HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Oct 29, 2011, 03:44 PM
Gopher huntin' stick jockey
turboparker's Avatar
East Bethel, MN USA
Joined Jul 2009
11,182 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfaulguy View Post
I can see the merits of not allowing the system to be turned off; after all you can't disable it on the Blade MCP X and nobody complains about that. But something they do complain incessantly about is the "twitchy" performance (and resulting crash damage) of the previous generation UM aircraft, such as the UM P-51. If the system does what Horizon claims it will, there would be absolutely no benefit to turning it off. I don't understand what folks who poo-poo it think they'll be gaining by disabling the stabilization. My apologies if I missed this in the 7 pages of posts, but did Horizon have any plans to push AS3X to those "legacy" UM aircraft? I could see the P-51 and Mosquito in particular really benefiting from this technology.
The mCP X is not a good analogy in this case, as it is impossible to fly without the flybarless unit engaged. The Beast, on the other hand, is quite easy to fly without stabilization, and some would have liked a switch to disable the system. I'm all for the system, but on planes that are neutral or positively-stable, a software switch would have been nice. When it's calm, the system will be compensating for things like roll & pitch-coupling during KE, ballooning when cutting power with an aft CG, P-factor torque & gyroscopic effects on takeoff, or when going over the top of a loop, etc. Some pilots would rather have the choice to do those things manually, if they wish.

Regarding the older 1s planes - the tech adds approximately 15 grams, going by the weight difference between the new & old Beast. The Mustang will fly terribly with an extra 15 grams on-board, as will the other single-engine 1s planes. The 8.5mm 'pager motors' are already marginal on the stock airframes, and they suffer high failure rates. An extra 15 grams would be a major performance-killer, and would tax the motors even more. I fly the Mossie with a 15-gram keychain cam under the belly. It carries the weight better than the other brushed UMs, but it loses all aerobatic capability, it comes in hot, and climb-rate is very poor. Plus, the factory 150 mAh UM cell is already overloaded just flying the stock P-51, XP, F4U, etc; and the Mossie cell is also heavily taxed already. Adding the system to the 1s brushed planes would likely require bigger, higher-quality cells - which means even more weight.

Joel
turboparker is offline Find More Posts by turboparker
RCG Plus Member
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Oct 29, 2011, 05:07 PM
Your customer
Silverexpress's Avatar
Berkley, MI
Joined Dec 2009
1,381 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by turboparker View Post
The mCP X is not a good analogy in this case, as it is impossible to fly without the flybarless unit engaged. The Beast, on the other hand, is quite easy to fly without stabilization, and some would have liked a switch to disable the system. I'm all for the system, but on planes that are neutral or positively-stable, a software switch would have been nice. When it's calm, the system will be compensating for things like roll & pitch-coupling during KE, ballooning when cutting power with an aft CG, P-factor torque & gyroscopic effects on takeoff, or when going over the top of a loop, etc. Some pilots would rather have the choice to do those things manually, if they wish.

Regarding the older 1s planes - the tech adds approximately 15 grams, going by the weight difference between the new & old Beast. The Mustang will fly terribly with an extra 15 grams on-board, as will the other single-engine 1s planes. The 8.5mm 'pager motors' are already marginal on the stock airframes, and they suffer high failure rates. An extra 15 grams would be a major performance-killer, and would tax the motors even more. I fly the Mossie with a 15-gram keychain cam under the belly. It carries the weight better than the other brushed UMs, but it loses all aerobatic capability, it comes in hot, and climb-rate is very poor. Plus, the factory 150 mAh UM cell is already overloaded just flying the stock P-51, XP, F4U, etc; and the Mossie cell is also heavily taxed already. Adding the system to the 1s brushed planes would likely require bigger, higher-quality cells - which means even more weight.

Joel
It sounds like you got your hands on one! Can you tell us more about it? Pics would be nice. Are you a beta tester and is there a possibility of us becoming one still?

I stuck one of those piezo gyros in my UM P51, and it flies awesome. Real scale like all around especially on takeoff and landings. Got rid of the twitchiness.
Silverexpress is offline Find More Posts by Silverexpress
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2011, 05:15 PM
Registered User
McCarthy, Alaska
Joined Jun 2004
1,133 Posts
Been thinking about that added weight. Not gonna get rid of my old Beast. Not sure what the added 15 grams will do to the performance we have come to love
WSEN is offline Find More Posts by WSEN
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2011, 06:07 PM
Your customer
Silverexpress's Avatar
Berkley, MI
Joined Dec 2009
1,381 Posts
What I've learned from Turboparker and Binaryclock have put me on the fence regarding my pre-order. I'm really considering on canceling it now. Their knowledge and opinion of this AS3x system from the users point of view is unparalleled.

I've been working the 6pm-6am shift these past weekends (Aug-Oct), and that $139 was earned from heavy metal, oil filled air, and a work environment that generates over 100 decibels of metallic noise. What do you guys think (Turboparker/Binaryclock) should I cancel my order? I'm really keen now on basing my decision on what you guys say.

I was halfway thru programming my own 3-axis gyro unit, known as the Phubar. When this AS3x was announced. I was elated! The programming I've been doing is no walk in the park, and it was starting to feel more like work than a hobby! Let me know what you guys think - should I buy it or not? If not I'll go back to the hardship and toil of making my own.... I know nothing about this AS3x, but I have been learning from the best....

http://code.google.com/p/phubar/

If this AS3x does not work, I know I listened to the right guys.
Silverexpress is offline Find More Posts by Silverexpress
Last edited by Silverexpress; Nov 04, 2011 at 09:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2011, 08:57 PM
Gopher huntin' stick jockey
turboparker's Avatar
East Bethel, MN USA
Joined Jul 2009
11,182 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverexpress View Post
It sounds like you got your hands on one! Can you tell us more about it? Pics would be nice. Are you a beta tester and is there a possibility of us becoming one still?

I stuck one of those piezo gyros in my UM P51, and it flies awesome. Real scale like all around especially on takeoff and landings. Got rid of the twitchiness.
SE,

I don't have one. However - between the official videos and these threads, the Horizon guys have explained it pretty well. The flight-behavior I describe is based on what Dave & David have already told us, and what the guys said about the system in the videos. I also have a basic understanding of how damping systems, flybarless systems, and full autopilots work.

If I were you, I wouldn't cancel the order. I am confident that the new Beast will do exactly what the team intended to do. I am very much looking forward to getting mine!

Joel
turboparker is offline Find More Posts by turboparker
RCG Plus Member
Old Oct 30, 2011, 02:02 AM
I hate winter!
binaryclock's Avatar
Canada, ON, Barrie
Joined Jul 2011
1,737 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by WSEN View Post
Been thinking about that added weight. Not gonna get rid of my old Beast. Not sure what the added 15 grams will do to the performance we have come to love
Since the wing area didn't increase it won't be able to go as slow as the original beast. The original beast is still going to be the best choice for a calm day.
binaryclock is offline Find More Posts by binaryclock
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2011, 02:09 AM
I hate winter!
binaryclock's Avatar
Canada, ON, Barrie
Joined Jul 2011
1,737 Posts
Silverexpress:

I am just a newbie to RC flying - don't listen to me. I do have lots of experience with the Beast airframe, probably around 500 flights. However I still don't have a fraction of knowledge, experience, or skill as someone like Turboparker or anyone else on this forum. Sure Turbo being the nice guy he is will say otherwise, but the truth is I have only been in this hobby since the start of summer 2011 and other people have been in this for 20+ years.

AS3X will be pretty awesome. I was in a really bad mood the other day. I do wish they would allow us to disable it, but like someone said, it's probably because they don't want people crashing the plane and asking for warranty replacements.

I'm sure we'll be able to find a way to disable it from correcting the servos, but it will be a hard hack and not a simple switch provided by HH. I think that if HH felt that AS3X wasn't worth its weight in gold, then they wouldn't take their best selling UMX and most popular and plop it in there without a way to disable it. HH is a company and they are looking for profit. To profit on this, they'd make damn sure that AS3X passed with all their expert/pro testers otherwise they'd just be slicing their own wrists. If they weren't sure about AS3X they'd bring it out on the T-28 or something first... not the Beast, their flagship UMX model besides the Sbach.

I certainly wouldn't cancel your order. The 3D Beast is going to be a big deal. $139 is still a good price. I am glad they were able to offer it at this price without the charger/battery instead of something like $169+ which I would of been upset.

December isn't too far away. We'll all know how well it functions soon. going forward, this is the only Beast we can purchase anyways so trust me, even if you don't like it, you'll be able to sell it with no problems. Certainly not a bad investment either way.


SILVER - Your 3 axis unit is awesome. Did you do all the SMT board component soldering/work yourself? What is your job? I'm going to check out your code in the morning.
binaryclock is offline Find More Posts by binaryclock
Last edited by binaryclock; Oct 30, 2011 at 02:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2011, 02:30 AM
I hate winter!
binaryclock's Avatar
Canada, ON, Barrie
Joined Jul 2011
1,737 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfaulguy View Post
I can see the merits of not allowing the system to be turned off; after all you can't disable it on the Blade MCP X and nobody complains about that. But something they do complain incessantly about is the "twitchy" performance (and resulting crash damage) of the previous generation UM aircraft, such as the UM P-51. If the system does what Horizon claims it will, there would be absolutely no benefit to turning it off. I don't understand what folks who poo-poo it think they'll be gaining by disabling the stabilization. My apologies if I missed this in the 7 pages of posts, but did Horizon have any plans to push AS3X to those "legacy" UM aircraft? I could see the P-51 and Mosquito in particular really benefiting from this technology.
bfaulguy:

The problem exists when the wind becomes too gusty or the system doesn't act as it should. Helis are a different "beast" to use a pun. Also I don't think the gyros were put on the helis to correct the wind - rather to make the plane more stable in general. The beast will be flown outdoors 90% of the time in 15km/h winds. Something that the micro helis probably wouldn't be doing.
binaryclock is offline Find More Posts by binaryclock
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2011, 08:30 AM
Registered User
United States, CO, Lakewood
Joined Mar 2007
2,865 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by WSEN View Post
Been thinking about that added weight. Not gonna get rid of my old Beast. Not sure what the added 15 grams will do to the performance we have come to love

Don't forget the motor in the new 3D Beast has bit more power. 2300kv to 2500kv
ColoradoHeliNut is offline Find More Posts by ColoradoHeliNut
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2011, 11:12 AM
Registered User
Joined Oct 2009
221 Posts
Really cool

HI all.
Really intriged with this technology, and have questions and an assumption.
I think the Beast is a pretty good deal considering the components you are getting for the money, but also thinking about buying the the reciever only, and putting it in a "slower" wing loading air frame.
Does anybody know what the ESC is now rated at?
Can the rcvr drive larger servos, such as an HS-55
Also, I would assume that the gyro system would only work properly if the full compliment of control surfacies are used,for example, if one was to attempt to use elevator and rudder only, would the system now only correct for yaw, and not roll with the rudder, etc.

Thanks, RUD.
RUDDERLESS is offline Find More Posts by RUDDERLESS
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2011, 11:47 AM
Gopher huntin' stick jockey
turboparker's Avatar
East Bethel, MN USA
Joined Jul 2009
11,182 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUDDERLESS View Post
HI all.
Really intriged with this technology, and have questions and an assumption.
I think the Beast is a pretty good deal considering the components you are getting for the money, but also thinking about buying the the reciever only, and putting it in a "slower" wing loading air frame.
Does anybody know what the ESC is now rated at?
Can the rcvr drive larger servos, such as an HS-55
Also, I would assume that the gyro system would only work properly if the full compliment of control surfacies are used,for example, if one was to attempt to use elevator and rudder only, would the system now only correct for yaw, and not roll with the rudder, etc.

Thanks, RUD.
RUD,

4.9A ESC

The brick can drive larger servos, as can the other UM bricks. It has integrated rudder & elevator servos, so you'll have to disconnect them & add your own connectors.

Most likely, the system would not "know" that it needs to correct roll with rudder on a RET plane. Hopefully, Dave or David will chime in on this.

Joel
turboparker is offline Find More Posts by turboparker
RCG Plus Member
Old Oct 31, 2011, 11:16 AM
Registered User
Joined Oct 2009
221 Posts
Thanks turbo

Quote:
Originally Posted by turboparker View Post
RUD,

4.9A ESC

The brick can drive larger servos, as can the other UM bricks. It has integrated rudder & elevator servos, so you'll have to disconnect them & add your own connectors.

Most likely, the system would not "know" that it needs to correct roll with rudder on a RET plane. Hopefully, Dave or David will chime in on this.

Joel

ESC, bigger than I thought.
To take the control surface issue a step further, maybe even using one aileron servo instead of two, as in the P51 etc, may cause problems.
I wouldn’t want to be a HH employee, having to put up with guys like me all day

RUD
RUDDERLESS is offline Find More Posts by RUDDERLESS
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2011, 05:58 PM
Gopher huntin' stick jockey
turboparker's Avatar
East Bethel, MN USA
Joined Jul 2009
11,182 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUDDERLESS View Post
ESC, bigger than I thought.
To take the control surface issue a step further, maybe even using one aileron servo instead of two, as in the P51 etc, may cause problems.
I wouldn’t want to be a HH employee, having to put up with guys like me all day

RUD
RUD,

They went to the 4.9A ESC on the Sbach's AR6400NBL brick. Opened up a lot of possibilities, as compared to the V1 Beast's 3A ESC (AR6400LBL brick).

Not sure about the ailerons, but I'm hoping that the system will work with either setup. Hopefully, one of the Horizon guys will clarify this.

Joel
turboparker is offline Find More Posts by turboparker
RCG Plus Member
Old Oct 31, 2011, 07:06 PM
Sopwith Camel's Cousin
Between my tx and crashed aircraft
Joined Mar 2006
3,783 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by turboparker View Post
The mCP X is not a good analogy in this case, as it is impossible to fly without the flybarless unit engaged. The Beast, on the other hand, is quite easy to fly without stabilization, and some would have liked a switch to disable the system. ...

Regarding the older 1s planes - the tech adds approximately 15 grams, going by the weight difference between the new & old Beast. ...
The weight difference may only be 5g. Not as much as 15, but still quite a bit:
http://www.e-fliterc.com/Products/De...080#quickSpecs
gives a flying weight of 2.36 oz (67g) for the original UMX Beast

http://www.e-fliterc.com/Products/De...#quickFeatures
gives a flying weigh of: 2.54 oz (72 g) for the 3D AS3X UMX Beast,
and I think most of that added weight is from the larger battery.

Part of the complication with the weight calculations is that the manuals give much lower weights:
http://www.e-fliterc.com/ProdInfo/Fi...080-Manual.pdf
has 2.0 oz (57 g) for the original Beast on page 3 (I am guessing that this is without a battery).

http://www.e-fliterc.com/ProdInfo/Fi...-Manual_EN.pdf
has 2.0 oz (58 g) for the Beast 3D on page 3 (explicitly states no battery).
flying-llama is offline Find More Posts by flying-llama
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2011, 08:37 PM
Gopher huntin' stick jockey
turboparker's Avatar
East Bethel, MN USA
Joined Jul 2009
11,182 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by flying-llama View Post
The weight difference may only be 5g. Not as much as 15, but still quite a bit:
http://www.e-fliterc.com/Products/De...080#quickSpecs
gives a flying weight of 2.36 oz (67g) for the original UMX Beast

http://www.e-fliterc.com/Products/De...#quickFeatures
gives a flying weigh of: 2.54 oz (72 g) for the 3D AS3X UMX Beast,
and I think most of that added weight is from the larger battery.

Part of the complication with the weight calculations is that the manuals give much lower weights:
http://www.e-fliterc.com/ProdInfo/Fi...080-Manual.pdf
has 2.0 oz (57 g) for the original Beast on page 3 (I am guessing that this is without a battery).

http://www.e-fliterc.com/ProdInfo/Fi...-Manual_EN.pdf
has 2.0 oz (58 g) for the Beast 3D on page 3 (explicitly states no battery).
Holy crap. Let's see what's going on, here....

I just weighed a NIB V1 Beast & a couple of Eflite packs:

UMX Beast EW ------- 52.30 g
Eflite 120 2s pack ---- 9.02 g
UMX Beast AUW ---- 61.32 g

Eflite 180 2s pack ---- 12.48 g
AUW with Eflite 180 - 64.78 g

OK, so here's what we know:

A stock V1 Beast weighs 52.3 g empty, and 61.3 g w/120 mAh pack
A stock V1 Beast with the 180 mAh weighs 64.8 g
A stock 3D Beast weighs 58.0 g empty, and 70.5 g or 72 g w/180 mAh pack

Going by my measured EW for the V1, and Eflite's advertized EW for the 3D, the AS3X + 5A ESC + better servos adds 5.7 g to the airframe.

Going by my measured AUW for the V1 Beast w/Eflite 180 pack & my calculated AUW of the 3D, using Eflite's advertized EW & my pack weight, the difference is also 5.7 g.

However, going by my measured AUW of the V1, and Eflite's advertized AUW of the 3D, the difference is 7.2 g.

Therefore, we can conclude that the AS3X + 5A ESC + better servos adds either 5.7 g or 7.2 g to the weight of the Beast. Given that the V1 comes in below advertized weight, it is reasonable to think that the 3D will do the same. If true, 5.7g is most likely to be correct.

There!
I feel much better, now...

Joel
turboparker is offline Find More Posts by turboparker
RCG Plus Member
Last edited by turboparker; Oct 31, 2011 at 08:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Product UMX Hyper Taxi, UMX Beast 3D, and mSR X boredom.is.me Scratchbuilt Indoor and Micro Models 37 Oct 23, 2011 09:22 PM
Sold New in Box UMX Beast PatternFlyer Aircraft - Electric - Micro & Indoor Airplanes (FS/W) 1 Dec 22, 2010 09:55 AM
Sold UMX Beast BRAND SPANKIN NEW with extras Kev71H Aircraft - Electric - Micro & Indoor Airplanes (FS/W) 5 Dec 19, 2010 09:49 PM
Sold UMX Beast Brand New never flown H&H Aircraft - Electric - Micro & Indoor Airplanes (FS/W) 4 Dec 19, 2010 07:33 PM
For Sale UMX Beast Brand New never flown H&H Aircraft - Electric - Airplanes (FS/W) 1 Dec 19, 2010 12:24 PM