|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Verrrry innnnnteresting.
The only MiniLaser 3D I've seen fly has an Astro 020 in it and isn't all that impressive, though I've never challenged him to a fly-off. I'm not surprised that the Phoenix does better.....better MOSFETs mean lower switching losses. Sounds like time to put my Phoenix in my SB. Patrick always uses the very best MOSFETs he can get, which is one of the reasons his controllers sometimes cost a bit more. |
|
Latest blog entry: Diverted from R/C to Free Flight (of a...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh I agree -- not faaaair
. But fun anyway . First time I've seen a 'park flyer' hover and accelerate out of the hover. This wasn't really mean't as a 'review' of which one's best. Each of us wanted to see the others plane as see how it performed and how they were built and covered. He flew mine and I flew his as well for one flight. Actually I am quite (very) satified with the performance of the AC1215/16. Can't think of anything short of true 3D flying that the SB 3D couldn't do with the motor. I like to tinker with gearboxs/props though -- just to see !The Phoenix-25 was backordered for about a month... That was why I had the Jeti in it instead as I couldn't wait .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, as mentioned, the planes can’t really be compared with such different power systems. From my vantage point of the two aircraft, (I was the one with the ML3D) I believe that they are very similar as far as airframes go and flight characteristics. They both have generous amounts of elevator and rudder. The ML3D has a little more aileron but after watching them fly the roll rates seem very similar. Stall is a gentle drop of the nose with no tipping characteristics on either model and inverted flight was very similar between both planes (I think that the SB actually required less down elevator than the ML3D though this could be attributed to my poor motor alignment). The only other major difference between our planes was that I have higher amounts of control throw on my plane (this explains the wicked snap and spin maneuvers but I believe that the SB would perform equally well, I just didn't want to try with a borrowed plane
).Anyhow, Mr. Rclark was defiantly exaggerating when he stated that he got his tail whipped. Every maneuver he performed was VERY smooth and exact as apposed to the jerky movements of my over sensitive Laser. Anyhow, IMHO, these are both wonderful flying models and I would recommend either as an entry to advanced level aerobatic plane. Now we just have to plan the next MEAF (Montana electric aircraft festival) Maybe we will have a record turnout of 3 participants!! ![]() Regards, Fwstingray |
|
|
|
|
|
I may have to bring MEAF up with the club in January for next year
. See where it goes . More than 3!! You have two more guys at least in your area and here in Butte, we have two IC guys that fly an electric!!! May be 6 guys plus spectators LOL. Of course, if Dreamer showed up, why that would triple the number of planes that'd be flying just in switchbacks LOL. Like to see him ROG his floats off the dirt field just kidding Martin .....Good time had by all .Got in 6 more flights this morning. Clear and sunny of course (Saturday was cloudy and rainy).
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm just covering my second Mini Laser, and ordered the Mega 16/15/7 last week. I also have a SB. I think the planes themselves are almost identicle. The big difference I see is that the Laser is sturdier. Which means heavier. Not that its better or worse. I'm useing it with the mega simply because of what I think is a little stronger wing. With the stock power setups, I lean a little more toward the SB as the funner flying plane. As Martin said, it is also a few oz. lighter. I would recomend either to anyone!
On a completely unrelated note, I treed my Acro-Cub yesturday. That was an exciting retrevel.... Last time I treed a plane it was a foamy. Just shook the branch till it fell. Can't do that with a balsa plane 40feet up :| Surprisingly, almost no damage. It was still flyable. The sad part is, the feild I was flying at was about 10 acers with trees on the far side. I had to work really hard to make it to the tree ![]() Darren |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
YEA!! We’ll give that NEAT thingy a run for its money!! The future is MEAF!! (Sorry, just my frustration taking over due to my inability to attend NEAT
![]() Addler, Sorry to hear you’ve got carnivorous trees there as well. We have one at my flying field that seems to have some sort of advanced mind manipulation power. People with barely enough skill to fly a straight line (me in particlular) are forced into a beautiful landing pattern right into its outstretched branches.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fwstingray,
Got a chance to try the APC 10x4.7SF this morning for two flights. Thumbs down . Didn't get the thrust I expected and speed was way slower -- and not 'just' slower, SLOWER. Didn't bother to try the 9x4.7SF ..... So back to the 10x7SF for me . Course I didn't bring with to the field; so I slapped the 9x6SF back on which I had. Flys really good with the prop, and lot more duration -- just not the vertical of the 10x7.
|
|
|
|
|
|
==Got a chance to try the APC 10x4.7SF ...So back to the 10x7SF for me ==
If I understand you correctly, you went from a 10x7 to a 10x4.7 expecting to get more thrust? You have to increase the prop diameter if you're dropping pitch. You should get less speed and more thrust. Try an 11x4.7 if your landing gear is tall enough. Fly for a few minutes and land and check motor temp. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tres,
I went from 10x7 to 10x4.7 for test this morning -- so same diameter prop. I understand what you said (but why?). But I just went over to p-calc and quickly put in (as an example) a 3:1 9x6 and 3:1 9x4.7 using the default 400 6V. The 9x6 had 9.8oz inflight thrust while the 9x4.7 had 10.8oz . Slower pitch speed though (plane will be slower). Still not sure what I am missing here..... Dropping pitch should have gave me more thrust and lower speed..... Instead I got lower speed, lower thrust (observed) . At least it really seemed that way. |
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree with rclark. Decreased pitch should force higher rpm on the same length prop and in turn increase thrust but decrease speed. Maybe you have maxed out the rpm that your motor/gearbox will produce. Could you re-gear a little higher? I'm kind of new to the electric aspect of RC so I could be wrong.
I bet 10 cells would help ![]() T.J. |
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Trying it pick--Switchback 3d vs miniflash | bigjake | Parkflyers | 7 | Apr 14, 2005 08:19 PM |
| Switchback 3D vs Flashback vs Miniflash | Martin Hunter | Parkflyers | 1 | Oct 07, 2002 09:47 AM |
| E3D vs Mini Laser 3D (does size matter?) | Ben74 | Sport Planes | 18 | Jun 14, 2002 12:50 AM |
| Switchback 3D vs Crazy Max | kansascloud | Parkflyers | 12 | Apr 28, 2002 12:01 AM |
| Mountain Models Switchback 3D | J Bergsmith | Parkflyers | 330 | Apr 08, 2002 11:18 AM |