DIGGER Posted August 8, 2017 Share Posted August 8, 2017 I looked on here in search for this model and found it was mentioned 1 year ago. I was thinking of getting this plane, but on other forums there is alot of concern and updates to the landing gear. Have any of you out there had or have this model and what are your experience with it , did you do a modification to the landing gear, if so what? They have now released a navy version of it but the landing gear looks the same. Any help please. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Watkins Posted August 8, 2017 Share Posted August 8, 2017 Chris, which one? The 1400 mm or the 2350 mm wingspan ? This is a very substantial proven undercarriage, The parkfly only weighs 4lb, and the undercarriage would be difficult to improve, but wheel tyres are often too hard and can be substituted Edited By Denis Watkins on 08/08/2017 08:47:48 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McG 6969 Posted August 8, 2017 Share Posted August 8, 2017 Hi, There is also a 1620mm / 64" version, traditionally built in balsa & light ply by VQ Models... Cheers Chris Edited By McG 6969 on 08/08/2017 09:08:59 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon H Posted August 8, 2017 Share Posted August 8, 2017 If its the big one (as in the photo above) then i have an unbuilt one and a friend had one but eventually crashed it as the engine over heated and stopped. In any case, the undercarriage is fine but will likely need some tidying up as his was very stiff and needed some oiling and sorting out. The elastic bands are pants as well and its better if you substitute some thin bungee cord instead. While the covering is super fragile its a nice model and flew very well. It would fly on a 90 in all honesty but a 120 is probably the safest middle ground. The 150 fitted to my friends model was way over kill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIGGER Posted August 8, 2017 Author Share Posted August 8, 2017 Thanks everyone, sorry for the confusion, I should have said . It's the 1400mm one, foamie. Has been done by other company's in the past, Top Gun, and a yellow one as well by someone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Watkins Posted August 8, 2017 Share Posted August 8, 2017 Weak undercarriage can be " subjective" to how we fly Or more importantly, how we land. The u/c on the 1400 mm span does look the part and substantial enough. In flight practice, we may fly 6 times and get one hours flying, but we only land 6 times and practice flair out For 12 seconds in that day? That is not a great deal of time spent saving our u/c. The lads like " touch and goes " to hone these skills But be alert to abort touching the ground if the final touchdown looks heavy, and go around again Edited By Denis Watkins on 08/08/2017 12:08:55 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIGGER Posted August 9, 2017 Author Share Posted August 9, 2017 Thank you Denis for that, that does sum it up, but I think the other forums were referring to the weak plastic parts where the springs attach, they say they only last about 6 landings, and I find it a little hard to belive, that's why I asked the question to see if anyone else has had this problem. Thanks again. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.