PDA

View Full Version : Another WWI fighter from Maxford


Kmot
12-05-2008, 06:08 AM
http://www.maxfordusa.com/albatrosd-iiiep40arf.aspx

Looks nice, no? :$

http://www.maxfordusa.com/images/products/detail/DSCF2466.JPG

rhino
12-05-2008, 06:45 AM
Yip, pretty good looking.

degreen60
12-05-2008, 12:42 PM
I like that yellow tail. I keep seeing these Albatros show up and it make me want to use my Kavan foam fuselage and make a set of built up wings with ailerons for it. Well maybe when I get both the DVII and the DRI finished.

dai phan
12-05-2008, 03:00 PM
OMG .... PERFECT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Looks like I better get my flying skills up for these birds. I hope they don't use pull pull cables as these get much more complicated than they should be. DP

barmonkey
12-05-2008, 03:28 PM
Looks like a push/pull setup for the rudder and elevator.

barmonkey
12-05-2008, 03:32 PM
Don't waste your time watching the video on their web-site....hardly get to see the plane...98% clouds only in the frame.

dai phan
12-05-2008, 03:32 PM
Hi

I just ordered the plane / motor and the shipping and handling to South Carolina is almost 19 bucks. Is that the norm as I thought it is kind of steep?:<: I have ordered similiar size from TH and the S/H is about 8 bucks. Any comments? DP

floss
12-05-2008, 07:32 PM
Looks impressive, another red german WW1 plane but at least its based on a real colour scheme. Would the actual kits engine have all that detail, valve springs etc?

The few seconds in the vid where he drops the airspeed looks promising.

Steve

dai phan
12-17-2008, 03:28 PM
Hi all,

My plane was shipped yesterday and I will recieve it next week. I will do a detailed review after the year. Anyone is interested? Dai

7car7
12-17-2008, 04:13 PM
Yep, love to see how this one progresses.

Kmot
12-18-2008, 07:04 PM
Hi all,

Anyone is interested? Dai
By all means, do post a review and build thread! :)

FlyingMonkey
12-18-2008, 07:51 PM
Hi all,

My plane was shipped yesterday and I will recieve it next week. I will do a detailed review after the year. Anyone is interested? Dai

I hate you, but in a good way...

:D


Make sure you post a link here to the build thread when you get it started. I'll be looking for it.

dai phan
12-19-2008, 01:39 PM
Hi all,

I will do a complete detailed analysis of the plane from the initial conception to the first and final flight firery crash (my dumb thumb) in front of terrified onlookers. DP

Kmot
12-20-2008, 03:13 AM
LOL... :p

Better to think positive. ;)

dai phan
12-26-2008, 02:20 PM
Greetings to all,

I recieved the plane two days ago and I did a quick preview before I had to fly out of town. I will post detailed pictures when I get back so keep your eyes peeled. These are my initial impressions:

1. The airframe is light. It reminds me of Pat Tritle designs and appeared to be well engineered.

2. Workmanship is first class. The seperation line between the two colors are so sharp that it appeared to be cut by machine.

3. Lots of details built in. The engine is a work of art with rocker arms and spring valves. I am very very impressed at FUNCTIONAL main wheel assembly and tail skid.

4. The machine guns have perforated barrels as they should be but the plastic is way to thin and was distorted. They should be replaced with all wood or with more rigid material. The modeler can easily make these barrels out of printed paper for better details.

5. I like the detailed windshield. Very nice touch.

6. All riggings have been built in and only require connections.

7. The fuse has sheeting on the top deck but stringers below. I prefer all sheeting since it has the "saddled look" with the way it is. I do not know if this will bother any pure scale buff. I may end up sheeting the whole thing.

Overall, it is a large airplane and is light for its size. The fuse is much bigger than the GP Fokker DVII and with lots of details pack in. I must give credit to Green Models RC as they give the consumers an airplane that has so much details for what it costs. I can't help but to think how much work went into this by the time it reached my hands ( perfect example is the 38" Jenny that has so much details to be in such a small package). I think giants like GP should look at these examples and do the same thing to their lines of WWI birds without making the price out of reach for the average flyers. Overall, I am very impressed of what I have seen. DP

floss
12-27-2008, 12:35 AM
DP

Thanks for the report, looking forward to the pics and build.

Steve

Bub Steve
12-27-2008, 12:41 AM
Looks impressive, another red german WW1 plane but at least its based on a real colour scheme. Would the actual kits engine have all that detail, valve springs etc?

The few seconds in the vid where he drops the airspeed looks promising.

Steve
Wow she's something else for detail, bub, steve
http://www.maxfordusa.com/images/products/detail/DSCF2455.JPG

dbcisco
12-27-2008, 03:06 AM
Dang! That is some fine detail on the motor! Worth the $$$

Kmot
01-12-2009, 10:49 PM
I had an opportunity to see this model up close at the AMA Expo this past Sunday. WOW! What a fantastic looking plane it is, even in person! It's a must have! (someday, lol)

Kmot
01-17-2009, 05:11 AM
DP: Are you back yet? Let's see your build thread! :)

floss
01-19-2009, 07:34 AM
A guy in RC Groups is giving a heads up on the Maxford DIII to strengthen the firewall with a bit of extra gluing after his decided to part company with the plane 60 ft up on its maiden.

Yep, looking forward to that build thread too.:D

Steve

7car7
01-19-2009, 05:25 PM
A guy in RC Groups is giving a heads up on the Maxford DIII to strengthen the firewall with a bit of extra gluing after his decided to part company with the plane 60 ft up on its maiden.

Yep, looking forward to that build thread too.:D

Steve

I witnessed that event first hand last Saturday morning. It was amazing. Was my first time flying with this group of guys. (1/2 hour drive). They have a guy that does all the maiden flights, he's a VERY good pilot. Saw 2 maidens by him that day.

The Albatros took off like a rocket, circled left, and then I heard this strange noise. The noise got louder and more furious, and then POW, the front end was raining pieces of airplane. I was so impressed with how he got that plane down in one piece. It really seemed to be a floater. Engine dangling down, nose all torn apart, but it just floated down nice.

The front end looks like it exploded - PLEASE have a close look at yours before flying.

Kmot
01-19-2009, 05:35 PM
Yikes!! :<::eek::red:::o????

7car7
01-19-2009, 05:46 PM
Here's a link to the post...

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11369240&postcount=91

7car7
01-26-2009, 04:17 PM
The plane I saw fall appart is now flying again. It did amazingly well. Looked very majestic in the air, and had no issues at all.

I have a couple small complaints about some details. The rigging is wrong, and could easily be changed. Also, like all these ARF's, the shiny finish needs to go. I think if I had one I'd put a more scale working landing gear on. These are all pretty minor issues, and easily overcome. All in all, it's a very pretty plane that will take well to some scale details, and is certainly worth doing them to.

wilmracer
01-26-2009, 05:30 PM
whats with the Anakin Skywalker "flyboy" pilot? They are actually selling it?!?!?!

floss
01-28-2009, 11:12 PM
I notice that the CG on this DIII is 3.0-3,3/4 inches back from the top wing leading edge. Obviously right as the manufacturer states it but it seems way back considering the fact that the WS is 40 inches. It must be half of the wing chord?

Steve

Kmot
01-29-2009, 04:00 AM
To find the basic CG of any aircraft, the formula is 25% of MAC (Mean Aerodynamic Chord).

http://www.scaleaero.com/mac_page.htm

casor
02-28-2009, 09:34 PM
Look for my review in the Spring issue of Park Pilot - overall a very nice, easy to assemble model and it flies great. Best flown on a day with low wind and use the 3.0" upper wing balance point. Flew it on a HiMax 2812-0850 with 10x4.7 prop which generates 149watts and a 2100 FMA battery. Below the 166 watts in the instructions but the model flew well with this set up.

Rob Caso

Kmot
03-01-2009, 07:35 AM
That's a great photo!

IndyJones
03-02-2009, 02:27 AM
:{ I just don't like seeing "ribs" on an Alby fuse...

casor
03-02-2009, 02:31 AM
I agree, it would be nicer to have it closer to the prototype but probably would weigh (and cost) alot more. I think it's a deal for well under $150

dai phan
03-03-2009, 02:54 PM
Hi all,

I wish they would have used the foam fuse because the ribs just look AWFUL ! That's one reason why I have not build it yet. DP????

dai phan
03-03-2009, 02:56 PM
Look for my review in the Spring issue of Park Pilot - overall a very nice, easy to assemble model and it flies great. Best flown on a day with low wind and use the 3.0" upper wing balance point. Flew it on a HiMax 2812-0850 with 10x4.7 prop which generates 149watts and a 2100 FMA battery. Below the 166 watts in the instructions but the model flew well with this set up.

Rob Caso

For someone who can fly the PZ Trojan, can I handle this plane? DP

dogsheep
03-03-2009, 03:33 PM
Apples to oranges, in my opinion.

WW I designs are most stable when flown slowly, with good thrust.

Unless you are an "advanced intermediate" pilot, I recommend against any WW I "scale" design.

degreen60
03-03-2009, 03:40 PM
Hi all,

I wish they would have used the foam fuse because the ribs just look AWFUL ! That's one reason why I have not build it yet. DP????

Build the fuselage then use foam to fill the open spaces and sand to shape. I do not like the looks of a build up covered fuselage for the WW1 planes that had plywood fuselage either.

degreen60
03-03-2009, 03:45 PM
Apples to oranges, in my opinion.

WW I designs are most stable when flown slowly, with good thrust.

Unless you are an "advanced intermediate" pilot, I recommend against any WW I "scale" design.

Some of the WW1 planes make very stable planes. I used a foam Sopwith Triplane as my second plane. Was almost as easy to fly as my trainer.

dogsheep
03-03-2009, 04:12 PM
Most are "stable," but require flying skills (landing skills!) far different from what he appears to have at present-my opinion.

casor
03-03-2009, 05:19 PM
I found the Maxford Albatros to have "trainer like" flight characteristics the only difference being that with all that "stuff" hanging off the aircraft it has to be landed under power - you cannot just cut the throttle and expect it to coast in. So, you have to make sure you have enough juice left for a few missed approaches. With an 11 oz WL, it is very easy to fly but you have to watch the wind. Interestingly, I flew the model a few times for only 5-6 mins and only used 20% of the 2100 3s pack which is proof enough that the model needs little power to stay up.

Being a scale purist, I agree with all the fuselage comments and the model could stand the weight of a "redo" on the fuselage skin. I would think that you would have to add a couple oz (or more) of nose weight to balance the model if you did this, but it could take it and there is room for a more powerful motor - I would say that 200 watts would be about right in such a case.

I feel that this model could be used as a trainer or maybe a "second" model and, with the rudder and adding larger throws, could keep an experience pilot interested. Again, this model is tough to beat for less than $150
Rob

Kmot
03-03-2009, 05:23 PM
Hi all,

I wish they would have used the foam fuse because the ribs just look AWFUL ! That's one reason why I have not build it yet. DP????
Fussy, fussy, fussy! :p>

degreen60
03-03-2009, 10:27 PM
For someone who can fly the PZ Trojan, can I handle this plane? DP

I found this: "ParkZone’s T-28 Trojan is a powerful, high performance aircraft. The Trojan is perfect for the experienced pilot." Is this the PZ Trojan you are flying?

casor
03-03-2009, 10:48 PM
I found this: "ParkZone’s T-28 Trojan is a powerful, high performance aircraft. The Trojan is perfect for the experienced pilot." Is this the PZ Trojan you are flying?

I would say "yes" as the T-28 is heavier and faster than the Albatros. Just make sure you have at least 150 watts to fly it.
Rob

casor
03-03-2009, 10:50 PM
For someone who can fly the PZ Trojan, can I handle this plane? DP

See my resp's above....I don't know the PZ Trojan but the Albatros is a cat
Rob

They "edited" me - the Albatros is easy to fly....

BEAR-AvHistory
05-16-2009, 06:21 PM
What is the real world best choice for a motor & has the firewall issue be fixed?

casor
05-16-2009, 10:32 PM
See above for the motor. I am not sure what "firewall issue" you are referring to.

BEAR-AvHistory
05-16-2009, 10:36 PM
Early versions had firewall failures where they pulled out of he plane in flight.

casor
05-16-2009, 11:01 PM
Holy----! I will double check mine. I have only a 1/2 dozen flts on it and it seems OK. I would definitely use the motor setup above. Perfect for this model.

BEAR-AvHistory
05-30-2009, 10:35 AM
Just received mine today. Its the Version 2 with improved struts, tail skid, radiator & spinner. I have no idea if the firewall has been strengthened.

The instructions have an addendum that revises the servo & motor requirements along with a few other assembly steps.

They now request 2XSG50 & 2XSG90 servos in place of the original 4XSG90. The motor requirements are now 165 watts 1,300 RPM/V from 166 watts 1,200 RPM/V.

I am new to E-planes & still learning about the motors, ESC etc.

That being said I have an AR-6100 receiver, 3X2200mah lipo's, 25 amp ESC, 260 watt 1,350 RPM/V motor & SF-9X6 props with no current home. Can this gear be used successfully in the Albatross or should I buy new stuff?

casor
05-30-2009, 05:20 PM
Bear - I would focus on the amount of wattage your equipment will generate. Mine has 149 watts so that or more will be fine. A 9x6 sounds a little small as this is a "thrust" model so you may want a 10x5. I also recommend using the largest battery you can stuff in the nose as the model needs the nose weight. It can easily handle a few more ounces. You may have to build a battery box to keep the battery from interfering with the motor. My firewall is fine but you may want to check and reglue it if it looks shakey.
Rob

BEAR-AvHistory
05-30-2009, 07:36 PM
Just some thoughts, my next size up Lipo's are 3X3,400 & are quite a bit heavier & physically bigger then the 3X2,200's. Will take a look to see if they fit.

I was not sure if the 260/1350 was a good thing or a bad thing when compared to the recommend installation.

Finally, what is the difference between the 9/6 prop & a 10/5 (some of which I have for a different plane) in regard to this plane & proposed power pack.

So far I have only done RTF or P&P which were packaged with prop, motor,ESC & battery. This will be my first 'ala carte effort powering an E-plane & am not really up on how the different parts relate to each other.

Thanks for all your help.

casor
05-31-2009, 02:58 AM
Bear - again I would focus on wattage - you should hook your set up to a watt meter and see what each prop will yield in terms of wattage. A 9x6 will spin faster and give you more top speed but a 10x5 will give you more thrust and less top speed since it will spin slower. The 10x5 will also probably pull more watts. You want enough wattage to move the model (70-90 watts per pound) for this model and you also want to get closer to the limit of your ESC and batt in terms of amps. The watt meter will tell you both. Use a large battery not only to handle the wattage but also to give you more nose weight.
Rob

casor
05-31-2009, 03:02 AM
One more thing - I am using a 3s 2100 for the model, forget about 2s.....

BEAR-AvHistory
05-31-2009, 05:31 PM
Bear - again I would focus on wattage - you should hook your set up to a watt meter and see what each prop will yield in terms of wattage. A 9x6 will spin faster and give you more top speed but a 10x5 will give you more thrust and less top speed since it will spin slower. The 10x5 will also probably pull more watts. You want enough wattage to move the model (70-90 watts per pound) for this model and you also want to get closer to the limit of your ESC and batt in terms of amps. The watt meter will tell you both. Use a large battery not only to handle the wattage but also to give you more nose weight.
Rob

Sounds like a plan..I have a "Watt's up" from Hobby City & have just put on some EC3 connectors so its good to go.

Have the motor in the plane with the ESC right behind it mounted sideways across the fuselage. the 2200 will hang off the back of the battery tray so I added some Velcro to the batteries & tray to help out the retaining strap.

Did you put the RX on top of the ESC as is recommended or onto an interior side wall? Was wondering about heat.


BTW the smallest lipo I have is a 3s1,800 so I should be OK on power

casor
06-01-2009, 04:36 AM
Bear - I would not worry about heat too much with this model. The flights are not really that long 8-10 mins and the motor, ESC and the batt are relatively under stressed in this application. You won't be flying the thing full throttle for more than 1/2 of the flight in any case - really not an issue. The Albatross is really a 1/2 throttle airplane.

My ESC is as far fwd in the nose as I could get it on the side of the fuselage and the Rx is opposite with the batt in the center, just aft of the motor. The servos are just behind also on either side of the batt box that I made for the model.
Rob

BEAR-AvHistory
06-01-2009, 03:39 PM
Bear - I would not worry about heat too much with this model. The flights are not really that long 8-10 mins and the motor, ESC and the batt are relatively under stressed in this application. You won't be flying the thing full throttle for more than 1/2 of the flight in any case - really not an issue. The Albatross is really a 1/2 throttle airplane.

My ESC is as far fwd in the nose as I could get it on the side of the fuselage and the Rx is opposite with the batt in the center, just aft of the motor. The servos are just behind also on either side of the batt box that I made for the model.
Rob

OK sounds good...trial fit went fine. Thanks for the input.:)