New Products Flash Sale
PeterVRC's blog View Details
Posted by PeterVRC | Nov 26, 2015 @ 06:04 PM | 1,075 Views
I have had the FlyFly MB229 for many years, in a box...... so it was time to get it out and build it finally! Especially with the demise of the Lander RC F9F Panther, though I had started the MB339 the week before that crashed - hmmm, maybe the F9F was not happy about that!

At approx 1.4m wingspan by 1.4m long, the FlyFly MB339 is quite a big "90mm" plane. It has a TON of internal space. This is all because the full scale one is not a 'big' plane and when you keep dimensions at "1.4m" across all the planes you make (FlyFly) then a smaller full scale plane makes for a lower scale number compared to other larger full scale jets they make. This then means the overall 'volume' of the plane is large, versus the lower scaled plane of the same span/length dimensions. (eg a Lancaster bomber of this same scale will have a pencil thin fuselage).

Everything about the MB339 is "Typical FlyFly" - nothing better, nothing worse. A great blank canvas to work on, though many have been built just as they came - and probably had short lifespans due to all those typical FlyFly inadequacies in their stock form. One common thing is the wings folding up = crash.

Posted by PeterVRC | Nov 24, 2015 @ 03:44 AM | 1,036 Views
I finally bought a 3D printer, after a long time of humming and harring over the cost and the uses for it. For sure it would have uses, but they need to be cost effective too!

When HobbyKing had the Print-Rite 3D printer on special for almost $100 off, which was AUD$383, I quickly read up on it and with all reviews etc sounding good I decided to get one!

I am no 3D Printer Expert!! Not yet anyway. But this was easy to assemble and set up - with a bit of added DIY usefully added. And then the first two test prints went PERFECT right away! That was a surprise bonus, after reading so much about setting up importance and issues etc. you can run into.
Well, they are a quite simple device really....

I also ordered a heated bed from ebay for AUD$19, but on the 6 prints I have done so far the stock bed and tape setup has been totally fine really! I had read how good it is - better - to have a heated bed.... hmmm.

It IS important to align it all! The two main things are leveling the 'cross beam' and setting the home Z Axis nozzle height. It seems best to do that every time you get the printer out to print again, as they can move/change.

Posted by PeterVRC | Nov 15, 2015 @ 03:03 AM | 1,805 Views
Hey! This sounds familiar!.....

After my first FPV Bixler 2 was irreparably damaged in its 'flyaway' crash into a tree I had decided that was that - I would not get another one.
But everyone I know has one! So I eventually decided I will get one just for fun flying, relaxing flying, and for letting other people/learners to have a go etc.
They really are an excellent plane, even though they are a minimalist flimsy 'rubbish' plane, LOL. They are just what they are made to be.... something that flies extremely well, light, glides, stable and a trainer.

This time I was going to leave it 'stock' but I could not bear to do that! It NEEDS things done better on it....

Posted by PeterVRC | Jul 23, 2015 @ 08:38 PM | 1,727 Views
HobbyKing had a "End of Financial year Sale", so what would you do to make the best use of that? BUY some stuff!!!
Many aircraft were notably reduced in price so of course I had to find something of good value to get!!
Seeing I have too many planes already I decided to "Not spend much" - though cost isn't an issue, SPACE is the real issue. Oh well.... what to pick....???

I ended up choosing the DC-3 Skybus made by Dynam. AU$129 was a 'bargain'... I thought.
1470mm Wingspan, so that seemed a fair size.... SEEMED.....

The much more costly Durafly DC-3 (and C-47) were greatly reduced in price too. I would never buy that at full price, but at the $100 or so discount I almost got that instead. But it was AU$262 still!! Normally AU$375!!
After reading reviews on it I decided it was NOT a good buy..... and especially when still at over double the price of the Dynam!

At HobbyZone (Melbourne) they sell Dynam planes but they only have the C-47 version (not DC-3), but I would have much preferred that one anyway - except it is AU$199. Though to have the HobbyKing one delivered it cost AU$161 in total... a lot of shipping cost! To be fair, shipping from Hobbyzone adds another $12 - though I could drive there to get it, and spend 'only' $10 on petrol, LOL.
$38 ($50 really) is a fair amount more, BUT in hind-sight... for the painting that the C-47 has, and the DC-3 is bare foam with decals, I would rather have bought that for the $199.
OR.... I could alter the DC-3 to suit what I want......

Posted by PeterVRC | Jun 23, 2015 @ 11:28 AM | 2,462 Views
Yet another FlyFly kit....
I decided to make up a 70mm EDF version of the FlyFly Mirage2000 90mm jet. Apparently a lot of the FlyFly jets fly very well on 70mm EDF combos, but only "light" versions, typically a hand/bungee launch... no landing gear etc. That is because you typically get 1300W to 1500W from a powerful 70mm EDF combo - not 2000W to 3000W of a 90mm combo!

To make it more flexible, I am actually making it up as a 90mm and THEN change down the fan to 70mm. The reason for that is so that it is all setup for any future 90mm use, and adding retracts etc, but I will fly it as the 70mmm first.

I have a Jetfan/HET 1500kv combo that does almost 1800Watts on 7S. This is enough for the hand/bungee version setup, and I would expect all the extra weight of that fan and its batteries would pretty much end up the same as running a 1300W 70mm fan with its smaller/lighter batteries. So it will be interesting to see BOTH cases!!

Seeing it is being done as a very basic build, it should be VERY quick!
In one night I did all the wing and fuselage assembly, including modding the hatch/battery area to have a tray that can also fit two 4S 5000mAH in-line... allowing setups of 6S, 7S, 8S. But the main aim is the 7S for 90mm and 6S for 70mm.

It will be Fiber-glassed with WBPU, and painted up 'nicely'.... and hopefully will be a fair way under 2.5Kg for the 70mm AUW (2.2Kg?), and maybe a bit over 2.5Kg for the 90mm 7S AUW.

Posted by PeterVRC | Jun 12, 2015 @ 10:04 AM | 2,269 Views
It seems like time for another jet..... hmmm, too many unfinished really!!!!

The FlyFly Twin 90mm Mig-29
Whilst "Twin 90mm" makes it sound BIG, it is really much the same size as any twin 70mm version.

One good thing is that seeing a full scale Mig-29 is not a large jet (similar to a F-16), it means this is a 'bigger scale number' than many others. Thus it is an aircraft of considerable 'bulk'. ie It is 1/10th scale
The Twin 90mm construction also means the ducting etc is large.... so no restrictions to airflow for fans - which you can actually use 70mm's, 80mm's, or 90mm's... and ALL will fly totally fine and great! But it is easier to get high... 'huge'... power from a pair of 80mm or 90mm fans. So if you want over 1:1 Thrust to Weight then 80mm or 90mm is best. If you just want a FAST jet... 70mm's will do fine!
I have still not decided what I will sue for sure, but 90mm is leading the way because you can use two LOW/Med power fans to still get a huge result, and 90mm fans are more efficient than smaller diameters.

I also had to decide over what to DO with it in total.... and I decided to once again go "Full House" with Retracts, Flaps, Ailerons, Rudders, All Moving Stabs. Seeing it can reasonably easily get well over 4Kg thrust anyway. Unlike the Su-35 Twin 70mm which struggles to get near 1:1 !

Posted by PeterVRC | May 19, 2015 @ 08:13 PM | 2,319 Views
I have had this jet a LONG time now! It was my first 70mm EDF jet!
I actually have two of them....

Mine are Version 1's, but be sure to get the Version 2 if you buy one! They now come WITH retracts. I had to modify mine to have retracts - though I guess I got to do what I wanted and make it truly robust.

Hmmm, it looks like a HABU !! I guess it is a clone of that excellent flying jet, and thus why this one is excellent too!
It is totally fine to fly it as it comes in its 4S guise.
Or upgrade the ESC (only) to 90Amps so you can run the stock plane on 5S - which stresses the motor but MOST people have had theirs cope with that. Some go up in smoke....
Or change the whole fan combo to a higher Power setup. 1000W.... 1200W... 1300W... 4S, 5S, 6S.... CS10, 12, 14... Wemo EVO, Pro...

It is a very sleek jet, which means it can fly fast! Like a missile - though not so fast on the stock 4S setup. Still fast though!

Posted by PeterVRC | May 07, 2015 @ 07:25 PM | 2,267 Views
After having bought all kinds of CHEAPER bits for EDFs and building up a bit of everything you can do that way, I decided to get an ExtremeRC ready to run combo.
I could still have done that the same myself, but it is not much more to have it all done and ready to use so I figured I would do that to check it out.....

The ERC Jetfan combo choices are here:

I wanted something above 'average' in power, so I chose the 8S 3000W combo - you can always use lower Throttle! hehe

I actually already have two Jetfan Rotors and Wemo EVO Rotors, but have not assembled those because getting a suitable CHEAP motor is not easy/possible.
The HK Fandrive 3968-1500kv CHEAP BEAST ($74) is a really great motor... but it has an 8mm shaft which Jetfans and EVO's cannot fit! BAH.
A suitable HET motor costs $160

The ERC specs for this combo are:
29.58v / 101A / 2990w / 4.5+kg thrust (1.52 Thrust to Power)
And there is a video to show/prove that!!
Those are good numbers!! This shows the motor is coping with that load just fine.

When I set mine up and tested it I got:
28.1V 93.6A 2620W 4.00Kg - using 2x 4S 4400mAH 65C Turnigy Nanotech (also 1.52 Thrust to Power)
But you can see the VOLTS dropped a lot - the battery cannot do that load comfortably!
These numbers also show that the ERC numbers ARE in line with what you would get if you had a better battery.

Once in a jet, with reasonably decent ducting, you should get 1.3x to 1.4x the WATTS in Thrust. So mine at 2600W = 3.38Kg to 3.64Kg. Which should be the upper region of a jet's AUW for that anyway. WAY more Thrust than you truly need in most cases! But you do 'need' a lot if you want your scale jet to also be able to do a scale TOP speed!

Note this test below is using Revo batteries, but the HK Nanotechs (plain Nano) can drive the combo to another 200g higher Thrust. For almost 4 Amps more input.
Jetfan-HET, HET650-1600kv 8S 4400mAH 60C Revo 90.6A 27.4V 2470W 3.87Kg (1 min 5 sec)

Posted by PeterVRC | Apr 15, 2015 @ 12:38 AM | 7,437 Views
Quite a while back I had bought a second FW Su-35 KIT with an aim to make it up for an 8S and 3000W+ setup. After badly damaging the first one I decided to get this underway and done ASAP. (this was a few months back now!)

The aim is to fly from GRASS.... have approx 4.0Kg AUW.... an 8S setup that can do 4000W on the bench, with 5.2kg total(!!), but who knows what amount for sure IN the plane.... and the main lenghened battery hatch/bay mod, with its strengthening gains, plus fibreglassing and a Flight Controller (Stabiliser).
But the least possible else than those things!

The first one was very good! And it is a very nicely designed and made plane - that flies great too! This one should be even BETTER!!

Posted by PeterVRC | Apr 13, 2015 @ 09:50 PM | 3,374 Views
I finally gave in and got a "Twin"..... though I am not sure it was that great an idea....

Dynam make good 'cheap' planes, so I was confident this would also be in their typical style. And it is....
But as usual, as much as they have some great ideas and well thought out designs, there are things you can improve upon. Quite a few in this BF-110 as it turns out....

Another 'standard' of Dynam is the very average paint job they do. Very 'chalky' pastel colours, and the budget idea of painting the whole plane the underside colour (eg sky blue) and then ONLY adding the secondary Camo Scheme colour to the top where that goes.
But surprisingly, once this plane is coated in WBPU it dramatically transforms it into being a great paintjob finish!!

Posted by PeterVRC | Dec 23, 2014 @ 08:24 AM | 6,916 Views
I had been keeping an eye on this jet for a LONG time!! I always wanted to get it, but anything from "LX" - also known as "Sky Flight" - costs a lot to get to Australia! Typically $300 to $340 for a kit version of their stuff! And that is not because it is 'good' stuff at all! In general LX (Lanxiang) have many weaknesses in each of their models. Things that are made too weak... fail... don't work properly.
This fact also makes the "$300 kit" a bit rich to even risk to get! But you can always 'fix' all the shortfalls..... and there is no other twin 70mm A-10 to get if you want that specific plane!

After LOTS of monitoring of forums about this LX A-10 I finally decided to RISK getting one, to see if it could be all 'fixed up'.....
AU$304 delivered.... that was using EMS post, and it took 7 days from order to the door. (Just the KIT remember!! sigh).

Posted by PeterVRC | Dec 15, 2014 @ 06:45 PM | 4,582 Views
Time for a new jet..... ummm, not really - but I got one (two) anyway.
"But I don't have a swept wing single seat fighter... from the 40's - 50's... and that didn't have 'Super' in its name".....

The FlyFly models are always a great base to build upon! Though a LOT to do to complete them into a truly good model. In some ways it can be better getting some other decent brand PNF, except they always need CHANGES anyway! And this is pretty big - versus the Freewing 1200mm Sabre with its 80mm EDF.

Surprisingly it took FOUR DAYS, including the weekend(!!) to go from Order to my door, from China! Hobby88 are always reliable and prompt, though sometimes they can be a bit delayed in getting some models out the door and I think that is when they do not actually have one right there in a box ready to go. But nevertheless they are super service!
Shipping to Australia cost as much as the kit!!! Ouch!

Some pre-reading of forums and other owners info - done over the last year or so also(!) - gave me good ideas of what to expect and what I would likely do to mine. Quite a few mods to do, as is common here!

Posted by PeterVRC | Nov 16, 2014 @ 08:12 AM | 4,553 Views
Ever since I had the Skyzone goggles I had seen they have a 'serious problem' with their Button layout.
With three buttons per each top end, for various control functions, they are quite raised 'domes' and thus very easy to press. You might think that is good.... but it is actually BAD!!
This is because you have to reach up to feel where they are, when you are using the goggles - or more importantly, there are times you grab up the top and you do not even want to touch them... but DO !! eg To adjust them on your eyes (eye-cups). Or even when you put them on, or take them down.

All of the buttons, except just the BAND button, are 'instant acting'. Click them and they do their task right away! Which means a number of possible cases of "I didn't really want that!" occurring. The two most disastrous being the CHANNEL button - changing a channel and you lose your FPV video link(!!), or the Internal Camera button toggling the view to be the goggles front camera instead of the FPV video feed!
I had actually changed Channel by mistake once when I was flying the PT-17 FPV and it was about 200 metres or so away!! I could only see a speck of it, but luckily my memory of where it was (seen in FPV mode) meant I could locate it in the air rapidly by LOS, plus then was VERY LUCKY that what I chose to do made it climb and enable me to lock onto WHAT it was doing very well. In 95% of cases losing FPV video would have been fatal and a crash really!

It is somewhat weird that...Continue Reading
Posted by PeterVRC | Nov 16, 2014 @ 07:45 AM | 4,564 Views
This is a 3 Axis DIY Head-Tracker as designed by Dennis Frie here:

That thread is pretty straight-forwards... sort of... but it seems that some people still have problems building it and getting it working. All I can say is that I have built two, and both were very easy to make and worked perfectly right away. So if you make them 'properly'...... they work. And they work excellently too!

I have two sets of FPV goggles which both have Head-Trackers in them. But both are 2-Axis 'older' generation Head-Trackers. Just 2 Axis is not that bad, but the DRIFT and ERROR they have is totally unacceptable! It makes them almost unusable, seeing you have to constantly Reset the Head-Tracker's center point as you fly around - seeing they drift astray almost continuously!

This DIY Head-Tracker has 3 Axis support AND it never drifts any amount at all !
This is what you want in a Head-Tracker and thus makes it worthwhile to even have it as a unit you have to attach to the top of 'nice trendy and sleek' FPV goggles! Which ruins their good looks, but function wins over form!!

Posted by PeterVRC | Nov 11, 2014 @ 12:51 AM | 5,230 Views
I decided to get a 'large' Flying Wing for FPV - because so many people say they are great for that!!
I bought the KIT version so I can fit the electronics and motor that I want.

I bought the Turnigy XP 3542-1000kv so that it has a bit more power than stock.
I am also aiming to run 3S and 4S 4400mAH batteries, with just a Prop change to use 3S or 4S.
For 3S I will use a 10x5 Aeronaut folding prop.
For 4S, and aimed for fast zooming around at shorter ranges, I will probably use about a 8x6 APC prop.

I will use an OpenLRS 433MHz RC TX/RX setup, but still just 5.8GHz FPV for a start - this might be able to do 5km approx max. Then I will get 1.2/1.3GHz FPV stuff later, to hopefully go out past 20km.
For long range I will carry a GoPro also - probably with a tilt only gimbal on the nose. Though maybe tilt/roll if I can fit that.

.......Continue Reading
Posted by PeterVRC | Sep 25, 2014 @ 09:54 PM | 7,866 Views
I am focussing only on 5.8GHz FPV setups so far. Maybe I will go to Long Range one day, but not for now....

After buying LOTS of various FPV items I have quite a lot of 'sub standard' items(!!) and some 'great' items! So I decided to make a list of what is good and what is NOT good to get!
What is "good" today might not be good tomorrow!! It is an ever changing world of electronics and FPV goodies!

I will just keep updating this thread as I go through more things over time.....
Posted by PeterVRC | Sep 24, 2014 @ 06:08 AM | 5,950 Views
There are some 'nuisance problems' with FPV Goggles that are perpetually annoying.

For all use:
1) A need for power - a battery that you need to fit or hold somewhere

For use with Head-Tracking:
2) A lead going to your TX
3) Having to press the Head-Tracker Reset Button, which are ON the Goggles, quite often.

After a bit of investigating and thinking I decided on a 'fix' for all of these issues in one swoop.....

Posted by PeterVRC | Sep 17, 2014 @ 08:06 PM | 4,986 Views
For FPV there is quite a large range of options as to what Camera you use. So I will cover all the ones I have tried and what pros and cons each have.

1) 808#16V2 (720p - CMOS)
2) Mobius (1080p - CMOS)
3) FH18C (520tvl - CMOS)
4) CAM5820 (380tvl - CMOS) with 20mW 5.8GHz inbuilt TX
5) Sony SuperHAD (600tvl - CCD) boardcam
6) Sony HADII (600tvl - CCD) minicam

I also have several pan, or pan/tilt setups - plus Headtracking via goggles or separate DIY unit, so I will cover those also.

Posted by PeterVRC | Sep 10, 2014 @ 09:47 AM | 5,174 Views
After fun with the FPV250's I decided to get something a bit bigger, to carry decent FPV/Camera payloads and be able to do more 'useful' missions. More stable... more efficient... longer flying...

There are lots of cheap X Frames around, but this H frame stood out with a bit more character. It cost a bit more than many X's, but it can also fold up into a nice small rectangle - so it won out as my final choice of the many options there are.

I have not decided on what motors and ESC's yet - nor even the Flight Controller!
I am thinking APM, but next in line could be a KK2.1.... but it will be something with GPS and thus RTH and Waypoints capability.

I have to go and do some reading and assessing of what things to use with it.....

.......Continue Reading
Posted by PeterVRC | Sep 09, 2014 @ 10:45 PM | 9,171 Views
First lets go over a few “FPV Goggle’ details…..

In order to make the smallest possible unit (Goggles) designers have chosen to use two very small display screens – one per eye. If you were to use a single display screen it would need to be 3.5” at least, so that both of your eyes can see it all – because your eyes are spaced apart and separated by your nose!
So, now we have two very small screens, and we need those to be very close to our eyes – to keep the whole goggle unit ‘short’ and small. This means we need lenses to magnify what we see of the small screens, and they need to have a LOT of magnification! Also, the more they magnify the screen image, the larger a screen result we “see” – it is forming a Virtual Screen, like watching some large TV that is further away from us! That is pretty cool really!
The larger you want that Virtual Screen to be, the more magnification you need.

The lenses are already a very complex shape because they need to ‘convert’ a ‘round’ camera source – that is our eye – into clearly seeing a rectangular screen. This is a complex lens shape to create! It is also a very ‘thick’ lens, because of the complex shape and it needing to have a huge ‘convex’ curve for magnification. The more magnification the greater that curve must be and then optics get more and more difficult to produce with clear results.
Most are done in plastic. Some are done in glass (very few!).

The goggle Specs pretty well always give a FOV – Field Of...Continue Reading