The UMX warbirds are perfect in the backyard or the club field. I kept hoping the Corsair and Spitfire was next. I could hunt for subs in my pond in the backyard. Even a UMX version with the Citation motors and removable gear would be fun. I would have to study the landing gear a bit more, but I think they aren't too far from what the F-16 uses or at least be close enough to work. If I had extra channels, I would make a boom that extends and retracts out the back. I think a S-3 Viking would be a lot of fun.
I hope horizon is listening and they rethink their market research because I would take ANY 2S WARBIRD!!! On the slightly larger size, like the scale of the twin otter or a10 eflite has out. The s-3 viking is something that could be so neat in a umx and I'd much rather that than the citation.
#RC GROUPS ELECTRIC WARBIRDS PLUS#
I fully understand preserving history - but the fact that dad risked his life flying CAS in the most FLAK-dense area of the entire EU theater, flying 60+ missions down-on-the-deck, while taking thousands of machine-gun hits, hundreds of 20mm cannon hits, and even an 88mm tank hit right in the engine - plus the fact that many of his buddies in the 350th FG didn't make it home - strongly influenced my decision to stick with Allied warbirds.I dig that list. When I was a kid in the '60s/early '70s, he wouldn't allow me to even build a plastic model of any Nazi plane. Yup! In my case, it has a lot to do with the fact that dad spent two tours in a P-47, flying CAS in Italy's FLAK Alley, blowing the crap outta Nazis. And I'd always want the Allied planes more if given the choice. There might one or two exceptions that I'd potentially be interested in, but possibly still wouldn't pull the trigger in the end. I would have to admit to being one of those that would probably be highly unlikely to buy an Axis plane. Not likely to be profitable as a BNF/PNP foamie. Small numbers were used in development squadrons and these ultimately saw combat in a few cases in April 1945, but the plane proved more dangerous to its own pilots as its tiny fuel load lead to a number of planes crashing off field, along with additional cases of structural failure. Only ~120 He-162s were delivered to airfields, and most of those never flew - lacking parts, fuel and pilots. For example, according to the powers that be HH - Eflite's 1.5m P-51 outsells their 1.5m Fw 190 by a huge margin - even though both are highly-detailed scale models with gobs of power on 6s.Ī somewhat obscure Nazi warbird that saw less than 5 months of service is unlikely to be profitable. Thing is - the major RC manufacturers of PNP/BNF-style planes have found that in the US, even popular Nazi RC planes such as the Bf 109 & Fw 190 rarely sell well, as compared to Allied warbirds. And then there are planes like the Timber, which will probably last longer than hydrogen. Some planes get the axe after only a year or so (despite being traditionally "popular" models), and yet others that aren't Cubs or Mustangs hang around for quite a few years.
I built it in 2009 & still have it.īut today's foamie market seems to be rather unpredictable by comparison. Precision Aerobatics still makes the 1st electric I ever had - their 48" Extra 260 balsa/ply/carbon-fiber ARF. Hell, a lot of the old '80s & '90s favorites from Ace, Great Planes, Top Flite, Sig, etc.
"Back in the day", popular kits/ARFs stuck around for decades. Sersously - I often wonder why stuff goes that way in today's RC world. Unless each project is budget limited regardless of units sold. If they are playing the long game in regards to turning a profit unless they meet their marketing goal quickly, which hardly seems the case? You would think they would keep things available longer. Well I agree on all fronts, what’s a head scratcher to me is how fast they DC stuff.
0 kommentar(er)
