• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

I have a horrible confession to make...

#1
...I'm not that impressed with the FT Legacy/Founders plane.

I don't have one so I'm obviously not judging based on that. I am mainly judging on my interest in the aircraft and if I think it's worth pursuing. I look at the FT Store and a good portion of the planes look cool, look fun to build, and I would imagine be fun to fly. The Founders plane just doesn't excite me. I do think it is cool that it can be a twin or single motor but it just doesn't jump out at me. Not sure if I'd ever pick one up or attempt to scratch build it.

It's not the only plane though...some others that don't interest me: Sparrow, Explorer, Bronco, and Cruiser.

*puts up shield to protect from haters*
 
Last edited:

makattack

Winter is coming
Moderator
Mentor
#2
That's fair and shows a good trait... That you know what you like and dislike. I personally like flying wings and tend to favor those when flying or building, but can enjoy an occasional plane with tail feathers. I think if you liked them all, you'd need a lot of time, space, and money! It's good to have a preference. I do like having more than just belly landers though. I like to be able to ROG off a rough field, so that's one of the reasons I like the Legacy/Founders plane, along with the other bush type planes.
 

Hai-Lee

Old and Bold RC PILOT
#3
I hear you. For some people though they will be the planes of their dreams. Go figure!

Early on I built the Explorer and flew it for about 6 months until out of sheer boredom I gave it away, (fully loaded). It never flew again!

At my club the Explorer was dubbed "the LEGO plane".

As for the Legacy it is a pity that it was not designed to resemble the Ford Trimotor as that would be of greater appeal, (well to me at least).

Have fun!
 
#4
As for the Legacy it is a pity that it was not designed to resemble the Ford Trimotor as that would be of greater appeal, (well to me at least).
Agreed...the Ford Trimotor would be a cool one to do. I saw a video on here of somebody attempting it with the Legacy. It flew, but it definitely needing some tweaking.
 

PsyBorg

Wake up! Time to fly!
#5
Not everyone has the same tastes when it comes to what we like ir do not.

Its all good. I think if you liked everything they put out you would be more at risk to be labeled "fan boi".

I am sure not everyone likes certain models and as this is a happy place those feeling go unaddressed in the forums.

Kinda what makes this all work so well.

Like me. I am more a military aircraft person over civillian. I like the lines better not to mention all the splodey things they do hehe.
 

Hai-Lee

Old and Bold RC PILOT
#6
Agreed...the Ford Trimotor would be a cool one to do. I saw a video on here of somebody attempting it with the Legacy. It flew, but it definitely needing some tweaking.
There have been a rash of strange handling issues of late with some designs. Most are build quality issues but a couple are not! For instance when the simple cub was released there was a huge demand for help to get them to fly. After a few months I relented and built one to see what the issues were. Sadly there seemed to be a wing incidence problem which caused the plane to fly not so well.

On my version of the simple cub, after a number of close calls, I increased the main wing incidence slightly and now I have a cub that flies like a cub. It has a moderate turn of speed, floats incredibly and can land so slow that with a breeze it can land vertical. In addition its stall characteristics are such that it just suddenly drops it nose with a slight roll moment which is best. It can stall on landing and just bounce hard on its landing gear. It is now able to be used as a proper though a little advanced trainer.

Sadly most are not up to exploring a design and so struggle with their builds. That is where they need mentors to help them sort things out and get flying!

Have fun!
 

makattack

Winter is coming
Moderator
Mentor
#7
Heh, speaking of wing incidence issues, my go to trainer plane for new pilots I'm instructing is a cub like "Blu Baby" I built out of Model Airplane foam, gorilla glue, and packing tape. It's powered by a blue wonder motor and 3S ESC/batter with a 8" slow fly prop on a prop saver.

If you look at the photo I have of it from FliteFest Ohio 2018, it's the white plane with the green piece of tape on the wing. Well, you can clearly see that the flight-ready plane has the main wing at a clear offset angle with the tail feathers/fuselage. Yet, it flew great in both 3 channel and 4 channel modes. You can bank and yank it, fly coordinated, fly with just the rudder, etc.

I got plenty of comments from folks kindly offering that it might fly better if I fixed the wing incidence issue, and I acknowledge that, but I was of the "not going to mess with something that works" mindset, that is until I got home.

At home, I decided, ok, let's fix this. It landed in the bean fields on one training flight with a fellow volunteer named Tom, and I decided it was time to get it flying even better. Out came my knife and sander, and I sorted out the fuselage so that the wing mounting angle looked better. I was still eyeballing things, so nothing scientific here, but on my test flight, I realized that I essentially removed the ability to easily bank and yank this plane! Now, when I have ailerons enabled, if I bank it, it goes on knife edge until it loses lift (it doesn't have enough thrust to stay on knife edge, especially with the small rudder I have on it) and drops from the sky. I've managed to make it a better trainer (IMHO) in that you if you're flying with ailerons, you have to turn with the rudder for coordinated turns or else it'll just roll on axis until you level out again. I suppose thats a more "accurate" flight model, but I now have to keep it in three channel mode (rudder elevator) for true beginners whereas before, I can cheat and give them aileron control and they could choose to use rudder or not.
makff2018planes.jpg


Links:
Model Plane Foam: http://www.modelplanefoam.com/
BluBaby build forum: https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/sho...u-Baby-Primary-Trainer-**-Plans-Pics-and-Fun!
 
#8
I have seen the Blu Baby on RC groups. Seems like a very good trainer. I'm actually working on the FT Simple Cub to use as a trainer for our RC field when we have our fly-ins. Just doing it as a 3 channel for now. I learned on a 3 channel and feel it's a great place to start.
 

d8veh

Elite member
#9
Yeah, I know what you mean. I'm totally disappointed in the Long EZ. I hate the look of it so much that if I saw one at FTTX, I'd stamp on it. Long live the Sportster.

BTW, does anybody want to sponsor me to visit FTTX? I can't afford the cost of the 4,782 mile journey. Alternatively, can someone arrange an FTTFUK? It's not fair on us stuck over here while you lot have fun. No wonder we get so angry that we have to take it out on poor defenceless Long EZs
 

PoorManRC

Master member
#10
Sadly most are not up to exploring a design and so struggle with their builds. That is where they need mentors to help them sort things out and get flying!

Have fun!
As one who's going to Relish the idea of tweaking my Builds (likely ALL of them!)...
I would encourage anyone to sort an Aircraft out, before just proclaiming it a DUD, because they had problems with it!!
Half of the fun of it is making it, making it better, then making it your own! (y)(y)
I'm guessing that if you're going for FT Aircraft..... you're NOT shopping for a RTF! :p

Your last sentence.... What a satisfying, inspiring thought! You can hang your Hat on a Day of helping others.
 

Bricks

Master member
#11
Most if any of the planes that are not 3D capable are very boring to me. I fly a high wing or scale type plane, fly a few circles maybe a loop, inverted that is about all they can do.
 

Hai-Lee

Old and Bold RC PILOT
#12
Most if any of the planes that are not 3D capable are very boring to me. I fly a high wing or scale type plane, fly a few circles maybe a loop, inverted that is about all they can do.
To each his own! Personally I love to explore the full envelope! Nothing more exhilarating than doing a flat spin inverted and fighting to get it out of it. Stalls including high speed and tail stalls are also fun.

For anyone bored with the standard fair try adding thrust vectoring and see what you can do!

I have a number of 3D planes but flying in one spot is just not my cup of tea! I like extreme flying, (and sadly his close cousin - extreme crashing!). Dogfighting is also fun and there is some small degree of pylon racing but pylon racing without FPV can be considered as a pylon contact sport!

Just me!

Have fun!
 

buzzbomb

I know nothing!
#13
I like the lines better not to mention all the splodey things they do hehe.
Dude, I just can't resist. Beavis and Butthead may never have said it, but that is totally what was in my mind - "Splodey, heh, heh. Explode and stuff. Heh, heh." On a side note, Beavis was in the spell-check. What is the world coming to?
 
Last edited:

Brett_N

Well-known member
#15
Interesting - thread. I agree with Hai that there have been some issues with late builds.

Now, my confession - I build pretty much EVERYTHING when it comes out, a lot of it flies once, then gets scrapped. (I like building as much as flying)
Some recent "experiments" that didn't work out so well

FT Long EZ - mine "flew" a little bit. Not impressed
Sparrow - never flew
Goblin - never flew
FT Cub - Why in the world is this plane so hard to build correctly to get it to fly? It's a cub for cying out loud
Sea Otter #2 - first one flew great, second one wouldn't get off the ground with the exact same setup.
FT Racer - never flew, but could have been builder error
Mini Arrow - first one flew, 2nd one refuses to.
Versa Wing - had better luck with an EDF version than I did with the pusher, but could have been builder error.
I had less than stellar luck with the mini's, but I was just getting started and my build skills were crap.

Now the good -
Sea Duck - flew great until I burned up an ESC and melted all the wiring. First experience with hot glue in the AZ sun in the summer and the plane kinda fell apart. But so much fun to fly!
FT3D - I am in love with this plane. I have a 3DHS balsa big boy version of it and I've been smashing up foam while practiicing. I think I've built 4 of these so far. Last one is foam covered tape with some additional CF structure in hopes it will last more than 2 weeks.
Bushwacker - loved it, became a test mule
Storch - loved it, became a test mule
Viggen - loved it - need to build another
Old Fogey - love it on floats with ailerons
Rasters XF5U - it's ugly, and it flies
Baby Blender - another great flier
Explorer - my 1st build, beat the snot out of it.
Tiny Trainer - the kids are beating this one up right now
Bloody Wonder - Just build one, and stuff a monster motor in it.
 

PoorManRC

Master member
#16
<BR>
As for the Legacy it is a pity that it was not designed to resemble the Ford Trimotor as that would be of greater appeal, (well to me at least).

Have fun!
...... I would think that someone with more design skills than I have, could make a new Fuse, that looks more like a Trimotor. ;)
 

Craftydan

Hostage Taker of Quads
Staff member
Moderator
Mentor
#18
Agreed...the Ford Trimotor would be a cool one to do. I saw a video on here of somebody attempting it with the Legacy. It flew, but it definitely needing some tweaking.
If you're refering to the maiden of my tri-legacy . . . Yeah, but most of that was racing the sun to maiden. I ended up reducing the throws on all quite a bit (my fault -- never set them against the gage), adjusted the outer nacell's throttle mix, reduced the thrust differential a bit and added a bit of downthrust on the main motor.

Simple trimming any model benefits from, and she turned into a pussycat. Only issues from the kitbash itself was the neutral thrust angle from the outer nacelles. In retrospect, they need a bit of adjustable down. The rest were from rushing through the details.