This is the first-flight on a scratch-built U-2 RC model with an electric ducted fan for power. The flight started well, but ended badly. Caution, strong language. The builder says he will build another!
@@Aus78Formula That is part of it. Everyone who builds RC goes through it many times. I'd have liked to see the spar of the wing that fluttered down. That'd finish the story with an idea of what failed.
@@Aus78Formula No sir, seeing what the malfunction was and how the parts scatter down means you get an idea of what went wrong and how to fix it. You gotta document that stuff to make sure the improvement you make is as informed as possible from the story you record.
And that's why I stick to surface RC. Crashes are much less catastrophic when your RC doesn't have to be made of super-light materials and can coast to a stop instead of plummeting to the ground.
He seemed to be going too high...only under 500 feet......in certain areas......Need a license to fly these toys ? This one was going too high......from what I could see.
@@mikeoftheussenterprise4895 As Joe brags about getting a Ukrainian prosecutor fired.. lol ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-UXA--dj2-CY.html
Fun fact this is actually what would happen to the real U2 in the event of an overspeed. The margin of the flight envelope at cruising altitude was 6 knots. Drop below that 6 knot window and the plane stalls, go above and the structure of the aircraft would be damaged or destroyed by aerodynamic forces. Quite a tricky aircraft to fly.
That was my first thought too. Although I don’t know if design limits scale down, or what happens at lower altitudes. Also the g limit on the U2 was very low if I recall correctly.
The window was very small. At the 50th Anniversary and open house of Edwards Air Force Base I got to talk to some U-2/ER-2 mechanics that were upgrading the aircraft. Note that as of this writing the 50th anniversary of EAFB was a little over 20 years ago. Still, what they were doing was very impressive. Among the upgrades: Strip the airframe down to the bare structure, reinforce the empennage, repower with a more powerful engine, 12 miles of new wiring, "glass dash" digital instruments, new sensor package capabilities and a molded windscreen/canopy to replace the old flat panels that were interrupted by lots of metal structure, drastically improving the pilot's view.
@@David-hm9ic yes , a U2 maintenance is ground up , EVERY RIVET is drilled out ‘replaced , essentially a NEW aircraft , pretty amazing , yet aircraft designed back then were simple in parts , ingenious in their design
@@EdwardT9 The issue was the coffin corner. You won't hit that with a reasonable plane below 10 km, and it's only really relevant above 20 km. If you go to fast, you'll get a shock on the wing that causes massive drag and, because it shifts the lift length-wise, tends to make you pitch down even more (mach tuck). What we saw here was just weak structure. Looks like the wing root was improperly attached, which is arguably quite difficult to get right.
I thought this over a few times and my explanation is the following: I think that was only a camera fault and the plane didn't fly as high as the cloud - the camera was not able to adapt/adjust its aperture fast enough to the much brighter cloud (brighter than the surrounding sky) so this led to overexposure of a few frames and the plane only virtually vanished within that glare.
@@haraldschurr1035 There may have been some of the effect that you describe, but I think that it may have been more due to a loss of camera focus on the airplane. Take a close look at the frames around when the plane apparently goes into the cloud. You can see that before the plane apparently enters the cloud, the cloud and the plane are in focus. But when the plane apparently enters the cloud, the cloud goes out of focus. Loss of focus can explain why the plane looks like it disappears: The image of the dark plane is blurred out over the background of the bright, white cloud, making it appear that the plane has momentarily vanished.
I used to fly mainly small (48" wingspan) electrics. Spend the whole week building/repairing a plane or 2 or 3. Only to spend a day of crashing them. Some of the best times I had before kids. We'd have hot glue guns and 5 min epoxy on site and do quick repairs to get up and going again. For me, I got more satisfaction out of building than flying.
@@Watthead80 Unfortunately or fortunately I am from the balsa generation.Weeks or months building,gone in seconds.I agree ,enjoy the building nearly as much as the flying .Always an excuse to get going on another plane...😎
This is my home flying field. 25 years ago, Jerry Mattern and I built a scale B-17 and crashed it on its maiden flight. ALL of these guys were always in such good spirits when they crashed. Jerry’s last words that I heard before he passed were “if you don’t want to crash it, don’t fly it.” That stuck hard with me and the other neighborhood kid he got interested in model flight. I have NO DOUBT that these two flew together back in the day.
First, a thank you to the videographer and you. The ability to stay young is within all of us. You Sir, showed where we can find that ability: Doing something you love (even with a set back). It’s the joy that keeps you young. Thank you both for sharing this moment.
There was a picture joke in a model railroading magazine where a guy had just crashed his plane onto the windshield of a parked car. Another guy says, "Maybe you should have taken up model railroading." But I suspect you shouldn't be in the RC hobby unless you are willing to expect this sort of thing happens from time to time. Perhaps the only ones who never crash are the ones who never build and fly. The good news, especially in this case, was that it was not over Soviet territory.
I feel the pain when your hours of labour last but a few fleeting moments. I've had maiden flights that have been far, far shorter then that. Pick up the pieces and move on to a rebuild or a new model!
Beautiful airplane... great flying up until the wing separated. Sorry for the loss but you have the right attitude - REBUILD!! Keep up the great work and Happy New Year!
Man that’s a shame :( I worked out at Beale Air Force Base for 13 years and never got tired of watching the real ones do their thing. I hope you plan to build another. Good luck!
That's hard to watch. I'm not involved in the hobby, but I can respect the amount of work that he put into creating something like that. Tough to see it end like that so soon.
Yeah, that was total structural failure. Wonder if the main spar was fiber wrapped or not. Or bolted. Waaay back in the day when I used to pilot RC, spars were always fiberglass wrapped to avoid just such a misfortune. Hope get got it back in the air!
I had a genuine, "I can't look" moment there when the wing came off! A sad loss, I imagine you put a lot of work into that. I hope you were able to build a replacement.
The S75 didn't even leave a trial. Incredible. In all seriousness, if this was mine, I wouldn't be upset because the important bit is that it got up there and it flew!!! Good job sir!!!
That looks like down elevator just prior to the structural failure. That’s a lot of wing, span-wise; the bending moment at the root must have been hideous.
THIS right here is why I geek with scale trucks, crawlers, and construction equipment. I do enough damage at 4mhp on the ground, and they only go airborne accidently. Beautiful build, hopefully you'll apply the lessons learned from this on to the next.
I have found it better to put another bird in the air immediately! You gota bounce back and build your skills so you have happy flights. Also dont pick birds like the fragile U2 to test your build skills.
I often wonder why RC servos are so fast... watch the takeoff on this clip.. the plane fishtail rapidly while picking up speed. The servos need to be buffered so any jerky pilot control is slowed down. This is not pilot error on controls rather controls sending and receiving signals too quickly...
@@baggieshorts1406 you can do all these settings this from the remote controller. The pilot probably just didnt set well, maybe it was the first flight of the plane. The balance and aerodynamic of the plane can also be a cause of this
@@baggieshorts1406 : No, the U2 has inline landing gear, with only small wheels fairly far out on the wing. If a U2 model does not have the wing gear quite long enough, It is natural for it to be hard to steer straight on the ground at very low initial speed. Once the ailerons had enough airspeed for control the takeoff was exceptional. The servos are fine.
@@baggieshorts1406 You can setup servo limits in virtually any transmitter these days but it's not wise to do so because sometimes you need the full span of any given control. It's best for the rc pilot to get smoother on the sticks
The U2 had a very limited structural VNE. I fear you exceeded it. It was the reason the full size went into such a steep climb immediately after take off.
Sorry to say but those clouds are much much higher and further away than this RC place... The camera just went out of focus at that moment. The plane didn't pass through the clouds.
Ugh! I remember reading in an RC magazine when I was a kid - most RC boat and car guys started out as RC plane guys, but after a wreck or two they decided to make it easier on themselves going foward.
@@zanelathrum balsa dosnt fly better! If a foamy is built well it's great, I have had tons of both balsa and foam rc models. The problem is the choice of model built here. The U2 as a model was doomed from the start, plus he wasn't flying it carefully enough! U2's were not meant for abrupt maneuvers! Also why would he build another, after that eye opening experience? Just to see more batterys busted up?
At least you got some satisfaction flying it for a short time. The next one will be built stronger. It was a good-looking build, good luck on the next one.
beautiful moment when it flew. been there myself. i had a hangar 9 P-51 that was gorgeous and a joy to fly. had 3 flights with her. hit a radio tower when i got a low batt alarm on the transmitter and was attempting an emergency landing. i remember and cherish those 3 flights with her more than any other aircraft
Why would he do that? This plane is pointless! Was never meant to be flown like he was flying it! This plane is meant for strait and narrow flying! Doomed from the start because pilot was trying to yank and bank the notorious U2! Ugly stuff to watch so many batterys get toasted!😤😲💯
catastrophic in flight failure due to unanticipated aerodynamic loading ! AYIEEEE! Thanks for your efforts and your willingness to let us learn from your experience regardless of the personal pain.
Well, that proves it; it always takes two wings equally distanced to be able to fly ! Building these RC aircraft is 90% of the enjoyment of the hobby ! Great video and sad ending but fun is the end game !
Oh wow i'm not a model builder but can appreciate the time, love and care that went into the construction :-( So sorry to see your great model end this way.
Yes. Socks with sandals -- dead giveaway that he's a communist. Every software engineer I've ever known who wore socks with sandals was a left-wing extremist. Not kidding.
Reinforcing the spar by using an aluminium tube or tubes might have been a better option; the U2 is more or less an overspeeding glider which creates tremendous moments on the wing roots due to the relative large span.
The minute I read scratch built from plans, I said wing failure. The structure of the U-2 was pretty delicate. To scale it down without substantially reinforcing the wing box is just a recipe for disaster. The video didn't disappoint.
He was cool calm and collective in the end. Even after many many hours of work just to have it all gone in 2 minutes....But the good news is, the video of that flight will last forever. Congratulations.
When we're done having fun with speculation we'll look up the real reason. So perhaps the nickname is due to the problem with directional control upon landing. And a chase car accompanies landing ('chase the dragon?')
Really good sport, it was a great plane but definitely could have used a main spar going straight through the middle into both wings, you truly have skill in building planes and I really hope that you are still flying to this day. I’m currently making my own U2 with a 8.6 foot wingspan so probably smaller than yours. If your still looking at comments then please let me know if your still flying, I want to know. Also I just watched a video of some grown man stomping out a 200 dollar foam A10 and he was throwing a fit about it, you just lost about a thousand dollars and what I’m guessing was hundreds of hours of building and laughed it off. This hobby needs more people like you
Love the sport and not the plane, is the way I learned it :). Ambitious project right there, lessons were learned. Hope he gets it all ironed out! That's a beautiful model!
Great looking model, hope that flight gives you the inspiration to build a better mark two version, I often find I can knock out a second plane of the same design much faster as well.
