View Poll Results: Which type of combat do you prefer?
One design (same plane shape/size) with common and battery) 1 4.35%
Similiar planes (Kens single motor combat planes) and common motor and battery. 14 60.87%
No limits except battery size (900 mAh 2S) 3 13.04%
Anything that flies....no limits 5 21.74%
Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools
Jan 12, 2020, 05:04 PM
treefinder
springer's Avatar
Well proof is in the pudding ,try it and fly it. It's not like you really want to fly scale speeds, "here it com---- where'd it go?!?"
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Jan 13, 2020, 02:22 PM
Registered User
dbacon's Avatar
I been promising to show my Eclipson V, so here it is.

478 g = 1.05 lbs

Things I did that added weight:
- Air diverter structure inside fuse 2
- Scoop shaped air exits on the sides of fuse 2
- Traded PLA motor mount for Lite ply firewall/mount (added-subtracted weight???)
- Real hinges made of 1mm CF rod and 1mm ID tubing, full length on 4 control surfaces (Tape is for gift wrap and Exacto slip ups)
- Metal gear servos
- Music wire on servo ends of ruddervator control rods with set-screw adjustment on servo horn
- Added inside structure to canopy to hold sides in (paranoid about losing pilot)
- Magnet latch and metal plate for cockpit retainer (Velcro would have been lighter, maybe better too)
- Printed rings to join fuse 2-3 and 3-4 for better alignment
- 6mm wide strips to cover all wing joints because they were ugly
- Same strip to cover canopy joint, it was double ugly
- 4mm CF rods for left and right replaced with one long one tip-to-tip
- MLG and fairings enlarged to accept 51mm GWS lite wheels (Wish I could get more of them)
- Metal collet/spinner on motor for prop (The recommended motor came with it)
- 650mAh battery
- Used big klunky servo extensions ans Y splitter for ailerons (Too lazy to solder up new custom extensions and Y junction)
- Depron foam cover over cables to keep them out of the air flow path

Things I did that probably reduced weight:
- No nuts and bolts wherever plastic was involved, glued it together instead
- No PLA nut holders used (as in the plans)
- Vase printed fuse 3 and 4, so no internal structure (selected "merge all outlines into a single solid model" in S3D slicer)
- No servo mounts in wings or fuse 2, glued them directly instead

Things I am cautious about:
- The nose joints (fuse 1 to 2) broke while handling, so added joiner strips there too
- A couple delaminations (sp?) occurred in the wing, hopefully no more will occur
- Tiny 1" long antennas on Orange RX receiver scares me, but has always passed range checks...
- Haven't flown in three years, but I was good back then...

Whoa! I forgot the screws for the servo arms! Hope I remember them before I fly...
Last edited by dbacon; Jan 13, 2020 at 02:29 PM.
Jan 15, 2020, 01:03 PM
Registered User
XDmToter's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbacon
- Tiny 1" long antennas on Orange RX receiver scares me, but has always passed range checks...
I've had very good luck converting those little quarter wave mono-poles to di-poles. Just strip back the outer plastic to expose the braided shield, wrap a 28 awg copper around it, solder it in place, bend it down at a 120 degree angle, and cut it off at 31 MM.

Search the webs for "2.4ghz inverted vee"
Jan 15, 2020, 01:06 PM
Registered User
XDmToter's Avatar
Oh... I just took a closer look at your photo. it looks like the mono-pole is soldered directly to the board. Probably no way to convert that to a di-pole.
Jan 15, 2020, 04:39 PM
AKA Larry
I never had a plane fly out of receiver range. I have used both Spektrum knock offs and Orange units. In fact Eric flew a blue baby from Mikes place all the way toooooo..............never mind

Larry
Jan 15, 2020, 06:58 PM
It's always C A V U
got-one's Avatar
First call for breakfast tomorrow...

Dave F
>< *>
Jan 15, 2020, 07:11 PM
treefinder
springer's Avatar
Shall we see if Moni's is open?
Jan 15, 2020, 08:53 PM
AKA Larry
Sure
Jan 15, 2020, 09:31 PM
Registered User
Moni’s it is. 08:30?
Jan 15, 2020, 09:43 PM
It's always C A V U
got-one's Avatar
yes 8:30
Jan 15, 2020, 10:32 PM
Registered User
XDmToter's Avatar
The only time I had a range issue (or what I perceived to be such) was using a Turnigy 9x. I tore it down and found that one of the PC Boards was actually delaminating. Those radios were so cheap, I just bought another one. The bad one has been canibalized for switches and such, so it wasn't a total waste. At least I have spare parts for these cheap Chinese radios. I see now that they've actually gone UP in price by 50% since the days when I was buying them regularly for family and friends.
Jan 15, 2020, 10:52 PM
Registered User
OK. Moni's at 8:30...
Jan 16, 2020, 07:35 AM
Registered User
dbacon's Avatar
Thank you guys for the Rx info, I appreciate your insight into my concern for those tiny antennas. I have used a few of these receivers in smaller planes, flown outdoors with no problem, I just can't get over how they can receive enough signal with little antennas not much more than an inch long...
I now feel more confident, but I will still do an extensive range check!

XDmToter - There was a lot of interesting antenna info in response to the search for "2.4ghz inverted vee" , thanks. I do understand a little bit of it from my R.E.T.S. training back in '64... I see you understand a lot more.

DecoKid, - Thanks for the note of confidence in the newer 2.4g Rx units.
Last edited by dbacon; Jan 16, 2020 at 08:08 AM.
Jan 16, 2020, 05:09 PM
treefinder
springer's Avatar
Dave, ya gotta remember that antenna length is determined by frequency/wave length. While the antenna length for72 mhz was 31 inches (or so), the antenna length for the much higher frequency (and shorter wave length) 2.4 ghz is 31 millimeters (or so). Whereas the entire wire length of the 72 receivers was the antenna, on a typical 2 4 receiver with about 6 inches of wire, only the last inch is the actual antenna, the rest is coax to help with positioning the antenna away from blocking things like batteries, motors, etc or wires /CF. The little receivers with two pigtails just eliminate the coax, and replace with two antennas for diversity effect that allows use of the one with strongest signal. I suppose there are situations where a length of coax would be better to get antenna outside of a shielding airframe, but for foamies it is pretty much immaterial. I have several planes painted with aluminum paint which may or not be a shield at ghz frequencies and never have issues with the antenna laying inside the fuse. For 2.4, orientation is the most critical issue. One wants the antenna oriented to minimize potential for it to be pointing straight back (or away) from the TX. That orientation is absolute minimum signal strength. The only times I have had issues with my planes is when I lay the rx/antenna straight back in fuse (convenience or laziness) and I am flying away from myself. I will get glitches, remember and turn plane so antenna side is to me regaining good signal/response. With the twin whiskers, aligned 90 degrees to each other signal loss from orientation is further minimized.

In DSM and early DSM2 days, the catastrophic part of the issue was not signal loss (momentary), but the relatively higher voltage required and reboot time of the receivers. In my planes running FlySky protocol reboots are effectively instantaneous. My understanding is that DSMX RXs are also superfast reboot and reacquure, so no worries.
Jan 16, 2020, 05:39 PM
Registered User
dbacon's Avatar
Mike,

Thank you for the additional information, it is reassuring and I feel less apprehension about these little antennas now. I will try to orient the antenna to maximize the pickup when the plane is pointed away from the TX, and as when straight above, using the 90 degree arrangement of the two small wires.
This will put one arranged side to side and one up and down.


It just seems too good to be true that the performance is similar to the old 31 inch antennas, as it seems like they could "capture" more energy than these silly little things.

Thanks again!
Last edited by dbacon; Jan 16, 2020 at 05:45 PM.


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Flyers in SE Michigan Fungoo Electric Plane Talk 18 Aug 15, 2014 12:14 PM
E-flyer clubs in SE Michigan? LBM Electric Plane Talk 8 Dec 17, 2008 06:31 AM
Yippee! Any Foamy Flyers On Or Near Elizabeth City, N.c??? nieves50 Foamies (Kits) 31 Mar 06, 2004 09:11 PM
Flint, Michigan E-Flyers ??? crashnburn Electric Plane Talk 21 Dec 04, 2001 05:54 PM
Slope sites SE Michigan or NW Ohio? daveh Electric Sailplanes 4 Jul 27, 2001 06:37 PM