Boomerang Nano!!!
08-03-2009, 06:33 PM
#151
Senior Member
My Feedback: (12)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Carlsbad , NM
Posts: 1,319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
thats the size of the nano, not much diffrent that the intro when it comes to the fuslage, booms are shorter and the wing is smaller but wider, everything fits perfect all of the turbine stuff,retracts,servos, everything was thought out no modifying perfect!
08-03-2009, 07:11 PM
#153
Senior Member
My Feedback: (12)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Carlsbad , NM
Posts: 1,319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
gold, the original should fly it dont use retracts. i fly at 3/4 thottle im running a 32 dubro tank and get 5 min of flight time
08-04-2009, 05:29 PM
#157
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
Here's a pic of the Nano in Yellow sports scheme & also with the Navy version.
Nano is not a development of the Intro (Baby B.) It is a completely new design. I have changed many major and minor details so although it is a similar twin boom model, my favoured style of jet, it was specifically designed for the small 44 and 60 size turbines, so is very light and has great aerobatic characteristics. It will fly fine on an early Wren MW44 with only 7 or 8 lbs of thrust or great with the later Gold version, an Artes Bee or on 14 lbs thrust like a P60, the max recommended, it makes a hot little jet.
Nano is not a development of the Intro (Baby B.) It is a completely new design. I have changed many major and minor details so although it is a similar twin boom model, my favoured style of jet, it was specifically designed for the small 44 and 60 size turbines, so is very light and has great aerobatic characteristics. It will fly fine on an early Wren MW44 with only 7 or 8 lbs of thrust or great with the later Gold version, an Artes Bee or on 14 lbs thrust like a P60, the max recommended, it makes a hot little jet.
08-05-2009, 11:09 AM
#158
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Louisa,
VA
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
Nice addition to the Boomerang fleet!
How difficult is it to set the plane up initially without retracts and then modify things to add the retracts later?
Is there a build thread?
Thanks.
How difficult is it to set the plane up initially without retracts and then modify things to add the retracts later?
Is there a build thread?
Thanks.
08-05-2009, 11:11 AM
#159
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: AbergeleNorth Wales, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
That's exactly what I shall be doing, installing fixed gear to begin with, before adding retracts at a later date 
I think it should be pretty easy.
I think it should be pretty easy.
08-05-2009, 01:56 PM
#162
Senior Member
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
ORIGINAL: littlepiston
it is easy to change from fix gear to retracts no glueing
it is easy to change from fix gear to retracts no glueing
That is great to hear. Thanks. Does anyone know if that is true of the Sprint as well?
08-05-2009, 02:37 PM
#163
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
No problem to start the Nano with the fixed gear supplied in the kit and then convert to retracts later. I designed it to be able to do that.
The Sprint does not come with fixed gear supplied.
Alan.
The Sprint does not come with fixed gear supplied.
Alan.
08-05-2009, 02:49 PM
#165
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Louisa,
VA
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
ORIGINAL: Turbinac
No problem to start the Nano with the fixed gear supplied in the kit and then convert to retracts later. I designed it to be able to do that.
The Sprint does not come with fixed gear supplied.
Alan.
No problem to start the Nano with the fixed gear supplied in the kit and then convert to retracts later. I designed it to be able to do that.
The Sprint does not come with fixed gear supplied.
Alan.
A few more questions if you don't mind.
1. Have the SpringAir retracts held up OK in your prototype? They're obviously not as strong, well made, etc. as the custom gear, but the price is good!
2. Is there an option for a second elevator servo and a split elevator? I get a little paranoid with only one elevator servo on a moderately expensive plane.
3. With the small wheels used with the retracts (2.25" mains and 2.00" nose) are takeoffs/landings OK on less than perfect grass fields?
08-05-2009, 03:42 PM
#166
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
I fly only from grass at both my local club sites. The Springairs are still going strong after about 60 or 70 flights, even with my often less than perfect landings. The wire struts are so short that I haven't even had to bend them straight.
There's no denying that trailing links are much superior, and I'm sure the custom retract sets now being made will be great, but I had these Springairs 102's on my shelf when I built the prototypes, so used them. I was also looking for the lightest option. I use Robart light wheels and only one air bottle for both the retracts and brakes to save an extra few ounces! Nano is a very light plane (12 to 13 lbs total dry weight) , so in my opinion does not need overkill on the landing gear.
No provision is in the Nano kit for split elevators. ...but....It's a wooden kit, you're a modeller, so you could alter it to take two servos if you feel the need. That would add several ounces to the tail and thus need more nose weight, thus helping to defeat the light weight ethos of the design. Probably would add over half a pound. When did you last have a modern high quality airborne elevator servo quit? That's the one control surface to spend money on to get a top end servo.
Small wheels on a light model .......No problem. Takes off easy from grass and stops nicely on landings. See this video and others of our test flying the Nano on YouTube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUp8_eL9WK0 and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dNRK3K-Ge0&NR=1 and a couple of others there.
Our own video will follow shortly!
There's no denying that trailing links are much superior, and I'm sure the custom retract sets now being made will be great, but I had these Springairs 102's on my shelf when I built the prototypes, so used them. I was also looking for the lightest option. I use Robart light wheels and only one air bottle for both the retracts and brakes to save an extra few ounces! Nano is a very light plane (12 to 13 lbs total dry weight) , so in my opinion does not need overkill on the landing gear.
No provision is in the Nano kit for split elevators. ...but....It's a wooden kit, you're a modeller, so you could alter it to take two servos if you feel the need. That would add several ounces to the tail and thus need more nose weight, thus helping to defeat the light weight ethos of the design. Probably would add over half a pound. When did you last have a modern high quality airborne elevator servo quit? That's the one control surface to spend money on to get a top end servo.
Small wheels on a light model .......No problem. Takes off easy from grass and stops nicely on landings. See this video and others of our test flying the Nano on YouTube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUp8_eL9WK0 and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dNRK3K-Ge0&NR=1 and a couple of others there.
Our own video will follow shortly!
08-05-2009, 03:49 PM
#167
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Louisa,
VA
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
ORIGINAL: Turbinac
I fly only from grass at both my local club sites. The Springairs are still going strong after about 60 or 70 flights, even with my often less than perfect landings. The wire struts are so short that I haven't even had to bend them straight.
There's no denying that trailing links are much superior, but I had these Springairs 102's on my shelf when I built the prototypes, so used them. I was also looking for the lightest option. I use Robart light wheels and only one air bottle for both the retracts and brakes to save an extra few ounces! Nano is a very light plane (12 to 13 lbs total dry weight) , so in my opinion does not need overkill on the landing gear.
No provision is in the Nano kit for split elevators. ...but....It's a wooden kit, you're a modeller, so you could alter it to take two servos if you feel the need. That would add several ounces to the tail and thus need more nose weight, thus helping to defeat the light weight ethos of the design. Probably would add over half a pound. When did you last have a modern high quality airborne elevator servo quit? That's the one control surface to spend money on to get a top end servo.
Small wheels on a light model .......No problem. Takes off easy from grass and stops nicely on landings.
I fly only from grass at both my local club sites. The Springairs are still going strong after about 60 or 70 flights, even with my often less than perfect landings. The wire struts are so short that I haven't even had to bend them straight.
There's no denying that trailing links are much superior, but I had these Springairs 102's on my shelf when I built the prototypes, so used them. I was also looking for the lightest option. I use Robart light wheels and only one air bottle for both the retracts and brakes to save an extra few ounces! Nano is a very light plane (12 to 13 lbs total dry weight) , so in my opinion does not need overkill on the landing gear.
No provision is in the Nano kit for split elevators. ...but....It's a wooden kit, you're a modeller, so you could alter it to take two servos if you feel the need. That would add several ounces to the tail and thus need more nose weight, thus helping to defeat the light weight ethos of the design. Probably would add over half a pound. When did you last have a modern high quality airborne elevator servo quit? That's the one control surface to spend money on to get a top end servo.
Small wheels on a light model .......No problem. Takes off easy from grass and stops nicely on landings.
All excellent points.
I'll go with a single high quality elevator servo, exercise it on a cycler a little before sticking it in the plane, and not worry about it.
I also appreciate your comments on the SpringAirs, weight savings, etc.
08-05-2009, 10:59 PM
#168
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Strathcona county,
AB, CANADA
Posts: 5,394
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
Don't know what all the fuss about the size was about - it is tiny compared to the other boomerangs! I'm looking forward to getting it in the air!!!!!!
08-06-2009, 09:39 AM
#169
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Louisa,
VA
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
ORIGINAL: Turbinac
I use Robart light wheels and only one air bottle for both the retracts and brakes to save an extra few ounces! Nano is a very light plane (12 to 13 lbs total dry weight) , so in my opinion does not need overkill on the landing gear.
I use Robart light wheels and only one air bottle for both the retracts and brakes to save an extra few ounces! Nano is a very light plane (12 to 13 lbs total dry weight) , so in my opinion does not need overkill on the landing gear.
Are you using pneumatic braking on the nosewheel only? Seems like I read that in one of your posts, but can't find it at the moment.
Are the Robart light wheels on the mains only? If so, what wheel/brake combo are you using for the nosewheel?
Thanks!
08-06-2009, 01:19 PM
#170
Senior Member
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
For someone just coming to turbine from props and EDF, what factors ought I consider in choosing between the Nano and the Sprint? They seem somewhat comparable.
Thanks.
Thanks.
08-06-2009, 02:08 PM
#171
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
W4sm, I am using an Airpower 2" wheel & brake as nosewheel brake.
Socomon, Nano & Sprint are for totally different power bands. The Nano is small & for up to 14 Lbs max. thrust, as mentioned in this thread and others re the Nano, and the Sprint is for 14 lbs to 22 lbs turbines, and is a much bigger jet altogether.
Have a look at http://www.boomerangjets.com/us/kits.htm and you can compare sizes etc.
Here are pics of the three schemes available now for the Nano and the underside.
Socomon, Nano & Sprint are for totally different power bands. The Nano is small & for up to 14 Lbs max. thrust, as mentioned in this thread and others re the Nano, and the Sprint is for 14 lbs to 22 lbs turbines, and is a much bigger jet altogether.
Have a look at http://www.boomerangjets.com/us/kits.htm and you can compare sizes etc.
Here are pics of the three schemes available now for the Nano and the underside.
08-06-2009, 02:33 PM
#172
Senior Member
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
Thank you again Alan for your prompt reply. I understood the different power requirements, but as I have not yet purchased the turbine (and the turbine prices seem reasonably comparable - ie a couple hundred dollars), this is not an issue for me. That being the case, is there any good reason to select one over the other for a first turbine jet?
.
.
08-06-2009, 04:54 PM
#173
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 478
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
I have a 44 waiting for a mount - Looks like it may just be a Nano...
...Though, I do think the colour scheme would look better if the underside was more plain. Maybe, without the "lightning flashes" and the writing.
Best Regards,
=Adrian=
...Though, I do think the colour scheme would look better if the underside was more plain. Maybe, without the "lightning flashes" and the writing.
Best Regards,
=Adrian=
08-06-2009, 07:48 PM
#174
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Strathcona county,
AB, CANADA
Posts: 5,394
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
Thank you again Alan for your prompt reply. I understood the different power requirements, but as I have not yet purchased the turbine (and the turbine prices seem reasonably comparable - ie a couple hundred dollars), this is not an issue for me. That being the case, is there any good reason to select one over the other for a first turbine jet?
08-06-2009, 09:22 PM
#175
RE: Boomerang Nano!!!
I just open the box check my out.
Let see if I can get it done tonight and fly tomorrow......
Just kidding. The inlet go to be a challenge to made it work with TJ100.
Alan,
I think I go to send you the invoice for making new inlet scoop to work for EDF.
I clock my time right now. Don't worry. I won't charge you OT or extra bowl of rice.[sm=lol.gif]
Also bill you for heat iron.......I forget where my located. Must throw out during the clean up.
Let see if I can get it done tonight and fly tomorrow......
Just kidding. The inlet go to be a challenge to made it work with TJ100.
Alan,
I think I go to send you the invoice for making new inlet scoop to work for EDF.
I clock my time right now. Don't worry. I won't charge you OT or extra bowl of rice.[sm=lol.gif]
Also bill you for heat iron.......I forget where my located. Must throw out during the clean up.