Reaction 54 Jet Kit
#1877
My Feedback: (2)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Woo Hooo.
I finally got a CD, a waiver holder, work, weather and other distractions to come together and made my first turbine flight last night.
I had to bring my R54 to work with me and worry all day about it still being in my truck after work since I work in a very slimy neighborhood and have to park in an unattended parking lot out in the open.
Then I had to blast out of work right at the bell to make the 20 mile drive to the field, assemble and prep the plane.
Calm down the jitters for a couple of minutes.
I finally broke ground about 10 minutes before sunset.
The flight its self was nothing spectacular, trimming then some slow flight and check stall characteristics, a few laps around the field with a few loops and rolls thrown in, and an early landing just in case it would take a few trips around the field to get it right. Didn't need the extra trips since the R54 just settled right in and touched down nice and soft right in front of me.
Flew for 5 minutes and still had about a third of a tank of fuel left over.
Now I just need to get everything to fall into place at least one more time to actually get signed off on my waiver.
Then it is burn kero time.
Thanks to everyone that I made crazy helping me to get this far.
I finally got a CD, a waiver holder, work, weather and other distractions to come together and made my first turbine flight last night.
I had to bring my R54 to work with me and worry all day about it still being in my truck after work since I work in a very slimy neighborhood and have to park in an unattended parking lot out in the open.
Then I had to blast out of work right at the bell to make the 20 mile drive to the field, assemble and prep the plane.
Calm down the jitters for a couple of minutes.
I finally broke ground about 10 minutes before sunset.
The flight its self was nothing spectacular, trimming then some slow flight and check stall characteristics, a few laps around the field with a few loops and rolls thrown in, and an early landing just in case it would take a few trips around the field to get it right. Didn't need the extra trips since the R54 just settled right in and touched down nice and soft right in front of me.
Flew for 5 minutes and still had about a third of a tank of fuel left over.
Now I just need to get everything to fall into place at least one more time to actually get signed off on my waiver.
Then it is burn kero time.
Thanks to everyone that I made crazy helping me to get this far.
#1879
My Feedback: (2)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Thanks Bruce.
Now if I can just get the weather to cooperate.
I do have to admit that I was pleasantly surprised by just how fast the roll rate was and how tight it could loop and turn without even getting close to a stall.
I guess I was expecting it to wallow around the sky like most of the jets I have seen fly at our field.
I do intend to abuse this plane in the air since my head will explode if I fly straight and level for more than a couple of seconds.
Me thinks me has a keeper here.
Now if I can just get the weather to cooperate.
I do have to admit that I was pleasantly surprised by just how fast the roll rate was and how tight it could loop and turn without even getting close to a stall.
I guess I was expecting it to wallow around the sky like most of the jets I have seen fly at our field.
I do intend to abuse this plane in the air since my head will explode if I fly straight and level for more than a couple of seconds.
Me thinks me has a keeper here.
#1880
My Feedback: (10)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Hi Jeff,
Great to hear about your success, did you go with the P-70? And you used the Garry Mueller tank if I remember correctly?
Also, has anyone tried a set of trailing link main gear in a Reaction? I would like to fly off of grass this gear design is very interesting to me and I would like to try it.
Thanks in advance,
Great to hear about your success, did you go with the P-70? And you used the Garry Mueller tank if I remember correctly?
Also, has anyone tried a set of trailing link main gear in a Reaction? I would like to fly off of grass this gear design is very interesting to me and I would like to try it.
Thanks in advance,
#1881
My Feedback: (2)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Yes I have the kero start P70.
I am not sure about the brand of tank since I can barely see it.
It is Kevlar and rectangular.
I bought this plane from Samo here on RCU, there are some pics ind info about it earlier in this thread. Look around post 1342.
My first flight was off grass as will be all of my flights.
I do have the stock mains. So far after one flight nothing fell off.
I don't know of a paved runway within 3 hours travel. so unless I go to a jet meet somewhere I'll be off grass.
The nose gear is the one I am worried about.
I am not sure about the brand of tank since I can barely see it.
It is Kevlar and rectangular.
I bought this plane from Samo here on RCU, there are some pics ind info about it earlier in this thread. Look around post 1342.
My first flight was off grass as will be all of my flights.
I do have the stock mains. So far after one flight nothing fell off.
I don't know of a paved runway within 3 hours travel. so unless I go to a jet meet somewhere I'll be off grass.
The nose gear is the one I am worried about.
#1882
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Matt, I whipped over to my handy thread index at http://www.btemodels.com/r54threadindex.html and found two possible posts that may help. Check out:
Post #1402 http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5296256
Post #1781 http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6205815
Post #1402 http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5296256
Post #1781 http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=6205815
#1883
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
I'm in the sanding primer stage of finishing my R54 and will be installing the fuel components soon. This raises a question regarding the main fuel tank orientation as shown on the plans. Probably Bruce can put some insight into this. Why is the clunk in the main tank placed in the front of the tank rather than the rear. It would seem that in a steep climb the fuel will stay in the rear of the tank and the clunk will suck air.
#1885
My Feedback: (85)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Hey Bruce---Any thoughts of a P-80 size R-54????---If you do come out with one or are planning one I'll gladly submit my deposit!!!---Design it with the inlets as some have added to their 54's and maybe a slightly swept wing.....[sm=thumbup.gif][sm=thumbup.gif][sm=thumbup.gif]
Kevin
Kevin
#1887
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
John,
I agree with Bruce, it doesn't matter which way the tank is facing. I have two R54's, one has the tank facing rearward and the other the tank is facing forward. Neither one has caused any problems. The one with the tank facing forward was done so the fuel lines could go into the forward fuselage area under the canopy. I placed the UAT under the canopy to place all the weight forward. I talked with the PST representative about this topic and he agreed with Bruce. It's just a matter of convenience and how you plan to plumb the fuel lines.
Good luck,
Keith
I agree with Bruce, it doesn't matter which way the tank is facing. I have two R54's, one has the tank facing rearward and the other the tank is facing forward. Neither one has caused any problems. The one with the tank facing forward was done so the fuel lines could go into the forward fuselage area under the canopy. I placed the UAT under the canopy to place all the weight forward. I talked with the PST representative about this topic and he agreed with Bruce. It's just a matter of convenience and how you plan to plumb the fuel lines.
Good luck,
Keith
#1888
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Bruce,
I'm not sure about a P-80 size R54 but a swept wing version would be awesome!! Would your workload permit some design drawings for a swept wing option?
Keith
I'm not sure about a P-80 size R54 but a swept wing version would be awesome!! Would your workload permit some design drawings for a swept wing option?
Keith
#1889
My Feedback: (6)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
I disagree about which way the tank faces. When the clunk is aft you only risk it being out of the fuel when the nose is downwards. But many times we are accelerating downwards (not always, but sometimes) and so the fuel may be around zero G. But when we climb, the fuel is ALWAYS at the rear of the tank. In other words, you can increase the safety factor on your header (how close you get to sucking bubbles) by using a rearward clunk or you can compensate by having a much larger header (dead weight).
In an old Isobar, I managed to get the clunk heavy enough on very flexible Tygon where it would go to all corners of the tank anyway, in all attitudes.
In an old Isobar, I managed to get the clunk heavy enough on very flexible Tygon where it would go to all corners of the tank anyway, in all attitudes.
#1890
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Jose,
CA
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Woketman,
On a long downhill, the fuel will probably go forward. Its only zero g if thrust is greater than drag, i.e. the net acceleration is more than the 1 G of gravity. But the drag goes up in a hurry as the speed increases, and the thrust goes down a bit, so unless you are doing really absurd power dives, the fuel ends up in the front of the tank.
OTOH, if you do low power on the dive, the fuel flow rate goes way down. The main clunk will pull air, but not too much will get into the header because of the low flow rate. Combine that with the fact that there is not a lot of time on downhill, and its not bad.
For a climb, thats almost always high throttle, so high fuel flow rate, and you spend some time that way, so if you were pulling air in the main, then thats a lot of air in the header.
One final thing.. if the uphill or downhill is in a loop (i.e. pulling G's ) then the fuel ends up at the BOTTOM of the tank. It might have a bit more depth at the front or the back, but the whole bottom will be covered and the clunk will be submerged.
Summary: I do my tanks with the outlet at the front and the clunk mostly in the back.
Bob
On a long downhill, the fuel will probably go forward. Its only zero g if thrust is greater than drag, i.e. the net acceleration is more than the 1 G of gravity. But the drag goes up in a hurry as the speed increases, and the thrust goes down a bit, so unless you are doing really absurd power dives, the fuel ends up in the front of the tank.
OTOH, if you do low power on the dive, the fuel flow rate goes way down. The main clunk will pull air, but not too much will get into the header because of the low flow rate. Combine that with the fact that there is not a lot of time on downhill, and its not bad.
For a climb, thats almost always high throttle, so high fuel flow rate, and you spend some time that way, so if you were pulling air in the main, then thats a lot of air in the header.
One final thing.. if the uphill or downhill is in a loop (i.e. pulling G's ) then the fuel ends up at the BOTTOM of the tank. It might have a bit more depth at the front or the back, but the whole bottom will be covered and the clunk will be submerged.
Summary: I do my tanks with the outlet at the front and the clunk mostly in the back.
Bob
#1891
My Feedback: (18)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New City, NY
Posts: 3,021
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
ORIGINAL: Kevin Greene
Hey Bruce---Any thoughts of a P-80 size R-54????---If you do come out with one or are planning one I'll gladly submit my deposit!!!---Design it with the inlets as some have added to their 54's and maybe a slightly swept wing.....[sm=thumbup.gif][sm=thumbup.gif][sm=thumbup.gif]
Kevin
Hey Bruce---Any thoughts of a P-80 size R-54????---If you do come out with one or are planning one I'll gladly submit my deposit!!!---Design it with the inlets as some have added to their 54's and maybe a slightly swept wing.....[sm=thumbup.gif][sm=thumbup.gif][sm=thumbup.gif]
Kevin
Bruce,
I'm not sure about a P-80 size R54 but a swept wing version would be awesome!! Would your workload permit some design drawings for a swept wing option?
Keith
I'm not sure about a P-80 size R54 but a swept wing version would be awesome!! Would your workload permit some design drawings for a swept wing option?
Keith
Marty
#1892
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
I had big plans (in my head, not on paper) of making a swept wing for my R54. It was also going to be thinner for more speed but about the same area. Maybe one day...
#1893
My Feedback: (6)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Bob, yeah, that was my point. I realize that eventually on a downline the fuel will be forward, but for some of the time on some of the downlines, the fuel will not be forward. But its always rearward on the upline. So therefore it is better to have the clunk aft. Might not be a huge difference, but it's a difference!
#1894
My Feedback: (85)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
ORIGINAL: Woketman
Bob, yeah, that was my point. I realize that eventually on a downline the fuel will be forward, but for some of the time on some of the downlines, the fuel will not be forward. But its always rearward on the upline. So therefore it is better to have the clunk aft. Might not be a huge difference, but it's a difference!
Bob, yeah, that was my point. I realize that eventually on a downline the fuel will be forward, but for some of the time on some of the downlines, the fuel will not be forward. But its always rearward on the upline. So therefore it is better to have the clunk aft. Might not be a huge difference, but it's a difference!
Kevin
#1895
My Feedback: (6)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Yeah, I like to give the header tank the best bubbless supply possible and make its job easy. Years ago (a long time ago actually, it was with a RAM 1000) I took the original Isobar (Eddie gave her to me and I fixed her up a bit with a nice coat of Kylon!!!) up with my own lost foam main tank and the pleated paper clunk header tank. I flew her dry on purpose and landed dead stick. Now, mind you, for the final minute or so of flight I was high up (keeping lots of altitude for the soon to come dead stick) doing lazy eights - no wild aerobatics. When I landed there was literally nothing but Jet A residue in the main tank (MAYBE two or three drops in a corner, when tilted for a minute or so), and a perhasp a half ounce in the header. THAT was what sold me on the pleated paper clunk!!!
#1896
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Speaking of pleated paper pickups;
I don't use the pleated paper clunk, but I do use the pleated paper pickup in the hopper tank. In the F-16 I'm finishing up I also have it in a 10oz. tank (fed from two mains) which then feeds into the pleated paper hopper tank. Although the 10oz. tank isn't used as a filter, because it gets filled from the hopper tank, it still is a good bubble catcher for the main tanks. I used the extra long filter for this tank.
I don't use the pleated paper clunk, but I do use the pleated paper pickup in the hopper tank. In the F-16 I'm finishing up I also have it in a 10oz. tank (fed from two mains) which then feeds into the pleated paper hopper tank. Although the 10oz. tank isn't used as a filter, because it gets filled from the hopper tank, it still is a good bubble catcher for the main tanks. I used the extra long filter for this tank.
#1898
My Feedback: (1)
RE: Reaction 54 Jet Kit
Well, several respected jet pilots have chimed in above in favor of a forward-facing tank/rear clunk setup, and I'm sure not going to argue with them. They all make a strong case. I know Dave Rigotti had flameouts with a forward clunk, none after reversing the tank (the 72 oz. kevlar tank), so there's a real-world example of the forward-facing tank/rear clunk making an improvement.
In my defense, I went with the rear-facing tank/forward clunk mainly because it simplifies and shortens the plumbing somewhat. It is an arrangement that was tested thoroughly before the release of the kit, and it never caused me any trouble. The prototype would typically land with the main tank about a quarter full, and the UAT never had an air bubble more than 1/4 its capacity. My second R54 also uses a rear-facing main tank/forward clunk, but the 16 oz. header tank faces forward with a rear clunk. In fact, the clunk is a pleated paper type inspired mainly by Wocketman's story (which I read somewhere else long ago). I described this fuel setup in posts 1556 and 1557 (photos too). It performed flawlessly all summer. Yes, air made its way into the header tank, but never more than 1/4 its capacity; usually much less.
I'm not trying to say "do it my way", but it does work fine if you want to. If you want to reverse the main tank, that's fine too.
In my defense, I went with the rear-facing tank/forward clunk mainly because it simplifies and shortens the plumbing somewhat. It is an arrangement that was tested thoroughly before the release of the kit, and it never caused me any trouble. The prototype would typically land with the main tank about a quarter full, and the UAT never had an air bubble more than 1/4 its capacity. My second R54 also uses a rear-facing main tank/forward clunk, but the 16 oz. header tank faces forward with a rear clunk. In fact, the clunk is a pleated paper type inspired mainly by Wocketman's story (which I read somewhere else long ago). I described this fuel setup in posts 1556 and 1557 (photos too). It performed flawlessly all summer. Yes, air made its way into the header tank, but never more than 1/4 its capacity; usually much less.
I'm not trying to say "do it my way", but it does work fine if you want to. If you want to reverse the main tank, that's fine too.