin Polyurethane top coats. Outdoor/marine grade high UV protection - OIL based(!) - as the Water Based versions (WBPU) go a bit brownish over time. But this stuff has very strong solvents/carrier and even with a mask it tainted my mouth and throat! And the smells made me sickly and get a headache. And this was done OUTDOORS in a driveway to have free flowing air! Boy is it strong stuff !
Even walking around the plane to check it an hour later you could smell it emanating off the plane as it leeched off the solvent/carrier during its drying process! And still hours later!
But a spray can made an entire top surface coat take 5 minutes.... and then the underside later on also in 5 minutes! Rather than 20mins per surface if brush painted on! I considered the TIME saved, and evenness of the coats, plus the higher level of UV protection, to be worth its quite higher cost (versus WBPU in a can). Oil based is tougher too....

I do not have a number of the SPECIFIC 76-0552 ID decals, so I will have to make those up. I think I can. I have a vinyl cutter and it MIGHT just be able to do this scale of lettering - they will be close to the smallest it can viably cut. Hopefully that works!!
Otherwise I could laser print them onto decal paper, especially as they are just plain ALL black items. But decal paper will have the CLEAR portions, as per the string of letters in on that still, and that is not as nice as totally separated cut vinyl lettering.

It should all be done by the end of tomorrow.....

Jan 02, 2019, 04:50 AM
Registered User
Thread OP

Landing gear fixes

As per the Maiden Flight video showed - where it BRONCO BUCKED on landing - this A-10 suffers from the same problem as my LX A-10 does! For the same reason....
The landing gear is way too stiff !! The springs used.

The nose leg is an oleo, so that just as a normal compression spring inside it. That can be rewound and changed....

The main gear use a 'weirdo straight trailing link' invention and that is what makes it 'have to be' too stiff. A strong spring keeps the leg dead straight, yet allows suspension action IF the forces are rearwards at least at first! Once they begin to 'fold' compress, they will do so on vertical force also.
But it is just not a good idea to even have this system/geometry!
Changing its spring will not really work.... because it NEEDS to be strong to keep the leg straight vertical for most of the time.
It basically needs a new LEG used!!

Either the 'Pay for it, buy it' Freewing 'upgrade oleo' set !!!
Or some straight oleo - like HobbyKing have many of - BUT with no wheel offset on those it would not fit unless you modify the retract mount to be more offset then! Someone has done that!! But it is messy and a big task to do!
I decided to buy the Freewing set..... and I will check what spring it comes with, and if need be I will change the springs on those.

It seems that people who have bought the Freewing set have 'cured' the Bronco Buck problem. To solve that you HAVE to have softer springs, so I will see what they do really have......
I did not get the new nose leg as you can just change the spring on the old one and they cost too much to 'waste' money on for no other good reason!

In reality FREEWING should have GIVEN those landing gear sets to everyone for FREE!!! Because THEY made the stock rubbish that is not fit for purpose! But it is very fit for DAMAGING aircraft sooner or later, randomly!! (maybe they liked that consequence of their boo boo! Sell more parts!). If you have the stock landing gear then one way or another, one day, you will bronco buck it... sooner than later usually!!
I actually need to get around to changing the LX A-10 springs to be softer also!!
Jan 03, 2019, 01:47 AM
Registered User
Thread OP

Peanut Scheme

The "Peanut" Scheme is done... well, 98% all done!
I need to paint on the white hog nose....
Blacken the Exhaust Nozzles....
Make up some extra decals, and put them on.... (AFRES,,, AF76 552.... nose door 552...)
And just some small touch ups here and there to complete it all.....
THEN also the Landing Gear changes....

What an EFFORT!! It better not crash ever!
But it looks awesome!! WAY BETTER than the 'run of the mill' grey schemes seen all too often. And... I have a grey scheme one already anyway!!

This think actually looks better than most Skymaster A-10 jets!! Bar a few that have been done extremely well. Many are not...
And most are the wrong colors used too!


Quick Reply
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Product Freewing Twin 80mm/90mm A-10 Thunderbolt II xplaneguy Foamy EDFs 12430 Yesterday 04:43 PM
Discussion R2hobbies A 10 Warthog Twin Edf fotoreb Electric Ducted Fan Jet Talk 1 Jan 21, 2016 01:11 AM