I'll probably use the included 3-blader. I have a BP12 just waiting for this kit to arrive. The rubber spinner fits on the threaded prop shaft perfectly.

Although I'm sure a duBro would work just as well, or one of the new eSpinners.

Pat

Originally Posted by crxmanpat

I'll probably use the included 3-blader. I have a BP12 just waiting for this kit to arrive. The rubber spinner fits on the threaded prop shaft perfectly.

Although I'm sure a duBro would work just as well, or one of the new eSpinners.

Pat

question the Bp21 (is the power version of the bp12) it will give you 22oz/623g of thrust using a 11.1 volt 3 cell lipo pulling around 14 amps would this not be under powered! as I think the flying weight is of the new P40 is22.9oz up to 26oz?

I have never flown any of the new larger GWS fighters so i'm just going by what I'm finding doing online research!

The "problem" with the BP21 (or TP2409-12) is that the motor is limited to an 8*4 or 8*6 prop. Understanding the thrust comes from the airfoil of the prop, but if the cowl is too close, you may loose some efficiency. I have the 2409's n my P-38 and the cowl is quite small - like the older sized GWS planes. I think the 8*x prop would get lost on the P-40. Might work - who knows until you try it.

Jim

Originally Posted by Blaze.45

Wow Ken, glad you're here. Best wishes to you on the recovery. Also, I didn't know about the 49th Pursuit USAAF squadron defending Darwin with their lives... now I think I'd like to do mine in that scheme also. We'll see...
-Chris

Livingstone Airfield was named after Lieutenant John D Livingstone USAAF who was killed on 4 april 1942 and Strass Airfield was named after Capatain Allison Strass USAAF who was killed on 29 April 1942 . Lieutenant Owen Fish USAAF was also killed on the 29 April 1942 . Lieutenant Ed Miller USAAF was killed on 6 June 1942 and Lieutenant William Payne USAAF was killed on the 10 Jun 1942. Lieutenant Chester Namola USAAF disapeared while flying combat on 16 June 1942 and has never been found.

The 49th Pursuit Group USAAF consisted of three squadrons,the 7th, 8th and 9th and they had many sucesses here. The biggest success being on 23 August 1943. Twenty seven Japanese bombers escorted by fifteen Zeros attacted Huges Airfield and of these, seven Bettys and eight Zeros were shot down for the loss of one P-40 but the P-40's pilot was not killed. This success makes one wonder how come the P-40 has such a poor repution nowdays.

Ken

Originally Posted by kensp

This success makes one wonder how come the P-40 has such a poor repution nowdays.

Ken

I think almost any bird that was loaned/leased is looked down upon by people with a moderate interest in WWII history. Many people would argue that the US would never give away it's "front line stuff". That said most people who quote lines like that are best to shut there yap as they weren't even around during the war.

It's pretty obvious that by wars end Allied fighters had made a lot of advances. But the P-40 having a bad rap? Nahh I don't think so. Heck some will even argue the merits of the P-39 <under 15K angles> and you must admit, it's one unique bird!

P-40's of the AVG were successful mostly due to training/tactics. The enemy counterparts weather we like it or not were well trained <better?> then out avg service person. By the time we entered the war Japanese pilots had pretty much nailed down there tactics.

Many early allied fighter and unfortunately serviceman was lost as we learned the hard way to counter the Japanese pilots and there tactics. As our guys learned hit and run tactics and how to keep the energy up in there fighters newer fighters <better?> were becoming available.

Even with these new fighters new tactics had to be employed to take advantage of them. If I recall correctly early P-38 squadrons got torn up pretty bad in the pacific dog fighting Zeros. Before you P-38 guys take offence to that I believe that was written by Japanese ace Subro Saki <SP?>.

To make it easy Ill be doing mine in a Reno Racer scheme. If anyone has any info on one racing at reno, please PM me!

Tommy D

Originally Posted by kensp

What the H*ll has the above got to do with postage. This is a peronal attack on myself, to draw attention away from the postage matter and the fact that the Australia Post quote for postage of a GWS-190 size kit box weighing 1001gms to 2000 gms is more than twice your $20 postage quote.
As a matter of fact the GWS inner and outer boxes for the Early Bird GWS-190 weigh 2364 grams and the contents of the box add another 500 grams.
So it would appear that your quote for AUD $20 postage, to Darwin, on a kit that will travel 4500 Km in the back of a truck is for a box that is not securely packed and is liable to be damaged when it arrives here.
Ken

I am not attacking anyone and I do not need to draw attention away from FACTS, facts which another member just confirmed. You were offered a replacement 262 kit at a discount rate to help you out, you shunned that and chose to order overseas from UH, (who incidentaly has changed all its GWS pricing to bring it inline with the rest of the world) then you argued incessantly with the rest of us about CG and lost another plane.

I send all my GWS kits double boxed as thats how I receive them, My quote of $20.00 is for up to 3 kilos sent registered mail to 0800. The actual cost is $19.30. There are NO VARIABLES here Ken, you can argue all you like, you are not in business and you have not sent boxes around Australia for 17 yrs, I have.

The fact you continue to clutch at straws bringing up inane points like bad packaging shows you value pride more than offers of help and discounts that might have benefitted you. You are the only person I have ever come across who would argue that snow is black rather than accept that someone can actually do what they claim, even when they are backed up by other people at the same time!

Originally Posted by kensp

I asume you were talking about GWS when you made the quoted statement but you should be more worried about companies like the Chinese internet retailer United Hobbies. They make more than 1,000 sales every week.
United Hobbies can supply a GWS-190 NPS kit, a 2215 outrunner motor, an 18 amp ESC and a 1700 mAh 20C three cell battery delivered, by EMS in a double inner and outer box, to the door of any modeler in Sydney for AUD$135.
Using the prices on the http://www.extremerc.com.au/ web site the same combination will cost a total of AUD $246 without postage. You say that people who are buying overseas are just saving a couple of dollars but the saving on this quoted combination is 45% and thats a lot more than a couple of dollars.
Ken

Comparing apples with oranges again Ken?? get some perspective ok

If I was selling cheap motors like UH I could put a $20.00 motor in with an FW190, if I was selling cheap batteries and ESC's I could do the same. I choose to sell a range of products that have factory backed service and work as they are designed to.

If I was living in China on $4.00 a day I could afford to offer full service and still make only 5-10% over factory cost. I refuse to buy many items overseas because it invariably hurts Australians and the Australian economy. You have the choice to do what you like and I respect the choices people make unconditionally, but don't you go comparing an Australian business with a Chinese one!

When you stop making excuses for buying from overseas by telling people how hard it is to ship locally, then I will stop refuting your inaccurate claims.

Extreme_RC

your Last 2 post have nothing to do with the GWS P40!

and then you post this (I am not attacking anyone and I do not need to draw attention away from FACTS)

Please keep the GWS P40 thread clear of all he said she said you don't call it attacking but come on please.

Originally Posted by jamesdr

The "problem" with the BP21 (or TP2409-12) is that the motor is limited to an 8*4 or 8*6 prop. Understanding the thrust comes from the airfoil of the prop, but if the cowl is too close, you may loose some efficiency. I have the 2409's n my P-38 and the cowl is quite small - like the older sized GWS planes. I think the 8*x prop would get lost on the P-40. Might work - who knows until you try it.

Jim

I feel a bit like the bee. Aerodynamic theory proves irrefutably that the bee can't fly. Fortunately no-one has told the bee which flies happily and indeed makes some honey on the side.

I didn't know the 2409-12 is limited to a 8040 or an 8060 so here's me been happily flying my P47D and my Formosa "Bad News" on a 9075HD.
The Formosa may be pretty slick aerodynamically but the "Jug" certainly isn't. I'll admit I don't fly WOT all the time and I haven't decided what motor to put into my P-40 but Jim I think it would be OK with the 2409-12 and the bigger prop (I'm sure a 9050 would be fine for amp draw but short of pitch speed)

There are now so many variations of the original BP21 and the BP12 that you need a science degree (and a crystal ball because the spec sheets are so inconsistent) to figure out the differences but I do agree with Jim that the "original" BP21 - the one with the silver bell and no labels - didn't like anything bigger than an 8060 while the "original" BP12 - with the black bell and no labels- was happy swinging bigger props but slower.

The 2409-12 is an odd one out because all the "bell" motors whether they have a BP or a TP designation are in the 80-125-ish watt range whereas the 2409-12 (because it has neodymium magnets ?????) is up around 200 watts and so is a different box of soldiers altogether.

These are assumptions I've been working on for a while so if someone can prove me wrong OK but be gentle with me

Edit: I just checked one of my sources and they're actually selling a 2409-12 and esc combo with a 9060 prop http://www.unitedhobbies.com/UNITEDH...idProduct=4708

Bad News is running a 9075? !! Man - the paint must be blistered off from the friction I really ought to put a 2409-12 on a mule with different props and pull some real time data. I've not put a bigger prop on it 'cause I read the data sheet. Maybe I should take after the bee!

Jim

Jim I already have great admiration for you. If you can make sense of the TP spec sheets it now has no bounds. For anyone interested one version of the spec sheet is included at the link I gave above.

The paint is only slightly blistered Jim - note what I said about not running WOT all the time (OK running WOT hardly any of the time )

Roger

Perhaps this copy of the Tower Pro specification sheet in Microsoft XL format will help you. I have highlighted the 2409-12s and 2409-18s. This specification sheet recomend 8 inch propellers but I expect that the 2409-18s, with their kV of 1000, would be able to swing larger propellers.

Ken

For anyone interested, I've done some extensive bench testing on the BP-21.

I would be happy to share that information with you -- just send me a PM with your e-mail address.

Am I the only one who is going to run 4S on this model?

Just for clarification, you guys have the numbers mixed up on your TP/BP motors.

BP21 = 2408-21 (8x6HD prop max)
BP12 = 2410-12 Delta/Triangle (9x5HD prop max)
2409-18 = Slightly larger motor than the BP21's and 12, so can handle more watts. 1000KV
2409-12 = Slightly larger motor again, so can handle more watts. 1600KV
2409-12D = Newer enclosed outrunner as shown above in Ken's pic.

However, Ken's pic shows the 2409-12 as a Thunder Power motor (typo?). It's Tower Pro as I'm sure he initally meant.

IMHO, the 2409-18 would be a better choice for this plane out of the mentioned TP/BP motors.

-Chris