Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

Welcome aboard Don Here is the "definitive" R54 thread guide as displayed on BT's website:

http://www.btemodels.com/r54threadindex.html

You'll find a lot of good points categorized for your perusal.

As far a quick CG advice, there are many feelings on this. I won't attempt to say what is right or not, but I will say I have flown my R54 on a wide variety of CG locations and I do tend to prefer a more forward location. It flies quite the same during maneuvering flight IMHO, in most places within the range. But the behavior is different in the landing flare depending on the CG. Here is a post Bruce made regarding CG:

Post #1370
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_24...tm.htm#5184687

I originally flew in the mid to aft ranges, and I felt the model was pitch sensitive in the landing flare and had a slight bounce issue. Since I've moved the CG to 6 and 1/8" aft, as measured from the wing root leading edge, my landings have felt more solid with little flare ballooning or bouncing. I have not noticed the model turning into a slug. Results may vary, no warranty applies, sold "as is" with no cash value.

P.S. show us a pic of your new toy!

highhorse

My Feedback: (2)

Thanks for you help...

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

Good day of flying today!!

I flight tested the new JetTech 74 ounce tank (Excellent quality tank - I recommend going with the upgraded Jet Tech hardware, it's good stuff). Did not notice the extra weight at all, it was impossible to tell on flying qualities. But, I really did like the extra couple minutes of fuel.

No flight pictures unfortunately, but it was fun, you'll just have to take my word for it

u2fast

My Feedback: (37)

im pullin an all nighter to maiden mine tomorrow. barry

Woketman

My Feedback: (6)

Holy feces Eddie, that thing looks AWESOME!!! What a gorgeous scheme!

TommyWatson

My Feedback: (1)

Hi Eddie,

That is beautiful!!. it makes all of our plain old Reactions look very ordinary.

Great work.

I agree with you about the Jettech tanks, especially his screw in fittings. Much better than the bungs.

Regards

highhorse

My Feedback: (2)

Hi guys, i bought Barry's (u2fast) old 54 and have put a wren ss in it. As a poor-man's fix for more fuel I added a sullivan 32 forward of the dubro 50. Lots of room, fits fine. I have yet to run it but the only obvious drawback I can see is that the CG will shift aft just a bit after the main (which is practically ON the cg) empties and the aux begins to burn off. But since I dont plan to burn more than half of the aux we're only talking about burning off half a pound or so that is located sorta close to the CG of an 18+ pound airframe....

And yes, I know SOMEONE is wondering, I did the cg check tanks empty (even UAT) so that even if I run it completely dry, I'm still good on CG and my deadstick landing won't be compounded my wild PIOs in the flare.

With the UAT and aux full my CG will be very conservative with room to go aft after i get more experience with it.

I may get to test run it this week, wish me luck !

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

Thanks Woket and Tommy! Inside it's still a 54, and it flies like one too, so all good there

As an aside I added an ouce of lead to the nose today to bring the CG just ever so more forward to experiment. My R54 might be a little different due to the inlets and the canopy aerodynamically speaking. But I do seem to get better feel in the round out to flare, the more forward it gets to the 6 inch mark.

I'll be taking the lead out before the next flight because a new 3 cell ECU pack of A123 batteries will go in to replace the Lithium Ion pack. Nothing fatally wrong with the LiIon pack, but the A123 should hold voltage better under load (starts) and will behave better in cold winter mornings than LiIon. It is a touch heavier but I need the weight up front anyhow.

highhorse

My Feedback: (2)

Eddie, I'm dying to hear more about those 123's

Let us know how they work out for you, OK?

Thanks, Don.

oistein

My Feedback: (1)

Please let me know how you're maiden went Barry. Believe it or not, we actually had flying weather this weekend also. No wind, 5C and sun. Very abnormal this time of the year.

u2fast

My Feedback: (37)

oiston, my norwegian bud. the maiden went off without a hitch, i put 5 flights on her in all. looks like we will be taking it with us at the end of the month. see you soon, barry

rorrock

Does anyone have an idea of how the performance/flight characteristics of this model compares to the turbinator by Nick Zirolli.

Rob

TommyWatson

My Feedback: (1)

The Reaction looks a lot better!!!! , and how could anything fly better than a Reaction anyway.

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

Good job on your successful maiden flight Barry, and of course the four more that followed Did your modifications change the way the model "felt" for you at all? Any idea what weight you were flying at and what you came in at with just the UAT?

u2fast

My Feedback: (37)

eddie, i havent got a weight yet. i was up till 3:30 am sunday morning and back at it around 8:30 sunday morning getting her ready. i did not have time to install the fuel and smoke lines in the external tanks, so i flew without them. i did fly with the bombs. i can tell she is a little heavier when picking her up. flying characteristics is about the same. take off roll, maybe a little longer, but not much runway is required either way. could easily fly off of 300 ft or so. landing, i did carry a little throttle all the way around, where on my other reaction, i basically did a lot of idle gliding. but i cant give a good landing comparison due to 15 to 20 mph winds quartering across the runway slightly. so some power was needed for that. i did fly so long once that on final i ran out of fuel. i had full flaps deployed and left them down, as i was almost to the runway. landing this way was uneventful. i think one of the things i like the most is the higher stance that the model has with longer struts and larger tires. i have a bvm bobcat nose retract and robart 635's for mains. tires are also bvm, i think the mains are 2 3/4 or so. she looks good taxing out and ground handling is excellent. my friend shot some video and i will see of i can post some of it, but most of the flight was spent piddling around with 4 other guys flying, and i was watching out for them. loops did feel different, a little bigger and a little more on the elevator on the down side. probably more kingcat like. but overall, i am happy with the new 54. i like the looks and a solid weekend beater jet. barry

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

I took the 54 out for some more flying today -the weather was perfect, and I just could not pass up the opportunity.

I tried to setup my Jetcat P-60 V5.0 with the "8 cell Nicad" option last night for today's flights - to facilitate running my new A123 pack for the ECU - but found that v5.0 ECU's do NOT have the 8 cell Nicad option. So a call to Jetcat USA in San Juis Obispo confirmed that V6.0 software is required to run A123's. Not a huge problem, as the upgrade to V6.0 costs $25 dollars - the only issue is I have to send in my ECU for them to make the change. They did quote a one day turnaround however for a simple software upgrade.

So, nothing to report on A123's yet for anyone, but I plan to make the change in batteries and software as soon as the weather turns lousy for a few days [:@]

Eddie P

My Feedback: (4)

Anybody see anything sorta, kinda, maybe possibly familiar in this thread

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_7131611/tm.htm

highhorse

My Feedback: (2)

Sweet re-vamp!

u2fast

My Feedback: (37)

i spoke to bruce and email with pst yesterday. both are friends of mine. both pst and bte have an agreement and that is a proto composite r54 style of jet. just keeps getting better. barry

highhorse

My Feedback: (2)

Ooooooooooooh WHEN WHENWHENWHEN !!!!
I waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaant it NOWNOWNOWNOWNOWNOW !!!!

B777

The "Reaction ARF" will be flying at Top Gun 2008. Bruce Tharpe will have a few very soon. Availability will be April/May 2008.

Reaction ARF is fully licensed from Bruce Tharpe for production and sales.

She flies beautifully just like her Balsa R54 sister. 77 inches wingspan, just a bit longer but a lot meaner !!! [8D]

3 Colors options: Navy Orange/White; Blue/Yellow/Red; All white
Price: $899 all-composite ARF with 2.5 liters fuel cell and hardwares
Retracts: PST HD retracts or standard heavy duty 90 degree tri-gear
Engine: 14-20 lbs turbine: No mounting adapter needed. Designed for std mounting.

Cheers,
Kraivuth S.

Square Nozzle

My Feedback: (1)

The specs on the upcoming R54 ARF make me feel lots better after yesterday's panic in my shop. My R54 is completed, painted in the Patrouille Suisse color scheme and pardon me for seeming boastfull but it is beautiful. I'll post photos soon. Now to my concern. The power is by P70 with add on inlets ala F5E and the paint is all PPG. I weighed the plane and it comes out at 21.5# [:'(] minus fuel in the main and UAT. I have over a pound of lead in the nose to get the CG in range[:'(]. I did a review through Bruce's library on the weights you all reported on your R 54's and find that most are in the 18# + range. I have 3# on you guys. I guess I should say that I'm a bit concerned that I am heavy for this jet. Then comes the ARF at 24# dry for a slightly smaller version and I feel a little better. Anyone, feel free to comment and soothe my feelings.

Then, to top off the day I have two dents to repair[:@]. I am using a bridle system as a CG balancer. It consists of an inverted "T" which hangs over the plane with cords that cradle the plane at the wing root and go up to and wrap around the horizontal legs of the "T". When the plane is lifted off the gear (by the bridle) and leveled, a plumb bob, also hanging from the "T", indicates the CG. Nice system but now I know that you have to be real careful with things hanging over your pride and joy. I was lowering the jet back onto the building bench and knocked a roll of packaging tape (in a dispenser) off of a hook in the rafters above the jet[:@]. Of course it had to hit dead center on the front hatch and leave a dent. As a result of my shock and anger I dropped the CG bridle on the top of the fuselage also[:@]. Two dents being repaired[].

BruceTharpe

My Feedback: (1)

John,

The closest comparison that I can think of is maxvertical's R54 with a P70, 21.5 lb. dry. I've seen it fly, and it is spectacular. He posted a link to a great video here:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5902895

So don't be concerned about the weight. Even a pound of nose weight is not that unusual. I've noted many times that the heavier R54s (20+ lbs.) seem to float less on landing, making the touchdown spot more predictable.

Now the hangar rash stuff - that would make me mad too! Worse when it happens before the first flight...

BruceTharpe

My Feedback: (1)

About the Reaction ARF from PST... From what I have seen so far, this looks like it is going to be a real winner. I want to confirm what Kraivuth (B777) said in his earlier post - the Reaction ARF is fully licensed, endorsed and supported by BTE. This is one ARF maker that does things the right way when it comes to design, and it has been a pleasure working with them from the start.

Not sure how much control I can exert here, but I would sure like to see this thread remain dedicated to the original BTE Reaction 54 kit. As you may know, I'm currently out of stock, but plan to cut another run of kits in a few months. The kit will remain in production because it is different enough from the ARF that I think it will still be a viable option for certain builders for years to come.

Square Nozzle

My Feedback: (1)

Thanks Bruce, I recall reading those words about heavier R54's and confirmation coming from you goes a long way in reassuring me that all will be well. Maxvertical's video confirms that I'm not marching onto new ground.