Originally Posted by Elkster

Just my opinion, but I don't think many wood will outlast a composite.

agree. i have never had a wood plane keep it like new luster or last as long as a composite. matter of fact i havn't had rotation pins or any of that wear out yet. but i do keep an eye on my servo gear train to make sure everything is tight. and balance my counter balances so there no constant strain on my servos.

Originally Posted by Elkster

Just my opinion, but I don't think many wood will outlast a composite.

Clearly you've never seen the durability of a Carden Aircraft kit then. I've known several to have well over 3000 flights (not a typo). I sold my 40% Edge 540 with around 1200 flights on it, and the next 2 owners put well over 1000 on it since then.

And i agree with shaker.
You noobs dont know what this guy does!

I only have had two composite planes, one was an Extra 2.3 CARF and the other was 2.6m CARF 260.
Although I did not like the top skin hinges due to obvious reasons, it was amazing how different they were due to better stiffness.

I am very happy that Quique designed the center hinge ailerons and with as much deflection they are showing on these pictures, I bet most of us mortals wouldn't be able to handle more than 40 degrees throw.

I read the thread. Did I miss somewhere about when these will be available? Also, I saw that the airframes did not have decals put on at the factory. Does that mean they are strait white? Sweet plane! I hope they do some other airplanes as well. I just don't care for round cowl airplanes. Just a personal preference. I really hope composite comes to main stream brands. After seeing what was involved in getting a carf in the air I bought a 104 slick last year instead. Carf has bad product support, bad owners manuals, and just an overall lack of information on set up etc.... Awesome airplane hanger 9. Can't wait too see the build threads start.

Originally Posted by Bam Bam

And i agree with shaker.
You noobs dont know what this guy does!

Noobs?? Not everybody here is a noob....

I've got Carden's too, I have had to update them, as the covering got old and worn. My Compy's still look and fly just like they did when they came out of the mold. And they have all been thrashed. Do you know what I, or for that matter, others do?

Originally Posted by Friedclutch

I read the thread. Did I miss somewhere about when these will be available? Also, I saw that the airframes did not have decals put on at the factory. Does that mean they are strait white? Sweet plane! I hope they do some other airplanes as well. I just don't care for round cowl airplanes. Just a personal preference. I really hope composite comes to main stream brands. After seeing what was involved in getting a carf in the air I bought a 104 slick last year instead. Carf has bad product support, bad owners manuals, and just an overall lack of information on set up etc.... Awesome airplane hanger 9. Can't wait too see the build threads start.

You missed it. They are painted in the mold, The logo's are stickers. I'm not really into round cowls either, but if you had ever flown any of QQ's Yaks, believe me, you want this one.
One question, what do you and others find so hard about working on composites? They are easy to work on, don't let the internet ignoramouses sway you on that pile of bs. I have had nothing but great customer support from CARF, just as thousands of others have. When you read two or three internet grippers whine about bad service, this does not automatically equate to CARF having bad support. All my owners manuals have been clear and concise, gave me everything that I needed to know. The rest was left up to my building skills that I have amassed through the years of modelling. But really, they are just a different kind of canvas to paint on. They are still ARF's, but not as much of an ARF is, as 3DHS's Slick 104's are. Really, it just takes some common sense to get a Compy together. If you have not tried it, you should!

Originally Posted by FugginLunatic

You missed it. They are painted in the mold, The logo's are stickers. I'm not really into round cowls either, but if you had ever flown any of QQ's Yaks, believe me, you want this one.
One question, what do you and others find so hard about working on composites? They are easy to work on, don't let the internet ignoramouses sway you on that pile of bs. I have had nothing but great customer support from CARF, just as thousands of others have. When you read two or three internet grippers whine about bad service, this does not automatically equate to CARF having bad support. All my owners manuals have been clear and concise, gave me everything that I needed to know. The rest was left up to my building skills that I have amassed through the years of modelling. But really, they are just a different kind of canvas to paint on. They are still ARF's, but not as much of an ARF is, as 3DHS's Slick 104's are. Really, it just takes some common sense to get a Compy together. If you have not tried it, you should!

well put. composites rock! they are not hard to put together and carf does make great manuals. But really thats not the point. this is a hangar 9 and from talking with others about this plane the level of completion is just about the same as any arf now a days. but really give it a try. they're are not hard to do at all. its just an airplane. and if you get stumped pm me and i'll help anyone with a composite plane build. i have had 15 so far and i still have my very first one and still love it. and i will be getting the new qq yak for my hangar . i have my last 2 wood planes up for sale now. this plane is perfect for someones first composite.

One thing that makes a huge difference (in my experience) is the type of hinge line the model has; beveled like this QQ Yak and *most* wood airplanes, knuckle style hinging like full scale (doesn't work as well as normal beveled hinge on a model), and top hinged (like a lot of other composite airplanes, Comp-Arf, Krill).


Seth Arnold[/QUOTE]


Seth,

You say two things here I would like to understand better.

First, how does the type of hinge line a model has make such a huge difference?

Second, if the hinge line type makes such a huge difference, then why does full scale type (knuckle style as you refer to it) not work as well as a "normal" bevel hinge on a model?

Dennis

I don't think the plug cutout is that big of a deal. For Petes sake they give you a blister to cover it up. Majority of these planes will end up with a DLE or some other china motor with angled plugs and will not require a cutout anyway. There are just a few chronic complainers on FG that have no intentions of buying this plane and a DA120 if it did fit without a notch.

Originally Posted by dhawks

Seth,

You say two things here I would like to understand better.

First, how does the type of hinge line a model has make such a huge difference?

Second, if the hinge line type makes such a huge difference, then why does full scale type (knuckle style as you refer to it) not work as well as a "normal" bevel hinge on a model?

Dennis

Dennis,

In past experiences, I've flown the same airplane with both style hinges (flew one flight, swapped wings, flew another with same throws and setup). Snaps are cleaner, fast roll direction changes are cleaner, rolls faster in general with the same amount of travel; just an overall better flying airplane.

I don't have an exact reason as to why they do it the way they do (I don't work on full scale models). It could be a couple things (I really don't know). 1 - Reynolds numbers we deal with on a model are far different than the full size (air doesn't scale down as the model does!), and 2 - they also have limited power on a full scale airplane. Many times with limited power, you also try to reduce the drag as much as possible to help increase that power. With models, we don't exactly need to focus that much on drag since we have so much power. It could be that do them, this reduction in drag is a greater advantage than improving the flight performance of the airplane a small amount.

As I mentioned, I don't have a definite answer as to why the full scale guys do it the way they do, but I do know that the bevel style flies better on a model.

Seth

Its the geometry that is different, top hinge ailerons expose more surface in the up postion than the down causing differential between the two. Center mounted are more even both directions.

Originally Posted by Shaker

Clearly you've never seen the durability of a Carden Aircraft kit then. I've known several to have well over 3000 flights (not a typo). I sold my 40% Edge 540 with around 1200 flights on it, and the next 2 owners put well over 1000 on it since then.

Do your own research as there are entire threads dedicated to this topic. NO WAY wood will outlast a composite. Head to head after 3000 flights, that wood will not look near as new as the composite.

Originally Posted by Bam Bam

And i agree with shaker.
You noobs dont know what this guy does!

I've been flying RC for over 25 years......Giant scale for the majority of that. Between us, who's the noob?

Originally Posted by FugginLunatic

Noobs?? Not everybody here is a noob....

I've got Carden's too, I have had to update them, as the covering got old and worn. My Compy's still look and fly just like they did when they came out of the mold. And they have all been thrashed. Do you know what I, or for that matter, others do?

I guess our experiences and others like us are abnormalities. We're all just noobs in some people's eyes.

Its the geometry that is different, top hinge ailerons expose more surface in the up postion than the down causing differential between the two. Center mounted are more even both directions.

vmceachern,

I understand this in regards to top hinge systems where significant differential is needed to make rolls axial. What Seth is referring to (correct me it I'm wrong Seth) is full scale type hinging sometimes called pocket hinges like what is used on the rudder of this aircraft.



This hinging method is still center hinged and not offset like a skin hinge.

Seth,

If bevel hinging is so much better, then why was the rudder hinged in manner shown above?

Dennis