Hi everybody
Is Brodaks F82 twin mustang aerobatic ?
thinking of 2 x AP 061 motors
What props will be best for this ?
Someone has done this before
Any photos of finished models ?
Vincent 

Thanks for the reply Paul

The Brodak version is profile fuse/built up wing
and with a little more area= lighter loading
I am a little bored waiting for kits that are
still out of stock, thought I might make one
of these for amusement, but would have to
be capable of lazy eights at least ............
rather fly than build but the weather man here
has been saying no way since July!!!

Vincent

I appreciate your reply Keith

I am too lazy to undertake that type of build though
and not keen on scale, thought the Brodak kit could
yield a quickly built fun twin, but it has to aerobatic
as that is all I fly nowadays

My main question is will the Brodak F82 do some stunts?

Thanks also to Robert , our host who makes this possible

Vincent

     I built the F-82 Brodak twin mustang. I and several club members loved this airplane. Its very aerobatic. In fact its a great airplane. I can tell you that two .061 's is two much power. The Big mig Norvel's in the .049 would be a terrific match. This plane would just tear out on a launch with the black widows.I was flying it on 42' lines eyelet to eyelet. I actually flew on .008 52' lines with plenty of line tension. The biggest problem was the black widow consistency. When the engines were on it was an awesome plane. A club member called John Brodak one day while we were flying it to comment on it. I lost the plane due to an engine out on the downside of a wingover. The plane needed about 3/8 oz of tail weight to balance with the black widows. I purchased another in hopes to build it very soon. Some of the changes I originally was going to provide was ply doublers in the front with 1/4 maple bearers to install the engines traditional profile style. The gear was bending on me quite frequently so I was going to modify it as well. In addition I was going to mount 1 oz metal tanks on the fuse halves. I have had great success with the Cox Sure Starts. I've done a bit of hopping up on them and seriously considered using these engines in place of my Norvels. One reason is, the mount Brodak provides allows a direct fit for the Sure Start backplate as well as the radial mounts. The shorter nose might just pull the balance point back enough so no tail weight is needed. In addition I wouldn't be using any ply up front. I would highly reccommend this plane to anyone that loves 1/2 a. For those interested in using the stock black widows, I would just make sure you use the best of the bunch. I had several instances were I just couldn't seem to get them both in synch. This caused 2 crashes which were more than I really wanted to repair. Ken Cook

If you really want an aerobatic F-82, do as I did - - Ask Larry Richards to laser-cut a Veco P-51 with an extra fuselage, then add a 13" center-section to the wing between the fuselages. Power should be two old-style OS MAX S-.30's, or a pair of .25FP's (I'm using two Saito .30's). You'll also need to cut a new stabilizer and elevator, and rig linkages to the flaps. but this stuff is relatively minor.

Ralph

Scribble up a twin baby flite streak F-82 erised.

Same asa Bf 109 Z.

     I built the F-82 Brodak twin mustang. I and several club members loved this airplane. Its very aerobatic. In fact its a great airplane. I can tell you that two .061 's is two much power. The Big mig Norvel's in the .049 would be a terrific match. This plane would just tear out on a launch with the black widows.I was flying it on 42' lines eyelet to eyelet. I actually flew on .008 52' lines with plenty of line tension. The biggest problem was the black widow consistency. When the engines were on it was an awesome plane. A club member called John Brodak one day while we were flying it to comment on it. I lost the plane due to an engine out on the downside of a wingover. The plane needed about 3/8 oz of tail weight to balance with the black widows. I purchased another in hopes to build it very soon. Some of the changes I originally was going to provide was ply doublers in the front with 1/4 maple bearers to install the engines traditional profile style. The gear was bending on me quite frequently so I was going to modify it as well. In addition I was going to mount 1 oz metal tanks on the fuse halves. I have had great success with the Cox Sure Starts. I've done a bit of hopping up on them and seriously considered using these engines in place of my Norvels. One reason is, the mount Brodak provides allows a direct fit for the Sure Start backplate as well as the radial mounts. The shorter nose might just pull the balance point back enough so no tail weight is needed. In addition I wouldn't be using any ply up front. I would highly reccommend this plane to anyone that loves 1/2 a. For those interested in using the stock black widows, I would just make sure you use the best of the bunch. I had several instances were I just couldn't seem to get them both in synch. This caused 2 crashes which were more than I really wanted to repair. Ken Cook

I was looking around at the prices of the Brodak  ship and was shocked to see how inexpensive it is right now. I am not affiliated with Brodak in any way but if things were better for me financially I would definitely buy one!!! One dealer has it priced under $25.00! initl

Robert