Jump to content

Philip Charlesworth

Members
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Philip Charlesworth

  1. For those who want to check NOTAM have a look at this link. Itgives details of current and upcoming NOTAM. https://notaminfo.com/ukmap
  2. Thank you. I'll have a poke around on their website.
  3. I've been flying RC for about 4 years. My RC setup is a DX6e with a mix of AR4xx and Ar6xx receivers in my planes. I've recently bought a Volantex Ranger 2000 for longer flights and fitted it with an AR6610T so I can monitor battery voltage. I'd also like to monitor battery current so I can fly it as efficiently as possible but can't find anything in the Spektrum range which will allow me to do that with the 6610. Any suggestions wouild be appreciated.
  4. I got one of these kits - the 1430mm version - a few months back. It's cheap as chips and looks fantastic in the air. The silhouette probably sends small mammals scurrying for cover, and mine has been checked out by the occasional bird. Sadly, it's had a couple of crashes and the cause has been inherent to the kit. If you're getting one then I have a couple of tips which should help to get more flying time out of this otherwise awesome kit. First Tip: The tailplane is not stiff enough to take the forces of anything other than gentle flight. It flexes during turns and can bend to the point where it becomes ineffective, which was the cause of crash 1. The CF strip is not enough to prevent it from flexing. The solution is to run a strip of 1mm thick balsa along the leading edge of the tail from root to tip. This stiffens it significantly without adding significant weight. I soaked the balsa and pre-curved it which made it easier to fit. Second Tip: The hinges start to tear after a few flights, which was the cause of crash 2. When building it reinforce the hinges with either UHU POR or tape. After the latest crash I'm doing both. Apart from these two issues it is a good kit and a real head-turner at the field.
  5. I rather enjoyed my Bixler 1 before its sad demise. It was a handy little trainer, passable glider and not bad at slope soaring. A versatile little plane for under £100. I confess that on full throttle the whine from that 6x4 prop was a bit irritating, but I hardly ever needed to ramp it up that high.
  6. Took it to the field today with the new setup. Apart from the usual launch dip that Pushers have, it flew much better than on the stock motor. On its first flight it was struggling to climb on full throttle, and needed 80% throttle for level flight. Today it was a totally different aircraft. It cruised comfortably on 50% throttle and climbed steadily on 80%. The only time I ran it up to full throttle was to pull up when I decided to go around again. Takeoffs needed a bit of care because the pusher dip is quite noticeable. Launching on full throttle resulted in it dipping enough to hit the ground. A colleague hand launched it. I set the throttle to 50% and slowly opened up to about 80% after takeoff and had no problem. The bigger motor required a larger battery to move the CG forward, so I put a 4000mAh 3S right in the nose. That seemed to be a good combination as it landed after 8.5 minutes with 73% battery remaining. All things considered it was a much more positive experience that the first flight.
  7. Thanks Andy. I'm still trying to understand why some people, like me, have problems getting this aircraft to fly while others don't. I wonder if there's a lot of variability in the unbranded 1400KV motors. Today I fitted a 1680KV motor with a 40A ESC. The higher revs should give it more thrust with the 8x4, and I can consider an 8x6 later. Flat out it was pulling 22A on the 8x4. I'll give it a test flight on Sunday to see how it performs.
  8. Prop's the right way round on the 3mm shaft and turning the right way. I agree that it should work. I've come across a few other comments and videos which suggest that its underpowered so I don't think I'm alone here. I'm running out of straws to clutch!
  9. It can be run up to full power (145/150W) so throttle cal and ESC setup should not be a problem. Looking at Shaun's suggestions I haven't tried a 3-blade prop as I don't have one handy. I have a 1900kv 2212 from my recently-deceased Bixler which I might try. The problem with the 2212 sized motor is that they can't handle any more power as it's already running at max power. I suspect that increasing RPM with the 8x4 or 8x6 prop will just overload the motor.
  10. Mine is PNP, with 2200mAh lipo and Spektrum Rx. Battery was fully charged, and a fresh battery was used for each flight.
  11. My Bixler 1.1 died recently after a catastrophic ESC failure. It was my 'goto' aircraft for throwing around & gliding, and was quite battered after over 2 years of regular flying. It had plenty of power for climbing yet could glide for 30 minute flights and land with plenty of battery remaining. Looking at your video it was very tail heavy. I found that a 2200 was too light and always flew with a 3000 right forward in the nose. It balanced perfectly and flew on rails. Why the 3-blade prop? The stock 6x4 two-blade delivers plenty of power. If it ain't broke don't fix it! My only crit of the Bixler is that it has no ventillation so the ESC can cook on a hot day. I 3D printed a scoop for the nose and vents under each wing which helped to cool the ESC.
  12. I think the root problem is lack of thrust. The cause is unclear. I've seen videos of the PNP aircraft flying acceptably on 2200 batteries & 8x4 props, which was my setup. Mine flew nothing like theirs. It improved with the 8x6 but still didn't match the videos. My thought process so far: The ESC is running at 12A to 13A from a 3S 2200mAh lipo, which is well within spec. Looking at spec sheets for generic 2212 motors they seem to have a max power of around 150W, so 50W/lb is probably as good as it gets for this aircraft. I'd have thought that 70W/lb to 100W/lb would be better as it gives some 'get out of trouble' power and avoids running flat out all the time. This suggests that the aircraft needs about a 250W motor. Delivering that power to an 8 inch prop would require higher RPM and probably a steeper pitch, and I haven't yet found a motor/prop combination which will work. The obvious choice is to increase the prop diameter and motor power/KV to gain extra thrust.
  13. I maidened my 1600 this week and also found it gutless (the prop was the right way around). It really struggled to climb. I changed it out for an 8x6 prop and it managed to climb slowly with the motor running flat out and needed about 80% for level flight. I'm accustomed to aircraft which will climb on 70& throttle and cruise on 50% so this was a bit of a shock. Back on the bench I weighed it and put the power meter on the motor. It's about 50Watts/pound, which I think is very low for an aircraft intended for FPV. It seems to need some extra thrust so I'm currently working on a 3D printed motor adapter to raise the motor and allow a 9/10 inch prop. There is an adapter on Thingiverse but it changes the direction of thrust and I suspect that it's not aligned with the thrust line so I'll make my own adapter. I'm interested to get other people's views on this.
  14. I'm a relative noob to RC flying having started in late 2018. I'm currently flying and crashing a Valiant & Bixler 1.1 at my local club. In the workshop I've got a Riot and a rocket glider under construction. I first saw RC flying on Epsom Downs as a kid and always wanted to try it. I've finally got around to it and love it!
×
×
  • Create New...