andyh

I don't have a diagram, but I'll try to describe it ... split the power feed from the battery four ways to the four ESCs & bring the ESC servo leads back to the Rx. if you want differential thrust, you can Y the two port motors into one channel & the two starboard motors into another. if you're using the BEC from one of the ESCs to power the Rx, disconnect the red cable from the other three. if you're using a separate BEC then disconnect the red cable on all four & connect the BEC to a spare Rx port, or Y it into an in-use channel if you're short of ports. you don't say what radio you're using, but if you put "differential thrust mixing <radio type>" into youtube/google you should get some pointers. I have differential thrust set up on my BushMule (just two motors, but same principle) for taxiing, mixed to the rudder & it will turn 180 in its own length which can be handy. I'm not brave enough to use it in flight though!

I have the PNF so I haven't had to do what you're asking about, but this is the spare part for the mount: **LINK** you don't say whether you're using the HK OEM motor that fits the mount, but hopefully it should give you an idea. I love my Tundra, I think I must have 300+ flights on it, hope you enjoy yours too

if it's the same powertrain as the Riot, 4S is a recommended upgrade with a slight drop in prop size to 10x6. there's a lump of steel in the nose that can be removed to liven the CofG up a bit too: **LINK**

done. a bit of a magnificent octopus, as Baldrick might say. I pity the poor person who has to wade through all the submissions!

Posted by Lunch-time flyer on 19/08/2018 13:28:07: ... I’d just prefer flat batteries I'm not keen on flat batteries myself

Posted by Keith Evans 3 on 19/08/2018 10:33:08: Nose down ! ! ! I've never really questioned this in the past , but how can a model "balance " nose down ? I've seen this and do it myself . If I were to try and balance a long piece of wood on a sharp fulcrum it would either balance or tip one way or the other .It would not "balance" nose down. Is it something to do with friction between the balance fulcrum and the wing surface ? your balance fulcrum is typically above the CofG (which has a vertical position, as well as the longitudinal one which we're usually concerned with), so the model will balance with the CofG directly below the fulcrum, which may be slightly nose- or tail- down, so long as it's not too far out. when you're balancing a piece of wood, the fulcrum will be below the CofG, so it will tip unless it's perfectly balanced.

my absolute favourite illustration of how flaps can change the effective angle of incidence of a wing: Edited By andyh on 15/08/2018 18:13:12

if it's arrived faulty/damaged (I'm assuming you've bought it new from T9 or similar), then contact the seller & get it replaced, don't try to fix it yourself.

the satellite of an AR7010 would mount quite nicely vertically on the rear bulkhead, behind the servos, of the radio compartment of the foam-e wot4. the main Rx could go on the floor at the front of the compartment as you might conventionally expect. other than that, make sure the antenna wires are at right angles to each other & there's nothing masking the signal. if you still can't get it set up glitch-free in the model when range-testing at 75', I'd try taking the Rx out of the model & testing it. have you used it successfully in other models? if not, I'd be inclined to give the shop you bought it from a call & see if you can get a replacement. in any case, I wouldn't fly again until I'd done a glitch-free range test at 75'. apropos of nothing, I smashed up two foam-e wot4's on Spektrum/Orange through radio gremlins before switching to FrSky ...

Posted by Geoff Sleath on 26/07/2018 01:07:29: Just out of interest, wouldn't the roof count as 'ground level' just as if you took off from the top of a hill and therefore the mast inspection would qualify as OK under the latest regulations? how are other airspace users to know that someone is using a height above ground level as their personal ground level reference? hilltop level is fairly unambiguously "ground level" for all users.

Rumours of model flying's demise are greatly exaggerated. If anything, the diversification & rate of progress of the hobby have contributed to LMS's becoming less viable. How is a small shop supposed to keep up with technology that will be obsolete in a few years if it doesn't sell, or stock 20 sizes of LiPo in different C-ratings rather than a few different flavours of glow fuel? I don't think I'll be sounding the death knell for the hobby quite yet, or planting a balsa tree in my garden.

Posted by Percy Verance on 24/07/2018 14:15:11: Another one in the back of the net for Hobbyking etc. Trouble is, what happens when Hobbyking goes??????? Where will the bargain hunters go then???? Save a few quid now, but eventually be left with nothing....... I'd urge anyone who doesn't at present build models from plans to learn to do so, because in just a few years time it may be the only way you get to fly a model aeroplane.......... Hobbyking's crown seems to have been slipping of late & the likes of Banggood have been picking up some of their market share. Whilst there's money to be made from model planes, there will be someone selling. If we're left with nothing, where will you buy balsa to build from plans Percy?

ceasing trading 8th Sept: **LINK**

Posted by Percy Verance on 15/07/2018 12:13:19: An unsuitable airfoil section perhaps? Thin wings don't normally take too well to slow flight. given the wing chord & the airspeed for "slow" flight for this model, you're getting down into relatively low Reynolds numbers where, contrary to what we'd expect on a larger model, a thicker wing section definitely isn't an advantage.

Posted by Peter Christy on 10/07/2018 17:14:12: Is it a diesel? probably a VW

oi! it's nicked my icecream!

I remove the red wire from a 2" servo extension & put the extension between the ESC & the Rx. you can then re-use the ESC in the future without having to do anything to the servo plug wiring.

Posted by Erfolg on 08/07/2018 23:05:36: I see nothing intrinsically special about APC propellors. In my case I have used the brand as an example of the type I want. I have not had any of the propellors I have purchased from HK fail. The issue is i seem to have purchased a lot of propellors that are sold as suitable for electric/IC, which are far to heavy and strong relative to the electric duties i require. The price is a heavier current draw than is necessary. APC's are not intrinsically special, like you say, but they are a known quantity & perform as you expect. I buy plenty of budget stuff from HK & it's generally fine. however, I don't quibble over a couple of quid on a prop which can have a hugely disproportionate effect on the performance of a model. buying cheap & discovering the budget props don't perform as you'd hoped seems like a false economy. YMMV.

why not get a real APC from somewhere else?

Posted by ASH. on 05/07/2018 13:58:05: There is most definitely I just can't think of it right now! scaring BEB doesn't count!

is there a use for more-sensitive-around-the-center expo? I'm struggling to think of when I would ever want a setup like that. Edited By andyh on 05/07/2018 13:53:13

I'm still using it. people are still producing new site & model files for it. the graphics may age over time, but the physics is still pretty good. as it's no longer being sold commercially, it might be worth trying a little googling

1/2/3: your ESC has a built-in BEC (Battery Elimination Circuit) which provides a 5V power supply for your Rx. you don't need a separate BEC or Rx battery. 4. it will make the plane a little heavier - at a guess by 1/2 lb - but it's unlikely to ruin the flight characteristics on a plane weighing 5-6lb in total. I doubt the leccy conversion would be any heavier than the IC version it's based upon.

Posted by Rich too on 03/07/2018 05:47:25: My question is, why not use lots of movement with high expo? Is it necessary to use dual rates? I do both. Low rates with low expo & high rates with high expo. The rates are fairly similar up to around 50% & then obviously then diverge markedly. The way I see it is that most mechanical linkages give a non-linear response, usually *more* sensitive around the mid-point, so a small amount of expo just brings it back to somewhat more linear for normal flying. I don't think this amount of expo is bad for beginners. I'm really never sure whether the expo %age values are comparable between radio vendors - ie whether it refers to some real mathematical variable, or whether it's just some arbitrary weighting set by the manufacturer. I use 70% on some of my models on high rates & it's progressive & predictable (on FrSky/OpenTX), but on some other radios it can be a case of nothing .. nothing .. huge deflection, which can be a bit alarming!

Posted by phil alvirez on 11/06/2018 22:47:08: andyh: the thing is, my radio is a DX6G3. taranis programs dont fit my needs. thanks anyway. sorry Phil, thought I was on the Taranis thread!