I built one from Fred Reese's MAN plans, and it's a great flying plane. The
only disadvantages I've heard on the ARF is that the plastic parts are a
little flimsy and that it tends to be a bit tail heavy with a .40 glow
engine. Mine balanced perfectly with a Saito 50. Also, I'm not that happy
with the all-white bottom so you might want to decorate the underside with a
dark color. If the ARF is anything like mine, it flies like it's on rails,
and snap rolls are a blast!
Had .40 with TT .46 pro. Flew on rails with a reasonably wide speed range,
the light loading allows for large lazy loops and slow aerobatics. Member of
another club did mention he experiences a little aileron flutter with his
model when exiting the bottom of loops or split S using a .46 at full
No such light wing loading, high aspect ratio model is intended to be used
as a throttle to the wall from go to whoa through every stage of aerobatics.
A thin layer of fibre glass or carbon cloth inside cowl is recommended.
Designed for either 4 str or 2 str, use of a two stroke will require a
little lead or extra battery to compensate for the weight difference.
Recently upgraded to the .60 size, now almost complete with retracts and a
TT .91FS, the much larger sized .60 as owned by another club member is
Alan's Hobby, Model & RC Links
Me too on the built from MAN plans, and Saito .50 power.
It's a fun model. one of my favorites for a long time now.
Not sure about the ARF, but if possible, keep as lite as you can. That is
difficult with an ARF, but really try to not add any balancing weight. move
stuff (battery pack, servos, etc) around for balance.
That should be a good match. I've seen a couple Magnum .52s around our club
and they run fine.
Albeit with no apparent compression.
Please post back on your flying experiences with the ARF, as I get plenty of
questions about the 'Dancer and maybe the ARF is a viable alternative to
You might be correct on the plans coming from R/C M.
Been a mighty long time since I've built the Cloud Dancer.
If you're not aware, I believe Ace R/C used to kit the 40 and 60 size Cloud
They were the original design with no plastic parts.
That's right. The original design has light ply sides in front with
doublers, balsa on top and bottom, and sticks in the aft fuselage
section. I have the plans for the 40, 120 and the original 60 size from
RCM, but I've built only the 60 size. It's one of the best flying
planes ever, and the reason why is because of light wing loading. I
would be amazed if an ARF were made available that did not weigh more
than it should. I know several people around here who have had Cloud
Dancers built from Ace kits. They were good, but not as good as a
plans-built airplane. Mine flew like a low wing Telemaster. I would
not get very excited about a Cloud Dancer ARF, simply because Cloud
Dancer = light weight, and ARF = heavy.
However, the ARF manufacturers could prove me wrong some day. ARFs have
been getting better and better over the years. Most of them are no
longer covered with ARF-o-kote any more. I saw a guy at the flying
field with an Ulta Stick Lite the other day. he said that they shaved
three pounds from it. I can't imagine why the original was made three
pounds too heavy in the first place, but I'm glad that the Lite version
is lighter anyway.
I would expect a Cloud Dancer ARF to be better than the average ARF.
But maybe some of you non-builders can try building a plane some day.
You end up with a great airplane, and it's FUN.
From what I have read, the Cloud Dancer ARF is built well and light. The
big knock on it is the plastic cowl and wheel pants. If that is the only
problem, I will be happy with it. As soon as I get it, I will post back a
weight and my opinion of the quality. Regarding the Mag 52 4-strokes,
several in our club use them and are happy with them.
The Cloud Dancer ARF is covered with Ultracoat. I have heard some good
things about other Thunder Tiger arfs. I will post a weight and opinion of
quality when I get mine. I love to build, but don't have time right now.
With three young kids and everything else, there is not enough time in a
24-hour day. I am looking forward to the time (if it ever happens) that we
can do away with sleep. I hate going to bed at night.
And the Magnum 61 4-strokes are exactly the same size AND weigh 1/2 oz
less !!! I'm flying 2 of them now, and they are great AFTER about 2
hours running. I put at least 90 minutes on them before attempting to
Great flier. Had one for a couple of years. The LHS thought I was crazy
when I put a OS 61SF with Mac's slimline on the 40 size. Flew nice and
the engine worked out fine,even tho it was heavier with the 61 it was a
joy to fly. In fact I'm shopping around rite now and wondering whether
to go that route again. You'll love it.
PS.Another club member has the 40 size and has a Saito 72 on