HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Feb 01, 2013, 12:01 PM
Registered User
USA, CA, Chico
Joined Feb 2011
3,249 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavillon View Post
Thank for these prompt answer!

The glue stick is a good suggestion (I can't find that mention in my manual).

I'll try to increase the flap camber.

Gerard
When I talked with Pete from HH at AMA expo, he said you should be able to get 45deg flaps with standard top exit setup, and that 45deg works fine on this plane,, but he did also say that 60deg would be better . I'm up for a challenge myself,,, I've always liked top linked flaps,,, ill see if I can get 60"deg with top exit. ;-)
Airman74 is offline Find More Posts by Airman74
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Feb 01, 2013, 12:34 PM
Registered User
Bremen/Germany
Joined Apr 2004
476 Posts
@ Gerard,

re: the elevator rods, see the photo.

I filled the rear tubes with a piece of brass tubing and soldered a short length of the same tube to a piano wire "rod" to match its diameter with the hole in the elevator lever. A slight bend in the piano wire provides a permanent friction for a secure fit and easy dis-/assembly.

Herbert

P.S. The hint for the glue stick was "hidden" in a separate box in the manual. It took me also time to find it - however I did not like the idea...

Bon vols
Herbert
Herbert
h.eberbach is offline Find More Posts by h.eberbach
Last edited by h.eberbach; Feb 01, 2013 at 12:38 PM. Reason: Correction
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 01, 2013, 01:46 PM
Registered User
USA, CA, Chico
Joined Feb 2011
3,249 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by h.eberbach View Post
@ Gerard,

re: the elevator rods, see the photo.

I filled the rear tubes with a piece of brass tubing and soldered a short length of the same tube to a piano wire "rod" to match its diameter with the hole in the elevator lever. A slight bend in the piano wire provides a permanent friction for a secure fit and easy dis-/assembly.

Herbert

P.S. The hint for the glue stick was "hidden" in a separate box in the manual. It took me also time to find it - however I did not like the idea...

Bon vols
Herbert
Herbert
Hmmmmm!! Creative interesting idea!!!
Airman74 is offline Find More Posts by Airman74
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 01, 2013, 01:51 PM
Proud member of LISF and ESL
LI, New York, USA
Joined Mar 2003
24,573 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airman74 View Post
AEAJR ,, just wanted to say thanks again for posting that link to BP Hobbies and that GREAT deal on the Aurora radio!!! Wasn't sure what to expect out of such an inexpensive radio with soooooo many features,, but its been AWSOME ,, that huge touchscreen makes programming and adjusting the quickest and easiest of ANY radio I've ever owned,, and flexibility of set ups are fantastic,, sooooo easy and fast to go in and change things,, and I was a BIG spektrum fanboy before now. ;-)
I am very pleased it worked out well for you. That radio should carry you for years.
aeajr is offline Find More Posts by aeajr
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 01, 2013, 04:42 PM
LSF303 / AMA Life Member
tkallev's Avatar
USA, IL, Wheeling
Joined Jan 2003
3,171 Posts
If you want more braking effect, add some crow mix at the very end of the flap travel, it helps when you can't get the boatload of flap most of us like.

I never use crow unless the flap travel ends up less than about 75* down because it erodes the roll control at low airspeeds.
tkallev is offline Find More Posts by tkallev
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 01, 2013, 04:59 PM
Registered User
USA, CA, Chico
Joined Feb 2011
3,249 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkallev View Post
If you want more braking effect, add some crow mix at the very end of the flap travel, it helps when you can't get the boatload of flap most of us like.

I never use crow unless the flap travel ends up less than about 75* down because it erodes the roll control at low airspeeds.
That's interesting about this sport/hobby??,, each of us prefers something a little different,, for me I find that different amounts of flap travel work differently on different planes dependent on several design factors
Airman74 is offline Find More Posts by Airman74
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 01, 2013, 05:07 PM
Proud member of LISF and ESL
LI, New York, USA
Joined Mar 2003
24,573 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkallev View Post
If you want more braking effect, add some crow mix at the very end of the flap travel, it helps when you can't get the boatload of flap most of us like.

I never use crow unless the flap travel ends up less than about 75* down because it erodes the roll control at low airspeeds.
I agree. I don't generally use Crow. I would rather float in with more flap/camber.
aeajr is offline Find More Posts by aeajr
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 01, 2013, 05:28 PM
Registered User
Joined Nov 2005
1,988 Posts
I first tried no spoileron/crow with full flap and it felt "floaty." Then I used about 12 deg of spoileron/crow with 40 deg flap and it really gives me that locked in feeling.
tclaridge is offline Find More Posts by tclaridge
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 01, 2013, 08:57 PM
Joined Jan 2007
184 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airman74 View Post
When I talked with Pete from HH at AMA expo, he said you should be able to get 45deg flaps with standard top exit setup, and that 45deg works fine on this plane,, but he did also say that 60deg would be better . I'm up for a challenge myself,,, I've always liked top linked flaps,,, ill see if I can get 60"deg with top exit. ;-)
Flaps are top driven intentionally, you get far greater mechanical advantage preventing surface blow back on approach. Putting the linkages on the bottom when bottom hinged reduces the mechanical advantage (Linkage is closer to the hinge line) . If you must have bottom drive I would suggest you increase the length of the control horn to compensate so the length is the same distance from hinge line as it would be if it was top driven..
Flap blow back will create all sorts of problems with your elevator compensation when flaps are deployed especially when deploying the flaps at higher speeds.
TeamHorizon is offline Find More Posts by TeamHorizon
Site Sponsor
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 01, 2013, 11:43 PM
Registered User
USA, CA, Chico
Joined Feb 2011
3,249 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamHorizon View Post
Flaps are top driven intentionally, you get far greater mechanical advantage preventing surface blow back on approach. Putting the linkages on the bottom when bottom hinged reduces the mechanical advantage (Linkage is closer to the hinge line) . If you must have bottom drive I would suggest you increase the length of the control horn to compensate so the length is the same distance from hinge line as it would be if it was top driven..
Flap blow back will create all sorts of problems with your elevator compensation when flaps are deployed especially when deploying the flaps at higher speeds.
Thanks Pete !!! Now I'm Definatly going to go with the reccomended top drive , ill make it work!! :-)
Airman74 is offline Find More Posts by Airman74
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 02, 2013, 01:12 AM
Electric Glider Nut
timography's Avatar
Australia, WA, Perth
Joined Feb 2012
357 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airman74 View Post
[



Did bolt holes on front of motor line up with holes in motor mount??
What did you use dremel for??
I found my EFlite spinner was a PERFECT match,, I'm wondering if the to tolerances are all over the place on this plane
Bolt hoes lined up perfectly for me. i did notice the firewall is pretty soft plywood though- tightening the bolts made the washers start to crush the ply.

I had to use the Dremel around the ply plate in the forward part of the nose. if you look at the rear of the motor you can see the scallops in the ply tray to accommodate the width and length of the rear of the motor
timography is offline Find More Posts by timography
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 02, 2013, 01:29 AM
Registered User
France,Paris
Joined Sep 2010
18 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by h.eberbach View Post
@ Gerard,

re: the elevator rods, see the photo.

I filled the rear tubes with a piece of brass tubing and soldered a short length of the same tube to a piano wire "rod" to match its diameter with the hole in the elevator lever. A slight bend in the piano wire provides a permanent friction for a secure fit and easy dis-/assembly.

Herbert

P.S. The hint for the glue stick was "hidden" in a separate box in the manual. It took me also time to find it - however I did not like the idea...

Bon vols
Herbert
Herbert
Thank you Herbert: that's an excellent idea!

Gerard
Pavillon is offline Find More Posts by Pavillon
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 02, 2013, 12:05 PM
Registered User
USA, CA, Chico
Joined Feb 2011
3,249 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by timography View Post
Bolt hoes lined up perfectly for me. i did notice the firewall is pretty soft plywood though- tightening the bolts made the washers start to crush the ply.

I had to use the Dremel around the ply plate in the forward part of the nose. if you look at the rear of the motor you can see the scallops in the ply tray to accommodate the width and length of the rear of the motor
Thanks!!! If this E Flite BL25 1000kv motor turns out to be too ineffecient I will probably go to that MVVS motor. Can you tell me how much it weighs??
From what I've read and heard I'm thinking the MVVS will be a much higher quality motor than either E Flite motor,, would you or others here agree with that???
Oh and Timography : if you don't mind do you think you could measure static watt and amp draw with that motor ?? And with what prop size?? My BL25 is pulling 54-56amps and 540-580 watts static with a 13x6.5 aeronaught cam carbon prop
Airman74 is offline Find More Posts by Airman74
Last edited by Airman74; Feb 02, 2013 at 12:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 02, 2013, 12:51 PM
Proud member of LISF and ESL
LI, New York, USA
Joined Mar 2003
24,573 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airman74 View Post
Thanks!!! If this E Flite BL25 1000kv motor turns out to be too ineffecient I will probably go to that MVVS motor. Can you tell me how much it weighs??
From what I've read and heard I'm thinking the MVVS will be a much higher quality motor than either E Flite motor,, would you or others here agree with that???
Oh and Timography : if you don't mind do you think you could measure static watt and amp draw with that motor ?? And with what prop size?? My BL25 is pulling 54-56amps and 540-580 watts static with a 13x6.5 aeronaught cam carbon prop
On what cell count? What voltage is the pack and what voltage is it holding? At what time?

Note that watt measurements are VERY time dependent. There is a reading the instant you hit the throttle. Many wattmeters will hold that as the peak. Then there is the watts after 10 seconds which is more indicative of what the battery can sustain.

Your watts reading will vary greatly based on the battery pack you use and the point in time when you take the reading, and my not be indicative of the motor/pro itself. So the measurement method greatly impacts the results.

This became VERY apparent to me when tuning up my Radian. It comes with a 1300 mah 15C pack. Time the climb and take the reading. About 161 meters.

Same set-up, but 1500 mah 25C pack. About 172 meters.
Less voltage drop so higher prop speed


Change the prop.

Original 1300 mah 15C pack. About 170 meters.
wider, steeper prop. More thrust but serious voltage sag so not a lot of gain.
Static tests gave amp readings that exceeded the C rating of the pack.


New prop with 1500 mah 25C pack - 208 meters.
larger, higher C pack was able to sustain voltage which resulted in better climb.
Static tests showed amp draw well within sustained C rating with good voltage hold.


These are all 30 second climbs as controlled by an ALES unit with peak altitude measured with a "how high" altimiter.



For no other reason than to establish a standard for discussion I will suggest that you state what motor, what prop, what battery, including brand, capacity and C rating. Give your watt readings at 10 seconds into the run.

If you keep it going for 30 seconds you might see a VERY significant drop in watt readings if you are using a battery that is very near its limit. If your amp reading at 10 seconds is more than 75% of the max ( not peak ) rating for that battery then the battery is probably the limiting factor in measured input watts. You may be getting significant voltage sag. This is just an illustration, the numbers are not exact or absolute.

Just some thoughts on how to take and report tests.

Also note that, there is the Unload factor in the air. If you could put the watt meter in the plane, launch at low power to get it going, then hit the throttle, you will get a lower reading as the motor/prop are not stalled against the air like the are on the bench. We call this the unload factor. This can be 15 to 25% so a reading that looks like it is at the limit of the ESC may actually be 20% lower in the air.
aeajr is offline Find More Posts by aeajr
Last edited by aeajr; Feb 02, 2013 at 01:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 02, 2013, 02:47 PM
Registered User
USA, CA, Chico
Joined Feb 2011
3,249 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by aeajr View Post
On what cell count? What voltage is the pack and what voltage is it holding? At what time?

Note that watt measurements are VERY time dependent. There is a reading the instant you hit the throttle. Many wattmeters will hold that as the peak. Then there is the watts after 10 seconds which is more indicative of what the battery can sustain.

Your watts reading will vary greatly based on the battery pack you use and the point in time when you take the reading, and my not be indicative of the motor/pro itself. So the measurement method greatly impacts the results.

This became VERY apparent to me when tuning up my Radian. It comes with a 1300 mah 15C pack. Time the climb and take the reading. About 161 meters.

Same set-up, but 1500 mah 25C pack. About 172 meters.
Less voltage drop so higher prop speed


Change the prop.

Original 1300 mah 15C pack. About 170 meters.
wider, steeper prop. More thrust but serious voltage sag so not a lot of gain.
Static tests gave amp readings that exceeded the C rating of the pack.


New prop with 1500 mah 25C pack - 208 meters.
larger, higher C pack was able to sustain voltage which resulted in better climb.
Static tests showed amp draw well within sustained C rating with good voltage hold.


These are all 30 second climbs as controlled by an ALES unit with peak altitude measured with a "how high" altimiter.



For no other reason than to establish a standard for discussion I will suggest that you state what motor, what prop, what battery, including brand, capacity and C rating. Give your watt readings at 10 seconds into the run.

If you keep it going for 30 seconds you might see a VERY significant drop in watt readings if you are using a battery that is very near its limit. If your amp reading at 10 seconds is more than 75% of the max ( not peak ) rating for that battery then the battery is probably the limiting factor in measured input watts. You may be getting significant voltage sag. This is just an illustration, the numbers are not exact or absolute.

Just some thoughts on how to take and report tests.

Also note that, there is the Unload factor in the air. If you could put the watt meter in the plane, launch at low power to get it going, then hit the throttle, you will get a lower reading as the motor/prop are not stalled against the air like the are on the bench. We call this the unload factor. This can be 15 to 25% so a reading that looks like it is at the limit of the ESC may actually be 20% lower in the air.
Ok, ok,, I was ASSUMING a freshly charged reccomended 3200mah 30c 3S pack in first few seconds.. My mistake,, I should've been more specific,, thanks AEAJR . I shouldn't have made those assumptions. :-)
AEAJR : try using a TP 1300mah 65c pack and see how it does. :-O
Very good treatise on importance of matching C ratings and pack capacities especially when proping up
To particular application
Airman74 is offline Find More Posts by Airman74
Last edited by Airman74; Feb 02, 2013 at 02:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale New in the box E-Flite Taylorcraft ARF Kit plus High Performance E-Flite components Philscho Aircraft - Electric - Airplanes (FS/W) 4 Aug 19, 2012 01:25 AM
Sold E-flite Habu 32 ARF with E-flite Motor/Fan/Retracts/ESC/lipo ton2di Aircraft - Electric - Jets (FS/W) 3 Aug 16, 2012 08:42 PM
Sold (2) E-flite Power 32's, (2) E-flite 60a ESC, all NIB cybercrxt Aircraft - Electric - Power Systems (FS/W) 8 May 17, 2012 02:53 PM
Discussion E-Flite Taylorcraft 450 ARF Kit and High Power E-Flite electrical components $300 Philscho Hot Online Deals 1 Mar 02, 2012 09:11 PM
Wanted WTB Art Hobby 2.5M or 2.9M e-glider rrweather Aircraft - Sailplanes (FS/W) 0 Sep 12, 2005 12:09 PM