HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Feb 28, 2010, 04:07 PM
Registered User
ocminimoto's Avatar
Canada, BC, Coquitlam
Joined Jan 2007
180 Posts
motor size

Quote:
Originally Posted by crazysccrmd View Post
i ended up getting an eflite park 250 brushless outrunner (14g), eflite 10amp brushless ecs (10g) and a small 7.4v 300mAh lipo. total weight combined is only about 1.5oz, so not too bad. went ahead and spent a little more money figuring that these will be used many times in small scale models
might be a touch small for your application. You may find a better match with the 300, there is quite a difference between the 250 and 300. The 250 is closer to the 180 and you were saying this one will come in at about 14oz. That puts you over by 2 ounces on the 250. With the 300 you would get some pretty snappy performance.

I know it's probably too late but ailerons are going to be needed.

And the last little bit of my 2 cents worth. Don't build it to crash, build it to fly! All that planking is not necessary and won't help if you pound it in anyway. It is not a foregone conclusion that you are going to trash the plane simply because of its design/er. Just build'em faster then you can crash'em
ocminimoto is offline Find More Posts by ocminimoto
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Feb 28, 2010, 06:19 PM
that guy
United States, WA, Parkland
Joined Feb 2010
36 Posts
im planning to do my next one with ailerons, might even do one of their WW1 biplane kits. they are smaller so better suited to my motor size and are laser cut now.
crazysccrmd is offline Find More Posts by crazysccrmd
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2010, 10:58 PM
Registered User
ocminimoto's Avatar
Canada, BC, Coquitlam
Joined Jan 2007
180 Posts
be careful what you choose. My experience with a SE5a was that it was a little too heavy to be practical. But then again my skill at building light are still developing so who's to say.

Looking forward to your next one! Cheers.

P.s. I'm kinda partial to the Focke-Wulf 19 kit 502. built one when I was a kid and it flew on the rubber motor. That 250 should be perfect for it.
ocminimoto is offline Find More Posts by ocminimoto
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 07:56 AM
Registered User
Parkk's Avatar
Near Austin, TX
Joined Dec 2008
428 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocminimoto View Post
might be a touch small for your application. You may find a better match with the 300, there is quite a difference between the 250 and 300. The 250 is closer to the 180 and you were saying this one will come in at about 14oz. That puts you over by 2 ounces on the 250. With the 300 you would get some pretty snappy performance.

I know it's probably too late but ailerons are going to be needed.

And the last little bit of my 2 cents worth. Don't build it to crash, build it to fly! All that planking is not necessary and won't help if you pound it in anyway. It is not a foregone conclusion that you are going to trash the plane simply because of its design/er. Just build'em faster then you can crash'em

1.5 oz. is the airplane and electronics?
Parkk is offline Find More Posts by Parkk
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 10:25 AM
that guy
United States, WA, Parkland
Joined Feb 2010
36 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkk View Post
1.5 oz. is the airplane and electronics?
1.5oz is the motor, battery, esc. electronics total weight is probably 2.5oz maybe. i dont have a scale so im not sure what the auw of the airplane is unfortunately
crazysccrmd is offline Find More Posts by crazysccrmd
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 10:46 AM
Suspended Account
WTFLYR's Avatar
West Central PA
Joined Dec 2008
2,140 Posts
Gotta get a scale. If you were close by, I'd give you my old trusty rusty postal scale. Worked fine, until I found a newer one in the house. I only finally got a 0-7oz digital scale for component weights for micro building. Set at zero though, I found that weights could be determined from the old postal scale, within 1-2 grams. Not too bad.

On the SE5A, mine is certainly not light, but I'm convinced many just don't set the CG far enough forward to get these planes to fly well, along with well set wings, etc. These planes will handle more weight than many seem to think, once properly setup. In general though, they are more difficult to get to fly well at higher weights, but I think they are dismissed at times due to weight, when they actually could fly well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ocminimoto View Post
might be a touch small for your application. You may find a better match with the 300, there is quite a difference between the 250 and 300. The 250 is closer to the 180 and you were saying this one will come in at about 14oz. That puts you over by 2 ounces on the 250. With the 300 you would get some pretty snappy performance.

I know it's probably too late but ailerons are going to be needed.

And the last little bit of my 2 cents worth. Don't build it to crash, build it to fly! All that planking is not necessary and won't help if you pound it in anyway. It is not a foregone conclusion that you are going to trash the plane simply because of its design/er. Just build'em faster then you can crash'em
Agreed that the 300 class outrunner has proven ideal for these planes. It would be difficult to build light enough for the 250 to balance the plane, and possibly power it well. I wouldn't worry about the added weight of the 300 either. This plane with 1 sq=ft of wing area is not a heavy flyer at 14oz, as 14oz/sq-ft is not terribly heavy. I'm convinced it could easily handle another ounce, from flying it at 14+. I certainly won't argue that being lighter helps though. What isn't often discussed is that the plane simply becomes less tolerant, as weight increases, i.e. the CG, washout, overall straightness, thrust angles, etc... must be closer to ideal. I'm convinced many folks don't put enough effort into adjusting/reworking these planes until they get a decent flyer. Very tall grass can be a useful aid in this process.


For all practical intent and purpose, you do need ailerons, but not mandatory. My FW190 flew rud/elev, but admittedly was a test, to see how gently one could be on the controls, and not much fun until adding ailerons. I'm convinced the Spitfire would have flown rud/elev, with the correct thrust angle, but by that time I had already added ailerons to it also.

It's never too late to add ailerons, but it is certainly more practical to add them during the initial build. He may still end up doing it, as I did. Here's one method below:
WTFLYR is offline Find More Posts by WTFLYR
Last edited by WTFLYR; Mar 01, 2010 at 10:59 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 11:17 AM
that guy
United States, WA, Parkland
Joined Feb 2010
36 Posts
im considering tossing the spitfire off my 3rd floor balcony just to see the glide path...getting annoyed waiting on this battery charger i ordered to show up. wish i would have realized ahead of time that my charger cant do 2s lipos
crazysccrmd is offline Find More Posts by crazysccrmd
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 10:35 PM
Suspended Account
WTFLYR's Avatar
West Central PA
Joined Dec 2008
2,140 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazysccrmd View Post
im considering tossing the spitfire off my 3rd floor balcony just to see the glide path...getting annoyed waiting on this battery charger i ordered to show up. wish i would have realized ahead of time that my charger cant do 2s lipos
What can I do to talk you out of that?
I lost interest in glide tests and chuck gliders, when I realized that they don't simulate heavier/powered flight well. This is especially true with rudder control. Probably shouldn't have said that, as I don't to turn your thread into a test glide/chuck glider debate, but it's been my experience. I do have respect for rud/elev warbirds having done them, as it forces you to build a straight flying stable plane, where aileron trimming can otherwise make many other planes flyable.
WTFLYR is offline Find More Posts by WTFLYR
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 01, 2010, 10:37 PM
that guy
United States, WA, Parkland
Joined Feb 2010
36 Posts
haha, i didnt do it. i ended up taking my old 2 channel out to the park right next to my apartments and tooling it around for a little bit...not as fun obviously but it kinda helped the itch to fly
crazysccrmd is offline Find More Posts by crazysccrmd
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Build Log Fun Build 3 - Guillow's Spitfire - She's Finished! Steve85 Scale Kit/Scratch Built 95 Nov 16, 2011 01:30 AM
Yippee! Guillow's Spitfire success unmodified!! lw_hughes Parkflyers 81 Dec 31, 2005 11:32 AM
First Guillow's Conversion -- Spitfire! The Enemy Scale Kit/Scratch Built 194 Mar 15, 2004 04:59 PM
Help with Guillow's Spitfire.....TIA ramw5p Scale Kit/Scratch Built 10 Aug 30, 2003 01:11 AM
Guillow's Spitfire as electric R/C Clipperkite Beginner Training Area (Aircraft-Electric) 23 Mar 11, 2002 10:39 AM