Overview of the new HobbyZone 450mm XCub and P-51 Mustang Micro RTF Trainers

[@weseehowcommiegoogleis3770]

I want to see the little Xcub in action. How slow/stable is it I wonder.

[@BRGT350]

waiting for the weather to improve and then going to do exactly that. Fly and report back. I am excited to get them both in the air and see how they do.

[@weseehowcommiegoogleis3770]

@@BRGT350 Well I've seen vids now and It's a pass for me. The Little p51 is just another of a million..

[@danielmoreau4476]

Approx how much flight time does one fully charged battery give you and how far can the plane be before loosing connection?

[@BRGT350]

the Micro XCub 450mm flies for 5-7 minutes depending on throttle. I have no idea how far the transmitter will reach, but I am sure it is farther than you can see the plane. The micro trainers are small and you need to keep them in close. At those ranges, 2.4gHz transmitters have no problem. The plane will be out of sight before it loses connection.

[@Drones_Eye_View]

I like the Cub color and style. Similar to my Qidi-560 but that plane has a brushless motor, and a 500mm wing. Do they fly on a Spektrum or EdgeTx transmitter? So similar to the Volantex and eachine 400mm's.

[@BRGT350]

It is a proprietary transmitter for the micro trainers and won't connect with Spektrum. Not sure if it would with others, but I know it won't work with my NX8 or DX6. The planes are meant for people who are new to the hobby, who don't have a programmable radio or any of the infrastructure needed to support a BNF or PNP plane. If you have a transmitter and charger already, then you are probably already further along than a beginner, and then you should be looking at the UMX models vs the micro trainers. They are 100% designed for a beginner.

[@Drones_Eye_View]

@@BRGT350 Great. Thanks. I've got the UMX TTE and UMX AT so I'm good there. Also the Cherokee 1.3 among others. I still like to fly the Volantex 400mm warbirds I have but not as much and the Cherokee, UMXs, or FMS Ranger 1220. I'll be in Michigan (Grand Rapids and north) late in June and hope to find a place to fly.

[@BRGT350]

It is important to note that the micro trainers aren't UMX planes and sell to different customers. I have a lot of UMX planes and I love flying them in the back yard or even at the flying field. They are more detailed than the micro trainers and have more features. A very different class of model. I will be doing a comparison between the micro trainers and UMX models when I get back from a work trip. If you make it over to Grand Haven, you can fly as a guest at the local club. They fly in the evenings during the week and since it is at an airport, you have to fly with club members as spotters.

[@BRGT350]

They aren't a 100% re-branded TopRC model. There are similarities in terms of the products, but the code for the SAFE system was all done by Horizon along with a number of other minor tweaks. It is correct about the foam and I can say for sure after flying that these things are far more durable than any UMX plane I have flown before. It is crazy how durable they are. I would totally hand one of these over to a new pilot where I wouldn't a UMX. The prop saver is also great.

[@theoztreecrasher2647]

@@BRGT350 Yep, I needed to edit that comment after seeing the remnant Rate Stabilization on the "Expert Mode". 👍👍 "These are just re-branded TopRC Minis. Protocol for your multi Module Radio is V761/TopRC - to use your Spekky Txs plug a satellite receiver into the DSM socket on the board. They are both tough and flexible EPP not beer-cooler EPS like most UMX planes. You've got a much better chance of having these survive the rough and tumble of a beginner's crashes. I guess that the Volantex V761 Minis have been making such a dent into sales at Horizon etc that they have felt the need to stock these. A bit like when they re-branded the E-sky EYAS (Eagles) as the Aeroscout. Sadly these are not quite as good as the Volantex Minis but they'll do." I'm also not certain that the tail wheel attachment is exactly the same as the TopRC unit. I'll have to check some other videos. That looks quite like the XK mounting. I'll check out your further videos of these toys. You might confirm whether there are still active DSM and S-bus satellite sockets on the board or has that flexibility been removed?

[@WesternOregonRailfan]

These planes remind me of the volantex planes. They work just like the volantex planes, the volantex planes have a brushed motor, prop saver, simple servos and the P51D looks exactly like the Volantex P51D.

[@BRGT350]

A lot of these micro trainers are similar. The Micro P-51 is a lot like the original Parkzone UM P-51 with the 2-blade prop, wire landing gear without doors, black canopy, and single aileron servo. I do know that the Micro P-51, along with the XCub, aren't related to the Volantex planes.

[@pippyquark]

@BRGT350 so which should i choose? (which has a higher thrust/weight ratio)? also i subbed

[@BRGT350]

The Cub without the landing gear most likely has a higher thrust to weight ratio as it is smaller overall than the Mustang. The Cub is a bit more draggy with the wing struts and cowl shape. Having flown both back to back with the gear off, both are very similar. Both have a lot of thrust due to the giant prop. For very different designs, they fly more like each other than I would have expected. I have flown a lot Mustangs over the years and a number of different Cubs and other high-wing aircraft. Those all fly very different to each other, but the Micro trainers are very similar. You can't go wrong with either. I would probably pick the Mustang because it is available today, it is a Mustang, the invasion stripes help with orientation, and it looks good in the air with the gear off.

[@pippyquark]

@@BRGT350 Thanks once again! will do!

[@BRGT350]

no problem, happy to help!

[@pippyquark]

@@BRGT350 one last question, if either can pull vertical, which does it better?

[@BRGT350]

both should be equal in that aspect given the same power power system.