Suggestions for Sport Pattern 40 - 60 size plane

Tue Oct 19 17:37:55 AKDT 2004

>In favor of the Twist is I can toss it in the back of the van with the wing
on - no setup just  >fly.

Paul,
I've seen the Twist fly and I think that's the only good thing about it.

I'd compare it to a Sig Fazor (which I have). I can toss it in the back of
the truck & go fly, but when I get it in the air, I get bored before half a
flight. It just flops all over - no feel to it at all.  I guess the pattern
planes have ruined me. :-))

I'd much rather fly my 3-D delite foamy than the Twist.

JMHO  and it's worth what you paid for it   <G>

Eddie

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Paul Horan
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 7:04 PM
To: geobet at gis.net; discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Suggestions for Sport Pattern 40 - 60 size plane

George,
    The Javalin II does sound interesting.
    I checked on the RCU review and it shows a one piece wing - nice.  The
construction looks pretty simple and straight forward.  I
am still considering getting a 3D as a knockaround, the H9 Twist sound good.
But, the Javalin II sounds good too.  I'm having
trouble making up my mind.  In favor of the Twist is I can toss it in the
back of the van with the wing on - no setup just fly.  If
it goes in - no heartache there.  It also works well for fun flys.
    I am currently flying a Meridian and have just gotten booted up from
Sportsman to Intermediate.  I expect to be a cellar dweller
for quite a while BUT do not want a plane that has so many quirks that I
learn bad habits while practicing Intermediate.  By bad
habits I mean fighting a plane that does no groove (lock in on pitch and
roll).  I've been there and done that - its not practice
just massive frustration and learning bad habits.
    Back to the Javalin, how durable is it ? How much push is necessary for
inverted, this is usually a matter of preference
depending on how far the CG is moved back.  What CG are you flying at ?  Any
other info ?
Thanks,
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "George Kennie" <geobet at gis.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: Suggestions for Sport Pattern 40 - 60 size plane

> There's no way that you would ever confuse the Javelin with a 3D airplane,
> although you can get it to snap very nicely on low rates for things like
the
> avalanches and 45 downline snaps and FAI humpties thus eliminating the
need for
> switching. Nice package. Go to Cermark's site Ed. Tell 'em you want it for
$ a
> buck and a half and they'll probably go for it. That's what I paid back in
the
> spring. It's probably the quickest build out there and the results are as
good
> as or better than anything in the class.
> A friend of mine, who is relatively new to pattern, bought one on my
> recommendation and immediately stripped it because he was not thrilled
with the
> colors and recovered it in blue and yellow and I was convinced that he had
> probably wrecked it, but he recently let me try it and it was immediate
comfort
> on his sticks. It flew every bit as nicely as mine( and I wrestled with
the
> thought that it might be even better).I'm a little frustrated with the
fact that
> I can't get guys to try this thing. Guys want to buy a knock-around beast
that
> they have to fight through every maneuver instead of something that flies
with
> the precision of a much larger bird and on top of that they end up paying
just
> as much or more.............Jeeeeesshh!
> I feel like  "WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH THESE GUYS ?", .....If you get one
and you
> don't like it, take it to an auction and sell it for almost as much as you
paid
> for it! You ain't gonna do that with a 3D plane. Those auction people love
> pattern planes.
>  O.K., O.K. .......I'm done.
> G.
>
> Wade Akle wrote:
>
>> I looked at the Javelin 2 at NESail.com . Is this the same one? it looks
>> more like 3D rather than a pattern?
>> Wade
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Paul Horan" <phoran at vvm.com>
>> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 9:13 PM
>> Subject: Re: Suggestions for Sport Pattern 40 - 60 size plane
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >   Thanks for the info.
>> >   So far the candidates for knock around sport pattern are:
>> > * Venus,  possibly some QC problems but most have worked well and fly
>> > well.
>> > * Javalin II, sounds good but who carries it and how much.
>> > * Excelleron 50 & 90, also sounds good but a bit on the expensive side
for
>> > a knock around.
>> > * Swallow, Yes Chuck you kicked my butt with this.  I'm not sure it
fits
>> > as a sport knock around.
>> > * Wideboby 40, I'm not sure about this.  Haven't seen one yet.  Does it
>> > fit as a knock around plane.
>> >
>> >   What I am looking for is something that is
>> > *relatively inexpensive (< 200),
>> > *takes a 40 - 60 2 stroke,
>> > *is pretty sturdy (or replacement parts are available),
>> > *flys well enough that casual Intermediate pattern practice will not
teach
>> > me bad habits or cause me to spend most of my attention on fighting the
>> > plane rather than working the manuevers.
>> > * Is an easy to build arf - the easier the better.  This is a knock
around
>> > plane and
>> > expendable.
>> >
>> >  Anyone have any coments on a 46 powered 3d plane that fits this
>> > description ?
>> >   The Venus sounds interesting.  The only downside is the pitch hunting
>> > and it may
>> > be  a bit more serious than a knock around plane.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> > Paul
>> > KC5NF
>> > AMA 57131
>> > NSRCA 3606
>> > =====================================
>> > # To be removed from this list, go to
http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>> > and follow the instructions.
>> >
>>
>> =====================================
>> # To be removed from this list, go to
http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>> and follow the instructions.
>
>
>
>
> =====================================
> # To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
>

=====================================
# To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.