Above you can read that some guys get "reasonably good" climb performance on 14 to 18 cells; that's a lot of weight to lug around, and contrary to what some might think, weight matters... a lot! You probably don't want to go for it, but you could do quite spectacular things with a 7-cell Pletti and a 17x13 prop or a 10-cell Pletti with 18x16 prop.

Dieter Mahlein
http://shredair.com

You may have something with that 18x16 prop dieter... That would be a good prop for my current set up...

My only comments come from my experience with the Spiro E a similar area, although lower aspect ratio, similar weight, two piece wing fully molded glider. The airfoils on both are similar as well.

I have flown the Spiro in order on a :

Jeti 30 3 direct drive
Hacker B50 9S +6.7,
Electronic Model ELios 37 +3.7,
Electronic Model Chronos 40 + 5:1 and currently the
Hacker B40 FAI (6L+6.7)

Battery packs are nearly always 10 cell but there is the odd 8 cell pack in there.


As far as motors go:
For 10 cells the Hacker B40 FAI is my preference. It performs about the same as the 9S and the Chronos 40 but at lower weight. Probably even better than the 9S on 10 cells.

Second preference the Chronos 40 but the gearbox pinion keeps slipping.

Third preference: Elios 37 is a good sports setup and the Hacker B50 9S could be pushed to 14-16 cells and give you a faster climb heavy setup.

The extra wing area (580 -600 sq inch) means that the induced drag will be a lot higher than than for an out and out speed ship. So it will never be as fast and will slow down more quickly. The big wing advantage comes in the thermal performance and that is where low weight counts. The thermals are very very hard for me to spot when flying fast.

I am happy to trade the extra portability of the two piece wing over the greater weight.

Anyhow we all have our personal preferences so good luck and happy landings with your setup Jay.

My personal preferences:
Lower weight. Despite the slower climbs I sometimes prefer flying with the FAUP 1950 pack over the CP2400s. The GP3300s are the first sub C pack where I am truly content to fly faster and sink faster. Lower weight means climb faster, more agile in turns, easier launches and take offs and lower sink rates. The overall flight lasts longer. With the GP3300s the flight times are about as long as the FAUP 1950 because of the capacity and fast climbs. May even be longer.

Thanks for the input Brian, David, John and Dieter... But nowhere did I ask for help in my Mini Graphite setup. I was merely sharing my version of the mini graphite with the rest of ezone, be it succesful or a failure.

I honestly listen to everyone, but my setup is done, and there is NOTHING wrong with it... why? Because it's what I want to fly. I don't want to thermal, I don't want flight times, if I fold the wing you will see me blame no one. Please just sit back enjoy reading thread....

I know you guys have seen this shots before, but you can't have a Mini Graphite thread without some pictures... Of note this plane is heavy compared to my s11. With servos the s11 is about 15 oz. Without servos the Mini G is about 25 oz... But there is carbon everywhere and it's a two piece wing so ther will be more wight.

pic of my hacker b50 with the jeti 70 opto and a ubec (for the flaps and servos), both devices are wrapped in kapton tape and the motor is soldered directly to the esc. Also notice the all carbon RFM 18.5x12 blades...

Nothing but the best...

Fuse is made of a carbon/aramid (kevlar) weave. No shortage of carbon.....

not sure how this shot is going to look, but I am trying to catch a picture of the carbon on the top layer of the wing, AND the spar. Which is wrapped in some sort of composite.

This has been an interesting and informative discussion. It also shows how different perception of "good performance" we all have. (good climbing, fast soaring, extreme top speed, good thermaling, slow stalling speed, long flight time ...).

For me all these alternatives and possibility to setup your plane just as you like makes this hobby interesting. Is the setup good or bad depends on is it fun to fly or not.

Currently I have tried to put as much power as possible to my MG. When I get a faster plane, I propably make the MG lighter and more "thermaling oriented" than today.

http://kotisivu.mtv3.fi/lentskareita/mg3.mpg

You have propably seen this video before. It shows the difference of these tree planes. The middle MG is the lightest one.

In "climb and dive" as well as in "landing" section we see the "heavy ones". This is what I meant with "resonably good climbing".

Olli

Just so you know soho, I read the original post as "is this a good setup?" as well... Or at least until you specifically said "This is what I am doing, shut up..."

-Kelly

Originally posted by kbw99
Just so you know soho, I read the original post as "is this a good setup?" as well... Or at least until you specifically said "This is what I am doing, shut up..."

-Kelly

Ok, maybe I need to return to english class but

"That said here is how I have decided to set up my mini graphite.
" <> "Say, can you help me pick another motor system?"

What in the world am I not understanding? Your second translation of sohoenglish was spot on...

I guess this is the same as my Stork. Even though I am using something that no one else is, and others suggest different options, I feel that what I am using is working perfectly for my application.
Sorry to have mis-read your initial post. The system in post #1 sounds like it will work out for what you want to do. -- John P

No big deal John. I may have come off harsher than I intended. At anyrate, I still listened to you, and I ran the numbers on the Hacker f5f setup (b40) and the power is about the same, BUT the b40 setup pulls 120 amps vs 70 amps with the b50. I want the Mini Graphite to be faster than my flash 8.

No hard feelings...

Soho; what numbers is your computer program showing you for your setup...im intrested in climb rate ,and amps,and moter duration.... great pictures,,,send more pictures..Lee

12 hrsc 2600 cells 150oz thrust

16 cp1700 176oz of thrust

The weight is the same, so the climb on 16 cells is better, right around 3700 - 4000 fpm.

nice....