Tom Satinet

Hi Mike If you go to the blfy menu there are settings for aileron and elevator. Flaps is you have them. If you put a value in for ail and ail1 it will move the ailerons in response to the throttle stick. If it's the wrong way round change the values to minus (say -40 rather than +40). The bfly menu also has a setting for "ELEV" which is the elevator mix as you call it. If you put a number in there the elevator will move in response to the throttle stick also. Again change the number to minus if the elevator moves the opposite way to your requirement. you will see in the bfly menu it says "1/2" somewhere. You can move to a second page which lets you change the direction the throttle stick works in if required (I think default is UP is zero effect). I think you can assign something else to be crow (e.g side slider), but I don't have the tx any more so I am not sure. Everything to do with crow and spoilerons etc is in the bfly menu. hth Tom

Go to the bfly setting and put a value in for the ailerons.

You can make the little trim switches do something. on most mixes there is a second screen (you will see "1/2" somewhere on the screen). on the second screen there is setup for adjusting mixes in which you can use the LT, RT and CT switches). I thought you could assign them to control mixes (e.g flaps), but I might be wrong on that score. There are a few harder to access features like the mini trims but generally the TX is incredibly easy to use. I'm not sure what form a manual would take as the mixes screen is most self explanatory. I flew contest gliders on it with Crow, camber, launch settings, snap flaps, vtail etc etc and never even looked at the Pmixes. The whole point of the Aurora is that you don't need a Don Edberg manual to work it, IMHO.

A 1.5m DLG won't have flaps. Those types of models just have ailerons (weight saving). a lot of them don't have a rudder either. I would get a cheap "proper" dlg like a Longshot, Ypsi Notos, Topsky etc. They will fly rings round a Libelle or a Phoenix.

Posted by Percy Verance on 25/01/2015 10:38:09: Time will tell............... it may well have been reliable thus far Martin, but let's see what happens eh? And I wasn't actually dismissing it on those grounds Martin. I'm not a fan of transmitters adorned with lots of false chrome and garish styling........... (Mpx Profi Mc 4k owner) Edited By Percy Verance on 25/01/2015 10:45:34 I would have thought multiplex is a lot more likely to go out of business than Frsky (think Graupner, Robbe etc). In fact of course multiplex is already owned by the guy that owns Hitec. If you like the p4000 you should like the frsky taranis as OpenTX is the software is similar to the p4000 and you can jump from one to the other quite easily. I agree the set itself is not that great ergonomically, but Frsky has another TX in the pipeline. However the taranis doesn't have any chrome on it, fake or otherwise. The TX is grey plastic on the front and black plastic on the back. If you do a quick google image search you will see that the taranis case is essentially the same as the JR 9x2, but without chrome and without a scroll wheel etc.

**LINK** Sas Apache

ah right got you Phil.

Phil, I agree with a lot of what you said, but I can't say that I think it's easier to land in winds over 40knots (45mph+) than it is in moderate conditions, overall and on average. That's just my opinion based on experience of flying myself and watching other people. It's not meant as a slight. The rotor alone in some places is crazy. e.g the wrecker or crest at the bwlch you have to walk back several hundred yards. Once you get past a certain point it's hard to even carry the model back to the "pits"! You make a very good point about downwind legs on landing.

Strong wind doesn't make landings easier in slope soaring. It doesn't really make anything easier. Not least rigging the model. The easiest wind to land is probably around 10mph at a guess, depending on the slope, where the head wind is strong enough to stop the model, but not strong enough to make the circuit critical. Nevermind the reality that strong winds create a lot more turbulence and gusts. it's way harder to land in a genuine 50mph wind on most slopes that a light wind. You will see way more crashed landings in strong wind that light wind. The downwind leg catchs people out time and time again. I'm not sure if the running backwards comment was a leg pull, but forward motion is best.

IIRC I saw on a post on rcgroups by Joe Wurts where he said he ballasts so that his min sink settting is not flying backwards for a given wind speed. The amount of ballast really depends on how light the model is and other factors, such as how fast it flies (etc). Obviously at a basic level ballast increases you ability to cover the sky, which is why people tend to fly it when it's windy. i.e more windy more ballast. yes I think it is mostly suck it and see because ballast is quite airframe specific, and also condition specific. There are too many different conditions you can encounter for there to be a ballast check list IMHO. At 1500g your model has a very low wing loading. to be honest 14 ounces of ballast is not that much. I think a lot depends on your thermal tactics. Some people seem to rely more on the low minimum sink rate of the model rather than its ability to cover ground and find lift. 12mph on the ground will be a lot more once you get higher up. Edited By Tom Satinet on 23/12/2014 14:51:12

Hi Phil The quality of the wings is nice. I bought the duo a while back to use as an electric soarer. I haven't got round to building it, yet, but it's a nice kit. Didn't mr ellison do a review of one of the larger ones a while back in rcme? Tom

The crest is a world class slope, but has two issues - 1) it's a long walk from the parking 2) the rotor can be problematic in a strong wind.

hitec aurora 9. Spektrum module if necessary. Much better

2m is a good size. All the models you mention fly well.

Hi Clifford,   These thread on a german forum might help. You can translate it using google translate. There seems a few pics of drive sets: http://www.rc-network.de/forum/showthread.php/372281-Mandarin-F5J-von-Staufenbiel   Tom Edited By Tom Satinet on 11/09/2014 19:21:49

is the spinner size a major deciding factor or something? I would have thought that once you get the model it would be very easy to find the right size spinner as they are both cheap and readily available.

If I was going to build a woodie, ideally it would be a kit from skybench. but they are the wrong side of the pond. The Hollein stuff looks great and i've heard good things about the kits.

Have a look at the wood cnc stuff from **LINK**

Andy they didn't all have a corroflute mount for the tail boom. The kits went out with a plastic triangle that was stuck to the bottom of the wing. I believe they went back to corroflute, as they had a bad reputation for breaking off at the point the carbon square rod entered the plastic mount.   So I think it depends on the age of your model to an extent. It would require a pretty fundamental rethink of the tail arrangement to get away from the single rod.  Fast, heavy model, small tail boom.   Perhaps switch to a thicker fin, with an aerofoil, and a thicker bit of carbon.        Edited By Tom Satinet on 02/09/2014 10:53:40 Edited By Tom Satinet on 02/09/2014 10:55:12

this might help.     **LINK** Edited By Tom Satinet on 06/08/2014 09:09:51

From what I hear the original radian was better than the pro. The pro is okay, but I think the fuselage is too bendy and it just has several issues that need addressing (i,e stiffen the fuselage). The EG is a pretty well sorted model. I had the "normal" EG - the non "pro". I wasn't in love with the elevator linkage but I don't know if it is better on the EG pro. Edited By Tom Satinet on 17/06/2014 10:30:39

The amount of servo torque required for each control surface depends on a number of things: e.g. size of control surface amount of deflection speed of airflow gearing of linkage etc   Presumably with 3d you have a requirement for large surface movements at the same time as having a large airflow. This also means you can't gear it down in the linkages (ie small horn on the servo, big horn on the control surface).   It's like when you try and open a big door in to a strong wing (i.e barn door in a gale). A non favourable linkage setup is like doing it from the hinge end. This is a useful calculator, but isn't free. **LINK**   I guess that in a normal sport plane the order would be: ailerons rudder elevator throttle   Ailerons are quite big and deflect a lot. Rudder a bit smaller but deflects quite a bit. elevator small and doesn't deflect much. Throttle doesn't have a hard job. But that's for a "normal" plane (say wot 4 / normal glider) - 3d has much bigger control throws than normal.    Edited By Tom Satinet on 16/06/2014 14:56:41

I think the Easy Glider is the better model.

Is that Algebra "normal"? I though the Rudder/elevator version was a polyhedral design. It looks a bit lacking in effective dihedral angle for a rudder /elevator model.

Wind lateral balance would have to be way out for it to make a big difference on a polyhedral model like that.   Most likely one or both wings are warped. And/or the control surfaces.  Edited By Tom Satinet on 03/06/2014 09:40:16