144 MODEL AVIATION
THIS IS AN interesting time in jet
modeling. Last year AMA requested that we
review the turbine rules and work toward
simplifying them. This was to have been the
first complete cleansing of the turbine rules
since their inception. A brief history of the
rules will help you understand how we
arrived where we are.
The AMA Safety Code had a rule that
disallowed the operation of jet model
aircraft. The initial turbine rules were
implemented to allow development of
turbine modeling in the United States with
AMA’s support by use of a pilot waiver.
This waiver allowed the holder to operate a
model aircraft in a prescribed manner.
AMA’s leadership recognized jet
modeling as a new direction our hobby was
taking and established a process to support
our turbine-modeling activity. This was a
bold step.
Since that initial set of rules, the process
of change has primarily been through the
addition of new rules and documents as
knowledge and needs progressed. This has
resulted in confusion, less-than-ideal rules
for turbine modelers, and even a few
difficult situations for AMA to administer. It
became time to review the complete
package; identify the necessary, useful
items; and dispose of those no longer
deemed necessary. This would make the
rules understandable and consistent.
The latest Safety Code recognizes the
waiver process and specifically refers to
document 513: AMA Safety Regulations for
Model Aircraft Gas Turbines. This
document is the basis for what a modeler
must do to obtain a turbine waiver and what
is expected of him or her after attaining the
waiver.
Now the hard part: how do we rewrite
the rules? A group of experienced turbine
modelers from the Jet Pilot’s Organization
(JPO), our Special Interest Group, was
brought together to review the rules and,
based upon experiences gained from the
operation of turbines in the past few years,
submitted a revised set of rules to the AMA
Safety Committee.
Keep in mind that active turbine
modeling is not even a decade old in this
country; we are still in a learning and
growing stage. Amazingly, few members of
the AMA leadership have had the
opportunity to become involved firsthand in
turbine modeling in order to understand the
unique issues of this type of modeling and
its safety implications.
It was not expected that the rules
suggested by this group would be adopted as
Jim Hiller, 6090 Downs Rd., Champion OH 44481
RADIO CONTROL JETS
Paul Pigneri’s FiberClassics Eurosport is finished in a scale black scheme.
Nick Robinson’s Grumman Panther is all balsa and built from Nick Ziroli plans.
The Bob Violett Models F-16 and F-86 are powered by Artes Bees, and the Byron F-20
and FiberClassics Eurofighter sport Artes Eagles.
submitted. They were to provide guidance
to the Safety Committee for improving the
turbine rules. Once accepted by the Safety
Committee, the Executive Council would
have the final vote on these rules.
I could get into specific rules and why
they evolved, but pending further input from
the modeling community and the business
community, the final approval is on hold. A
release date is set for 2004. I’ll wait for final
approval, and then I will discuss them in
detail so all of us can understand them.
This experience has made me aware of a
huge gap in beliefs between active turbine
modelers and those who are not involved in
turbine modeling—mainly as they relate to
perceived safety issues. I will generalize
slightly, so bear with me. Turbine modelers
spend a lot of time talking within the turbine
modeling community about these issues, but
seldom do we address people outside our
group.
Jet models are fast. That is true when
compared to the typical sport-model
aircraft. Are they faster than racing aircraft?
Not really.
A typical sport jet will have a top levelflight
speed of roughly 120 to 160 mph. It
is difficult to get an open-flow-path
turbine up to level-flight speeds faster than
160 mph, regardless of how much power
you put in it and how steep you dive it.
Some clean airframes with larger turbines
and full-flow ducting will fly faster, but
most are typically not flown wide open
except briefly during flight.
Propeller-driven racing-class aircraft
typically possess similar speed potential,
with some of the advanced-level race
classes exceeding 200 mph. An aircraft with
this speed potential, whether it is turbinepowered
or piston-powered, when flown as
a sport model, can achieve greater speeds in
a power dive. This means that higher speeds
can be attained, but this is not common
practice.
The perceived difference of opinion is
that most turbine modelers feel this speed is
not excessive, but they do recognize that it
requires a different attitude about our
responsibility in operating these aircraft.
Outside the turbine modeling community it
appears that people believe our models are
regularly going faster than 200 mph and that
the issue of speed and the energy of our
aircraft is dangerous and cannot be dealt
with.
What is my opinion? I fly turbine
models with performance all the way up to
and including some truly clean airframes
that can approach the 200 mph mark, so I
am biased. My bias is based on my
experience and approach to operating our
aircraft.
What and who is right? All I can say is
“That’s why we have an AMA Safety
Committee.”
Are there any magic products out there
to limit speed? Maybe, but they are not yet
in common use. Don’t be surprised if that
isn’t the next technology that develops
into mainstream use.
The issue of the speed of our aircraft is
dealt with inside the turbine modeling
community. At all of the jet meets I
attended last year a common theme was in
place. At the pilot briefings it was stated
that no high-speed maneuvers that would
place the model flying in the direction of the
safety line were to be performed in front of
the crowd. This means that there were to be
no high-speed circles or rolling circles in
front of the crowd.
Violations of this rule were to be treated
like a violation of the safety line: first would
be a warning along with a request to land,
and the second offense means you’re done
for the day. This etiquette is the standard in
turbine modeling, and at no time did I see
anyone violate this rule.
This rule is based on the belief that an
aircraft tends to crash in the direction it is
heading, so don’t point the aircraft at
people. This is the standard in the full-scale
aircraft air-show community. For years it
has worked successfully in the United
States, and it has been adopted by the jet
modeling community.
We didn’t have such a practice in place
until a few years ago. As new modelers
were coming into the jet community, they
brought with them their past modeling
experience and with that some of the
maneuvers they performed with their
slower aircraft.
April 2004 145
Maneuvers such as the rolling circle and
figure eight immediately became a concern
when they started appearing at jet meets.
Contest directors (CDs) and active turbine
modelers informally talked and agreed that
this practice was uncomfortable and almost
immediately instituted a new standard
practice.
Now let’s look at input from the turbine
CDs. A common theme from them related to
the requirement of a safety fence the entire
length of the flightline. It is expensive but it
works.
This requirement grew out of the unusual
situation we have of high ground speeds on
takeoff and landing because of a typical jet’s
wing loading combined with slow throttle
response. A turbine-powered model’s
typical liftoff speed is roughly 40 mph. You
have to be a good driver to fly jets—
particularly in a crosswind and on
pavement.
Is this fence issue unusual? Based on my
experience, it is not. Every club I have
belonged to in the past 20 years has had a
similar safety fence in place at the local field
to protect the pilots and pit area. This is
merely an extension of the norm.
That is enough about rules and perceived
turbine operational issues. I want to write
about something fun!
I’ve had some good stick time on a
variety of Eurofighters, and they are fun
airplanes. As I am writing this, two
companies supply Almost Ready-to-Fly
(ARF) kits for Eurofighters: FiberClassics
and Composite-ARF. Rumor has it that
Mecca Models will have its Eurofighter in
production by the time this column is
published.
This model makes a great sport turbine
model. The basic Eurofighter design has
been around for a few years and has
become popular as an intro-level turbine
model. The Eurofighter has a huge delta
wing, providing excellent low-speed
stability and maneuverability.
All three manufacturers utilize advanced
composite-construction techniques that keep
this model light for its size, so slow speed is
the Eurofighters’ forté. If you follow the
balance and control setup instructions
carefully, you can be assured that your
model will display the same
maneuverability and stability as the
prototypes.
The latest version I flew was Paul
Pigneri’s Eurofighter, complete with a scale,
flat-black paint job. Paul added gear doors,
fiberglass inlet ducting, and a cockpit to
complete his model. He powered it with one
of his Artes Eagle turbines—28 pounds of
thrust with a 31-pound empty weight.
The best part of flying Paul’s Eurofighter
is pulling on the stick. Nothing turns and
rolls as aggressively as the Eurofighter. The
only thing you need is plenty of power to
overcome the huge drag of the delta wing at
the high angles of attack you can attain with
this model.
If you are looking for a nice patternflying
aircraft, look elsewhere. Enjoy this
one for its maneuverability. A large, light
model such as this with a wing that allows
you to comfortably pull on the elevator
without fear of stalling makes for a sweet,
slow-landing model.
If you want additional information on
these Eurofighter ARF kits, check out the
following Web sites: FiberClassics at
www.fiberclassics.com, Composite-ARF at
www.composite-arf.com, and Mecca
Models, distributed by Planes Plus, at
www.planesplus.com.
All three are great models. Each provides
its own special touches and color schemes to
the same sport-scale design. MA
146 MODEL AVIATION
Edition: Model Aviation - 2004/04
Page Numbers: 144,145,146
Edition: Model Aviation - 2004/04
Page Numbers: 144,145,146
144 MODEL AVIATION
THIS IS AN interesting time in jet
modeling. Last year AMA requested that we
review the turbine rules and work toward
simplifying them. This was to have been the
first complete cleansing of the turbine rules
since their inception. A brief history of the
rules will help you understand how we
arrived where we are.
The AMA Safety Code had a rule that
disallowed the operation of jet model
aircraft. The initial turbine rules were
implemented to allow development of
turbine modeling in the United States with
AMA’s support by use of a pilot waiver.
This waiver allowed the holder to operate a
model aircraft in a prescribed manner.
AMA’s leadership recognized jet
modeling as a new direction our hobby was
taking and established a process to support
our turbine-modeling activity. This was a
bold step.
Since that initial set of rules, the process
of change has primarily been through the
addition of new rules and documents as
knowledge and needs progressed. This has
resulted in confusion, less-than-ideal rules
for turbine modelers, and even a few
difficult situations for AMA to administer. It
became time to review the complete
package; identify the necessary, useful
items; and dispose of those no longer
deemed necessary. This would make the
rules understandable and consistent.
The latest Safety Code recognizes the
waiver process and specifically refers to
document 513: AMA Safety Regulations for
Model Aircraft Gas Turbines. This
document is the basis for what a modeler
must do to obtain a turbine waiver and what
is expected of him or her after attaining the
waiver.
Now the hard part: how do we rewrite
the rules? A group of experienced turbine
modelers from the Jet Pilot’s Organization
(JPO), our Special Interest Group, was
brought together to review the rules and,
based upon experiences gained from the
operation of turbines in the past few years,
submitted a revised set of rules to the AMA
Safety Committee.
Keep in mind that active turbine
modeling is not even a decade old in this
country; we are still in a learning and
growing stage. Amazingly, few members of
the AMA leadership have had the
opportunity to become involved firsthand in
turbine modeling in order to understand the
unique issues of this type of modeling and
its safety implications.
It was not expected that the rules
suggested by this group would be adopted as
Jim Hiller, 6090 Downs Rd., Champion OH 44481
RADIO CONTROL JETS
Paul Pigneri’s FiberClassics Eurosport is finished in a scale black scheme.
Nick Robinson’s Grumman Panther is all balsa and built from Nick Ziroli plans.
The Bob Violett Models F-16 and F-86 are powered by Artes Bees, and the Byron F-20
and FiberClassics Eurofighter sport Artes Eagles.
submitted. They were to provide guidance
to the Safety Committee for improving the
turbine rules. Once accepted by the Safety
Committee, the Executive Council would
have the final vote on these rules.
I could get into specific rules and why
they evolved, but pending further input from
the modeling community and the business
community, the final approval is on hold. A
release date is set for 2004. I’ll wait for final
approval, and then I will discuss them in
detail so all of us can understand them.
This experience has made me aware of a
huge gap in beliefs between active turbine
modelers and those who are not involved in
turbine modeling—mainly as they relate to
perceived safety issues. I will generalize
slightly, so bear with me. Turbine modelers
spend a lot of time talking within the turbine
modeling community about these issues, but
seldom do we address people outside our
group.
Jet models are fast. That is true when
compared to the typical sport-model
aircraft. Are they faster than racing aircraft?
Not really.
A typical sport jet will have a top levelflight
speed of roughly 120 to 160 mph. It
is difficult to get an open-flow-path
turbine up to level-flight speeds faster than
160 mph, regardless of how much power
you put in it and how steep you dive it.
Some clean airframes with larger turbines
and full-flow ducting will fly faster, but
most are typically not flown wide open
except briefly during flight.
Propeller-driven racing-class aircraft
typically possess similar speed potential,
with some of the advanced-level race
classes exceeding 200 mph. An aircraft with
this speed potential, whether it is turbinepowered
or piston-powered, when flown as
a sport model, can achieve greater speeds in
a power dive. This means that higher speeds
can be attained, but this is not common
practice.
The perceived difference of opinion is
that most turbine modelers feel this speed is
not excessive, but they do recognize that it
requires a different attitude about our
responsibility in operating these aircraft.
Outside the turbine modeling community it
appears that people believe our models are
regularly going faster than 200 mph and that
the issue of speed and the energy of our
aircraft is dangerous and cannot be dealt
with.
What is my opinion? I fly turbine
models with performance all the way up to
and including some truly clean airframes
that can approach the 200 mph mark, so I
am biased. My bias is based on my
experience and approach to operating our
aircraft.
What and who is right? All I can say is
“That’s why we have an AMA Safety
Committee.”
Are there any magic products out there
to limit speed? Maybe, but they are not yet
in common use. Don’t be surprised if that
isn’t the next technology that develops
into mainstream use.
The issue of the speed of our aircraft is
dealt with inside the turbine modeling
community. At all of the jet meets I
attended last year a common theme was in
place. At the pilot briefings it was stated
that no high-speed maneuvers that would
place the model flying in the direction of the
safety line were to be performed in front of
the crowd. This means that there were to be
no high-speed circles or rolling circles in
front of the crowd.
Violations of this rule were to be treated
like a violation of the safety line: first would
be a warning along with a request to land,
and the second offense means you’re done
for the day. This etiquette is the standard in
turbine modeling, and at no time did I see
anyone violate this rule.
This rule is based on the belief that an
aircraft tends to crash in the direction it is
heading, so don’t point the aircraft at
people. This is the standard in the full-scale
aircraft air-show community. For years it
has worked successfully in the United
States, and it has been adopted by the jet
modeling community.
We didn’t have such a practice in place
until a few years ago. As new modelers
were coming into the jet community, they
brought with them their past modeling
experience and with that some of the
maneuvers they performed with their
slower aircraft.
April 2004 145
Maneuvers such as the rolling circle and
figure eight immediately became a concern
when they started appearing at jet meets.
Contest directors (CDs) and active turbine
modelers informally talked and agreed that
this practice was uncomfortable and almost
immediately instituted a new standard
practice.
Now let’s look at input from the turbine
CDs. A common theme from them related to
the requirement of a safety fence the entire
length of the flightline. It is expensive but it
works.
This requirement grew out of the unusual
situation we have of high ground speeds on
takeoff and landing because of a typical jet’s
wing loading combined with slow throttle
response. A turbine-powered model’s
typical liftoff speed is roughly 40 mph. You
have to be a good driver to fly jets—
particularly in a crosswind and on
pavement.
Is this fence issue unusual? Based on my
experience, it is not. Every club I have
belonged to in the past 20 years has had a
similar safety fence in place at the local field
to protect the pilots and pit area. This is
merely an extension of the norm.
That is enough about rules and perceived
turbine operational issues. I want to write
about something fun!
I’ve had some good stick time on a
variety of Eurofighters, and they are fun
airplanes. As I am writing this, two
companies supply Almost Ready-to-Fly
(ARF) kits for Eurofighters: FiberClassics
and Composite-ARF. Rumor has it that
Mecca Models will have its Eurofighter in
production by the time this column is
published.
This model makes a great sport turbine
model. The basic Eurofighter design has
been around for a few years and has
become popular as an intro-level turbine
model. The Eurofighter has a huge delta
wing, providing excellent low-speed
stability and maneuverability.
All three manufacturers utilize advanced
composite-construction techniques that keep
this model light for its size, so slow speed is
the Eurofighters’ forté. If you follow the
balance and control setup instructions
carefully, you can be assured that your
model will display the same
maneuverability and stability as the
prototypes.
The latest version I flew was Paul
Pigneri’s Eurofighter, complete with a scale,
flat-black paint job. Paul added gear doors,
fiberglass inlet ducting, and a cockpit to
complete his model. He powered it with one
of his Artes Eagle turbines—28 pounds of
thrust with a 31-pound empty weight.
The best part of flying Paul’s Eurofighter
is pulling on the stick. Nothing turns and
rolls as aggressively as the Eurofighter. The
only thing you need is plenty of power to
overcome the huge drag of the delta wing at
the high angles of attack you can attain with
this model.
If you are looking for a nice patternflying
aircraft, look elsewhere. Enjoy this
one for its maneuverability. A large, light
model such as this with a wing that allows
you to comfortably pull on the elevator
without fear of stalling makes for a sweet,
slow-landing model.
If you want additional information on
these Eurofighter ARF kits, check out the
following Web sites: FiberClassics at
www.fiberclassics.com, Composite-ARF at
www.composite-arf.com, and Mecca
Models, distributed by Planes Plus, at
www.planesplus.com.
All three are great models. Each provides
its own special touches and color schemes to
the same sport-scale design. MA
146 MODEL AVIATION
Edition: Model Aviation - 2004/04
Page Numbers: 144,145,146
144 MODEL AVIATION
THIS IS AN interesting time in jet
modeling. Last year AMA requested that we
review the turbine rules and work toward
simplifying them. This was to have been the
first complete cleansing of the turbine rules
since their inception. A brief history of the
rules will help you understand how we
arrived where we are.
The AMA Safety Code had a rule that
disallowed the operation of jet model
aircraft. The initial turbine rules were
implemented to allow development of
turbine modeling in the United States with
AMA’s support by use of a pilot waiver.
This waiver allowed the holder to operate a
model aircraft in a prescribed manner.
AMA’s leadership recognized jet
modeling as a new direction our hobby was
taking and established a process to support
our turbine-modeling activity. This was a
bold step.
Since that initial set of rules, the process
of change has primarily been through the
addition of new rules and documents as
knowledge and needs progressed. This has
resulted in confusion, less-than-ideal rules
for turbine modelers, and even a few
difficult situations for AMA to administer. It
became time to review the complete
package; identify the necessary, useful
items; and dispose of those no longer
deemed necessary. This would make the
rules understandable and consistent.
The latest Safety Code recognizes the
waiver process and specifically refers to
document 513: AMA Safety Regulations for
Model Aircraft Gas Turbines. This
document is the basis for what a modeler
must do to obtain a turbine waiver and what
is expected of him or her after attaining the
waiver.
Now the hard part: how do we rewrite
the rules? A group of experienced turbine
modelers from the Jet Pilot’s Organization
(JPO), our Special Interest Group, was
brought together to review the rules and,
based upon experiences gained from the
operation of turbines in the past few years,
submitted a revised set of rules to the AMA
Safety Committee.
Keep in mind that active turbine
modeling is not even a decade old in this
country; we are still in a learning and
growing stage. Amazingly, few members of
the AMA leadership have had the
opportunity to become involved firsthand in
turbine modeling in order to understand the
unique issues of this type of modeling and
its safety implications.
It was not expected that the rules
suggested by this group would be adopted as
Jim Hiller, 6090 Downs Rd., Champion OH 44481
RADIO CONTROL JETS
Paul Pigneri’s FiberClassics Eurosport is finished in a scale black scheme.
Nick Robinson’s Grumman Panther is all balsa and built from Nick Ziroli plans.
The Bob Violett Models F-16 and F-86 are powered by Artes Bees, and the Byron F-20
and FiberClassics Eurofighter sport Artes Eagles.
submitted. They were to provide guidance
to the Safety Committee for improving the
turbine rules. Once accepted by the Safety
Committee, the Executive Council would
have the final vote on these rules.
I could get into specific rules and why
they evolved, but pending further input from
the modeling community and the business
community, the final approval is on hold. A
release date is set for 2004. I’ll wait for final
approval, and then I will discuss them in
detail so all of us can understand them.
This experience has made me aware of a
huge gap in beliefs between active turbine
modelers and those who are not involved in
turbine modeling—mainly as they relate to
perceived safety issues. I will generalize
slightly, so bear with me. Turbine modelers
spend a lot of time talking within the turbine
modeling community about these issues, but
seldom do we address people outside our
group.
Jet models are fast. That is true when
compared to the typical sport-model
aircraft. Are they faster than racing aircraft?
Not really.
A typical sport jet will have a top levelflight
speed of roughly 120 to 160 mph. It
is difficult to get an open-flow-path
turbine up to level-flight speeds faster than
160 mph, regardless of how much power
you put in it and how steep you dive it.
Some clean airframes with larger turbines
and full-flow ducting will fly faster, but
most are typically not flown wide open
except briefly during flight.
Propeller-driven racing-class aircraft
typically possess similar speed potential,
with some of the advanced-level race
classes exceeding 200 mph. An aircraft with
this speed potential, whether it is turbinepowered
or piston-powered, when flown as
a sport model, can achieve greater speeds in
a power dive. This means that higher speeds
can be attained, but this is not common
practice.
The perceived difference of opinion is
that most turbine modelers feel this speed is
not excessive, but they do recognize that it
requires a different attitude about our
responsibility in operating these aircraft.
Outside the turbine modeling community it
appears that people believe our models are
regularly going faster than 200 mph and that
the issue of speed and the energy of our
aircraft is dangerous and cannot be dealt
with.
What is my opinion? I fly turbine
models with performance all the way up to
and including some truly clean airframes
that can approach the 200 mph mark, so I
am biased. My bias is based on my
experience and approach to operating our
aircraft.
What and who is right? All I can say is
“That’s why we have an AMA Safety
Committee.”
Are there any magic products out there
to limit speed? Maybe, but they are not yet
in common use. Don’t be surprised if that
isn’t the next technology that develops
into mainstream use.
The issue of the speed of our aircraft is
dealt with inside the turbine modeling
community. At all of the jet meets I
attended last year a common theme was in
place. At the pilot briefings it was stated
that no high-speed maneuvers that would
place the model flying in the direction of the
safety line were to be performed in front of
the crowd. This means that there were to be
no high-speed circles or rolling circles in
front of the crowd.
Violations of this rule were to be treated
like a violation of the safety line: first would
be a warning along with a request to land,
and the second offense means you’re done
for the day. This etiquette is the standard in
turbine modeling, and at no time did I see
anyone violate this rule.
This rule is based on the belief that an
aircraft tends to crash in the direction it is
heading, so don’t point the aircraft at
people. This is the standard in the full-scale
aircraft air-show community. For years it
has worked successfully in the United
States, and it has been adopted by the jet
modeling community.
We didn’t have such a practice in place
until a few years ago. As new modelers
were coming into the jet community, they
brought with them their past modeling
experience and with that some of the
maneuvers they performed with their
slower aircraft.
April 2004 145
Maneuvers such as the rolling circle and
figure eight immediately became a concern
when they started appearing at jet meets.
Contest directors (CDs) and active turbine
modelers informally talked and agreed that
this practice was uncomfortable and almost
immediately instituted a new standard
practice.
Now let’s look at input from the turbine
CDs. A common theme from them related to
the requirement of a safety fence the entire
length of the flightline. It is expensive but it
works.
This requirement grew out of the unusual
situation we have of high ground speeds on
takeoff and landing because of a typical jet’s
wing loading combined with slow throttle
response. A turbine-powered model’s
typical liftoff speed is roughly 40 mph. You
have to be a good driver to fly jets—
particularly in a crosswind and on
pavement.
Is this fence issue unusual? Based on my
experience, it is not. Every club I have
belonged to in the past 20 years has had a
similar safety fence in place at the local field
to protect the pilots and pit area. This is
merely an extension of the norm.
That is enough about rules and perceived
turbine operational issues. I want to write
about something fun!
I’ve had some good stick time on a
variety of Eurofighters, and they are fun
airplanes. As I am writing this, two
companies supply Almost Ready-to-Fly
(ARF) kits for Eurofighters: FiberClassics
and Composite-ARF. Rumor has it that
Mecca Models will have its Eurofighter in
production by the time this column is
published.
This model makes a great sport turbine
model. The basic Eurofighter design has
been around for a few years and has
become popular as an intro-level turbine
model. The Eurofighter has a huge delta
wing, providing excellent low-speed
stability and maneuverability.
All three manufacturers utilize advanced
composite-construction techniques that keep
this model light for its size, so slow speed is
the Eurofighters’ forté. If you follow the
balance and control setup instructions
carefully, you can be assured that your
model will display the same
maneuverability and stability as the
prototypes.
The latest version I flew was Paul
Pigneri’s Eurofighter, complete with a scale,
flat-black paint job. Paul added gear doors,
fiberglass inlet ducting, and a cockpit to
complete his model. He powered it with one
of his Artes Eagle turbines—28 pounds of
thrust with a 31-pound empty weight.
The best part of flying Paul’s Eurofighter
is pulling on the stick. Nothing turns and
rolls as aggressively as the Eurofighter. The
only thing you need is plenty of power to
overcome the huge drag of the delta wing at
the high angles of attack you can attain with
this model.
If you are looking for a nice patternflying
aircraft, look elsewhere. Enjoy this
one for its maneuverability. A large, light
model such as this with a wing that allows
you to comfortably pull on the elevator
without fear of stalling makes for a sweet,
slow-landing model.
If you want additional information on
these Eurofighter ARF kits, check out the
following Web sites: FiberClassics at
www.fiberclassics.com, Composite-ARF at
www.composite-arf.com, and Mecca
Models, distributed by Planes Plus, at
www.planesplus.com.
All three are great models. Each provides
its own special touches and color schemes to
the same sport-scale design. MA
146 MODEL AVIATION
