Jump to content

pete taylor

Members
  • Posts

    517
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by pete taylor

  1. With rx batteries being in the order of 2500mAh these days and costing comparatively little, it's most unlikely that they'll expire during the course of a flying session. Also, when you consider that we're discussing multi-engined models that are more than capable of carrying the extra weight it's a simple insurance policy to have. I've been making a point of using a separate rx battery for a long time now without a problem and have witnessed several models lost due to esc or bec issues. You pays your money and takes your pick I guess!
  2. Just for the sake of throwing a curved ball in, why not dispense with the BEC altogether by isolating all of them and using a separate receiver battery? Safer than little black boxes and able to handle appreciable loads. Most multi-engined models are more than capable of carrying the extra weight.
  3. Hi Phil, you could, but you'll then need to buy a receiver to put between the tx and laptop which might be most of the price of the Quanum Cyclops anyway. Fpv works well on cars and is a lot of fun with a surprising range from the modest 25mW allowed
  4. Something like this - http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__89778__Quanum_ELITE_TX_CAMERA_COMBO_Micro_Cam_VTX_25mW_40CH_5_8GHz_NTSC_UK_Warehouse_.html With the Quanum Cyclops goggles will do the job for under ?100
  5. Posted by dirk tinck on 27/07/2016 22:23:28: Hi Pete ,thanks for replying,looks that you know your way arround with edf. Just thinking about what to do with the lack of exhaust area.I have a solution in mind but that would result in an oval instead of a round opening.Would that be a waste of time in your opinion ? I could make the outer shell hinged and opening mixed with the trottle or something like that...just tell me if thats to much theorie Cheers , Dirk Hi Dirk, and apologies for the delay in replying. An oval hole will be fine , just keep the area the same. I wouldn,t bother with hinged flaps for the exhaust. I've seen them used to good effect on the intake side to increase the volume of air taken in momentarily until the ram effect gets going. Oh, and don't believe the folks that knock EDF's they're great and a lot better than seeing a jet model wafting in the breeze!! LOL Cheers, Pete
  6. Hi Dirk. My first thoughts would be to go for 2 x 90mm fan units. A simple 6 cell setup will give you around 3kg of thrust per fan. The only fly on the ointment with going this route is that tthe intake and efflux areas are a tad on the small side, ideally you'll need 90~100% of the fan surface area (FSA) (minus the fan spinner area) for the intake and, for high blade count fans (best for a nice sound) 100% FSA (minus motor diameter) for the exhaust. In practice, the exhaust works out to be 82mm dia for a 90mm fan. Lack of intake area can be compensated for by using cheater holes strategically placed, or by using sprung loaded blow-in panels. Reducing the exhaust area will reduce static thrust. Hope this helps! Pete
  7. Here's a link to the 1986 David Boddington 40 sized plan
  8. Hi Martin, The usual rule of thumb is 100 Watts/lb and this gives a distinctly "sporty" performance. Your setup will give a little under 85 W/lb which should be excelent for a model like the Fournier. If you have the exact motor/battery details you can put them into an online calculator such as ecalc to give you a reasonable indication of the thrust, duration etc. Cheers, Pete
  9. It's a Changesun 90mm 12 blade fan with an HET 700-68 1400kv motor on 2 x 4000 mAh 4s pack in series to give 29.6V nominal. The ESC is a Turnigy dlx 160A The bottom line is almost 3000W and over 4kg of thrust static - rather more than adequate! Lol
  10. Thanks Stuey. The last pic was taken while I was finding out if she'd go straight up from slow flight....She did! It's a prototype kit from Jim's Jets, milled from styrofoam (green stuff mainly) with laser cut wooden parts and vac formed canopy. At 48" span and 67" long this one's a fairly impressive beasty!
  11. FINALLY... the weather and opportunity came along together for some in flight photos. There was a hiccup with the launch technique caused by the underfins catching the bungee dolly and not letting go! Sorted by rmoving said underfins! Anyway, I'm pleases to be able to report that the Lightning is another pussycat to fly, albeit a formidable one. With a thrust/weight ratio of better than 1:1 she performs in prototypical fashion and is deceptively quick. Now it's back to the workshop to add afterburner lights, carry out a little mod to correct the scale appearance of the cockpit area (needs moving forward slightly) and do a proper repair on the nose section following the launch issues.
  12. Quality's not great, but so evocative of the full size - Does it for me anyway!
  13. Most definitely an Elf! I had one many years ago. They look splendid with silver wings and a coach stripe along the fuselage I think mine had an OS26 4 stroke in. It certinly flew well and looked magnificent in the air - another "Gentleman's carriage" kind of plane!
×
×
  • Create New...