flieslikeabeagl

I hope this thread is'nt going to turn out like the TS11 one. You've made some good reading, but can we get back to the Acromaster in general. I would imagine that any new comers to this thread who actually own an Acromaster may be put off by the pages of motor and prop facts that you so far have posted here in the last couple of days. For me its getting a little tiresome And there does'nt seem to be much discussion going on.

I'm just concerned that this great thread is going to turn ugly

Mark

Originally Posted by flieslikeabeagl

...
First off, we can ignore the one or two confused folks with "Multiplex religion", who believe that anything built by Multiplex is automatically better than anything made by just about anybody else.
...
-Flieslikeabeagle

Please be informed that I reported you to the moderators for that comment.

I hope early action will avoid escalation.

Jürgen

Originally Posted by flieslikeabeagl

...
Also scattered through this thread there are numerous complaints about the Acromasters too-weak landing gear, several about the too-weak motor mount, and a few about the pushrod routing which causes excessive friction.

Another question in my mind is whether moulded (semi) solid foam is a good choice for a model of this nature and this size. By nature, solid EPS, EPP, or Elapor foam is not particularly lightweight in large sizes
...
-Flieslikeabeagle

Please note that those complaints are not posted by experienced modelers.

The AcroMaster was not designed for beginners.

All bigger AcroMaster parts are not solid and therefore pretty light for their size. There are no reports at all complaing about lack of stiffness, despite having removable wing panels.

The damage tolerance compared to a conventional balsa model of similar size/weight is much better. Feel free to try it!

Jürgen

Two more videos showing the potential of the AcroMaster can be found here:

http://www.flyinggiants.com/content/.../electrics.asp

Jürgen

Originally Posted by Jurgen Heilig

The damage tolerance compared to a conventional balsa model of similar size/weight is much better. Feel free to try it!

Jürgen

That, I am affraid is wrong. If you have seen my video Jurgen, you will see how little it takes to cause extreme damage to this plane. I will say that the wing, tail and most of the fuse is pretty good, but the nose area is way to thin.

I'm sure even Experienced pilots have the odd mishap.

I think that the Acro is aimed at people who are keen to get into 3D.

If I were an experienced 3D flyer I certainly would not go for this one.

Mark

Originally Posted by MarkJayne

That, I am affraid is wrong. If you have seen my video Jurgen, you will see how little it takes to cause extreme damage to this plane. I will say that the wing, tail and most of the fuse is pretty good, but the nose area is way to thin.

I'm sure even Experienced pilots have the odd mishap.

I think that the Acro is aimed at people who are keen to get into 3D.

If I were an experienced 3D flyer I certainly would not go for this one.

Mark

A model like the AcroMaster is not supposed to be flown into a slope. Your model stops instantly and the G-forces are extremely high. You also did not use the original soft spinner, and a much heavier than recommended battery.

When I posted my last mishap, somebody got a bit "bent out of shape":
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/show...&postcount=308

The AcroMaster will do 3D, but the design leans much more towards F3A.

Jürgen

Originally Posted by Jurgen Heilig

A model like the AcroMaster is not supposed to be flown into a slope. Your model stops instantly and the G-forces are extremely high. You also did not use the original soft spinner, and a much heavier than recommended battery.

When I posted my last mishap, somebody got a bit "bent out of shape":
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/show...&postcount=308

The AcroMaster will do 3D, but the design leans much more towards F3A.

Jürgen

Come now...

G-Force extremely high, Battery to heavy and the wrong spinner. I think someones looking for excuses here

Oh and what does the recommended battery weigh.

Mark

Originally Posted by MarkJayne

Come now...

G-Force extremely high, Battery to heavy and the wrong spinner. I think someones looking for excuses here

Mark

No need to look for excuses. Looking at the video, your AcroMaster stopped instantly. Landing against the slope in this manner is similar to flying against a solid wall.

The recommended pack range is 3s2000mAh to 3s 3200mAh.

The 3s2000 pack is 184g, while the heavier pack is 260g (my 3s2500 is 208g).

Jürgen

Hi
Markjane have watched your video several times and honestly would say your aparant problems would be solved if you flew from a decent site ie with a proper runway..If you continue flying it from the slope do remove the landing gear and try to land straight and leval and not like running in to a brick wall...gauranteed that will stop this unexplainable seperation of the nose...
urs 8tounge in cheak)

Originally Posted by urs

Hi
Markjane have watched your video several times and honestly would say your aparant problems would be solved if you flew from a decent site ie with a proper runway..If you continue flying it from the slope do remove the landing gear and try to land straight and leval and not like running in to a brick wall...gauranteed that will stop this unexplainable seperation of the nose...
urs 8tounge in cheak)

Yes its not really the answer is it. If you've seen it as many times as you say, you will notice that the landing gear hit the ground first and not the nose. If you think that hitting level ground is better, believe me its not, its made of the same stuff

If anything, the bank broke the fall, as it was at about the same angle as the Acro's fuse. If it were level ground it would of nosed in harder.

Mark

Originally Posted by Jurgen Heilig

Two more videos showing the potential of the AcroMaster can be found here:

http://www.flyinggiants.com/content/.../electrics.asp

Jürgen

Please vote for me Jürgen!! (Ian)

AM 3Ds like a beast, i dont fly mine with too much smooth, i have the CG too far back, a 1800 pack sitting right at the back of the battery shelf

Ian

Originally Posted by MarkJayne

You've made some good reading, but can we get back to the Acromaster in general.

Sure thing. I thought a look at suitable powertrains would be an interesting discussion, but perhaps not here. Anyone interested in choosing a powertrain (other than factory recommended) for the AM can always start a thread over in the power systems forum.

Originally Posted by MarkJayne

I'm just concerned that this great thread is going to turn ugly

I certainly am not going to turn it ugly. I cannot speak for anyone else, though!

-Flieslikeabeagle

Originally Posted by MarkJayne

I think that the Acro is aimed at people who are keen to get into 3D.

If I were an experienced 3D flyer I certainly would not go for this one.

Mark, I think you meant "If I were an inexperienced 3D flyer I certainly would not go for this one"?

I agree with you on that. A model this big and heavy will suffer a lot more damage in the inevitable crashes while learning 3D than a smaller, lighter model would. That comes down to simple physics and scaling laws, which are not kind to large, heavy models moving at speed. This is the reason why you can drop a lemon ten feet onto concrete with no damage, while a pumpkin dropped from the same height would shatter.

I don't do 3D, but one of my flying buddies had a little seven-ounce EPP 3D plane that was one of the most indestructible models I've seen - it would soak up dozens of crashes with virtually no damage. Perhaps the only RC model aeroplane I've seen that was even tougher is the little Air Hogs Aero Ace. Weighing about 20 grams (well under an ounce), you can fly it at full speed into a stone wall and it will suffer no damage.

The AM does look like a good choice to practice pattern type aerobatics, though, if the cost of getting it in the air is not an obstacle. Just as long as we understand that it will not be as tough as a smaller and lighter Elapor plane like the EasyStar.

I notice from the published dimensions that the AcroMaster is almost "square", i.e. the fusleage is about as long as the wingspan. That suggests to me that the AM is geared more towards smooth pattern-type flying than hard-core 3D maneuverability.

-Flieslikeabeagle

Originally Posted by flieslikeabeagl

Mark, I think you meant "If I were an inexperienced 3D flyer I certainly would not go for this one"?

I don't do 3D, but one of my flying buddies had a little seven-ounce EPP 3D plane that was one of the most indestructible models I've seen - it would soak up dozens of crashes with virtually no damage. Perhaps the only RC

I notice from the published dimensions that the AcroMaster is almost "square", i.e. the fusleage is about as long as the wingspan. That suggests to me that the AM is geared more towards smooth pattern-type flying than hard-core 3D maneuverability.

-Flieslikeabeagle

FLAB...

No I did mean experienced. This plane is'nt for the complete novice who decides that this is a good plane to have their first go at 3D or pattern-type flying. So to me, its aimed at somebody thats done this sort of flying before but would like a better plane to tweak their skills. Like I said earlier, the only 3D/ pattern plane that I've flown is my Mini Yak 54EP. If I were more capable of the sort of flying the Acro is designed for, I would look for an alternative.

At the end of the day, its not what type of plane the ACRO is, or who fly's it, its down to the strength of certain area's in that plane. Whilst its in the air, I probably can't fault it, its just that if you have a slight heavy landing or you nose over, damage can so easily be done. Its like when I tightened the motor housing onto the plane. You have to grip the nose quite firmly whilst screwing in the screws. You can feel then just how thin the nose area is, and you've got to take care not to squeeze to tight.

Am I the only one who thinks this. Maybe I am.

Mark

Mark, now I'm confused. Are you saying the AM is best for a novice 3D pilot? Best for an intermediate 3D pilot? Or best for an expert 3D pilot? I'm not trying to stir up an argument, I simply do not understand what you mean.

My wife is encouraging me to get an AM, and I might just do that. If I do, I will check the nose area you highlight for being too thin. I believe someone else earlier in this thread referred to strengthening this area of his AM with carbon fibre cloth, so I don't think you're the only one with complaints about the thin foam here.

-Flieslikeabeagle