Rascal 110

I'm considering a Rascal 110. Any comments,opinions? If I go with a gas engine, what do you recommend?

Reply to
Vegasfan
Loading thread data ...

My buddy had one of these. Pretty plane. Flew nicely, but was grossly over powered with a Saito 180. It would take off in ten feet and climb vertically at full power. We had to fly it most of the time with 1/3 power. I think any gasoline engine would be too big for it. Go with what the instructions recommend...which I do not remember at this time.

Reply to
Frank Schwartz

I have a Zenoah 20 that would probably be too small for it. Seems like there's a damaged one at

formatting link
do you have the means to carry it around? Looks pretty big. mk

Reply to
Storm's Hamilton

Your comments about your pickup reminded me of a friend I had a few years ago who had a Big John biplane. He used to transport it in the back of his pickup truck, assembled. He didn't tie it down in any way. I asked him whether he was concerned about it flying out of the back of the truck, and he told me that there was a pocket of calm air right behind the cab. Sure enough, about a week later he was driving along and he saw it in the rear view mirror, jumping out of the truck. He used to pay me to fix that plane for him whenever it broke, which was a lot because it was mostly made of lite ply. Anyway, I've always preferred minivans for transporting big planes. I built myself a Big John about ten years ago and had to transport it in the largest vehicle I had at the time, which was a 1965 Ford Fairlane. That was a pain. I'm amazed at how they could get so little functional space out of such big cars back then.

Vegasfan wrote:

Reply to
Robbie and Laura Reynolds

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 19:51:52 GMT, Vegasfan wrote in :

I think you are correct.

I helped a friend fish his servo lead out of the wing at the field. I'm pretty sure that the wing is held together by a tube or two, then bolted to the fuselage.

Nice!

I'm sure you'll enjoy the Rascal.

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

Best plane you will ever fly. It is awesome! I flew mine with a gas engine. LOVED IT until a brand new SR Battery pack took it out!

Reply to
Jim Slaughter

I had a 2.4 cubic inch gasser on mine! It flew great but flew at about 25% power most of the time. A saito 1.80 will work just fine. I know a lot of people flying it with that engine.

Reply to
Jim Slaughter

two piece wing

Reply to
Jim Slaughter

tube spar and struts. Very strong.

Reply to
Jim Slaughter

Re your SR battery pack, Jim. I lost a Q-500 to a new SR pack as well. Problem is the so called welded straps on the cells. Now, I open the pack and solder them over the crummy welds. No more planes lost to bad battery connections! And I still maintain the Saito 180 is totally too much power for the Rascal 110. If you fly a plane with a motor that has to be throttled back all the time to one third or one fourth throttle, logic should tell you that you have too large an engine... Frank

Reply to
Frank Schwartz

I just don't buy SR packs anymore.

I like having extra power for when it's needed. Also, you get long flight times on a smaller tank when running an engine at less than full throttle.

We all have our favorite opinions. This is just one of mine. Your position is perfectly valid also! :-)

Reply to
Jim Slaughter

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.