carlosponti

My Feedback: (1)

EDIT:double post

flyingohio

My Feedback: (2)

At a local flying event last fall an older gentleman and myself were talking rc airplanes and motorcycles, we shared interests in both. He was negative towards ARF's, in general. He loved riding his motorcycle. I asked if he built his motorcycle from a kit? No? This didn't detract from the riding experience? No? A light bulb went off. The exact same analogy was made in one of the RC magazines a while ago. (AMA?)

I have been flying less than 3 years, I'm an ARF'r. I have built a handful of planes from kits, both laser kits (Mountain Models rocks!) and stick kits. I did ok, but most ARF's are better than what I can do. I have had to repair my ARF's like everyone has to now and then. I'm learning about building from that. I've been told that I fly very well for only being in the hobby 2 years. (I'm not sure I believe it, but it was a kind compliment) Why? ARF's. I like to fly, at this stage, not build. I have modified every ARF I have built, tho, sometimes substantially. I absolutely desire to build some nice kits or scratch planes in the future, just not right now, not until I can fly as best as possible with the thumbs I've been given. I hope I didn't pile on the cliches too badly.

s3nfo

My Feedback: (14)

ARF's have their place.
I love to build and always have something on the board. Currently building a JHH F-4 and the Wren kit engine to power it and also have a Pica Duelist that I'm electrifying. But, I'm a Combat Systems Engineer by trade and USS Ronald Reagan is taking an inordinate amount of effort to get ready for cruise. Aegis 6.1 needs plenty of work to get ready and USS San Antonio (first of the LPD-17 class ships) is just waiting in the wings.
If it wasn't for ARF's my club would have one less instructor and I wouldn't be flying.

Jim_McIntyre

Your analagy is quite good ... unfortunately it breaks down when you confront the fact that motorcycles must pass stringent safety standards in both design and construction...

Yes, I comprehend the fact that models I built do not have to adhere to any such standard either but, I feel confident that I have done all I can to ensure they are designed and built safe. I can't say the same for any ARF I would buy unless I were remove the covering and inspect the airframe.

My one experience with ARFs (other than park flyers) was when I bought an ARF Heli (because it was cheaper). I tore it down and rebuilt it and am quite glad I did ... it was an accident waiting to happen with not a sign of threadlock anywhere, overtorqued screws into plastic, and many other substandard results typical of rushed construction.

For me, the ARF question is not about ego or pride in craftsmanship (although I think many are missing out on this aspect of building), it's primarily about safety.

I must admit though, I can't imagine missing out on the adrenaline rush and sense of accomplishment associated with a successful maiden of something you created....

RTK

My Feedback: (1)

To each his own.
I really like a good quality arf, they are quick and easy to get into the air.
I also enjoy building, it gives me much pleasure and relaxation, takes my mind off of daily BS too. In fact I enjoy building as much as flying, call me weird.
Unfortunately with my time obligations now I am forced to buy arf's if I want to fly a variety of different planes. I am working on correcting this in the future though.

The only draw back to arf's that I see is for the new rc hobbiest, in that sometimes they never learn all the ins and outs of how to set-up the airframe correctly. They follow the manufactures spec's, buy and fly.

In the end arf's have really helped grow our hobby by leaps and bounds. There is more competition, more selection, and more people involved in this great hobby because of them.

Flyfalcons

Nice cop out on the inspection thing, Jim. Model airplanes are tested every time they are flown. It's called vibration and G forces. My first ARF did not make the cut, but that was in 1995 and things have dramatically improved since then. I have seen well built kits and poorly built kits as well as well built and poorly built ARFs. I'm working on a 40% Edge kit and when done, it will be about the same as most of the ARFs in the same class in terms of quality and flight performance. It's great that you enjoy building, but sheesh get over yourself man.

rogerswin

My Feedback: (2)

The day of the packaged kit may someday fade away because there may not be enough demand for these to justify producing them for the market. However, as long as we have people who will draw plans and others who will cut wood for those plans, then I will be happy. I'm one who would much rather build than fly. I don't want an ARF - Somebody already built it! I enjoy giant scale civilian airplanes. I'd love to build all those Cessnas from Hostetler's plans. I'm working on his Skymaster right now. When it's finished I'll start his 421 (27%). I'm a gunsmith by trade and love working with my hands.

You can stand off from an airplane that you built and feel real pride as people walk around it and complement you. You CAN'T do that with an ARF!!

RTK

My Feedback: (1)

Roger- Ever heard of Ken Gennicco?

Banker

My Feedback: (10)

Gosh, I feel like such a second class citizen. I have Saturday mornings available to do this hobby, period. Which would I rather do, build or fly? The ARF's today are better than I can do and at a cheaper cost to me. My time is worth something.

Safety is important but the ability and desire to build does not guarantee that the model will be safely/correctly built nor that the operator can safely operate it. I seriously doubt that any of the top TOC flyers build their own aircraft. Andrew Jesky just won the Extreme with a stock QQ102 ARF.

If you wish to build, please do so and have a great time. In the mean time please cut the "better than thou" attitude about ARF flyers.

predator500

My Feedback: (1)

Im a flyer of 15 years of age and so far I have enjoyed flying arf's in the 4 years Ive been flying. I at the current moment wish that I could build this 310Q kit I have sitting in the attic, but my lack of kit building (more like I have never built a kit before) prevents this. I do however, put together ARF kits very well. I ALWAYS take some CA or Epoxy and glue everything that looks to be hotglued together. I always put two triangle blocks behind the firewall and in some cases, replace it completly. I take more time putting my arf's together because I feel by doing this I will become a more proficient kit builder. I really do enjoy ARF's but would rather show up to the flying field with a kitbuilt, hand covered Cap 231 and see three other guys with the same Cap 231 arf looking funny because they have the same airplane. When that day comes for me, I will smile!

Colin C

jsm77777

My Feedback: (4)

I see that the QQ 102 ARF's are having wing failures. Also, Andrew Jeskey won that contest using that plane. These top fliers can really win with most ANY plane. Look what Chip can do with his "inferior" Ultimate biplane. ARF's are fine to get into the air quickly. I would hate to be just an ARF person, because you are so limited in the hobby. If an ARF isn't availble, then there is always the option of building, but most cannot, because their experience is ARF's. Point is is that we are supposed to have fun with this hobby. I do think most people with ARF's will eventually build when they are ready. Scott

Jim_McIntyre

How is it a cop out? I guess you're saying it's unimportant?

Ok ... so having an airplane fail in flight, with spectators (potential victims) present is somehow your safety equivalent of a visual inspection before committing to flight?[sm=confused.gif]

I don't get it....

As for getting over myself ... why do you see my opinion as a personal affrontal? Sounds like you have some of your own issues to confront....

sebo

I'm with you Rogerswin. I'm finishing up Hostetler's Cessna 150. Balancing and adding nose weight. I prefer building to flying. It's a rush to see something, that I created, fly. My next Hostetler plane is the Lancair. I will be modifieing the LS into the new 2 seater with retracts in the wings. I really like building. Have been doing it for 40 years. I have one arf and I can honestly say I like the way it flies. It is an Avistar. Will I buy another one? I don't know. I have quite a few planes in my hanger now and I need to start crashing them or selling them. I don't like to sell them because there in no profit in it. I don't like crashing them because that THUD sound makes me sick. I believe 'building' costs more than arfing.

Jim Flannigan

One thing I have not read here is that flyers have gotten much better since the introduction of high quality and inexpensive ARF's. I have been building and flying for over 25 years (since I was 14) and I see that ARF's keep people in the air and flying on a more regular basis. Nothing is worse than seeing someone crash and you would not see them for 6 months while they built another airplane and had to start all over again rebuilding their flying skills.

I still do enjoy building from plans or a kit but when time is short I have no problem assembling an ARF and flying it. I really don't understand why people criticize anyone for flying an ARF, we all should enjoy the fact that we take the time to go out and fly and are part of a great hobby that benfits all of us in many ways.

No matter how we get into the hobby, it is a wonderful hobby and everyone should look to each others as members of such and not adversaries just because their airplane was built in China and not in small town USA.

Just my 2 cents worth.

rmh

Absolutely true- The advent of computer training programs and really GOOD arf designs can make a newbie into a really good flyer in months, not years.
Add in the Foamies - these arfs allow anyone to practice really complex , down low, up close stuf with impunity. the cost of repair and time down are a tiny fraction of the models available 10 years ago.
I really get irritated at some "experts in full scale aircraft design and aeronautical theory" who poo poo the results obtainable now using these super light ,high powered AIRCRAFT.
If it ain't in their old textbook - it ain't real.
ARFS are not killing the hobby -the are widening the availability of models for people who really enjoy flying .

Darrinc

My Feedback: (5)

I ended up getting into Arf's because I could not find the plans to build what I want. I would love to get my hands on plans for a 105" Cap232 or Yak 54. I have no AutoCAD, nor a plotter to print them out, nor the time to free hand every aspect. And if I blew up someone elses plans I would have to make the plugs and molds for the cowlings and such. I guess I'm just getting lazy.

I have found a new thing after years of building though, it is how to lighten something that is already built. I've gotten quite good at it and I can shed pounds off of these 35% planes. So when people walk up and look at my planes, I do have a huge feeling of pride.

Example, my 2.6m Yak typically weights 27lbs, mine comes in at 21.6lbs and I have been flying it that way for 2 years. It took about 60 days to get it together and ready for it's maiden. It was well worth it to me.

So I guess my point is that we all go into this hobby with what we can do as far as skill, time and finances. But nothing is written in stone and we will evolve in ourselves and our hobbies at what rate life allows and everyones motovations and desires will be different.

Just be glad we live someplace that we can go fly.

Darrinc

My Feedback: (5)

Jut a FWI on my life. I started building models from kits, them moved on to plans, then on to my own designs. The realization that bigger flies better got me into composites because I could afford the big planes, but not the big motors, so I had to build the big planes light. This background, combined with a layoff and a divorce, allowed me to reinvent myself and ended up working on defence contract jobs, which lead to working at Scaled Composites when they did their space flights, which got me into a position to fly UAV's over in Iraq. (and I got kicked out of RC Clubs because my thinking was unsound and my methods where unproven)

Who knows what tomorrow might bring, so don't put down a guy because he can't do this today, or that tomorrow. For the following week he may grow beyond belief.

Crusty

Darrin, brilliant stuff being done at scaled, d'you happen to know Groucho?

Jim_McIntyre

I don't see this.

I have seen people reacting personally when someone criticises ARFs, I just don't understand why it's taken so personally.

Yeah I don't like ARfs, that doesn't mean I don't like people who fly them. I don't like makeup either but, I sure like some who wear it.

I have some difficulty attributing better flying to the availability of ARFs. I've seen flying quality improve over the many years as larger , more powerful, more reliable engines become available, better radios etc. I'm sure there's some merit to mean time between repairs, and willingness to risk more (as there's less sweat equity involved) but, the best flyers I've witnessed have some inanate skill, a desire to improve (not just boring holes in the sky) and a life situation that allows them more time at the field.

rmh

Here is my favorite ARF

Jim_McIntyre

Cute!

Here's mine.

Balsa Master

no... we still exist... i refuse to buy a kit that some one else built... (mostly because of the inferior building materials and practices as well as the fun i get outa building it :-D)

and this is probably going to sound a little mean... but if after building your hand ful of kits... you should be able to produce a modle that is more structuraly sound than any ARF... i pulled one appart 1 time and total i think theres 1/2 oz of glue on the whole plane... (that and the arf weighs 3X as much as what i build cuz everything on them is plastic or ply.... so annoying)

im sorry... but that scares me... i have never ever ever seen a well built ARF... i stop by the LHS just to look around or to buy some wood or glue and i stop by the arf's to take a look.... half of them arent even solidly built and the other half have obvious structural failure points.. triangles are good what? no way!


were not getting on the arf flyers its the planes... i compleatly understand time constraints... i work 60 hours a week... beleive me i understand... but i would still rather know that the thing i am flying will perform the the stringent standards i have set for my planes, both in safty and in performance...

little more on my 1 arf that i have never flown... i pulled the covering off (beleive it or not... econocote is sturdier than this stuff was...) and went through and added wood everywhere... there were no triangle stock on the back of the firewall... the firewall was of inferior grade ply and lacked proper thickness to mount a .60 engine to. the fus formers ran only half way up the side of the model and were connected to one and other by a series of thin stringers... the designe CRIED burn me...

rmh

Viewpoints certainly are varied.
In looking at the current market - I will say that the really good improvements in ARF models -is not in the smaller models -such as glo 1.20 to smaller ones .
Thes are typically very high wingloadings-mainly to keep them together for the typical buyer who simply is not an accomplished flyer.
The common complaint I see is that they easily shed landing gear - this tells the story.
The really good 3D machines?
Typical complaint is flutter -again tells the story -
The customer wants a plane that will do something they are not ready for.
The manufacturer is caught in the middle .
Comments abound about "beef up the gear" and -"beef up the firewalls"---and they just get heavier -fly worse and crash harder.
The problem is typically found to be from what the end user has done.

Arthur K

Here is my 2 cents worth I love to build and I build War birds and Aerobats lots of pepole say it's not worth building them specialy the time it takes to put them in the air only to crash them for some reason or another Building is more expensive then buying an ARF and there are some incredible arf's today But this is what you will get out of building your own


A- a stronger more durable model
B- a level of detail only caped by your ability not economics
C- Braging writes
and most Important of all If you build it you can fix it in case of a nasty crash
here is an example of my 42% Aerotech Edge
it crashed at a fun fly in woodstock Ontario and the entire front half of the fues was crunched
within 4 nights I rebuild her with new formers and side sheeting rebuild the right wing and the right elevator
put it all back together and she even came out a pound lighter by making some modification to the gear monting
and now it flyies like a dream check it out http://media.putfile.com/red-bull-small
So building to me is more then worth the time and it's a shame more people don't
Ps if you look at the pics below the Red bull edge in the botom row is after the rebuilt

Jim_McIntyre

You have some points but, I disagree that the issues are limited to the set of flyers who fly beyond their skills or comprehension of what the aircraft was designed for.

I've seen too many wings shed and engines come off. The reason? Not because the aircraft was being abused but, because of poor construction and materials.
You simply can't escape physics, here are some post-mortems I've personally observed in the last couple years;
- balsa stringers and sheeting are not enough to restrain any large bore engine.
- a dried out chunk of Luan ply is not strong enough to support an 80" wing under a 10G load from a 12lb model
- a fin composed of light balsa (almost no visible grain) supported by the sharp edge of a plastic turtledeck will not survive flutter
- some glue securing the pylon of that seaplane would have been a great idea....[X(]
- cheap plastic extruded control horns do not hold up to regular use

On that last thought, I was very annoyed at the quality of hardware I observed, it was downright unsafe. I have since taken more notice of the ARFs I see at the field. I notice very few (that return for another session of flying) use the supplied hardware. The aircraft I found in the garbage bin almost invariably have what appears to be stock (cr#p) hardware. Is there some correlation? How many of you ARF buffs use the supplied hardware? If my guess is right, I wonder why they (manufacturers) bother supplying it? Marketing hype related to the completeness of the package I assume? If you know the supplied hardware is junk, what do you expect of the rest of the construction?[sm=confused.gif]