Richard Clark 2

Posted by Tim Kearsley on 09/07/2020 10:31:17: If you are referring to the charger I used when I saw the high cell Voltage, it is a Graupner Ultra Duo Plus 60, which was not a cheap charger when I bought it (somewhere around £280) and I don't think is "poorly designed". As for charging at 12C, well I wouldn't do it even if the manufacturer said it was possible. I'm never in a hurry as I prepare batteries the night before a flying session, so I charge at 1C. Tim. It didn't pick up your problem though. The difficulty with some chargers is that they are designed and made in a country where the government can tell them to stop that toy plane stuff and start making plastic garden buckets from next week. It may well be good for the 'people' but it doesn't help us much as the manufacturer has no 'commitment' to what they are doing at any given time. I wouldn't charge at 12C either, though I tried it once 'experimentally'. Usually I charge at 2C, both at home and on the field..

Posted by Nigel R on 09/07/2020 10:40:11: Richard The manual for your charger states: "The balancer can also further ensure that you’ve set the cell count correctly, and as a result we strongly recommend keeping the balancing turned ON at all times. Please also note that when balancing is turned ON you MUST connect the balance connector of the battery to the balance connector adapter board (which must be connected to the balancer/charger) BEFORE you start the charge process otherwise you’ll encounter a Battery Type Error warning. However, if you understand the associated risks, accept full responsibility, and choose to charge LiPo/LiIon/LiFe batteries without balancing/using the built-in balancers, it is possible to turn the balancing OFF" Emphasis is as per the manual. Edited By Nigel R on 09/07/2020 10:40:42 Believe it or not mine came with a manual. Which I read at the time and still occasionally look at.

Chis and Nigel, All I can say is this: I have used lipos in model planes  since day one, right from the time the Israeli military pure metallic lithium cells could be obtained if you were in the right sort of work (which I was). Long before balancing was thought of,  and have never had a fire except when I deliberately destroy them before getting rid of them, which I do as a matter of course. Because even a nominally 'discharged' one can catch fire if accidentally shorted. So I DO bear the dangers in mind. Balancing. It was a balance charger that caused the problem. A poorly designed one. I mostly use a Thunder Power 1430C which will charge their own batteries at up to 12C rate and 14S. (They don't recommend you charge other makes of battery at such a  high rate) You have to enter the number of cells, the capacity, the desired charge rate, and a time limit (all this can be stored per battery if you wish).Balancing is an option. Normal charge end is 4.2 volts by default. This 4.2 value can be altered but if you alter it is not stored. as 'routine'. This is deliberate of course. Connect the battery and press 'Check'. If all is ok it starts. Every ten seconds or so the charge stops and. everything, balance included, is rechecked automatically. This only increases the charge time by about 8% and there isn't an option to remove it. If every charger was as well designed as this I would unhesitatingly balance every time. But as many customers appear to be mostly interested in low prices they aren't. (PS: Many laptops used to have a facility that even when permanently plugged in you could lower the 'stop charging percentage. So the  battery would not  charge beyond, say, 70% full. Unfortunately this is not so common today  and keeping it 100% full all the time greatly reduces the service life.)  Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 09/07/2020 09:52:16 Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 09/07/2020 10:05:12 Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 09/07/2020 10:07:21

Posted by Tim Kearsley on 08/07/2020 20:40:10: Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 20:06:34: Posted by Nigel R on 08/07/2020 11:54:39: Posted by David Hall 9 on 08/07/2020 11:23:12: As will the charging current for all the cells (though it won't be the same for each) as they are connected in series. Really? That's the first time I've heard of items in series having different currents through them. Physically impossible I believe. Tim. You are of course correct. I was wrong. But I'm still mostly not going to bother. Because as soon as you use it, completing the circuit with the ESC/motor each 'high' cells charges any adjacent low one so it self corrects. Which is probably why yours measured in near perfect balance after flying it.

Posted by Ron Gray on 09/07/2020 06:25:30: I assume that for each of the 3 axes there are a + and -, so for pitch there are up and down, yaw left and right etc I could be totally wrong of course! You are probably right

Why do some of these things have 6 axes in a 3 dimensional universe?

Posted by David perry 1 on 09/07/2020 00:03:30: Funnily enough ive found myself watxhing a lot of ff rubber powered videos in yoochoob recently and ive begun to get an itch. I converted my ff rubber sapphire to micro electric and rc and its tremwndous fun. But rubber ff seems so pure... They are really cute. And if you get to modern Wakefields (F1B) the sophistication of the technology you have to make and deal with outdoes any mere RC plane where you just go out and buy stuff, often including the plane itself. But you have to chase them . And I'm getting a bit past running any great distance and while our field has a large chunk of WW2 concrete runway where we fly RC the rest of it is heavy scrub, gorse bushes, and bog. Though we do have an active free flight section.

Posted by Barrie Lever on 08/07/2020 08:52:52: Richard How did the Sirotkin Spacehound fly as an RC model? I have not heard of Sirotkin much in the last 20 years but at best he was a formidable character at worst he was something quite nasty. B. It's fine, very light too, which I don't usually achieve.. I enlarged it by about 10% and lengthened the tail moment slightly. It flies exactly the same as the equally thick winged Wolfgang Matt Superstar RC pattern model - I've built three of them over the years.

In their kitchen? Industrial chemistry takes a lot of expensive facilities. And a whole lot of elf and safety. Unlikely in Osbournby High Street. And some of their stuff is excellent, some of it near useless. Their aliphatic glue was useless at first but is excellent now.

Posted by Nigel R on 08/07/2020 13:29:55: I rest my case.     No case to rest. It's the excessive heat when using and charging the Mojo at the same time is the problem, though Chord say it is fine to do. Not the lack of balancing. The two Bosch garden tools I've got won't even start to charge even if the battery is just slightly warm. Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 20:36:37

Posted by Tim Kearsley on 08/07/2020 19:50:29: Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 18:56:07: Posted by Tim Kearsley on 08/07/2020 13:21:17: Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 06/07/2020 21:10:54: Actually I agree. It wasn't a good example. It also gets extremely hot if you charge and use it at the same time which Chord say is fine to do. A question: Do you own a Mojo or did you search specifically to cast doubt on my overall 'argument' without yourself trying non-balanced charging over a long period as I have done? No, I don't own a Mojo. I'm open-minded about the pros and cons of balance-charging every charge, but on balance (no pun intended) I shall continue to balance every time. My search was to see what came up in respect of Mojo and the battery it used, and it soon became evident that there was a body of complaint about the short battery life. As you say, it wasn't a good example. Tim.   I'm open minded about it too. I just can't be bothered most of the time As at the field I usually charge them in place and I can't reach  the balance plug.  But I never charge them out of sight either way. I keep them and any Lithium powered tools in a near valueless shed away from the house. Unattended laptops are more of a fire problem. I've removed the battery and run it from its charger as it stays in one place and its keyboard and screen are not used, Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 20:25:05

Posted by Nigel R on 08/07/2020 11:54:39: Posted by David Hall 9 on 08/07/2020 11:23:12: Please excuse my ignorance, but doesn't a LiPo battery charge to it's limit as determined by its chemistry, then generates heat rather than excess charge? No, they just keep on going. Hence why you never trickle charge lithium. The limit is a level applied by the charger. The limit itself is a trade off between desired cell life and total energy stored for a single charge cycle. The lipo charge protocol requires that ir is charged at constant current to about 80% charged then switched to constant voltage (normally set at 4.2). As each cell's voltage moves towards 4.2 the current it 'absorbs' will drop off. As will the charging current for all the cells (though it won't be the same for each) as they are connected in series. So the 'better' cells won't reach 4.2. Thus the cells are limited by the worst one 'naturally'. though some won't have been fully charged. And the worst one (which has the highest internal resistance) can't go over voltage if you have entered the number of cells correctly or less reliably (so check), the charger has detected the number. That is one reason I say balance charging is not strictly necessary.

Posted by Wingman on 08/07/2020 10:55:03: Yep BALANCE CHARGE AT ALL TIMES - No ifs no buts no maybes - anyone who says otherwise is talking out of their proverbial or is willfully attempting to discredit LiPo use. Hardly. I was one of the earliest UK adopters of Lipos (Thunder Power ones which were the only ones available in the UK) and which didn't have balance leads, and the chargers (Astro Flight) didn't have balance ports.. I have used Lipos ever since, And often the old Astro charger, which will do 9S batteries at 8 amps if required. From a 12 volt source. So why would I want to discredit them? Also take Tim's experience. He just balance charged the one he had the problem with and after flying it the cells were still within 0.01 volts of each other. Which is well within typical measurement error. As I said, I believe once every ten flights or so is more than adequate but personally I often don't balance charge them even then, We are all free to do what we want and offer differing opinions, Those differing opinions are a large part of what forums such as this are for.

Posted by Tim Kearsley on 08/07/2020 13:21:17: Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 06/07/2020 21:10:54: (I recently replaced the 2 cell 1600 lipo inside a British made £400 Chord Mojo portable digital to analog 'hi-fi' converter. It's intended to be charged from near enough any USB charger (I mostly use the Apple iPhone charger) and it's not got any facility for balancing at all, so Chord, which is a very reputable company, think it's safe enough.) Having just read through some forums and seeing the number of people complaining about the short life of the LiPo in their Chord Mojo I don't think Chord, who might well be "reputable", are a good example of how to charge a LiPo battery! Tim. Actually I agree. It wasn't a good example. It also gets extremely hot if you charge and use it at the same time which Chord say is fine to do. A question: Do you own a Mojo or did you search specifically to cast doubt on my overall 'argument' without yourself trying non-balanced charging over a long period as I have done?

Posted by Doc Marten on 08/07/2020 16:30:21: No, I just find you opinionated, abrupt, rude, condescending and quick to offer advice which is usually questionable, I thought that was quite clear, didn't you? Edited By Doc Marten on 08/07/2020 16:32:35 Whatever. But I fail to see why accidentally posting the same post twice, as mentioned by Andy Palmer and  which mention  obviously 'triggered' you  invalidates my post. Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 18:35:29

Posted by Lima Hotel Foxtrot on 08/07/2020 16:18:43: Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 15:15:51: Posted by Lima Hotel Foxtrot on 08/07/2020 14:59:47: Addlestone Models have some specific silicone based lube for rubber power. Silicones may be 'inert' but they aren't notably good lubricants for anything. So why do Deluxe Materials make a specific silicone based lubricant for rubber motors? Hmmm? I'm pretty sure the chemists there know what they're doing. https://deluxematerials.co.uk/products/eze-wind It's just an advert. Do they have any chemists? Do they actually make anything, or just repackage stuff purchased in large quantities and sold at much higher prices per 'quantity'?

Posted by Chris Pearce 3 on 08/07/2020 15:22:12: I managed to get photos taken and uploaded of the boxed engines and thanks to being pointed towards Gilding's I think my next step will be to contact one of their valuers if there is anything interesting in this collection. There are also probably around 50 unboxed engines that I still have to deal with but one step at a time In case anyone is interested in seeing the pictures of the engines the Album link is below. Boxed Engines Thanks once again for all your help chaps.   Chris, Your father was quite a collector. The Taplin Twin could be worth a lot. maybe as much as £1000 The 'Nano' is interesting. It was never a 'production' engine, It was a design for home building from a drawing published in a model engineering magazine so the quality varies enormously and the price will vary. similarly. But yours appears to have been be made by the designer. The 'CS' engines were rather poorly made Asian copies of (mostly) UK engines so wont be worth a lot. I suggest you get Gildings opinion rather than just put them on Ebay, but bear in mind the 'value' of something is what someone says he will pay for it and actually does. Not an auctioneer's or anyone else's estimate (including my estimate of the Taplin above). PS: I just noticed that the Taplin Twin  box says 'Airplane'  rather than 'Aircraft' or 'Aeroplane' so it might well be made later,  somewhere in Asia, where they are  known to have made some after Taplin and his company Birchington ceased production,  If so it would be worth less. Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 16:02:49

Posted by Doc Marten on 08/07/2020 14:51:20: He lost credibility some posts ago Andy which culminated with his 'Fanboy' ranting nonsense, he loves to give an opinion on most subjects, mostly questionable, very often abrupt, condescending and rude but he continues regardless. I must have once disagreed with you on some trivial point.

Posted by Lima Hotel Foxtrot on 08/07/2020 14:59:47: Addlestone Models have some specific silicone based lube for rubber power. Silicones may be 'inert' but they aren't notably good lubricants for anything.

Posted by Barrie Lever on 08/07/2020 08:58:41:   Richard Are you flying with Multiplex? I must get one of those 16 channel Royals before they empty the parts bin, I currently have the 9 channel Royal. B. Barrie, Yes. Ever since Mick Bone changed from the disastrous Simprop Competition Special to Multiplex. Early 70's at a guess. I had one of the early Evos which needed a new memory chip and some  other changes  for 2.4,   which  was done   for free (not including the  2.4 module)   but  with a long delay. I couldn't  be bothered  with that  so I bought a new 2.4 one, which I still use. Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 14:59:28 Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 15:09:39

Posted by Andy Palmer on 08/07/2020 14:30:34: You may be able to read a specification (as we all can). But not everyone can lose all credibility by posting twice... How many of you came here when your planet was destroyed? Some humans have been known to hit 'quote' when they intended to 'edit'.

Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 14:14:37: Posted by Frank Skilbeck on 07/07/2020 07:53:04: Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 07/07/2020 07:02:37: The Profi is totally discontinued, not that it was much of an advance on the Evo/Royal series. Apart from - Built in voice - 9 point servo curves - Logic switches (with telemetry input) - 12 flight phases - Multi position switches (i.e. switches can be combines to control one channel) - All controls can have switching functions - No longer limited to 3 mixer switches (and flight phases can be used as a mixer switch) - All 16 servo channels are fully adjustable (only the first 12 are on the Royal Sx) - No limit to control/switch templates - Mixers have 8 inputs rather than 5 - Custom mixer curves. - Built in sequencers - Trims can be either flight phase specific or global - Built in sequencer And they are just the ones I can think of now. While the Profi does have it's faults I do hope the Multiplex Open programming isn't discontinued. I'm going to have to look after mine a bit more carefully. Frank, You may be able to read a specification (as we all can). But a whole lot of it wasn't available from day one. Result? After a year or more of false 'available shortly' announcements they offered us an overweight, oversize, and overpriced Evo. A much more expensive burger with the same meat inside. And even then you had to buy extra switches and buttons to equal an Evo, and your trainer dongle wouldn't fit. Not that it mattered, we had all lost interest by then. They could add as many afterthoughts as they liked, nobody cared. Hence the Profi's relatively short life. And calling some of the 'end of bin' ones 'Master Series', adding a few firmware gimmicks and putting some fake carbon on the front couldn't save it. As for me, despite I have the too heavy and very tedious to 'program' *** Profi 4000 as a spare to my Evo (or whatever it's called this week), I've ordered a black Royal SX 16 (the last Evo-type one they still make) before they stop making that too in case my present silver one breaks and in case Mike Ridley retires. Despite the black 'rubbery' finish not being fuel proof, getting far too hot if left in the sun, and going all soft and sticky in a couple of years no matter how much care you take of it. Either Multiplex have lost the plot completely or more likely the Asian owner, Mr Park, has just stopped caring. *** It's 'configuration'. No programmer would ever call it programming. Multiplex has already done that and you can't alter it.. Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 14:20:52

Deleted - near duplicate Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 08/07/2020 14:40:31

Posted by PatMc on 08/07/2020 00:59:56: Posted by Richard Clark 2 on 07/07/2020 06:29:47: Jeffrey, Don't forget it's supposed to be a real rocketship. These things went up in an incredibly fast vertical 'rotating on its axis' or tight spiral ciimb reaching several hundred feet in a few seconds. Junior 60's or Ladybirds they aren't. (At our site we have a few free flight enthusiasts who still build such things and it is still an active competition class.) That guy making the OZ comment about a 'reduced thrust' Mills 0.75 is losing the whole idea, though he does mention they sometimes used a Oliver Tiger 2.5 cc (though the ultimate would have been a Super Tigre G15 glow). The Gaucho is what we would call a 'hotliner' today. and a very hot one at that. You need about a 300-500 Watt motor to get the correct 'historical' (and still existant today) performance, it's the entire point of 'pylon' models. Richard, I think you're being a bit over-enthusiastic on the engine power level of the day. The Gaucho had a long nose compared with most other FF power duration models of the time, which ruled out the favourite competition 1.5cc Olly Tiger Cub. This meant either shortening the nose or using a lighter 1.5cc. Most keen competition flyers would have turned their noses at a KK kit anyway but the average occasional competitors would have used a cooking pb 1.5. The AM10 & AM15 were the most powerful PB 1 - 1.5 engines commonly available (the AM10 was actually more powerful than most 1.5's) they were about 80W & 120W max respectively, even an Olly Cub was only around 130 - 150W. A few keener people used one of the lighter .09 or .15 glows. I never flew FF much (CL combat & Stunt were my main interests) but remember lending a mate my KB Torp 15 & Fox .15 ( Around 190W on a good day & using 15% nitro) for a pair of Gaucho's he used in a local comp. I agree the Contest Kit's Calypso 50 was a better comp model than the Gaucho. Maybe. I like vintage models (being vintage myself) and currently have a Junior 60, Mercury Aeronca Sedan, Juri Sirotkin's 'Spacehound' 1963 world championship winning c/l stunter, and a KK Spectre c/l stunter all flown with rc. I don't think KK ever made a serious competition model of any sort, The 'Talon' supposed combat model I had certainly wasn't, though I did put a Super Tigre G15 in it for a laugh. And the 'ferocious' (for the time) Eta 29 was often used in the Calypso Major, even at 'club level' competition. I had the last version, the Mk 6c, in mine. I think Jeffrey understands, both with his "horses for courses" comment, his link to SAM, and his using a rudder spring perhaps indicates that he is actually flying it free flight, but I suspect the average radio modeller who builds a 'vintage' pylon model, puts a low powered IC engine or low powered electric in it and potters gently around hasn't the foggiest idea how they were intended to fly.

Posted by Jeffrey Cottrell 2 on 07/07/2020 18:18:17: Hi Guys Thanks for all your help. I now have enough links to this material to start my own shop. Time to pull the curtain down on this one. Meanwhile, Richard. Agree with everything you say, except it was never going to be a competition model. The reason I am building it is to scratch an itch I have had for many years. If it performs well at the end of it, that's icing on the cake. Having said that, did have a look through some competitions and found this one. Could have been made for the Gaucho. Mine would come in power band A, so 20 second motor run and 5 minute max. If mine doesn't get to a decent height in 20 seconds, that will be a disappointment. Whether i can achieve a 5min glide is another matter. Just done a quick and dirty weigh in of all the components. Came to 330 g or 11oz. With a wing area of 1.95 sq ft, that gives a loading of less than 6 oz/sq ft., firmly in the floater category. Would also question you referring to the Gaucho as a 'hotliner'. True, they both climb fast, but the hotliner also glides fast as well, witness the distance task in multitask events. With such a low wing loading and thick wing section, couldn't get the Gaucho to fly fast, even with a cattle prod behind it. Horses for courses, I suppose Jeff Well, yes. I admit I wasn't thinking about speed on the glide. Which is the last thing you want. I called it 'like a hotliner' so people who have never seen these things would get an idea how fast they climb. The idea was to get a vertical climb. There were two ways of doing it. One way was a lot of washIN on one wing and launch it vertically. No 'power on' rudder offset. Thus it climbed while rotating on its axis. If you didn't do this it would do a series of full power tight loops until it crashed very violently. The alternative, favoured by some, was much less washin and a small rudder offset the other way and launch at a 45 degree angle in both roll and pitch. Then it went up in a tight spiral. The concept was to do a full power climb on a lightly loaded high lift wing flying very fast under power. The rotation or the spiral was to prevent its 'natural' looping tendency at such speeds by constantly changing the orientation of the loop so it never had time to develop into an actual loop. The rudder was freed by the same timer that cut the engine and a spring or rubber band pulled it to the correct angle for the aircraft to go into gentle tums so it stayed in sight. if the washin was on, say, the left wing causing a right power on roll or spiral, the rudder was set to the left during the glide enough to overpower the washin and give a left turn. Thus the washin and the rudder didn't work together which could result in spiral dive. (The best kit one was the Contest Kits Calypso.) PS: the modern FAI competition class for these things is 'F1C'. Engine 2.5 cc max,  engine run 7 seconds max. No radio of course. The top engines will give about 1 horsepower (750 Watts), maybe a bit  more. Edited By Richard Clark 2 on 07/07/2020 22:15:49