twinman

My Feedback: (2)

As it is warm in Houston, and I am blessed with three manufacturers here in town, and I am on vacation.....Life is good for the RC guy here.
Got a call last week from Ceder Hobbies http://www.cedarhobbies.com/ about a prototype twin engine arf. Neil over there wanted to know if I would be interested to try out a prototype twin engine arf for the US market....Uh.....ok........and they are supplying the engines, plane, glue, ect!!! UH.....let me see......Uh Ok. Bring it here! ( Did not want to seem too excited)
The plane is a converted Ugly Stick type plane in 40 size, but in ARF form.
The wings were lengthened to 65.5" to reduce wing loading. Nacelles, with 230 cc ( Whatever that is) fuel tanks, installed on the strenthened wings. Note, the nacelles are already glued and dowel onto the wings. Full shear webbing is installed on the wing halves.
There were issues ( there always are) with servo locations for the engine throttles, blind nuts and other small issures, but I figured it out. Total time from box to flight ready 16 hours....on a twin!! If not for my changing on the servo layout for the engines, it could have flown in 12 hours.
Cedar suppiled ASP 45's with the kit. I thought,,,WOW. I installed my favorite 12x4 ASP props for maximum thrust and off to the field. I did not do fancy programming for the initial flight..Working on that now..Tee Hee. Just four channels and Y connectors. It also has separate servos for the two ailerons.
Specifications. Wing Span..65.5 inches. Fuse length. 47". Engine centerline. 15.5" Wing cord..12.375" Ready to fly weight..6# 12 oz..dry.
Contact Cedar Hobbies at above for price and availability.
Twinman
PS.......Uh what do you mean you want it back?...What plane!!!

twinman

My Feedback: (2)

Fired up the ASP's and tuned them for rich running. Hey, they only had three minutes running time!!
Checked vertical test, Ok,,,,let's go..Wing is 10-15 MPH...hey this has symetrical wings......not my plane,,let's go!!
Full power take off. Can you say OVER POWERED!! Never mind what I warn people about..I went straight up rolling and rolled out at the usual four mistakes high. Roll rate approx 60-80 rpm. Might need larger ailerons. Discussed this point with Neil at Cedar Hobbies.
OH,,,perhaps I should trim the plane out..Not my plane. Four clicks on Ailerons and it flew level. Unilimited vertical...UH why do I not have the harmonic??? OH RATS.......one engine has a serious case of quiet in 10-15 mph wind...Hey,,no big deal?? Sluggish and needs some rudder, but completely controllable. Powered up on the live engine to make the field and down..Heart is slamming in chest. Neato!!
What plane?...You want it back.....uh need to make modifications on it.......then you can have it back....note, my e-mail, phone number and address have all changed......Tee Hee.
Twinman

twinman

My Feedback: (2)

Yes, we did the vertical test and proof that I did land it in one piece...with one engine on the maiden flight.
Twinman
PS Told Neil that the Pink or Light purple color has to go. Needs red. I did like that the white strip with the German cross on it, is only on the top. Made it easier to see in the air.
Yes William. I know you do not like the nose cone,,,,,,,,,but get this...it glues on. Put anything you like!! The other reason, I guess the nose is so short is for close engine spacing. Yes, I used 12" props so smaller diameter would allow a longer nose.
By the way, that is Spin Man getting drowned by the slobbering rich engines. Thanks for the help SPIN MAN!!
Have fun.
Twinman
PS Will be 80 here in Houston tomorrow. See you at the field.

Robby

My Feedback: (18)

So Twinman,,
Yes I read where it says to call creekhobbies, but,, would you mind
sharing estimated availability and pricing..

Does it only come as a tail dragger..... ?

Rbby

--------

twinman

My Feedback: (2)

Robby
Ugly Sticks, that I am aware of, only came in tail dragger. Would I suggest tricycle gear for a first twin? You bet.
Look at the enclosed picture prior to me gluing in the nose piece. You can see that the inside of the nose area is easily accessable to add a nose gear. The main gear is attached to a hardwood crossmember in the fuse. Other than adding another hardwood mount area in under the servo tray, I see not difficulty to make this a tricycle plane.
I have put in a call to Niel at Cedar Hobbies over price and availability. He is in contact with the factory tonight. Will keep you posted.
Will keep you posted.
Twinman

Baldeagle

My Feedback: (7)

And I thought Christmas was last week. That Twin Ugly brings back some memories. Rich

BillS

Is the tank to spray bar height suitable for rotating the engines 90 degrees? Mufflers pointed up looks sort of like a design kluge. Maybe a higher CG was needed.

Bill

twinman

My Feedback: (2)

BillS
The tank is centered on the engine centerline. The choice to mount upright was mine for ease of access. I am including a picture of the tank location. You do need to install the stopper after installation of the tank.
OK, it flew today on a simple four channels...Now working on mix from the rudder to the engines and elevator to the ailerons. Not my plane, let's see what it can do!!
Twinman

Terror Dactyl

I realize that I run the risk of getting my handle changed to Terror Tactile since I crashed my big bird profile and helped test the crash worthiness of this TUS, but that being said (before the others did).

I had a chance to fly this bird and it took off well and the elevator responce was good. once in the air I tried a series of loops and continued to pull the throttle back I got to about 1/4 throttle and the top of the loop was more a fall out but with no snap.

I did try inverted flight and there was only a hint of down elevator needed to hold level inverted flight.

I then tried knife edge and at half throttle it was still slowly coming down so a second attempt was tried at full throttle. I will interject here that I have been flying a highly aerobatic large extra 300l and had the TUS at a very large optical picture (spell that LOW). When I when into the knife edge I went quickly to full rudder and found that at high speed, no mixing to help at all, that there was rudder coupling and as that happened I tried to compensate and went to hard the other way causing a quick roll and again as I was low it ended upside down and heading for the ground. BTW it was 10MPH wind gusting to about 20 I think, but the testing still went on and it is a good windy day plane, I chopped the throttle and righted the plane before it hit pretty hard on the grass.

The result of this was the gear had to be reinstalled (only the screws were pulled out and the fuse bottom was still very much intact) and some more CA was to be applied to the joint on one side of the horizsontal stab.

I will say that as the three of us that walked to the bird we expected to see a mess and were pleasantly surprise to see only very minor damage. I can say that this is a very good twin trainer.

I understand that there was also some engine out testing conducted on the first flight as well, with great results.

Terror Dactyl

BTW guys Niel has been asking us what should be the next try for a multi. You might just want to let him know and the plane with the most votes (if you will) might just be the next thing to come out.

BillS

My friend recently broke his bashed sixty twin and needs a repair or replacement. He would probably rather purchase an ARF than repair the damage.

I have been looking for a place to put ST 90,s for some time and have also purchased two gas engines some months ago for a twin or triple of some sort.

Most if not all who become interested in twins have considerable single engine experience. Generally with single experience one has a number of 40’s and 60’s on the shelf. It seems difficult to gain experience without destroying a few airplanes and most engines survive the crash.

From a marketing perspective it would seem logical that 60’s would also be good size for a multi.

Personal preference is engine spacing that would accommodate a gyroscope in the center. For the lack of a better term the gyroscope would be called a center engine. It is safer with the gyroscope.

Thanks for asking.

Bill

rrudytoo

My Feedback: (27)

From what I've read, this is a very nice handling airplane but I've gotta tell you, it is just too ugly! I've owned a number of Sticks in my day but THIS one is Butt Ugly! Fugly comes to mind.

Cedar may sell some of these but I'm sure they'd sell a lot more if it looked better. Make that a LOT better. Sorry, but that's just my opinion.

Al

twinman

My Feedback: (2)

Wow. BillS...Ok the original area for the firewall is still in this model....Can you say .15?
Might want to extend the nose a bit for safe starting.
Twinman

twinman

My Feedback: (2)

rrudytoo
Suggestions? It is to be a quick and cheap route to .40 size twins, but Neil would probably listen to suggestions.
Twinman

Robby

My Feedback: (18)

The idea of a .60 / .90 size twin is a GREAT idea...

Neil should look into doing this before someone else does..


Robby

----------------------

Ed_Moorman

My Feedback: (1)

I thought Sticks were supposed to be Ugly. The original name was "Ugly Stick," from the expression, "It got hit with an ugly stick," that was used in the late 1960s-early 70's.

Does anyone know of the release date and the price? Looks like a fly-every-weekend twin to mess around with.

I understand that .46 size planes sell a lot more than .61 size planes. And there's not that big of a demand for twins, anyway, compared to other type planes.

William Robison

My Feedback: (3)

Ed: (and others)

I've been told to expect one in late January or up to mid-February.

Like I need another twin.

Bill.

BillS

Post #5 created a review of all other pictures closely for engine spacing. Safe operation didn’t appear to be possible.

From a marketing point of view the airplane would be more versatile if the nacelles could be user mounted further out. Yes close is good for stability but … Also it appears that the tank is completely in front of the leading edge, without much space for foam and without space for larger tanks. Fuel foaming is the enemy to every twin. You already know that.

Generally I think the airplane will be well received and it’s getting the exposure it deserves.

A similar 60 Stick would be down and dirty and fly with two 40’s, 45’s or 51’s. Some would use 60’s and a few wild men (with the disease) would use 90’s. Food for thought. Keep up the good work.

Bill

twinman

My Feedback: (2)

Bills
You asked for it, you got it.
Here is a triple Stick 60...yes, you asked for it..two ST 90's and OS 15 for taxiing back to the pits.
Here is also a Twin Star triple...Wings did not hold up well and too much wing loading.
I went back and measured the prop clearance from the fuse, for those who want to extend the fuse. With 12" that I am using, the props only clear by 1/8". Now scale that down for 11" or 10", which would be more normal for this size plane. Hey, don't yell at me to over power it...Those are Cedar Hobbies Engines!!! and Plane. Sure I will fly it!!
Tee Hee.
Twinman
PS The 230 cc tanks,( Whatever that is) had 1/4" all around them, except the front and back. The nacelles are dowelled into the wing going in approx 6", so yes, adding fuel capacity will be difficult. Have not tried to see how long these engines will run at full power, but flying it was at 1/3 throttle.

rrudytoo

My Feedback: (27)

twinman,

I came off way too strong on this plane's, uh, looks. Yes, I know it's based on an Ugly Stick but this is the redheaded stepchild of an Ugly Stick. Okay, enough of that. Suggestion? Oh, my yes! There are a bunch of Kaos-type planes around that could be converted into twins. Also, I recall a few years back someone did an article in RCM converting a Great Planes Super Sportster into a twin. One of my then-club members made one and it was a beauty! Granted, Sportsters aren't as common as they used to be but that's the direction I'd go with. But, hey. That's just me.

Al

William Robison

My Feedback: (3)

Rudy:

Seems to me there was even a packaged kit for converting the Super Sportster into a twin.

Bill.

twinman

My Feedback: (2)

rrudytoo
That is what is good about a manufacturer who at least listens. I am making sure that Cedar Hobbies is watching the comments.
What he has in mind, I think, is as Bills noted. It is simple and Hopefully cheap, quick way into twins. Unlike the Twinstar, which yes, does look much more like at plane, this thing is full aerobatic. While I did fly it with one engine, it still required you to concentrate, but without the dangerous, Marked Expensive, snap roll problems.
Cedar is listening to what you want next....no one else seems to other than Hobbico to bring back the twin star.
Tell you what. Last weekend it flew per the distributors request. Built and flown simple with only four channels.
Now, I want to see what this thing can do. Just finished programming it...MY WAY.
Each engine on separate channels and five step tuning for matching carb openings. Each aileron is now on separate channels.
Engines now mixed to the rudder. At full rudder deflection and above 50% throttle opening, the engine thrust will react to the rudder commands. The engine on the inside of the turn will go to 1/3 throttle. Let's try knife edge this time!!
Oh, yes, the ailerons via another mix and switch are now mixed to the elevator. Up elevator and down both ailerons.
Got to go to work tomorrow, but look out Saturday.
Will keep you posted.
Twinman
PS ( Let's see,,,flat spin,,upright,,both in and full throttle..inverted..both out....square loops...aileraotr mix ON....Knife edge..roll 90 degrees, full rudder with differential engine thrust) )Got to hide from Cedar Hobbies for one more week)

552transco

My Feedback: (3)

HI Gents, this looks a lot like a plane that was shown here in RCU a while back. It was called the Twin-Stick. Is there any relation?

Robby

My Feedback: (18)

Well,, the above plane is owned by a guy in Illinois..
That particular pic was how it looked when built the
first time..
GP BigStick 60 size powered by two OS .46 FX..
Since that pic, has had a major re-do done to it..
Many of the improvements don't really show in a
pic as better servos, better control rods, detailing,
and other repairs / mods ...

Here are a couple pics of it now..

The knife edge shot is crappy as I pulled it from the
maiden video...

Rbby

------------

rrudytoo

My Feedback: (27)

Now, there you go! The picture in 552transco's post is a much better looking airplane! A nicely shaped nose on the fuselage and some "respectable" colors and you've got a winner! I'd buy one of these in a heartbeat! I'm sure the fences shown in Robby's post work very well but I prefer the Stick's standard wingtips.

Is Cedar Hobbies planning on offering the complete plane in kit or ARF / ARC form or just a conversion kit? I'm now thinking of getting one of these. This looks like more fun than a litter of puppies..............if that's possible.

Al