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

Sportster Picture and Maiden Thread

Marty72

Well-known member
#1
I'm pretty much finished with my scratch build of the Sportster. I'd like to see pictures, specs and maidens of other folks Sportsters on here. I searched through the forum, but things are quite sporadic. What prop, motor, cg, ect are you using? What issues have you had?
I'll post up mine in a few.

So post up your Sportsters!
 

Marty72

Well-known member
#2
My Sportster is a spec scratch build with a few minor deviations. I'm running the C pack motor, 10-4.5 prop, 2200 mah battery. The plane is a bit tail heavy if I'm to believe the spec cg of 2.5 inches from leading edge. So I made some changes and moved things forward where I could. I've got the cg at 2 3/8 inches, with the battery slammed all the way to the front (for the maiden). I'd prefer to have the battery centered, so I could shift it around as needed. I'm set up to fly with 3 rates. I'm planning on using the same rates as the S Scout (I have the throws matched up pretty well between the two). The Sportster is a really solid plane, so much sturdier than the Simple Scout. I think this is an ideal belly lander and that is my plan for it. I fly in a very sandy lot, so having the bottom of the plane sealed up is excellent. Battleaxe in a round about way inspired me to build this one.

I'm hoping to maiden in the next week or two. The weather for the last week and a half hasn't been very good for flying in general (lot of wind and rain). That's how I got started building again, avoiding what I should be doing to build and tinker with yet another plane. Next week, the forecast looks great.



IMG_2164.JPG
IMG_2165.JPG
IMG_2168.JPG


IMG_2161.JPG

 
Last edited:

Homey

Well-known member
#3
My Sportster is a spec scratch build with a few minor deviations. I'm running the C pack motor, 2200 mah battery. The plane is a bit tail heavy if I'm to believe the spec cg of 2.5 inches from leading edge. So I made some changes and moved things forward where I could. I've got the cg at 2 3/8 inches, with the battery slammed all the way to the front (for the maiden). I'd prefer to have the battery centered, so I could shift it around as needed. I'm set up to fly with 3 rates. I'm planning on using the same rates as the S Scout (I have the throws matched up pretty well between the two). The Sportster is a really solid plane, so much sturdier than the Simple Scout. I think this is an ideal belly lander and that is my plan for it. I fly in a very sandy lot, so having the bottom of the plane sealed up is excellent. Battleaxe in a round about way inspired me to build this one.

I'm hoping to maiden in the next week or two. The weather for the last week and a half hasn't been very good for flying in general (lot of wind and rain). That's how I got started building again, avoiding what I should be doing to build and tinker with yet another plane. Next week, the forecast looks great.
View attachment 151905 View attachment 151906 View attachment 151907

View attachment 151904
Gorgeous! Beauty job.

Peter
 

Marty72

Well-known member
#6
Thanks. I think it would make a great plane for snow (like Battleaxe built). I fly in a lot of foggy mornings, the yellow (like the red) should be easy to spot. I interested in how different or similar it flies to the Simple Scout.
 

The Hangar

Well-known member
#7
Thanks. I think it would make a great plane for snow (like Battleaxe built). I fly in a lot of foggy mornings, the yellow (like the red) should be easy to spot. I interested in how different or similar it flies to the Simple Scout.
I'm thinking it will be more exciting to fly!
 

BATTLEAXE

Well-known member
#9
Thanks. I think it would make a great plane for snow (like Battleaxe built). I fly in a lot of foggy mornings, the yellow (like the red) should be easy to spot. I interested in how different or similar it flies to the Simple Scout.
That is a quality build if I have ever seen one! You should be putting out build tips vids of your own. Most people here would love to build like that, and thats what?... your third plane? Gorgeous man.

You said you think it's tail heavy brings on a question, You are balancing it upside down right, from the top of the wings and not the bottom? I found with mine it was difficult to balance right side up, upside down was better. I know the Scout and the Timber X is easy to balance from the underside. Just checkin :D
 

Marty72

Well-known member
#10

daxian

Well-known member
#11
@Marty72 ..full size was one of my early builds ...followed the vid instructions ,josh said "do it" so i did lol...uk westfoam ...quite a heavy board so most of the early ones were tail heavy ..took a while for me to adjust to that fact, which is why i built 3 sizes and why only the midi survived its maiden !!
 

Marty72

Well-known member
#12
That is a quality build if I have ever seen one! You should be putting out build tips vids of your own. Most people here would love to build like that, and thats what?... your third plane? Gorgeous man.

You said you think it's tail heavy brings on a question, You are balancing it upside down right, from the top of the wings and not the bottom? I found with mine it was difficult to balance right side up, upside down was better. I know the Scout and the Timber X is easy to balance from the underside. Just checkin :D

Thanks man! Coming from you that's quite a compliment. I built 2 Scouts, so this would be my fourth. I spent a bit too much time thinking about the graphics and the paint on this one ( but it was a lot of fun). I dinged things up a bit installing the wings, opened up the slots with sand paper, thought I was good but once I got close, it got really tight but I pushed through anyway. Funny, I thought I was very precise with cuts for the wing opening, but they just didn't match. Perhaps the wings opened up a bit during the gluing. The P-40 wings couldn't have fit any nicer, zero gap installed. This build I had gaps and tight places. Next time, I'll use the poster board template of the chassis to check the wing fit before install and make adjustments then.

You are absolutely correct, it's very difficult to balance on the bottom of the wing. I built a balance stand a while back, with patience you can find balance with the stand, but it won't stay there long, so you must steady and measure. I do the balance procedure a few time to be sure it's repeatable. If you use your fingers, upside down is the only way.

Post pictures of your beauty up here. You did a great job and like you said, it's built like a tank. I think you should build another one for the snow. Are the skewers on the tail feathers cosmetic or do they actually improve things?

I was hoping to fly something this morning, nope, more wind and rain. I had a window yesterday after the rain, didn't take it.

So yesterday, I realized I built a 1920 s aircraft, a 1930 and a 1940. Looks like I'm going to fly them in that order. ha
 

BATTLEAXE

Well-known member
#14
I did use the skewers on a couple of planes, I think the Sportster was the second or third. It does stiffen things up considerably, especially in the air. When you do say a loop and you are pulling positive G's, the rudder will shake, like a fast flutter. You don't see it from the ground but it does happen. Since you have your edges ironed it will help some, you could fly it as is and try it out. I find it just makes things a little more durable for storage, transport and handling as well.

Here is a vid of my Baby Blender tail feathers and you will see what I mean, your Sportster will fly in the same flight parameters as this plane
 

Marty72

Well-known member
#15
Yeah, good video illustration. I did notice at the end of the life of the S Scout 1.0, it didn't do loops well. I couldn't seem to keep them straight and sharp. I also notice the tail section was getting flimsy. The new Scout 2.0 had no issues with a clean, straight loop. So I'll do it, crappy weather today so now a good time to do it. The tail feathers are huge on the Sportster, so it's probably a good idea (though I may have to add a tad more weight to the front). Pretty long lever arm to the feathers.

I took pictures of my FT fleet today (while they are all still in good shape).

Thanks!
 

BATTLEAXE

Well-known member
#16
I like the new avatar. You won't be known as the Scout guy any more, you graduated lol.

I had issues with balancing the Sportster, mind you my motor is a little bigger then the C pack so that helped. I found the landing gear helped with keeping it balanced. And I installed power pod doublers to help keep it strong in the nose, not sure how much it helped with the weight in the nose.
 

Marty72

Well-known member
#17
Wow! Nice and stiff. Like it, very much. It also gave me a chance to true up the horizontal/vertical on each side. I noticed some small sag in the horizontal stabilizer as it measured more than 90 degrees on both sides. I was able to fix that and stiffen the whole tail up considerably.

Yeah, the landing gear. So did you use the spec approach to attach you skis or some other way. I didn't like the way it looks maybe it works good. I'd love to hear from folks on this. I like the Scout landing gear attachment more than this but then again, I've never used the Sportster approach so maybe it's better.

IMG_2229.JPG
 

BATTLEAXE

Well-known member
#18
Wow! Nice and stiff. Like it, very much. It also gave me a chance to true up the horizontal/vertical on each side. I noticed some small sag in the horizontal stabilizer as it measured more than 90 degrees on both sides. I was able to fix that and stiffen the whole tail up considerably.

Yeah, the landing gear. So did you use the spec approach to attach you skis or some other way. I didn't like the way it looks maybe it works good. I'd love to hear from folks on this. I like the Scout landing gear attachment more than this but then again, I've never used the Sportster approach so maybe it's better.

View attachment 152049
I installed on my Sportster the same style of LG as the Scout uses, tab in slot kinda thing. I found that there was a lot of reinforcing that had to be done in the build to help it stand up to hard landings. As you know from the first Scout there was a lot of damage the tab in slot will create just trying to land. I have used the rubber band mount now on the FT-3D which is what it comes with and I think I like it better. Its not as rigid as the tab in slot which also means it has give and less likely to tear the fuse apart unnecessarily.

]\It is held on by 2 skewers and a rubber band, it does sit pretty solid on the fuse and will let the plane bounce, rock, or take hits without damage. You can kind of see it here. It may be the same as what the Sportster is supposed to come with

20191210_013616.jpg
 

Marty72

Well-known member
#19
Excellent! Then at some point I may use it. How do you like the 3D, better than the Bush Wacker. You've also got this Gobblin thing going on, you seemed to really like that. I saw the maiden. That things hauls butt and sounds like you are under attack.

I gave away my margin with the skewers. Added a penny to the front, gets me back to 2.5 cg.
 

BATTLEAXE

Well-known member
#20
Excellent! Then at some point I may use it. How do you like the 3D, better than the Bush Wacker. You've also got this Gobblin thing going on, you seemed to really like that. I saw the maiden. That things hauls butt and sounds like you are under attack.

I gave away my margin with the skewers. Added a penny to the front, gets me back to 2.5 cg.
Nice, I'm surprised it was only a penny to balance, that's funny! I had to do some strategic readjustment of the battery position to get it as far forward as possible.

The 3D is a way better 3D format style plane in the fact it is more predictable, in the weather anyway, has better penetration. And predictable in the fact that it goes where you point it, that being said, you do have to concentrate on it more in the fact that it has a very narrow margin of balance so you are constantly correcting. The Bushwhacker would be nice to lumber around but was also susceptible to little gusts and throttle changes. Plus for doing 3D, not that I am any kind of expert at it, the few little maneuvers I have been practicing I find the Bushwhacker to be slow and less reactive, so there is a trade off there. As far as what I want this style of plane to do, yea the 3D is better for that.

Again the plane looks sharp! You still have the P-40 to maiden yet?