Just got mine.......it's a big bird. The misalignment of the wing to fuselage joint is due to the top half moulding having the spar groove being too shallow. Easily fixed. The dual motor positions are supplied with insert covers, for a single configuration, so yours had them fitted which prevents proper seating of the twin cowls to the positions. With all that battery capacity that big rear bay is begging for an EDF....of course.
@@BikingVikingHH ive got one on the design table as we speak, micro balsa flying wing, thinner and longer wings, very similar to seagull,,,looks like you are reading my mind, stay tuned :)
Micro Birds Great minds think a like! If you see this message, what is the CG for the Firefly by the way, I have one that I built on the heavy side, covered in epoxy and Film, should be great for the Northern California slope soaring
It will definitely flex if you grab it and tweak it like Andrew did. Adding sparring down the inside of the fuselage isn't a bad idea like on many aircraft that aren't designed to be highly crash resistant.
After a crash on launch on one of my first few flights, the fuse got bowed enough to where the canopy no longer stays in on its own. I have to tape it down and take it off on every flight. Still, this thing is an amazing plane!
@@michaelkryszak5262 I have an FX-61 that has seen many a crash for various reasons and after much boiling water and trimming, the nose is still about 10cm to 15cm shorter than it was new. I just trimmed the canopy to fit and glued Velcro in spots to hold the canopy on. Still looks ok and flies great. Nothing wrong with doing whatever you need to do to keep it flying. Glad you like the Aggressor!
@@jeffhampton8781I feel you on that. I have the RMRC version of the AR Wing. That was my very first wing. I feel like it has more hot glue and electrical tape than foam, but it still flies great. It's a nice basher wing. As far as the Aggressor, aside from losing about half of the decals at this point, I love it! I'm running an INAV FC on it and it's rock solid in the air.
Hey Andrew, the 4K video looks excellent! The extra detail like wrinkly stickers was really nice to see! Looks like it needs some tweaks and mods. I agree that the prop is too close to the very large obstructive tail of the plane. But it is nice to see designers experimenting with new ideas! I'm looking forward to the maiden flight! Also, I think that I'm all ready to set a new endurance record with the Phoenix 2400. I'm using the same prop, motor, and battery from the 5 hour talon. Just waiting for good weather!
If you are not going to use the wing motor mounts, i think i would use half of one of them to make a air scoop for that back hatch, to keep that esc cool. Just the right shape Andrew. The one you had in your left hand when you took the ply motor mount out of it. At 10.38. If you are going to use the wing mounts, i think it didn’t fit the wing correctly as it was upside down. So turn it over then that mount goes on the other side wing. I hope you know what i mean Andrew. Keith. 🇬🇧
Andrew, could the fuse have been bent while being shipped, so that the nose has bent UP? That would explain, why the hatch was to long and the stickers go so many wrinkles. ...
That is a lot of aircraft. It looks bigger than 1.2m, but I’m sure it’s the fuselage that makes the illusion. I know that you will have it flying well eventually, how much of the original design will be left after the necessary modifications is the issue. Liked the video, not the plane.
Looks like some fuselage spars may be in order. I saw Ali flying this and was quite interested, all other flying footage I've seen so far looks good too, price is borderline though, and I'm trying to push myself to scratch-build rather than buy.
Thanks for the awesome review, Andrew. I'm trying to design a similar plane from scratch and was wondering if you might know what root and tip airfoils are used for the wings? Just a rough estimate of thickness would be of great help. Thanks!
Hi Milos. Tip is 15mm thick x 150mm chord. Root (where it joins the leading edge) 40mm thick x 310mm. Sort of flat bottom airfoil with a few mm of reflex . Wings sections are 410mm long and the body is 350mm wide.
On my modified FunJet I don't use the motor brake because the propeller will line up automatically with the wing/fuselage (wind shadow) during the landing and because the rotating propeller is a great air brake. Also if you use an open motor mount will have better cooling of the motor and the ESC and you will create low air pressure in the fuselage so hatches will not open easely. Also I changed the airfoil near the propellor so you will have power compensation.
I modded one of my funjets as a twin counterrotaring tractor using 3d printed nacelles. It launches much easier, is silent, way more efficient and has a much wider speed envelope than the original pusher. Plus it can do crazy differential thrust spins. Eventually I'll add a VTOL flight controller to turn it into a high performance X-Vert. Fun to see they kinda halfway planned the same option for this model and also struggled with the nacelle wing cutout profile. It took me a few times to get it right as it is skewed in all three directions and def *not easy* to measure. It would be interesting to try the conversion, Andrew.
Hi Andrew, nice overview. Looks like it's fairly ZOHD inspired to me, it would have been nice if it had some wing connectors like the Talon GT or Dart. With the nacelles, are you sure you don't need to swap them over? I think if you put them on opposite wings you tried them on they would fit as the longer part would then be on top? Cheers
I've been looking at this one. I will be interested to hear your verdict! Usually very unstable aerodynamically, but i guess they have solved it with this model
@MAD GRUMPYMAN as i wrote that I was thinking about that plane - I think forward swept looks so cool, but I had just read a lot about unpredictable behaviour. It goes over my head for the most part. Looks like a great plane anyway.
@MAD GRUMPYMAN It flys nicely. You can check my channel if you and Mr. Newton would like to check some of the flight characteristics. But love Mr. Newton's reviews!
I have seen a channel on you-tube where this was flown - good luck - the black on white to me looks as if they are trying to emulate the ZOHDs - also I take it that this was sent to you by Banggood - I ask as to date they have not been selling many of them ....
Great video, looks like a lot of repairs and lack of quality for a wing that normally runs $200+ you would think they would atleast send the reviewers a top notch product lol.
I first saw the Aggressor when AliShanMao was testing the prototype and wanted one, only I waited until Race Day Quads sold it here in the U.S. because there was no way I was going to chance shipping from China. Got the kit version and was so impressed with the quality that I ordered a second one. The PNP you got looks to have been assembled shabbily because the kit versions I got test fit great, even the canopy, although I'll reinforce it because of the length. Those are inserts where the tractor nacelles are to mount. On the PNP they are to be removed if the nacelles are used. They aren't installed on the kit. The prop being too close to the fuselage was known right after production began and is a shortcoming of the design. Not an issue if using the twin tractor option obviously, but AliShanMao shaved off the foam in front of the motor which eliminated the inherent jello and vibration. I'm going to build one with rear prop and one with tractors and will move the rear prop back as well, probably with a 3D mount. And it definitely needs more internal airflow. But it's a lot of kit for $129. Those who have flown the Aggressor so far have indicated that it's very stable both fast and slow. Won't be able to get mine built until winter here in the U.S. but looking forward to some long-range flights with it next spring.
That looks a lot like the Russian Sukhoi Su-47 (Berkut) minus the canard wings. Would have looked great with canards. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-47
I've been waiting for another review of this, there was only one guy who reviewed it. I loved the flight demo he gave and been seeing it at bangood on sale, wondering if it's as good as the dartxl.
If it was mine, I'd paint that large forward hatch white, or silver, to keep any batteries as cool as poss. And you're lucky that it has forward swept wings, as you're going to remove those wrinkly stickers. I've had forward swept graphics on all my models since about five years ago. They really help! Heh, I'm just imagining the Aggressor as a 3.2 mtr flying wing! WoW! 😎 Bigger is always better, unless you need to Shmurf through a water tap.
Just got mine.......it's a big bird.
The misalignment of the wing to fuselage joint is due to the top half moulding having the spar groove being too shallow. Easily fixed. The dual motor positions are supplied with insert covers, for a single configuration, so yours had them fitted which prevents proper seating of the twin cowls to the positions. With all that battery capacity that big rear bay is begging for an EDF....of course.
I am so happy you are reviewing that plane... Thanks for all the good information. Can't wait to hear what you think when you fly it. Cheers!
Very glad you got your hands on this bird!
Looks like something out of Star Wars. Mean looking machine, I can’t wait to see it fly.
It’s certainly different looking, which I like, hope it flies good. Of course, you make them all fly good.
love the sweep and low profile, now time for a micro version of this wing :)
Micro Birds do one based on the firefly!
Also I’ve really wanted to do something that looks like an actual bird, like a falcon or even a seagull shape
Kind of like the dream flight aLula
@@BikingVikingHH ive got one on the design table as we speak, micro balsa flying wing, thinner and longer wings, very similar to seagull,,,looks like you are reading my mind, stay tuned :)
Micro Birds Great minds think a like! If you see this message, what is the CG for the Firefly by the way, I have one that I built on the heavy side, covered in epoxy and Film, should be great for the Northern California slope soaring
I think the fuse looks bowed upwards which would explain the problem with the canopy fit.
Watching from my phone, but could have sworn the fuse flexed a full centimeter as he was describing the rib section.
It will definitely flex if you grab it and tweak it like Andrew did. Adding sparring down the inside of the fuselage isn't a bad idea like on many aircraft that aren't designed to be highly crash resistant.
After a crash on launch on one of my first few flights, the fuse got bowed enough to where the canopy no longer stays in on its own. I have to tape it down and take it off on every flight. Still, this thing is an amazing plane!
@@michaelkryszak5262 I have an FX-61 that has seen many a crash for various reasons and after much boiling water and trimming, the nose is still about 10cm to 15cm shorter than it was new. I just trimmed the canopy to fit and glued Velcro in spots to hold the canopy on. Still looks ok and flies great. Nothing wrong with doing whatever you need to do to keep it flying. Glad you like the Aggressor!
@@jeffhampton8781I feel you on that. I have the RMRC version of the AR Wing. That was my very first wing. I feel like it has more hot glue and electrical tape than foam, but it still flies great. It's a nice basher wing. As far as the Aggressor, aside from losing about half of the decals at this point, I love it! I'm running an INAV FC on it and it's rock solid in the air.
Good luck with maiden, i went with the Rambler rs if it ever arrives
What a beastie
Hey Andrew, the 4K video looks excellent! The extra detail like wrinkly stickers was really nice to see! Looks like it needs some tweaks and mods. I agree that the prop is too close to the very large obstructive tail of the plane. But it is nice to see designers experimenting with new ideas! I'm looking forward to the maiden flight! Also, I think that I'm all ready to set a new endurance record with the Phoenix 2400. I'm using the same prop, motor, and battery from the 5 hour talon. Just waiting for good weather!
Wow, take a packed lunch and chair.
If you are not going to use the wing motor mounts, i think i would use half of one
of them to make a air scoop for that back hatch, to keep that esc cool.
Just the right shape Andrew.
The one you had in your left hand when you took the ply motor mount out of it.
At 10.38.
If you are going to use the wing mounts, i think it didn’t fit the wing correctly as it was
upside down. So turn it over then that mount goes on the other side wing.
I hope you know what i mean Andrew.
Keith. 🇬🇧
Hi Andrew
Large Elevon throws and Twin motor might call for a Pixhawk Tail Stander conversion.
Hmm, that would look cool
That would be a interesting one for the slope.
Looks nice, hope it flies as good as it looks. Your going to need a bigger hanger pretty soon I think.
Hmm , could go either way Andrew hopefully it flys better than it's fit and finish . ✌
good night my friend i really like your video, you can see the best radio with control. my name Pablo Lucas i'm brazilian.
Andrew, could the fuse have been bent while being shipped, so that the nose has bent UP? That would explain, why the hatch was to long and the stickers go so many wrinkles. ...
Not obviously bent but of course it's possible
Nice This will be a floater judging other vids, sloping yes;;;;
That is a lot of aircraft. It looks bigger than 1.2m, but I’m sure it’s the fuselage that makes the illusion. I know that you will have it flying well eventually, how much of the original design will be left after the necessary modifications is the issue. Liked the video, not the plane.
4K video! Thank you sir! Did you sneak in the Runcam 2 4K?
Yes I did
Looks like some fuselage spars may be in order. I saw Ali flying this and was quite interested, all other flying footage I've seen so far looks good too, price is borderline though, and I'm trying to push myself to scratch-build rather than buy.
Easy to scratch build something similar
Thanks for the awesome review, Andrew. I'm trying to design a similar plane from scratch and was wondering if you might know what root and tip airfoils are used for the wings? Just a rough estimate of thickness would be of great help. Thanks!
Hi Milos. Tip is 15mm thick x 150mm chord. Root (where it joins the leading edge) 40mm thick x 310mm. Sort of flat bottom airfoil with a few mm of reflex . Wings sections are 410mm long and the body is 350mm wide.
@@AndrewNewton This is pure gold! Thank you so much, Andrew!
Wonder if the top surface reverse curvature of the nose provides lifting force?
Yes it would, lots of area and the right shape
@@AndrewNewton Of course the aspect ratio really sucks and there is greater form drag and surface drag. Interesting choice.
On my modified FunJet I don't use the motor brake because the propeller will line up automatically with the wing/fuselage (wind shadow) during the landing and because the rotating propeller is a great air brake. Also if you use an open motor mount will have better cooling of the motor and the ESC and you will create low air pressure in the fuselage so hatches will not open easely. Also I changed the airfoil near the propellor so you will have power compensation.
open motor mount: th-cam.com/video/0UFl2nniNVU/w-d-xo.html
I modded one of my funjets as a twin counterrotaring tractor using 3d printed nacelles. It launches much easier, is silent, way more efficient and has a much wider speed envelope than the original pusher. Plus it can do crazy differential thrust spins. Eventually I'll add a VTOL flight controller to turn it into a high performance X-Vert.
Fun to see they kinda halfway planned the same option for this model and also struggled with the nacelle wing cutout profile. It took me a few times to get it right as it is skewed in all three directions and def *not easy* to measure.
It would be interesting to try the conversion, Andrew.
@@plemli DeltaRay
An interesting concept but rough as guts. John
Interesting plane... Another cute subscribe trailer. ;)
Hi Andrew, nice overview. Looks like it's fairly ZOHD inspired to me, it would have been nice if it had some wing connectors like the Talon GT or Dart. With the nacelles, are you sure you don't need to swap them over? I think if you put them on opposite wings you tried them on they would fit as the longer part would then be on top? Cheers
No, the bottom part is flat, top part curved
@@AndrewNewton Ok no worries, in that case they messed up slightly :)
Sorta like a Drak that Matt flies.
im sure something like this was on hobbyking about 2 years ago?
Nice shape, but needs some refinement here and there, it seems.
I've been looking at this one. I will be interested to hear your verdict! Usually very unstable aerodynamically, but i guess they have solved it with this model
@MAD GRUMPYMAN as i wrote that I was thinking about that plane - I think forward swept looks so cool, but I had just read a lot about unpredictable behaviour. It goes over my head for the most part. Looks like a great plane anyway.
@MAD GRUMPYMAN absolutely, Andrew's one of the best
@MAD GRUMPYMAN It flys nicely. You can check my channel if you and Mr. Newton would like to check some of the flight characteristics. But love Mr. Newton's reviews!
Reminds me of a Klingon bird of prey, looks huge but nice.
Flying video i am waiting
Mine is getting a 90mm EDF
300 bucks delivered to Australia, for that? If mine turned up with decals like that and warped foam Ide be pissed.
I have seen a channel on you-tube where this was flown - good luck - the black on white to me looks as if they are trying to emulate the ZOHDs - also I take it that this was sent to you by Banggood - I ask as to date they have not been selling many of them ....
Yes Banggood sent it
8:47... why not add a few more well placed magnets ? Not a good fit quality plane for that price... IMO
looks like something out of starwars
Great video, looks like a lot of repairs and lack of quality for a wing that normally runs $200+ you would think they would atleast send the reviewers a top notch product lol.
Where is the COG on this plane?
7:21 doesn’t look to far back from the leading edge
On the CG marks
I first saw the Aggressor when AliShanMao was testing the prototype and wanted one, only I waited until Race Day Quads sold it here in the U.S. because there was no way I was going to chance shipping from China. Got the kit version and was so impressed with the quality that I ordered a second one. The PNP you got looks to have been assembled shabbily because the kit versions I got test fit great, even the canopy, although I'll reinforce it because of the length. Those are inserts where the tractor nacelles are to mount. On the PNP they are to be removed if the nacelles are used. They aren't installed on the kit.
The prop being too close to the fuselage was known right after production began and is a shortcoming of the design. Not an issue if using the twin tractor option obviously, but AliShanMao shaved off the foam in front of the motor which eliminated the inherent jello and vibration. I'm going to build one with rear prop and one with tractors and will move the rear prop back as well, probably with a 3D mount. And it definitely needs more internal airflow. But it's a lot of kit for $129.
Those who have flown the Aggressor so far have indicated that it's very stable both fast and slow. Won't be able to get mine built until winter here in the U.S. but looking forward to some long-range flights with it next spring.
Ah, good to know thanks.
That looks a lot like the Russian Sukhoi Su-47 (Berkut) minus the canard wings.
Would have looked great with canards.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-47
Looks cool, but that's about the only thing nice about it. For the motor nacelle's, maybe you have them flipped upside down (and then swap sides).
No they are right orientation, flat bottom airfoil makes it obvious
I've been waiting for another review of this, there was only one guy who reviewed it. I loved the flight demo he gave and been seeing it at bangood on sale, wondering if it's as good as the dartxl.
You remove the foam in the wing entirely to mount the motor pods.
Thanks, that makes sense
Just curious, do you do reviews other than what bangood gives you?
He also makes his own planes to "review."
Yes
If it was mine, I'd paint that large forward hatch white, or silver, to keep any batteries as cool as poss.
And you're lucky that it has forward swept wings, as you're going to remove those wrinkly stickers. I've had forward swept graphics on all my models since about five years ago. They really help!
Heh, I'm just imagining the Aggressor as a 3.2 mtr flying wing! WoW! 😎
Bigger is always better, unless you need to Shmurf through a water tap.
Spars to strengthen that weak nose for certain....and yes, the prop is way too close to the TE.....Why do they have such Schoolboy errors?
Buil fpv 😁😁😁
Looks like a piece of crap!