Andy48

I've got a top of the range car with all the bells and whistles, but no sat nav or music function, yet a high quality sound system fitted. You plug your phone in for sat nav and music. Sensible really, why have loads of separate expensive bits of kit all doing the same job.

If it had OpenTX on it I would be more than a little tempted.

Nobody's mentioned the most obvious thing for testing failsafe with an electric model. Just remove the prop, and run the motor at a very slow speed. No restraint necessary. ?

If you are flying electric, its a current sensor that is a no brainer not the voltage sensor. The current sensor will tell you the actual battery consumption. Voltage sensors have their uses for identifying failing cells early, but different types of lipo have somewhat different voltage/capacity discharge characteristics and you can be caught out. Higher C batteries tend to maintain a fairly constant voltage and then drop off suddenly.

I remember the many weeks in school woodwork classes perfecting the perfect tent peg. ?

Tent peg.?

Basically, you are suggesting that your crude ground range test with motor running and not running is better than a standard range test followed by monitoring and recording the signal strength every part second of several test flights going out in every direction and at all sorts of different heights as far as one is able to fly. On top of that you are suggesting that your ground range test is better than getting a signal strength warning on every flight long before a loss of signal? I don't need a written guarantee from elsewhere, I have one instantly from the telemetry of every single flight I've made. Going onto your minimizing the unknowns, components in a receiver can begin to fail in time, or even after a hard landing and component values can drift. On the OCD scale one should do a range test before every flying day for this reason. However, telemetry is constantly monitoring that on mine and an unexpected low signal strength indicator gives an early warning of this. I have actually had this after a hard landing, the loss of signal strength being not enough to really show up on a range test, but enough to affect overall range. Better safe than sorry and the receiver got binned. Your crude range test still has plenty of unknowns, and walking 30 metres is far far less than the 130 metres I range test to, even though my transmitter reduces the signal by the same amount as others on range test. At one time it was the best we had. Today we have far better. Our flying site has a microwave link running directly across it. Would you like to tell me how your ground test ensures that you still have an effective signal strength flying through it? I sometimes get a low signal strength warning when I fly through it. I have to be exactly at the right height to do this, as it appears to be a narrow beam. I can look back at the telemetry and see these low peaks and just how low they get. Thankfully they never get anywhere low enough to lose the signal, but they certainly did with 35MHz gear, and my first Spekrum radio. Incidentally if I do get a low signal strength warning, I can double that distance away from me before the plane will go into failsafe. That is quite some safety margin. I know my system and trust it.

Cheers Matty, this is what I am going to do, along with swapping out and testing. The puzzling part is the same instability in the Neuron ESC, that must originate in the ESC as far as I can see, for the ESC to go into reduced power mode.

I cannot install the old software again as this requires uninstalling that software on the transmitter too. No the receivers are a different batch. I really don't understand it at all, but probably similar to your thinking I will try one of my new Access stabilised receivers instead, and possibly replace the ESC and run the plane up and check the telemetry each time. Job for tomorrow as it is due to rain all day.

Again I disagree. After doing a range test with a new model on the ground (engine not running), what can be better than examining the telemetry of a new model after a few test flights in the air. A ground test is just that. As I say, I get immediate telemetry warnings anyway, so what is the point of doing a range test on the ground with the motor running? It simply isn't needed. Add to that a range test for me is walking to the edge of our field, a distance of 130 metres, and it is still in range.

This is the BEC voltage, which should be 5v throughout the flight. Then there are the + and - spikes which I cannot explain. The first graph doesn't register 0 volts, its just that the graph is scaled to include the peaks, and as such the normal current drawn 20-40amps is insignificant compared to the 90,000,000 amp spikes. Definitely not my computer handling the download, never seen this problem before, and downloading older files do not show this spike effect. Similarly the same firmware does not give problems except with these two receivers, and yet a third similar one behaves perfectly.

Sorry, but I disagree about having the motor running for range test. I have telemetry on my system so on every flight I have verbal warnings long before the model goes out of range, and on a new model I check the telemetry after a couple of test flights to ensure all is well. This is a far more comprehensive test for the range test, and yes I am well aware the motor has to be running to test the failsafe. Newer systems with far enhanced capabilities need a rethink of 70s approach to such things as this.

Failsafe as in the BMFA test, as Matty B says legs in front of tailplane, though to be honest transmitter won't respond without failsafe set, and I also get a verbal warning. Don't see the problem with control movement, the plane is already on the runway ready to take off. Frankly with electric does the engine have to be running to check control movement, and if so can someone explain the rationale behind it.

With electric, I don't use a restraint as I do not "arm" the plane until it is on the field ready to take off. Mine are all armed with an arming plug in the side of each model. This effectively acts as a switch which switches off the battery. I use a shorted XT60 as the arming plug for most, you cannot use an ordinary switch for this. Its almost foolproof. This is pretty much the method used in the BMFA A test video, although they connect the battery on the flight line whereas I usually use an arming plug as often the battery is not always easily accessible.

I've been updating all my planes with the latest FrSky firmware. Its not been an easy job, as it resets all the telemetry, and I have to reprogramme all the telemetry setting. I have three planes with S6R receivers. The first updated normally and the telemetry logs are just as I expected. However 2 more have some really odd glitches that I can't explain. Here is the first, my Wot 4. Funfly 80amp receiver in this one. Before updating, perfectly normal flight pattern, after updating 3 huge current spikes shown in red 90,000,000amps on every flight!!! RSSI (in green) perfectly normal. These spikes did not affect the ESC. Here is the second, a Gypsy Moth, a new plane with a Neuron 60S controller. In this case the spikes are going up to over 100 amps, yet I have current limiting set to 50 amps. Similarly the BEC voltage is reading very oddly, with spikes up to 20v. Again I've shown the RSSI to highlight nothing abnormal is going on at those points with regards to telemetry. Clearly there are no such spikes actually happening otherwise I'd have spent an hour filling a bin bag with bits as the servos and receiver would have all failed. However, the spikes have been enough with the Neuron to shut the ESC down. Any geniuses out there with an idea of what is going on. My own thoughts are 1. Telemetry seems to be working OK, as RSSI looks quite normal. 2. Spikes affecting Neuron, so telemetry reading is feeding back directly to Neuron control system. 3. With the Funfly, these spikes have only occurred after updating firmware in receiver. Never a problem before. However, if the spikes are due to the firmware update and it somehow affecting the telemetry, how come the Neuron is affected?

Yes I use allen bolts to secure the cowl to the fuselage. You can see a small hole at the side of the fus near the cowl. There are 2 more bolts to secure the fus to the tail section.

On my electric one, I split the fuselage after the cockpit so it could stay rigged and still get it in the car. I also hinged the aluminium cowl with the motor and ESC mounted to it and the 5S battery slides in from the front. I also got a dummy motor and the electric motor fits nicely inside the crankcase. My setup is pretty much the same as 4max, and the battery as far forward as it is ensures the local church can keep its lead roof.

I would suggest a current sensor like this would be far better. If you are using OpenTx, you can set this to calculate the consumption. Voltage sensing only gives you a very rough indication of the charge level left, temperature will make a difference for instance. This device will give you a very accurate readout of the actual current used. You can then program the tx to give audible warnings when certain consumptions are reached, or program a switch to give you a readout.

Did the battery still work OK?

I used the Brown Gorilla foaming glue. The wing halves need to be well clamped to stop the foaming pushing them apart. After that no wing bandage, and over the years its proved to be more than strong enough, and the wing will break before the join. I also used the same glue for the wood landing gear supports in the wings.

The main pain for me, once I'd remembered how to do it, was that the update screwed up all my telemetry. As I use it a lot, resetting that has been a real chore.

I'll be generous, 12%. ? The answer is simple. It costs a lot of money to have a bunch of programmers working away developing a system. OpenTX is free.

I think they could have kept the costs down by not including the fuel tank for starters, seeing how common electric is getting these days. However, it is a pretty tough model and will stand a few hard knocks without damage, and as has been said the plan is really good, so possible to make a good job of any repair later on if needed. The wings especially are really tough, although you can get replacements for these.

Think I paid about £65 4-5 years ago.

That looks absolutely normal to me, no problems. You will always get the odd RSSI downward spike showing below 50 for some reason. It never has any effect, and you still have a good reserve below that.