SMALL - espritmodel.com SMALL - Telemetry SMALL - Radio
Reply
Thread Tools
This thread is privately moderated by RAY GWS, who may elect to delete unwanted replies.
Old Nov 03, 2006, 07:53 AM
Registered User
Ipoh, Perak Malaysia
Joined Jul 2006
4,011 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWS CHEN
Hi Friends,

I'll try to keep boss well informed of your words.

The manual in English will be published on GWS web site or this site as soon as possible.

I've today discussed the decal issue with Ray and another colleagues. Probably, the Me-109 one would be used instead if
it is in a hurry.

Chen

Are the Me109 ones at the same scale? Are they suitable for a particular squadron? How about the question on the availability of the 3900kv brushless with the plane?

chewy
chewytm is offline Find More Posts by chewytm
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Nov 03, 2006, 10:09 AM
AMA 353531
rdeis's Avatar
United States, CO, Colorado Springs
Joined Aug 2003
6,553 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronin4740
I think I might pass on this early bird. Did the math and realized what it's going to cost to do brushless power on the 262.
What do the 3900s cost- $25? As opposed to $10 for the 300H? Under $25 more for 15A ESCs, and the battery will be similar size. So you're looking at $50-$60 extra to go brushless..

With a kit motor (assuming you can wind it for similar performance) you could shave $30 off of that.

Not particularly cheap, but not certainly not exhorbitant like it use to be!
rdeis is offline Find More Posts by rdeis
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 10:47 AM
Confused? Who, me?
Roger Lombard's Avatar
United Kingdom, England, North York
Joined Jan 2005
4,790 Posts
If I've understood your maths right you're flying on one motor - can I come and watch?
Roger Lombard is offline Find More Posts by Roger Lombard
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 10:48 AM
Seeing the Farside.
Blaze.45's Avatar
Seattle WA, USA
Joined Aug 2005
4,285 Posts
lol roger
Blaze.45 is offline Find More Posts by Blaze.45
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 11:42 AM
Registered User
Ipoh, Perak Malaysia
Joined Jul 2006
4,011 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Lombard
If I've understood your maths right you're flying on one motor - can I come and watch?

Heh heh! I would like to watch too.
chewytm is offline Find More Posts by chewytm
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 12:04 PM
AMA 353531
rdeis's Avatar
United States, CO, Colorado Springs
Joined Aug 2003
6,553 Posts
Bah, the math'sd fine! (The assumptions, OTOH, always need to be checked carefully )

Did you forget to buy the brushed ESC, Roger? Detail:

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdeis
What do the 3900s cost- $25? As opposed to $10 for the 300H? Under $25 more for 15A ESCs, and the battery will be similar size. So you're looking at $50-$60 extra to go brushless..
(Estimated prices)
2 Brushed 300H motors: $20
1 Brushed 25A ESC: $25
2 Brushless GWS 3900 motors: $50
2 Brushless 15a escS: $50

Upgrade cost = $100 - $45 = only about $55 extra for brushless. Compare that to the days of the orginal A-10 where the extra cost for a brushless upgrade was $150 or more, and I think we're doing very, very well. And like I said, kit motors (though they often use more current and take extra time to build) can be even cheaper.

I assumed a 25A battery is needed for either case (the brushed may not draw that much), and left out connectors, wiring, heat sinks, and other incidentals, but they shouldn't be all that much much different brushed vs brushless.

But do keep keepin' me honest!

(Now if Mr Lin would put the same cost-saving work in to retracts that he's put into brushless motors, this airplane wouldn't be all that expensive! Heh..)
rdeis is offline Find More Posts by rdeis
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 12:11 PM
AMA 353531
rdeis's Avatar
United States, CO, Colorado Springs
Joined Aug 2003
6,553 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Lombard
flying on one motor
It's more scale that way, right?
rdeis is offline Find More Posts by rdeis
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 01:39 PM
rc transports rule!
new brunswick canada
Joined Jul 2002
1,301 Posts
maybe tossing both nacells in a kit for buyer to choose could be a better idea?
brushed motors with the larger nacelles for those of us who fly brushed,
and smaller nacelles packed in for those wanting to go brushless
the cargo trans has both sets of nacelles and cowls in the same box along with instructions for both versions so why not this?
it would be a good idea for all new releases to be setup for multiple arrangements
no changes needed to stuff like the mustang,zero or other fighters etc, but obvious ones like the cargo trans(which is done),BN2 islander(prop and fan),262(brushed,brushless) could bepackaged for ease of upgrade or alterations
i was really happy to find the quad nacelles, cowls and even the decals in my cargo twin box
i allowed my the option to build a quad from my plane
a bonus for GWS.....
a single package offering multiple aircraft selections
less package design,manuals,etc
derailed is offline Find More Posts by derailed
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 01:54 PM
AMA 353531
rdeis's Avatar
United States, CO, Colorado Springs
Joined Aug 2003
6,553 Posts
I think they did the right thing.

It's not hard to get good performance out of the 64 fans-- and if you got both sizes a lot of people would choose to build the more scale size but be dissapointed with the performance. (Recall that the A-10 was trivial to build as a twin pusher, but very few chose to do that and everyone else complained!)

Jet-scale flyers that want something more scale (and that have the pocketbooks and know-how to extract enough power from scale sized fans) can very easily fabricate more scale nacelles. 3 or 4 EDF-55 (EDF-50 might even be closer..) nacelles from an A-10 and a block of pink foam would take care of it in no more than a few hours.

I'd rather see more people happy with their stock 262 rather than tempting them to make the wrong choice by including both sizes.

We scale nuts can take care of ourselves!
rdeis is offline Find More Posts by rdeis
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 02:28 PM
rc transports rule!
new brunswick canada
Joined Jul 2002
1,301 Posts
hmmmmm
A-10 50s and 55s
i just got an idea for an experiment
lol
downfall to fans is thrust is less than props
makes sence since the props are smaller
maybe a pusher prop stuck in the smaller nacelles could help and still have that scale look
if i had the parts, i'd be tempted to experiment with it
derailed is offline Find More Posts by derailed
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 02:41 PM
AMA 353531
rdeis's Avatar
United States, CO, Colorado Springs
Joined Aug 2003
6,553 Posts
Absolutely. The scratchbuilders in the pusher forum have been doing this on 262s of similar and larger size for a while.

And scratch-and-bash has scratch-built 262s using A-10 nacelles and EDF-55s. It might actually be a great way to test the waters for someone that hasn't scratch-built before. But I want to get in the air quickly (don't say it, Red!) so I'm limiting my engineering work on this one. (-:
rdeis is offline Find More Posts by rdeis
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 02:41 PM
Confused? Who, me?
Roger Lombard's Avatar
United Kingdom, England, North York
Joined Jan 2005
4,790 Posts
rdeis - I'm sorry - I'm really not meaning to argue with your posts!!

I post this link simply to point out that if a single 55 fan can generate 720 g of thrust this set up would give you 1.40 kg of thrust on a 262 (or an A10). Now I'm the first to admit that the power input is a bit heavy but then again you wouldn't really need 3lbs of thrust for a 262 would you?

btw I think derailed has the right idea - put two sets of nacelles in the box. This is not going to be a plane for a beginner to brushless, never mind a beginner to flying. A couple of EPS nacelles would cost a few cents - my skills are not up to working a pair out of foam.

http://www.brchobbies.co.uk/?page=shop&item=161
Roger Lombard is offline Find More Posts by Roger Lombard
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 02:49 PM
AMA 353531
rdeis's Avatar
United States, CO, Colorado Springs
Joined Aug 2003
6,553 Posts
We're all friends here! heh..

Actually, if it weren't for the A-10's bad reputation I'd agree with you on this one, Roger.

But after the way the stock (even with 55s) A-10 gets ripped all the time I'd be a bit gunshy if I were Mr. Lin.
rdeis is offline Find More Posts by rdeis
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 03:11 PM
AMA 353531
rdeis's Avatar
United States, CO, Colorado Springs
Joined Aug 2003
6,553 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Lombard
my skills are not up to working a pair out of foam.
You sell yourself short! It's surprisingly easy to slap a small block of foam on to an A-10 nacelle and sand it all to shape.
rdeis is offline Find More Posts by rdeis
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 03, 2006, 03:38 PM
Confused? Who, me?
Roger Lombard's Avatar
United Kingdom, England, North York
Joined Jan 2005
4,790 Posts
I should come clean - I'm really looking at the 262 as a sloper so I won't be fitting motors! I'm sure we're in the process, right now, of seeing some real step changes in EDF fan performance and pricing so maybe in a year or so.....

I had an EDF55 A-10 - note the use of the past tense - and it would fly OK but it certainly wasn't an aerobatic performer. The video of the GWS 262 suggests they've maybe gone the other way a tad (but that's going to be what a lot of people want)
Roger Lombard is offline Find More Posts by Roger Lombard
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion GWS 262 EDF Jet GWS4CEO Foamy EDFs 14 Aug 03, 2008 08:28 AM
Discussion ****GWS262: Turbo Rocks the Sky!!**** RAY GWS Product Announcements 6 Aug 22, 2007 08:37 AM
Discussion GWS 262 comming soon! GWS4CEO Parkflyers 32 Jan 14, 2007 02:01 AM
GWS "turbo" daryl GWS (Grand Wing Servo) 10 Feb 12, 2004 11:43 AM
Brushless GWS P-51 ROCKS !!!!!! RMason Parkflyers 15 Jan 03, 2003 05:55 AM