HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Feb 17, 2013, 05:01 PM
Registered User
Letsmakeadeal's Avatar
United States, TX, Dallas
Joined Dec 2008
291 Posts
@Aros and GOT - Finally one that hits the mark!

Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder77 View Post
Absolutely no problem! We all enjoy the hobby and is a passion for a lot of us. Enjoy it!
This video is the first sound system video that makes me want to tear in and do it. You guys have accomplished something here that I did not think was possible. Superb work...

PS: GOT - Are you going to do any instructional videos of the install?

Thanks....David
Letsmakeadeal is offline Find More Posts by Letsmakeadeal
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Feb 17, 2013, 05:06 PM
Registered User
godofthunder77's Avatar
Vermilion, OH
Joined Aug 2010
876 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Letsmakeadeal View Post
This video is the first sound system video that makes me want to tear in and do it. You guys have accomplished something here that I did not think was possible. Superb work...

PS: GOT - Are you going to do any instructional videos of the install?

Thanks....David
David I have some on my blog or you can go to YouTube and search unitedguy28. I have instructional video on installing on the P-47
godofthunder77 is online now Find More Posts by godofthunder77
RCG Plus Member
Old Feb 17, 2013, 05:35 PM
Shameful Warbirdaholic.
Aros's Avatar
Maple Valley, WA
Joined Apr 2006
8,308 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by seahawk1984 View Post
Hey Aros! Glad I was able to be there to film it for you, that's one impressive model! Would love to have that done to my Starmax Gunfighter. Don't think wife would aprove of that just yet though, not after spending the money on that DJI Phantom. LOL. I'll need to wait a while to let that one smooth over before I spend more money on my hobby. I'll at least wait until after our trip to Vegas, she will be in a much happier mood then. Unless she finds out I just spent another $150 for parts on my Precision Aerobatics Katana, haven't told her about that one yet. Sometimes it's all about the timing


I've been wanting to repaint my Gunfighter, maybe I should hold off on that until after the sound system, that way wouldn't have to worry about scratching the paint job during the install.
Thanks to your video and your camera's audio capabilities you're the sole cause of hurting some folks wallets now that we've pushed them over the edge to invest in a sound system.

You definitely should get a sound install in that Gunfighter. Then we can get both roaring birds in the air at the same time!

Plus, you have the tools and talent to do the install without any issue...Get r' done! (After Vegas, LOL)
Aros is online now Find More Posts by Aros
RCG Plus Member
Old Feb 17, 2013, 11:48 PM
Most people are stupid!
dambit's Avatar
Australia, QLD, Gold Coast
Joined Oct 2011
3,684 Posts
Exactly!

The sole reason I haven't yet installed a sound system is due to the poor audio of most videos on youtube. I couldn't really get a true indication of the sound. Aros, while the video you posted has good sound, it is still not excellent (wind, not a dedicated mic etc), but it has managed to give me (and others I should think) a much better idea of the quality of the sound systems.

Thanks for that
dambit is online now Find More Posts by dambit
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2013, 12:55 AM
Shameful Warbirdaholic.
Aros's Avatar
Maple Valley, WA
Joined Apr 2006
8,308 Posts
I agree that my video is a pretty decent indicator of the sound quality you can expect with the Benedini system. Most videos I've seen it's just too hard to tell. Of course, it's obviously better in person but the video captured the sound quality well.
Aros is online now Find More Posts by Aros
RCG Plus Member
Old Feb 18, 2013, 05:00 AM
Registered User
Kaikokid's Avatar
New Zealand, Northland, Kaikohe
Joined Aug 2011
2,403 Posts
Aros - sorry if you have already told us the AUW of your red tail but if you know could you tell me please? Also, did you notice much change in the feel of the plane? Maybe it's to early to tell but you sure pulled of a great landing just the same !
Kaikokid is online now Find More Posts by Kaikokid
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2013, 07:14 AM
Registered User
Australia, VIC, Melbourne
Joined Nov 2006
10,412 Posts
More weight does not actually bother the landing process at all.
All my planes are much heavier than people typically have - intentionally.
All have flaps... all require power to land.
All land pretty well the same as when they were first built and tested lighter, as in speed, because all you do when they are lighter is use less power and less AoA. You still always aim for the same (or should) landing process anyway.... the scale/realistic speed.... you just do it a bit differently.
eg lighter means flaps are likely to be overkill anyway, and all you have is a floaty wavering plane on landings.

More mass means more linear. It doesn't mean more airspeed - not more than is 'correct' to scale anyway. The lighter plane COULD go much slower.... overly slow.... but fly it in how it should come in and then speed is identical, but its light handling lacks that linearity of mass.

The only thing I see worse than an overly slow landing plane, that amazingly can flop to landing, or stop within 2 metres is...... one that can LEAP into the air in just 2 or 3 metres of roll out! LOL

Mass (weight) not only gives a better flying result, but in a way it enforces you to take-off and land more realistically too! Though even a 1.5x.. or even 2x... "over weight" model plane can still be made to take-off way too quickly..... but at least it then does what a real plane would do too..... be in trouble and reasonably likely CRASH!! LOL. So again, the greater mass enforces better flying behaviour by the pilot! More things matter... again, exactly as per the real plane's had. G's and wing flex begin to matter.... but fly within the real plane's G limits (or really more like 2X still) and nothing is going to break - it just raises the levels you have to be more careful about.
I prefer ALL of that, because it moves you far closer to flying a 'real' plane, than a simplistic light foamie feather that you can do anything you want with!
PeterVRC is online now Find More Posts by PeterVRC
RCG Plus Member
Old Feb 18, 2013, 12:25 PM
Shameful Warbirdaholic.
Aros's Avatar
Maple Valley, WA
Joined Apr 2006
8,308 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaikokid View Post
Aros - sorry if you have already told us the AUW of your red tail but if you know could you tell me please? Also, did you notice much change in the feel of the plane? Maybe it's to early to tell but you sure pulled of a great landing just the same !
Sorry I don't have the AUW...I don't have a scale. It's significantly heavier than stock with the added weight, that's for sure. The plane has much more of a "real" feeling to it, not a "foamy", trainer feel which is better described in Peter's posts. It feels like a real Mustang, just shrunk down in size, versus just a model RC plane, you know?

I always thought added weight was the devil when it comes to airplanes, but this plane proves that is not the case. It's more stable and realistic which I love.

Thanks for the compliment on the landing...I came in well above stall speed, in fact I think I came in much too hot, but that's too be expected on the maiden where I didn't want to take any chances. My flight yesterday was superb. Now that I'm getting comfortable with her weight, it's a real treat to takeoff, fly and land.
Aros is online now Find More Posts by Aros
RCG Plus Member
Old Feb 18, 2013, 12:47 PM
Registered User
Kaikokid's Avatar
New Zealand, Northland, Kaikohe
Joined Aug 2011
2,403 Posts
Interesting comments Peter. What surprises me most is the lack of response they have received.( a timing issue I suppose ) I guess a little extra weight in some cases can be positive. Depends on how skillful the pilot is, where he's flying, and.....AND how good the LG is !!
For me at least this thread is currently 'Music to my ears'. Your probably a lot better off not having any scales Aros. Just go with your instincts you just have to be cautious to start with and I reckon you would know straight away if it was too heavy ... the plane would feel way underpowered for example ??
More videos please !!!!!
Kaikokid is online now Find More Posts by Kaikokid
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2013, 12:50 PM
Shameful Warbirdaholic.
Aros's Avatar
Maple Valley, WA
Joined Apr 2006
8,308 Posts
Definitely doesn't feel under-powered thanks to the prop mod.
Aros is online now Find More Posts by Aros
RCG Plus Member
Old Feb 18, 2013, 02:47 PM
Should've, Would've, Could've
v8truckin's Avatar
United States, CA
Joined Dec 2010
6,530 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aros View Post
Definitely doesn't feel under-powered thanks to the prop mod.
Your welcome!
v8truckin is online now Find More Posts by v8truckin
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2013, 03:39 PM
Shameful Warbirdaholic.
Aros's Avatar
Maple Valley, WA
Joined Apr 2006
8,308 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by v8truckin View Post
Your welcome!
Indeed!
Aros is online now Find More Posts by Aros
RCG Plus Member
Old Feb 18, 2013, 03:42 PM
Registered User
Australia, VIC, Melbourne
Joined Nov 2006
10,412 Posts
There are of course some trade-offs for having more weight, but I see almost none as negatives at all.

The main, and glaring, one is the landing gear. More stress for it. And it is an ongoing bug-bear, but NOT because of the weight really.
I have not seen a foamie with adequate landing gear yet.... they build everything to low weight limits, and low cost, so they end up weak and at best marginal to do their job anyway. So I will modify almost every case of landing gear - preferably not, if possible, but that is very rare!

So I am going to be making new stronger mounts etc on almost all larger planes anyway, whether heavier or not, so that makes that job a zero as far as the added weight goes. Doing it adds weight, LOL.

About the only other possible negative is power to weight ratio. Again almost a zero, because most of these models have far more power to weight than a real one ever had too! They will still do the scale speeds required (but to look right a 'scale' speed is higher than the mathematical scale is), and the max climb rate and the possible manouvers that the real one could anyway..... just less 'straight up', that the unrealistically lighter original model could do... but that aspect has nothing to do with a plane flying like its real counterpart, so I consider that a zero loss.

Stresses on the plane. For the most they are zero issue. Wings are about the only aspect (after LG taken care of) of possible failure after "Weight X". I am yet to cross that line, and have not strengthened any with extra spars etc because of weight (only because they needed it anyway), but I do 'stress test' them myself (no machine etc, just experience) as you can tell what is going to be a worry or not! Some foamies come with 'foldable wings' already, LOL..... as in they were designed too weak and people upgrade them right away anyway (eg a few FMS planes in their earlier versions and the FlyFly MB339... and more I am sure). Those sorts of cases - already assessed there is a problem calculated even when you just looked at the kit in pieces - get done during the build.
So whilst a bit of note is taken to make sure things are all OK, you do that to planes anyway (or should).

As far as getting more weight...... I do pretty well nothing 'intentionally'.
It tends to end up that once you do al the mods required to make a good model - upgrading LG (mounts or whatever), opening out battery areas for easier access and room, adding features (whether gear doors, this or that which 'moves'), changing surfaces to one servo each... whatever... usually quite a number of things of use can be done...... it ends up X amount heavier anyway. I don't even consider weight along that path because no matter what you do it is never going to come out "too heavy".It will more likey still fall short of optimal.
Over the last year approx, sound systems have been a big source of added weight.... interesting was adding the first one to a plane that was already 'heavy'! But it just flew on a good (or better?) than ever before with the extra 200g anyway! Which was actually an accidental way to find, and then explore, even higher limits of weights. (I have four sound system aircraft so far)
Then the biggest weight factor gain, possible to do in almost all planes, is battery capacity.... running far more than stock suggests, or people typically use. Thus allowing more flight time, or an easier job for the battery used so its life is easier and longer. A few planes I have I can fly for 5 to 6 minutes and use half the battery capacity.... which is long enough for me to to fly, and those batteries come down at ambient temp! (5 mins is a luxury versus EDF's 3 to 4 mins!!! LOL)
I am generally aiming that all weight added is for a valid 'gain' of something.. NEVER ever just lead weight!

Then I fly it..... and decide how it all went.
There is no specific target, and even the range that gives a great result is quite wide, so it is not some difficult narrow weight range you must be at.
It sees to me that it is generally at least 10% more... more often in the 20% to 30% area. It is of course quite plane specific, and what was its advertised advised weight, or what general owners end up with. So I am not really interested at all in those other numbers advised or used, but they do give you that reference of comparison.
Sometimes I go "WOW!! Mine is heavy compared to those!!".... other times it might be just that 10% or so. (seeing some planes are 'heavier' as they came stock anyway)

All fly great.... as much as that is a relative term, and even impossible to convey in words or even in sight! Only the pilot 'sees'... feels.... the majoroty of it, though 'educated' specators can know what they are 'seeing' in its motions SOME of the time. Even a fair amount is what is NOT seen in motions... as it does NOT do those 'wrong', floaty, things anymore.
And you get those great 'proper' roll outs and take-offs.... not requiring control finesse and fudgery to replicate, but they just DO IT ALONE! And the just as great looking landing sequences.

I would say that in Props (warbirds etc) it is all very easy to have the weight and no negatives. In EDF jets, most are still fine, but it is a far more marginal thing because of their more limited space - seeing they needed notably better and larger batteries to start with, and still get lower flight times from those anyway. So you very often don't have as much leeway to lose power to weight ratio, compared to conventional winged and propped aircraft. Though I have still not had an EDF jet cross a level that made it 'wrong' or unacceptable, but they can come close to that fringe. (probably a bit like a real fighter not meeting its performance specs predicted - still an awesome machine by all accounts really anyway).
PeterVRC is online now Find More Posts by PeterVRC
RCG Plus Member
Last edited by PeterVRC; Feb 18, 2013 at 03:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2013, 05:50 AM
Most people are stupid!
dambit's Avatar
Australia, QLD, Gold Coast
Joined Oct 2011
3,684 Posts
Totally agree with you Pete.
dambit is online now Find More Posts by dambit
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2013, 01:02 PM
Registered User
Kaikokid's Avatar
New Zealand, Northland, Kaikohe
Joined Aug 2011
2,403 Posts
Peter - If you look at my avatar you'll see a picture of my HK P40n ( 1700mm) I have owned it for a good while now but still not game to fly it. I have always regarded it as a 'poor mans' TF. It has a sliding canopy, working cowl flaps, enlarged ( scale ) flaps etc and hopefully better than stock ( modified LX P40e ) landing gear. The LG is by far my biggest concern. I've added a LOT of weight....Right up there in the 25 to 30 % territory I think and so my dream of a sound system has been canned.
You have to realise that I did all this, with the help of my dad who flew them during WW2 and was the inspiration to get into the hobby in the first place, without any real idea of what I was doing.The plane just 'evolved' as we went along with 'scale' been my No.1 aim. That's fly-by scale you understand.
Anyhow ...I have found your comments MOST encouraging so thankyou. I'm getting to the stage where I feel I could take-off with her ( my 'ten ton tess') but in all honesty not sure what would happen next and the landing would be interesting to say the least, so will have to wait a little longer yet. But I feel I have something to look forward to so thanks again.
Kaikokid is online now Find More Posts by Kaikokid
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sold NEW FMS 57" P-51 Mustang with upgrades godofthunder77 Aircraft - Electric - Airplanes (FS/W) 11 Sep 14, 2011 02:55 PM
Sold NEW FMS 57" P-51 Mustang with upgrades godofthunder77 Aircraft - Fuel - Airplanes (FS/W) 2 Sep 04, 2011 01:41 PM
Sold FMS/Airfield P-51 Mustang V6 - Newest Version w/ tail retract, nav lights, more: BNF Roswalt Aircraft - Electric - Airplanes (FS/W) 9 May 25, 2011 11:08 AM
For Sale Guillows North American P-51 Mustang SupaMan Aircraft - Electric - Airplanes (FS/W) 0 Jan 04, 2010 09:38 PM
For Sale Guillows North American P-51 Mustang SupaMan Aircraft - Fuel - Airplanes (FS/W) 0 Jan 04, 2010 09:07 PM