Wild Hare 88" Edge 540 Build

[Tired Old Man]

I didn't want to go back over the "hinge slop" comment but I suppose it's necessary now. Back when W/H was delivering the first planes to use the "pocket hinge" concept the hinges consisted of a carbon rod passing through ply tabs that were inset and part of a concave hinge line. Similar to what Comp Arf uses on rudders. The early 35 and 40% kits had wear between the ply tab and the carbon rod that permitted the ailerons to rattle after a number of flights. The condition was corrected on later kits with an updated design, and most of the early kits were taken care of as well as customers made contact with W/H. The 28% planes have never had pocket hinges.

[wildhare]

I finally found this thread and the time to read it. I was not aware that it existed until one of my customers sent me a link.

I'd like to make the point that I am here almost all the time and we have a voice mail system, anyone who has questions like these really should call me. My number is 817-430-0107.

First, pipercub sent me 1 email about the wig rib and hatch issues a week ago and I was left with the impression that he was doing some more investigating and I was waiting for more follow up from him. Now that I am aware of his need I have emailed and called him, still have not made contact. But I have made a few notes after a great deal of reading. I may have missed some things, my eyes tend to cross when confronted with so much verbage.

Wing ribs; They are probably fine as is, those little segments of balsa that popped out don't add anything to the structure, they are there primarily to provide rigidity during the manufacturing process and are always the first thing to go if something is stacked on the wing. You can glue in a little tab if it makes you nervous, but it's not necessary.

Regarding heat from the canister setup, just open up the vents on the bottom of the plane just behind the landing gear and it will be fine, the canisters don't get all that hot anyway. I've instelled cans in planes with no tunnel at all without any problems. People imaging the cans getting so hot they will burn wood, but that's just not the case and a little flow-thru ventilation is all that's needed.

Do not use nylon screws on the landing gear!

He talked about the rudders and said the 260 will have more authority, I think he got the numbers mixed up and meant the 540 will have more authority.

I need to talk to him about the hatch, if it is indeed messed up it will be replaced.

There are more aileron hinges than are needed, if they missed to backing block on one of them (or even on all of them) it will not hurt anything. The hinging is way stronger than necessary. This is one of those factory things, we design in more strength than needed because we know that once in a while they might miss, it's all taken into account.

About engine spacing, if I design for a particular engine then somebody with a longer engine will have a terrible time. I always leave a little room so the builder can get an exact fit. Please remember this as almost ready to fly, we have to allow for all eventualities.

Your weight should be about 16.5 lbs. or less, I just finished one at 16.4 lbs RTF with an engine of similar weight.

There is no need to fuel proof everything and that just adds weight. If you want to seal the wood in front a coat of spray polyurethane clear like Varathane or Minwax will do nicely. Gas engines do not deposit large amounts of goo all over everything like glow engines do.

Yes we now have CF wing tubes available.

There was a comment (reply) about wing fit from somebody other than pipercub, but I see no mention of it in pipercub's text. Did I miss something? We have never had a complaint about wings fitting, they are always (so far) quite an exact fit to the fuse. Perhaps he needed to tighten the screws.

Anyway I'm still waiting to make contact.

TF

[pipercub123]

Guys the responses are coming in, thanks everyone. Don't get me wrong, do not hesitate to buy from WH just remember the savings when evaluating it. Don't compare it to a Carden built by a master builder. This plane is a plane to be proud of and will be an awesome practice plane and one to take to a show as it does look good. From 10' you won't see some ironed in wrinkles on the hatch or the slight flat spot. If you look you'll see the engine isn't centered in the cowl, but that's when getting closer. Don't follow the manual as I did. I transferred the etched in mark an 1/8" as suggested for the first batch and mine is off horizontally and vertically. More so vertically. Mine is #23 so I thought it was the first batch as using the 1/8" centered it horizontally and I assumed the vertical alignment was good as the manual doesn't mention it. I should have stood it up on the fin and with cowl on, lined things up and transferred some marks. The wings were put into place without bolts. The one panel is good, the other is okay until about 3/4 towards trailing edge. These are minor flaws and what's important to me is getting a good deal and a good solid structure to practice with. I also like the ability to buy a replacement without having to pay for included hardware, bags, and a pilot. Yes, that's EF. If you had plans on buying these accessories to start and don't crash it than no biggie, but shipping will be expensive. The Aeroworks has good priced shipping and seems to be good quality. It does come with hardware and after a crash, replacing the whole plane will cost you more. So, there some options and things to consider. The servo slots had to be widen by an 1/8" for my HS 7955's, another small problem. A JR standard servo fit before enlargement and afterwards the slot would still be useable and a widened slot shouldn't bother one using a JR. I didn't check any Futabas. If it makes anyone feel better, my Airwild 260 had a cowl where the purple didn't match. This was more noticeable than an off centered engine and a bit more of a headache for one to fix. I'm not redrilling the holes in my firewall as I spent too much time on it as it is and I don't want to take the chance of weakening my firewall. Now, I've got a plane to build as when my header comes I want to get flying! To those afraid to order, don't be. Order that WH Edge and enjoy the money you're saving. However line your engine up with cowl on and forget the manual and transferring measurements from etched in markings. I'm sure EF and Aeroworks may have some slight flaws, but I've never owned any so don't know for sure. It would have been nice if the alignment issues were caught and corrected before being released for sale, but no biggie. Half of these planes get crashed anyway so don't spend time dwelling on nonsense. Fly and have fun, that's why they're built and these issues shouldn't affect flight.

[Tired Old Man]

One thing I've learned over decades as a carpenter, and of building planes and assembling arfs, is to measure twice and cut once. This applies equally to drilling holes for attachment points. Templates are nice but I generally figure they are best for laying out the base mounting holes of an engine. Before drilling any holes, if I don't have a template with a long pilot shaft on it I add one in order to verify that the engine shaft would be centered in the cowl opening.

If that sounds like to much bother, consider I have engine templates made up for 3w, DA, RCGF, Brison, Precision Eagle, Taurus, and 3MM engines. Some for singles and some for twins. Each has a long pilot shaft (wood dowel) extending from the plate and all my engines come out centered every time. If you looked at the W/H site you might have noted they have an alternate method of centering engines that works very well.

As for drilling new holes and weakening the firewall, no worries. Just plug the existing holes with short pieces of wood dowel. Glue them in with ca and drill away. Some of us try different engines on a plane to check performance and weights and have been doing the above for many, many years.

As for servo openings being too large or to small, what would happen if all servo openings were sized for 1/4 scale servos? How about sized for Seiko's? You would have to make up plates with smaller openings for smaller servos. It's a whole lot easier to open up a servo opening a tiny amount than it is to make a new one in a smaller size. Think this through a little bit before condeming something because the product you intended to use was not a fall in fit. Somebody else may be using a different product.

You are correct that it's not a Carden. Nor are any other of the arfs on the market. With a Carden you have to build it, not simply bolt a few parts together. Your comparions to other manufacturers seems to be skewed by limited knowledge. You can obtain replacement parts for W/H kits without buying new hardware. Anyone that has been flying the W/H planes has known this a long time. For the record W/H just had a clearance sale on discontinued kit parts that they have been holding onto for a long time in case anyone needed them.

[66stang]

For those interested. I have received my new WH 35% Extra 260 and will be doing a build thread starting tomorrow.I also will be powering it with the TMM-106. Pipercub, good luck with your plane. My 30% extra flys awesome. You are in for some good flying!

[flatspinjim]

Stang, you're going to love that plane! I'll be interested to see how the TMM works out for you. Everything I've heard about it has been great!

[pipercub123]

	Quote: Originally Posted by wildhare
	First, pipercub sent me 1 email about the wig rib and hatch issues a week ago and I was left with the impression that he was doing some more investigating and I was waiting for more follow up from him. See below for my response. Wing ribs; They are probably fine as is, those little segments of balsa that popped out don't add anything to the structure, they are there primarily to provide rigidity during the manufacturing process and are always the first thing to go if something is stacked on the wing. You can glue in a little tab if it makes you nervous, but it's not necessary. Probably fine is not what I want to hear. He talked about the rudders and said the 260 will have more authority, I think he got the numbers mixed up and meant the 540 will have more authority. Oops, sorry. I did mean 540 and was just thinking of the 260 and must have typed that. It's now corrected. TF

I have the emails we exchanged and below is a copy of the first email. I hope you don't mind Tom if I post it. I don't see how I left the impression that I was doing more investigating, but wanted to leave it up to the readers to decide. I figured to post as I don't want to be called out. If you knew when I asked you that the centers of the ribs were of no structural integrity than it would have been appreciated being told instead of putting the project on the back burner waiting for a response. If I have a wing failure I will expect a replacement plane. I also understand that your warranty wouldn't cover equipment. It'd be stupid to lose good equipment just because of four damaged ribs left alone. If you post any emails of our's please leave my name and my email address out.

Email #1, was sent because I always like notification on when an item is sent out:

"Hello Tom, I was wondering if you have a tracking number for my shipment? I'd like to track it so I can plan on being home when it arrives. Thanks"
Email #2:

Tom,

Please disregard my last email as I got the plane today.
I was wondering if you had an idea when the header is due in? The plane looks
good in all areas except the hatch and the wings. On the hatch it looks like
someone cranked the heat up to get out some wrinkles and in the process melted
the canopy enough to cause a flat spot the width of an iron and just ironed the
wrinkles over each other. As for the wings, both third and fourth ribs on both
panels are crushed between the tube area and the trailing edge. Boxes weren't
beat up at all, it just seems like someone put something heavy on it. I could
attempt to fix the ribs, but before hand wanted to let you know to see what you
think. Please see attched pics.

Thanks"




Reply from Tom, Email #3:

"I have contacted the builder to see how he wants to proceed on this. The problem with the hatch is not easy to solve, but I will get an answer soon."

After receiving this email, I waited about a week and sent this that Tom must have not received.

Email #4:

"Tom,

How are you? I was wondering if you've heard from the builder yet about the
wings and hatch? It's been almost a week now. Also in the last email, I asked
you about the header and you didn't respond. Again, have you
heard anything on when the header is due. I'm getting anxious to fly and I still
have no
plane after ordering a brand new one. Perhaps email isn't the best way to get
ahold of you?

Regards,"


Now there's been two other emails exchanged between us and I don't feel it'd benefit the readers as it's just a brief summary of problems and Tom's reply to each problem. A looked over email can happen when sent by mistake to a spam folder, but I recommend you take all means to not overlook an email. If that means adding a customer's address so it isn't sent to a spam folder than by all means please do.

In the last email, you admited that the factory markings are close and this was updated in the manual now available for download. I would have appreciated a banner on your webpage with an addendum either on the main page or on the Edge's page. Even a note with the plane would've been nice.

That aside, let's move on to the wings. When I get home, I'll check them again with bolts. Please do replace the hatch as it's the only major eyesore other than the wing gap and engine. I think the hatch is the worse.

Bottom line is that before I got the Edge I have been making plans to buy the 100cc Extra. Good customer support is number one in my book and the place that gives me that is where I'll keep taking my business. I consider any damage to the wings as a problem.

It's not my fault your manual is messed up and you can't let a customer know the right solution. It's not my fauilt that the wings were put in a narrow box that didn't allow for enough give to keep stress off the wing panels. The hatch I can't say is your fault. Perhaps you could have inspected it as you had my plane box opened before it was sent to me as you had to add the invoice and extra things I ordered. No big deal as you said you'd replace it.

I want to move on with the build now and not have this be an arguing ground. I'd like to see things turned around and I will be posting updates on when I receive my hatch and "DA 50 canister header". I want to see that both items arrive without damage and if there is any it will be documented on this site. I'm not doing this build just to evaluate the WH Edge 540, but to evaluate the company so I can find a good supplier to do future business with. If things are made up to me and we can settle this in a decent amount of time I'll do future business.

In a way I'd like a new fuselage. That should be under warranty! After all, if I assemble according to company directions than isn't that what I did to maintain valadation of implied warranty? It is up to the company to make me aware of any changes to a change so that I'm updated with the latest assembly instructions.

So how about it Mr. Fawcett? Would you send me a new fuselage, new wings, and a new hatch? I'm being serious! Why should I take the time to add dowels and redrill holes when you could have taken the time to have given me a current manual in the first place. Why should I take time fixing someone else's problems? I can't think about anything else. I guess in the meantime I could always just work on attaching the wheelpants and looking at my new canister. With a new fuselage I wouldn't have to put up with not being happy every time I look at my prop. The new hatch will keep me happy as well. I'll feel more at ease to have wings that don't have crushed ribs while wondering how much other stress was put on these wings to cause the damage.

I may want a practice plane, but I want to be happy with what I paid for and I'm not totally happy. Would I be happy if I didn't have these problems? You bet! This can be a nice and gorgeous plane and doesn't have to be considered just a practice plane. Than if I ever crash it up, it's my own fault and I can just buy another from you. Let me beat up my plane though, I'd atleast like to see it in perfect shape before I fly it. Just to let you know, I've only smashed two planes from pilot error in the last nine years and I do push myself while flying. So when I say I'm looking for a practice plane, I want something that has less of a pucker factor but it doesn't mean I'm planning on wrecking it in no time flat. So I do want one that'll last and starting out with damaged wings didn't make for a good start.

I'm so tired of trying to be a nice guy and putting up with crap and beating around the bush with some companies. It seems to be mostly with RC stuff as smaller companies mind losing money on replacement parts so don't reconcile as easily. I can't remember the last time I've had any problems with a company non rc related.

If I sound like a jerk than I apologize, but I work hard for my money like a lot of other people and want what I paid for. I don't deserve to have to put up with damage like this and your post about our emailing ticked me off.

[pipercub123]

	Quote: Originally Posted by yakpilot
	Pipercub123 and others, I'm sorry for coming off as an a$. Please accept my humble appology and I'll try to keep it more positive. Best of luck with the rest of your build.

It's cool. You made me laugh because I do type a lot. Also I've been building 10 yrs, mostly kits and giant scale might I add. That did offend me. It's just when I built those I always followed the manual to a tee. The manual listed a problem, stated the problem was fixed, and I went with the suggested fix. Aren't we supposed to trust manuals? In the future I'll check a bit better. If you want to see typing, I got mad with Tom because I saw his post where he put words into my mouth. Read on my man and you'll see some more typing!

	Quote: Originally Posted by flatspinjim
	I've seen quite a few build threads on this plane and haven't heard of any problems. Was curious to see what was going on

Stay tuned. Also, I'd like to see how they did with there build. Are these threads on another site as I haven't been able to find much on here other than Tram's.

	Quote: Originally Posted by flatspinjim
	Piper, could you post some pics of the wing to fuse fit?

Yes sir.

	Quote: Originally Posted by Tired Old Man
	I didn't want to go back over the "hinge slop" comment but I suppose it's necessary now. Back when W/H was delivering the first planes to use the "pocket hinge" concept the hinges consisted of a carbon rod passing through ply tabs that were inset and part of a concave hinge line. Similar to what Comp Arf uses on rudders. The early 35 and 40% kits had wear between the ply tab and the carbon rod that permitted the ailerons to rattle after a number of flights. The condition was corrected on later kits with an updated design, and most of the early kits were taken care of as well as customers made contact with W/H. The 28% planes have never had pocket hinges.

Whew, now I can sleep better.

	Quote: Originally Posted by Tired Old Man
	One thing I've learned over decades as a carpenter, and of building planes and assembling arfs, is to measure twice and cut once. This applies equally to drilling holes for attachment points. Templates are nice but I generally figure they are best for laying out the base mounting holes of an engine. Before drilling any holes, if I don't have a template with a long pilot shaft on it I add one in order to verify that the engine shaft would be centered in the cowl opening. I measured four times to make sure it was perfect and according to the manual it was. People pay big bucks for carpenters to follow what architects draw up in prints. It isn't up to the carpenter to think ahead and look for errors, you follow the prints. I followed the manual. I've built a two story garage before and followed the prints with no problems. Good idea on the dowl, will try that next time. If that sounds like to much bother, consider I have engine templates made up for 3w, DA, RCGF, Brison, Precision Eagle, Taurus, and 3MM engines. Some for singles and some for twins. Each has a long pilot shaft (wood dowel) extending from the plate and all my engines come out centered every time. If you looked at the W/H site you might have noted they have an alternate method of centering engines that works very well. No bother, just figured that if it was included someone had to have used it before and it worked for them so I did. Where is found on the W/H site, the forumns or their actual website as I haven't seen this on their website. As for drilling new holes and weakening the firewall, no worries. Just plug the existing holes with short pieces of wood dowel. Glue them in with ca and drill away. Some of us try different engines on a plane to check performance and weights and have been doing the above for many, many years. How does this work and not tear apart? If my spacers aren't enlarged and I only move the holes within the size of the 1/4" plugs, you rely on the bolts, washers, and spacers only making contact. To me it seams like an idea, but just weakens it. As for servo openings being too large or to small, what would happen if all servo openings were sized for 1/4 scale servos? How about sized for Seiko's? You would have to make up plates with smaller openings for smaller servos. It's a whole lot easier to open up a servo opening a tiny amount than it is to make a new one in a smaller size. Think this through a little bit before condeming something because the product you intended to use was not a fall in fit. Somebody else may be using a different product. Who in their right mind with the servo technology of today be using 1/4 scale servos all over? Nobody and if they did than they shouldn't complain when it flies like crap. Who uses Seikos on a 50cc? Nobody in their right mind. Plus the plane calls for standard sized so if the holes were made for the largest standard sized servo produced by popular companies at the time the plane is designed than we wouldn't have an issue as even the smallest standard size would still fit. I'm only enlarging for width of servo, not length. I get you're trying to make a point, but my point is I only had to enlarge the holes a tad so it would have been much easier if I didn't have to take the time to do this as this is a fast build. Plus factory done it'd be more accurate. I even put a small standard sized servo in and it worked just fine. Sorry T.O.M. You are correct that it's not a Carden. Nor are any other of the arfs on the market. Like the Hangar 9 Carden that we don't hear much about anymore. With a Carden you have to build it, not simply bolt a few parts together. No kidding. Your comparions to other manufacturers seems to be skewed by limited knowledge. What, how's that and knowledge of what? Knowledge of the quality of other kits or knowledge on building? You seem to be mostly WH so perhaps your knowledge of the quality of other kits is what's skewed. Try the latest Aeroworks and do an unbiased review. We know that's not gonna happen. I have no ties with WH so I've got nothing to lose admitting that something isn't perfect. I've had Airwild, now WH, and pretty soon may drop the dough on an Aeroworks or EF to see what the rave is about them with quality. Than you can bet your tush that I'm getting on here and I will say it how it is while being totally unbiased. Also my mention of the Carden is just an analogy to make an example so people aren't thinking these kits are the utmost in perfection. You can obtain replacement parts for W/H kits without buying new hardware. I never said you couldn't and in fact mentioned that a few times in this thread. One main reason for going with WH. I figure why buy hardware again to just replace an airframe. Anyone that has been flying the W/H planes has known this a long time. If you show me in my post where I said otherwise, please do. For the record W/H just had a clearance sale on discontinued kit parts that they have been holding onto for a long time in case anyone needed them. Hey buddy stop trying to nonchalantly advertise for WH in the threads. I've noticed this a lot from you and this is called spamming.

	Quote: Originally Posted by 66stang
	For those interested. I have received my new WH 35% Extra 260 and will be doing a build thread starting tomorrow.I also will be powering it with the TMM-106. Pipercub, good luck with your plane. My 30% extra flys awesome. You are in for some good flying!

Thanks, I'll be watching your build and will be there to cheer you on if needed. Good luck with your's.

	Quote: Originally Posted by Sewerdude
	Thanks for the heads up on the quality control with this bird Pipercub123. I was ready to drop the ball next week and order this plane. I've been eyeballing it for awhile. Now think I've changed my mind. I'm not really concerned about the engine thrust lines. But the poor wing fit is a huge turn off. Not to mention the poor communication from Wildhare. I guess I'll stick to Aeroworks.

Hey dude, lets see that new plane in a build thread no matter what you go for.

[Black Bird]

So...., the cub has a little fight in him after all. Im proud of you little buddy. They forced you to bare your teeth. You have a right to defend your position. Especially when it is challenged. Do you have something else to fly while you wait for parts?

[Tired Old Man]

No problem. I just find it difficult to sit by and read where people with low knowledge levels complain because (a) they don't yet know what they are doing and (b) because they read something somewhere, do not have first hand knowledge, and don't know what they are talking about. But they go ahead and post as if they know all about everything....... Just to let you know, I was one of the first that tried out the pocket hinges and let W/H know about the potential for problems. Because of that, and a few other people, design changes were made to improve the design before it became a sever issue.

Yep, I plug W/H planes. No differently than many others plug EF, PAU, Pilot, and others. I'm not paid to do so, but I do have, and have had, a lot of W/H planes. All of them have and do fly extremely well. I've done the first reviews on some of them, which you would note if you visited the W/H forum on RCU. I also do engine testing so don't get bent if you see me praising one manufacturer or another based upon those tests.

Based on first hand experience with some other makers I've found that I can pay more, but none fly any better. All of them, from any maker, including the high priced composites, have minor issues that a person can either work around or have tantrums. It may be covering, wing tube fit, firewall center marking, crappy hardware, weight, or some other item. I have planes from W/H, Comp Arf, World Models, and Dawghouse. None of them have been perfect out of the box. I've had others as well, also with minor issues that I could either fix and work with, or bitch and moan. Wanting a new fuselage because one failed to check dimensions and lay out is over the top, imo.

No, I do not want to argue. Not at all. If you want a perfect plane from anyone where you have to do nothing, have a Dalton or a Carden built. Then it's turn key. Just send money, lots of it, and go fly.

BTW, spamming is when someone sends an advertisement or unsolicited communication to numerous (hundreds or thousands) e-mail addresses in one shot for the purpose of garnering a response.

[Black Bird]

Your right piper, TOM does like to put words in people's mouths. My Dawg was not perfect. Nothing is perfect and everything comes with sacrifices.

[wildhare]

Pipercub:


I'll tell you what.

Pack the plane up and send it back. When it arrives I will evaluate it and make a decision on how to proceed.

Let me know when it's ready to ship and I'll have UPS pick it up.


TF

[flatspinjim]

Sounds like a very fair offer to me.

[yakpilot]

Tom, if this makes you feel any better, you've made a believer out of me.When (if) I get back to work I'll be buying from you. I like your planes and the way you do business.

best regards

[66stang]

Nice offer Tom..