Hi,
It seems that most of the guys fly Mike's 2548 Zero kit (unless they scratch-build).
Why is his Zero so popular compared to his P-51? I am kind of partial to P-51's, so I am wondering if they fly the same? I may pick one up over the winter.
Also it says on his page that you need ripstop nylon. Aren't guys flying these in colored packing tape?
Thanks.
Hattrick RC Kits
Moderator: hbartel
-
Alex Treneff
- Posts: 941
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:00 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Hey Alex. I've seen a wing covered with Icarex (a polycarbonate coated ripstop) and it is tough. It's as tough as fiberglass, but more flexible, and lighter. You can use Ultracote, or tape, but I don't think it's quite as strong. If you want to try the Icarex, I know where you can get it. Let me know and I'll send you the website info.
I've looked around too, and I gather from what I've read in several posts that the Zero is slightly out of scale. Something about the fuse being too small for the wingspaon, and the wing itself being a little too big in the chord. This gives it a performance edge over other planes.
This is not my opinion, it's what I gathered looking at several threads on here. I don't want to be quoted as saying it's not legal, or not the proper scale, or anything of that sort, because I personally don't know. I've been looking at 2548 and 3696 planes that are comercially available, and reading all the info I can find, so I've picked up a lot of opinions. Like I said, it's not my personal knowledge, but several posts I've read have basically stated that the HT Zero is way ahead in performance against other models being flown.
I've got a fuse cut for a FW-190 legal for 2548. Needs rounding off and wings. As soon as I can find someone that can cut wings to my specs, or I get a system that allows me to cut my own, I'll have a couple of 3696 Zeros, Mustangs, and even a P-38 Lightning. As far as 2548, I've got the FW-190 and a Zero fuses cut.
I've looked around too, and I gather from what I've read in several posts that the Zero is slightly out of scale. Something about the fuse being too small for the wingspaon, and the wing itself being a little too big in the chord. This gives it a performance edge over other planes.
This is not my opinion, it's what I gathered looking at several threads on here. I don't want to be quoted as saying it's not legal, or not the proper scale, or anything of that sort, because I personally don't know. I've been looking at 2548 and 3696 planes that are comercially available, and reading all the info I can find, so I've picked up a lot of opinions. Like I said, it's not my personal knowledge, but several posts I've read have basically stated that the HT Zero is way ahead in performance against other models being flown.
I've got a fuse cut for a FW-190 legal for 2548. Needs rounding off and wings. As soon as I can find someone that can cut wings to my specs, or I get a system that allows me to cut my own, I'll have a couple of 3696 Zeros, Mustangs, and even a P-38 Lightning. As far as 2548, I've got the FW-190 and a Zero fuses cut.
-
Rabbit Leader
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 11:37 pm
Alex, I've had a couple of Hats Zekes, and I find them to be extremely rugged. I don't use ripstop, however, I use a combo of bidi and regular strapping tape on the wings with Ultracoat covering, and bidi on the fuse in critical areas. I also glass the center section, andf the LE ghas a double bidi layer, all applied with 3m77.
I have no experience with his P-51, but I've thought about giving one a try..
Cash
I have no experience with his P-51, but I've thought about giving one a try..
Cash
That sounds like the way to go with me. I'm comfortable working with Ultracoat, or Econo/Towerkote.
On a side note, I found a contact cement at Lowe's called "Non-flammable contact cement(green can)." It's safe for any foam I've tried it on, and really grabs both packing tape and iron-on covering. It's kind of expensive, twice the price of the normal contact cement sitting right beside it, which isn't foam safe, but it does seem to go a long way. But it really works great to prime the foam. A little cleaner than spray adhesive too-cleans up with soap and water, and you don't get overspray all over everything.
On a side note, I found a contact cement at Lowe's called "Non-flammable contact cement(green can)." It's safe for any foam I've tried it on, and really grabs both packing tape and iron-on covering. It's kind of expensive, twice the price of the normal contact cement sitting right beside it, which isn't foam safe, but it does seem to go a long way. But it really works great to prime the foam. A little cleaner than spray adhesive too-cleans up with soap and water, and you don't get overspray all over everything.
Alex I have built two 51s and a zero. Full bidi with paint, My p-51 is extremely agile and flies as well as the zero. Maybe its just me but I prefer the stang.. If you come threw here I will be glad to let you take it home one weekend and give her a flight or ten.
I flew her last weekend just for the fun of it
I flew her last weekend just for the fun of it
The Hat Trick Zero and the Mustang share the same wing. I know nothing about scale fidelity of the kit, never measured a thing. All i know is scale fidelity has nothing to do with flying attributes, but if the 'stang and the zero have the same wing, and the stang has a thinner more streamlined fuse, well....i can't see how it would fly any worse than the zero.
We picked the Zero, despite our self-imposed ban on Japanese planes for scale competition, because the zero has some nice simple color schemes out there (as does the stang, but I could not find silver tape, though I think others have...). also i used to fly mustangs in 2610 and the belly scoop can be tricky- when the wing wants to torque in a midair, the config of the scoop can cause the wing and fuse to damage each other. With some work in building, this can be avoided, but the zero is easier in this regard.
We picked the Zero, despite our self-imposed ban on Japanese planes for scale competition, because the zero has some nice simple color schemes out there (as does the stang, but I could not find silver tape, though I think others have...). also i used to fly mustangs in 2610 and the belly scoop can be tricky- when the wing wants to torque in a midair, the config of the scoop can cause the wing and fuse to damage each other. With some work in building, this can be avoided, but the zero is easier in this regard.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by crash_out</i>
<br />I've looked around too, and I gather from what I've read in several posts that the Zero is slightly out of scale. Something about the fuse being too small for the wingspaon, and the wing itself being a little too big in the chord. This gives it a performance edge over other planes.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Combat planes don't care how much they look like their full-scale counterparts. If you take the same wing and use a more streamlined fuse (Hat Trick Mustang compared to Zero), the zero's not going to outperform the mustang just because it's fuse may not be exactly to scale. I don't even know if it is or isn't, I'm just amused by the continued theorizing as to why the zero is "dominant." The pilots flying them have something to do with it, I think.
I feel like building some Hat Trick Mustangs just to prove my theory but i'm too lazy. Oh well. I don't really care if everybody builds a zero, makes no nevermind to me, I just recommend you don't get your hopes up thinking it's the "magic" plane.
<br />I've looked around too, and I gather from what I've read in several posts that the Zero is slightly out of scale. Something about the fuse being too small for the wingspaon, and the wing itself being a little too big in the chord. This gives it a performance edge over other planes.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Combat planes don't care how much they look like their full-scale counterparts. If you take the same wing and use a more streamlined fuse (Hat Trick Mustang compared to Zero), the zero's not going to outperform the mustang just because it's fuse may not be exactly to scale. I don't even know if it is or isn't, I'm just amused by the continued theorizing as to why the zero is "dominant." The pilots flying them have something to do with it, I think.
I feel like building some Hat Trick Mustangs just to prove my theory but i'm too lazy. Oh well. I don't really care if everybody builds a zero, makes no nevermind to me, I just recommend you don't get your hopes up thinking it's the "magic" plane.
-
Alex Treneff
- Posts: 941
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:00 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by sgilkey</i>
<br />The Hat Trick Zero and the Mustang share the same wing. I know nothing about scale fidelity of the kit, never measured a thing. All i know is scale fidelity has nothing to do with flying attributes, but if the 'stang and the zero have the same wing, and the stang has a thinner more streamlined fuse, well....i can't see how it would fly any worse than the zero.
We picked the Zero, despite our self-imposed ban on Jap planes for scale competition, because the zero has some nice simple color schemes out there (as does the stang, but I could not find silver tape, though I think others have...). also i used to fly mustangs in 2610 and the belly scoop can be tricky- when the wing wants to torque in a midair, the config of the scoop can cause the wing and fuse to damage each other. With some work in building, this can be avoided, but the zero is easier in this regard.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I'd would probably attatch the belly scoop to the wing. I also have a pretty strong preference towards American WWII planes. It sounds like the mustang will be plenty competitive, so I may get one later this winter. I still have to aquire all the gear for some new Limite B planes first. I used a lot of extra HS-81's on my two 3696 planes and I sold my three .25's several years ago...
I still have a Lanier BF-109 in the box and my dad has their P-51. We bought them at the 2003 Toledo expo and never got around to building them. Now that would be fun - .15 size scale! [:)]
<br />The Hat Trick Zero and the Mustang share the same wing. I know nothing about scale fidelity of the kit, never measured a thing. All i know is scale fidelity has nothing to do with flying attributes, but if the 'stang and the zero have the same wing, and the stang has a thinner more streamlined fuse, well....i can't see how it would fly any worse than the zero.
We picked the Zero, despite our self-imposed ban on Jap planes for scale competition, because the zero has some nice simple color schemes out there (as does the stang, but I could not find silver tape, though I think others have...). also i used to fly mustangs in 2610 and the belly scoop can be tricky- when the wing wants to torque in a midair, the config of the scoop can cause the wing and fuse to damage each other. With some work in building, this can be avoided, but the zero is easier in this regard.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I'd would probably attatch the belly scoop to the wing. I also have a pretty strong preference towards American WWII planes. It sounds like the mustang will be plenty competitive, so I may get one later this winter. I still have to aquire all the gear for some new Limite B planes first. I used a lot of extra HS-81's on my two 3696 planes and I sold my three .25's several years ago...
I still have a Lanier BF-109 in the box and my dad has their P-51. We bought them at the 2003 Toledo expo and never got around to building them. Now that would be fun - .15 size scale! [:)]
Alex I have built both the p51 and the Zero. The Zero is on the money for balance and proportion. I built one in about 3 sessions. My P51 was not as accurate the nose was 2 inches long, which caused some proportion issues and balance issues. I ended up cutting 2 inches fron the nose.
The coroplast rudder also was mis-slotted for the horiz stab. I ended up getting out the laser levels and plotted and cut out a new rudder to get the stab at 0*. There were some other build issues with the mustang that were my error and I could have built better. I do fly the plane but only as backup due to it has a hard snap when you yank the elevator in a turn. one direction it snaps to the dirt the other to the sky (I have forgotten which is which because I have not flown it in about 2 month)
Not to bash this kit the concept is there it takes a longer and more carefull build to get it right. The Zero just kind of falls into place easily. IMO
The coroplast rudder also was mis-slotted for the horiz stab. I ended up getting out the laser levels and plotted and cut out a new rudder to get the stab at 0*. There were some other build issues with the mustang that were my error and I could have built better. I do fly the plane but only as backup due to it has a hard snap when you yank the elevator in a turn. one direction it snaps to the dirt the other to the sky (I have forgotten which is which because I have not flown it in about 2 month)
Not to bash this kit the concept is there it takes a longer and more carefull build to get it right. The Zero just kind of falls into place easily. IMO
-
Rabbit Leader
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 11:37 pm
I agree with Scott, there really is no "magic" plane. Last year we had a 2548 event at Richardson. There were 4 or 5 pilots to start, but the last 2 or 3 rounds had just Lee and I up. Lee was very tired due to staying up late watching the Mavericks (I think), and was not having a great day, I was having a good day, a very good day, as I actually beat Lee, which is a rarity. My plane of choice that day was my now-deceased JK Aerotech P-47, which I flew till the last round when I broke out the Zero. The p-47 didn't turn quite as tight as the Zeke, but it was very stable and when exactly where I pointed it, and proved to be a good competitve plane. The Zeke is one of the few 2548 kits available that's designed expressly for 2548, and it's readily available, which probably accounts for some of it's popularity, not to mention that it does fly quite nicely and is very easy to build.
-
Rabbit Leader
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 11:37 pm
The Zero and the P-51 share the same wing but for some reason the Zero seems to fly better. the fuselage is considerably shorter and I think the moments are just better. My P-51 also is snappier than the Zero. I found that if I feed elevator in slowly rather than just yanking on it like I do the Zero it will turn almost as well but it's tough to remember to do that all the time! The P-51 does need the battery way back in the fuse to balance. There is a lot of fuse in front of the wing. As far as scale fidelity on both the Zero and P-51 I blew up a three view and matched it as close as I could. Probably 3 views are not all created equally but I did my best to make it more or less exact scale. The 109 is the worst flyer. Also has a long fuselage and relatively small tail.
I didn't want to start bashing anyone's work. As it stands Hat trick has some of the only readily available kits I've found-kudos on that. I won't say anymore about it.
The contact cement is Dap Weldwood Nonflammable Contact Cement. Comes in a can like house paint. I think it was about 9 bucks for a 32 oz can. I recall seeing a gallon size at one Lowe's, but couldn't tell you the price on it.
The contact cement is Dap Weldwood Nonflammable Contact Cement. Comes in a can like house paint. I think it was about 9 bucks for a 32 oz can. I recall seeing a gallon size at one Lowe's, but couldn't tell you the price on it.
-
Yankee Samurai
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 4:55 pm
- Location: USA