PDA

View Full Version : Flying Styro


eparks11
03-23-2006, 02:16 AM
I've seen photos Flying Styro kits around online and I've gotten the impression they are high quality kits. Are they really better then E-Flights P47 kit for example? The problem I have with the E-flight P47 is that it looks like its made out of the same old styro foam that the $20 free flight foam planes I had in the 80's were made of. It kind of kills the scale look when I see pieces of styro foam chipping off and circular shaped imprints from the mold every few inches.

Twmaster
03-23-2006, 04:44 AM
The FSK models look great. Much detail. Although they require quite a bit of work to get assembled. The Alfa kits are soooo much easier to work with and look great.

Bill G
03-23-2006, 05:03 AM
The FSK models look great. Much detail. Although they require quite a bit of work to get assembled. The Alfa kits are soooo much easier to work with and look great.

Yeah, I couldn't design a more cumbersome servo layout than the FSK FW-190 wing panel servo mounting design, even if I tried.

CorsairJock
03-23-2006, 09:20 PM
I wouldn't rate one as being better than the other, they are really in different leagues.
Generally speaking, the Flying Styro kits are:

1) Much smaller. I have the Corsair and it spans about 25". I have been able to pack it into an airline suitcase and take it with me.

2) NOT originally designed for R/C, and thus require some fabrication skills.

By comparisn, the E-Flight P-47:

1) Is bigger (40" span)

2) Designed for R/C, thus is an easier build.

BOTH are highly detailed, great looking and great flying.

Twmaster
03-23-2006, 10:29 PM
I wouldn't rate one as being better than the other, they are really in different leagues.
Generally speaking, the Flying Styro kits are:

1) Much smaller. I have the Corsair and it spans about 25". I have been able to pack it into an airline suitcase and take it with me.

2) NOT originally designed for R/C, and thus require some fabrication skills.

By comparisn, the E-Flight P-47:

1) Is bigger (40" span)

2) Designed for R/C, thus is an easier build.

BOTH are highly detailed, great looking and great flying.

Jock,

Most of the newer FSK kits are intended as RC and have about 36" spans. The kit you have was one of those original FSK kits from years ago. The newer kits are magnificent compared to that older Corsair.

Bill G
04-16-2006, 03:24 PM
I may just have to make the FSK JU87 Stuka happen. HL dropped the price $10. Not a big discount, but I want it.

flypaper 2
04-17-2006, 12:58 AM
Corsair Jock:
If you don't mind my asking, what's the power system in your Hangar 9 Corsair. I have an unfinished 60 size Topflite job that I want to electrify.

omeYga
05-03-2006, 10:20 PM
One important note about the HL planes. Where do you get parts? I bought one and they don't stock any parts for hardly any of their planes.

CorsairJock
05-17-2006, 01:11 PM
Corsair Jock:
If you don't mind my asking, what's the power system in your Hangar 9 Corsair. I have an unfinished 60 size Topflite job that I want to electrify.
AXI 4130/16, 14x8 prop, Jeti 40 Opto (no BEC), 6S 4400 Li-Po. Static draw is about 27 amps, flight duration is over 12 minutes per charge (usually 2 x 6 minute flights).
For the record: I think most people are pushing these motors well beyond their max effiency ranges, to obtain slightly better performance at the expense of reduced battery life. I think these motors should be set up to pull no more than 40 amps static, with about 35 amps static being the ideal range. Most others seem to disagree tho.

For more details on mine (and other H9 Corsairs), go here:
http://www.wattflyer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2685

flypaper 2
05-17-2006, 11:24 PM
Great stuff Corsair Jock. Was thinking of trying the Himax 5018 up front.