Originally Posted by Muttdog

I never blamed the composite ply. What I stated is that I have seen several instances where a light impact is turning out to be much more serious then expected. Not just EF but pilot as well. When the entire wing tube and center wing section breaks out of a fuselage and NOTHING else is damaged, that should tell you something. Well not you because you are so smart and know everything.



your insults are the reason this forum has slipped to the state it is in now. Calling people sh*t pilots serves no purpose but to inflame. Every other thread here is a screaming match where everyone is an expert at everything when in reality they know nothing. Flame me all you want, I won't pay it any attention. Unsubscribed.

++1

So do we now care about how well the airplane is designed for crashing?
That’s none sense. When an airplane crashes it crashes. It is not designed to sustain crashes. Those airplanes are designed to fly superbly and withstand stupid maneuvers and pulling som ridiculous G’s on them without a problem and that’s the best part. Because most of the airplanes life time is in the air not in a crash. A crash whether it is my fault, engines or any other circumstance is a crash. I don’t expect the manufacture to make it crash better !!! That’s not why I buy it. I buy it because it has superior flying characteristics and robustness IN THE AIR!!!!

Originally Posted by Muttdog

Just don't crash it. 3 months and still no fuselage.

Originally Posted by Cycletech

Just curious was your fuse Carbon laminated?

Originally Posted by Muttdog

Yes it is the carbon/ply laminate EXP model. Sadly I've seen an EF V3 102" extra rip the entire bottom of the fuselage off on a landing that should have ripped the gear out at worst.

Originally Posted by Cycletech

Correct they are making them VERY lightly constructed and unfortunately they cant handle S**t.

So you deadstick and crash and blame the damage on carbon laminated construction? Guys have been crashing and bagging planes for a lot longer than composite laminates have been around so that conversation above is pure bull.

I clearly see a trend on FG where two guys elbow their way into an EF thread where guys are sharing great experiences about a great plane and a RC company and post a load of crap about how an RC plane should withstand your deadstick and crash, or how damage from a crash is somehow carbon laminate related. It's beginning to seem a bit contrived at this point.

Can’t we all just get along.

Yep... and back to the regularly scheduled programming with awesome EF planes.

My next plane short list is this plane or the 91" Yak 54. I'd love to do both, but I think a 106" Edge V2 is in my future too. So like a kid in a candy store, I can only have one for now.

Just for the record I own 2 EF planes and think they are awesomely designed and built. Just have seen some strange failers from landings and of course its mostly pilot error bit just seems they dont take it as well as they did 10-15 years ago. Its just part of having a lighter and better handling plane in the air. I DO agree that Id rather have a greater flying plane then one that "crashes" better! Lol! BUT rough landings are one of those things most of us deal with time to time and it just sucks when the airframe explodes instead of damaged landing gear and a cracked former. Oo well build another one!

I really enjoy my Laser 91”

Originally Posted by Nat3D

I really enjoy my Laser 91”

Speaking of which, does anyone know if we'll see the 91" Laser in the yellow version when they restock? I've been a big Laser and Leo fan for a long time, had a hand in a few 103" Laser 200 kit assemblies, and my son flew one in IMAC competition. But I'm ready for something different and the smaller yellow versions show up really well in the air.

I have the printed version and it shows up pretty well day and night

Extreme Flight 91” laser (1 min 10 sec)

Originally Posted by Aeroplayin

Speaking of which, does anyone know if we'll see the 91" Laser in the yellow version when they restock? I've been a big Laser and Leo fan for a long time, had a hand in a few 103" Laser 200 kit assemblies, and my son flew one in IMAC competition. But I'm ready for something different and the smaller yellow versions show up really well in the air.

Don’t think they make a yellow version. I’m also a huge Leo fan and that’s why I did both my 60”and 91” up in the Bud Light scheme. We need a metallic blue scheme to make the original Leo Laser!

Here's a pic of a pretty good scale version of the blue by Jim Roberts, but the color's a bit too light, but the scale is very good. I'd do an EF blue too.

Just to explain why this Jim Roberts RC version has the bar and stars on the vertical stab, here's his full scale Laser that he built and flew in 1980 and is now in the Frontiers of Flight museum. He was a member of the IAC as well with the US Team in 1981-1982, and he also coached Leo Loudenslager.

Originally Posted by Aeroplayin

Here's a pic of a pretty good scale version of the blue by Jim Roberts, but the color's a bit too light, but the scale is very good. I'd do an EF blue too.

There was a gentleman on the Joe Nall 3D line this year with a 104" Laser that he recovered in the blue & gold scheme. It was gorgeous.

I can't find a pic of the under-wing of the blue but if I remember correctly, it was latitudinal stripes of silver, yellow, then blue.

Edit... may have been red instead of silver on the earlier modified Akro version, but I just don't remember.

Originally Posted by suds

There was a gentleman on the Joe Nall 3D line this year with a 104" Laser that he recovered in the blue & gold scheme. It was gorgeous.

I don’t remember his name but here it is at XFC-v2