Okay, after giving this matter a great deal of thought, and taking on board all the good advise from my friends out there, I’ve discarded my original idea of buying a ‘Fantom‘.
It pleases me to believe, although some people may disagree, that my flying skill is greater than that of “Novice,” so I’m inclined towards models that require flying abilities of “Intermediate /Advanced,” To this end I’ve narrowed down the choices to one of the following two models.
1/ (Phase3) F16
2/ (Phase3) Squall HP.
(Strange how both are from the same manufacturer, Phase3.…….And my favourite glider is a Phase 6 Ha!)
In terms of cost they are both more or less the same, (around £95.00) Both are supplied with airframe, ESC, motor and fan unit. So on that basis there is nothing between them. They also have much the same wingspan and overall size.
The Squall HP (High Power) uses a 4cell Li-po, whereas the F16 only needs a 3 cell battery. So the Squall HP has a slight extra cost in terms of battery. There is also the additional cost of a servo to operate the rudder. (F16 has no rudder control)
Now let’s look at some of the other factors;
Wing loading……..
The F16 has a loading of 15oz per Sq ft.
The Squall HP = 21oz per Sq ft.
With winter coming on, perfectly calm days are likely to be few and far between. Although neither plane (I imagine) would be able to fly on “windy” days, the higher loading of the Squall should enable it to fly better on a “breezy” day however.
Landing………..
After watching videos, both models have much the same landing technique. They come in low, slow and nose high, then basically “drop” onto the ground.
JP advises that a weak point of the F16 are the elevators which tend to get damaged on landing.
Not likely to be a problem for the Squall because of it’s different design.
However, the higher wing loading will probably mean the Squall has a higher landing speed, which does have the potential for causing damage to some part of the airframe.
Controls……………
The F16 has 3 channel control.
The Squall has 4.
(In addition, as an optional extra which can be fitted later, the Squall has a thrust vectoring facility for an extra £22. However, this item could easily become damaged during a poor landing. In much the same was as the elevators of the F16 could.)
Thrust…………
I’ve been unable to establish the thrust/weight ratio of the F16, but I do know that the ratio of the Squall HP is greater than 1:1 (AUW of 780grm/Max thrust of 930grm.)
Overall………..
John’s recommendation of the F16 weighs heavily on my mind, and I understand that there are many people who enjoy flying the F16. But I wonder if their pleasure isn’t because it looks like a well known military jet, and that the Squall would fly just as well?
Conclusion……….
Because of the less risk of damage to the tail of the plane during landing.
Because of the Higher thrust ratio.
Because of the possible addition of Vectoring, (after I’ve mastered the art of landing.)
And because of the greater number of control surfaces, I’m going for the Squall HP.
(Despite the extra cost of a 4cell battery and rudder servo.)
Thanks to all members to contributed advise, and John please don’t think I’m “spitting in your eye” for not getting a F16.
Look at it this way. If the Squall ends in tears,….. you’ll have the last laugh!!! :lol:
K.
