Electric VS. Petrol/Fuel Engines

[Tomtom39]

I fly all three types (inc turbines). Pros and cons to all three. As Steve mentioned it really is about personal choice. I have enjoyed the challenge of converting some IC types to Electric (I now have all the gear - several different types of batteries and I'm able to fly on days that we are unable to use IC at our club strip) On the flip side I love the noise and smell of a decent engine - especially my radials - but lots of expletives when I can't get then to run - usually my fault!!

[Ian Jones]

Posted by ConcordeSpeedbird on 02/08/2012 17:51:19:
<snip>

I'm not taking sides, Electric is brilliant, IC just so. We can be proud that this hobby has such a wide range to suit anyone and everyone, with ARTF's, kits, electric and IC etc.

Can we please not argue about it? Choose what suits you Nickaliath, you'll have fun whichever way you go.

CS

I agree.

[Erfolg]

Lee

I have flown IC planes for many years. I know what a club 20 model sounds like, and yes we have Pico, Stryker, Zaggis in our club. Are they as noisy as there IC equivalent? flying on NT property, we cannot afford the noise levels of IC models, which are fast flying.

A major advantage of small electrics (up to about 40" is that you can put them on your back seat, without concerns of oil stains. They fit in the boot, requiring only a Tx. None of the gear I use to haul round with IC, starter, glow driver, fuel, and for some reason piles of tools.

I am not suggesting that IC motors are very unrelaible. It seems normal, after starting an IC motor, that the model is held up, to see/hear if it leans out. Then enevtably, like some law of nature, the mixture is fractionaly adjusted. With twins, one engine will stop almost enevitably before the other at some time whilst in the air. These are not issues forelectric.

For me noise is a big issue and convenience a massive bonus.

Do I really think that they are the complete answer, no, not for larger models, for the reasons outlined.

The massive increase of small electric models is a positive indicator that the motive power is right for some situations.

Will electric models increase there presence, probably yes, even for some larger models

Am I saying that electrics are better than IC, no. I am suggesting that electrics have some very strong points. Is there a weakness with electric? Well yes, the power to weight ratio is better with IC. Longer flight times are available with IC. For lovers of all things mechanical, there is a certain attraction of an engine.

I would love to fly diesel powered models at our field, but noise restrictions, knock the urge on the head. As for Glo, personally, no longer for me, although I have a number, just for looking at.

Edited By Erfolg on 02/08/2012 23:08:08

Edited By Erfolg on 02/08/2012 23:08:28

Edited By Erfolg on 02/08/2012 23:08:52

[Lee Smalley]

well it certainly came across that way mate "ultra reliable, compared to IC. No cutting out in the air, faltering, once tuned, stays at the settings."currently you seem to be re-iterating what we are all saying both systems are brill, both have the positives and negatives, some electric are very quiet some are very noisy some ic are quite quiet some are very noisy, this debate will rage and rage as long as people keep coming on here and making ill informed statements, i love electric power, its brill but IC really floats my boat in my day to day models, it really disappoints me when people come on and moan about the mess and noise unreliability, etc when they have naff all experience and totally incapable of operating said engine, it gives the newbie a slanted impression of a great power source for our models that has been serving us for way too many years to count, and it is still today a great reliable cheap and relatively quiet (dependent on engine and setup) way of getting started in the hobby, the fact electric now is also a superb way to get started is a total bonus and i recommend it to anyone

[Erfolg]

Lee

The frequency of unintended engines cutting out in the air, is certainly more frequent than electric motors. The causes can be many from leaning out, running out of fuel, even plug failure, clunk not working effectively, fuel foaming.

It does happen with electrics, particularly if a hard voltage cut of is selected, I always go for a reduction in motor power, to reduce the need for dead stick.

I am not saying anything new, I am aware of that.

It is the noise thing I strongly disagree with. For the same performance type, IC generates more noise. A Club 20 Dara used to produce more noise than any Zagi or Pico Jet. The main problem with the older type of pusher wing, was the close proximity of the propeller to the wing, which did generate more noise than was desirable. Most if not all current designs have created a gap from wing to the propeller, which greatly reduces noise. Even the noisiest Zagi type in our club cannot be heard from the road, which is probably 200 or so metres. If a Zgi type can be noticed, in our club, it is required that something must be done about it (which is move the prop). More surprisingly (to me) that noise from electric models does not carry to the same extent as IC engines.

As a club we had to go exclusively electric, banning all IC engines to ensure that we did not loose our field. Having a bird sanctuary, and the NT as the landowners, we did what we had to do.

Perhaps another factor is that we do not fly large (other than motorised thermal gliders) models. Electrics generally being better suited to the less than 400w power type or +600w gliders (big slow turning props).

If I were to build a Spitfire, the scale would be quite different to IC guys, mainly a cost thing and I am always concerned with safety (the general consequences with low power being less).

Possibly about 1-2 months back, a neighbour stopped me in the street, to ask why my model (which I fly in the park, behind the house) had become noisy. Luckily I was able to say it was nothing to do with me. It was a a couple of young lads with a IC car. Even a Cox in the past had caused comment. My electric park flyers never a comment, other than is it rubber powered? On one occasion, I must get one for my grandson.

I do prefer electric, because of the noise and convenience issue. I know others prefer the specific noise and the regime of working with IC.

In many ways, at present both IC and electric currently dominate specific niches, which dra on there strengths.

[Ian Jones]

Well some very good and some very poor arguments in both directions have been put forward but who is going to have the last word?

Well I'm sure that we all want help Nickaliath decide and a balanced discussion just might acheive that, however I think it is time for the last word....

... from Nickaliath.

Edited By Ian Jones on 03/08/2012 13:21:59

[Concorde Speedbird]

Ian- He should have the last word.

Going back to what I previously said,

I'm not taking sides, Electric is brilliant, IC just so. We can be proud that this hobby has such a wide range to suit anyone and everyone, with ARTF's, kits, electric and IC etc.

Can we please not argue about it? Choose what suits you Nickaliath, you'll have fun whichever way you go.

CS

[Nickaliath]

Well, I didnt expect to have my mind blown quite so much LOL.

Im really unsure now.

I basically like the noise of the IC and like the idea of that type of engine in the spitfire..... Although....

The sound of the simplicity of the electric engine is appealing and im wondering if it will eventually be the main source of power for RC planes??

Im very Confused now

[Steve Hargreaves - Moderator]

Well done lads......another great advise job done......

Which Spitfire is it?? Maybe the size (cost!!) of the I/C or electric motor required will bring a bit of clarity......

[Concorde Speedbird]

It's the Top Flite one Steve. SC 70 would do you nicely at around £120.

E-flite Power 60 motor is around £110, but you'll need an around £50 ESC as well.

NOT TRYING TO SAY IC IS CHEAPER, SAITO 72 IS £210, AND THERE MAY CHEAPER ELECTRIC BRANDS BUT I DON'T KNOW. OKAY?

I'm trying to be as fair as possible, some of the electric guys I'm sure will come with cheaper power systems. And you'll need starting equipment for IC, but batteries for electric.

Choose what you wish Nickaliath, it does not matter. Both are great!

CS

[Erfolg]

At the size you are talking about, probably about 10 lb, you would not go electric for economy.

I would guess about 1000w would be required.

Smaller sizes are probably much better for electric.

The other issue is that power kits are generally much beefier than is necessary for electrics.

So would you re-work the kit,seems to defeat the objective of a kit.

[Nickaliath]

Ive just taken a look at the sc 70 engine, looks like it could be just what im after .

I think i shall go with this engine for the Spitfire

I did see a OS Used engine forsale, is it wise to go used or better to go new?

Whats the procedue with running in, Setting up e.t.c?? as i read somewhere youve got to be carefull with a new engine and plane if neither have been flown before?

 

 

Edited By Nickaliath on 04/08/2012 22:46:40

[Dean B]

Just pick a system and enjoy the flight. Both ic and electric have advantages as well as disadvantages

[Concorde Speedbird]

SC 70 will be perfect. Delivering the right amount of power, with the right noise!

For the engine, you ought to lubricate it before you run it (if it's new, or second hand at that). Then for the first running, it will need running in. This is to be done on the ground, either on a bench setup or on the airframe. The instruction manual of the engine will have details on all of this so no need to worry.

The plane, build it well, which you are doing, and just make sure all the hinges are glued in properly, there is no strain on any of the servos and the control surfaces are all centered, just all the basic things. Getting another senior flyer to check the plane over is always a good idea.

Have fun, and make sure you get enough flying experience before flying the Spit, I've been flying for quite a while and I am still deliberating whether I would be able to fly a Spit. Should I take the plunge? Hmmm

CS

[Andy Ennis]

I'm sorry, but I think the SC70 will be too small for the TopFlite Spit.

The 70 is at the bottom end of the recommended scale, and these kits are notorious for building heavier than their quoted weight. TF quote a finished weight of 7.5 to 8.5 pounds, but the reality is going to much closer to 10 or 10.5 pounds.

If it was me, I'd be looking at an OS or Saito 90ish engine, or it's leccy equivalent.

[Ian Jones]

I can't see in this thread nor recall from your other posts what your level of experience is so forgive me if I now tell you something you already know...

I make it a golden rule of any flight to have done everything I can to ensure that the engine is tuned such that if I have to open the throttle to abort a landing that the engine will indeed pickup cleanly. If it won't then it's probably not been run in enough, occasionally this might also be an incorrect idle needle setting but generally you should leave that alone until the engine is properly run in. If it won't tick over on the ground for 30 secs then pick up cleanly then don't fly it - a spit will not be very forgiving of a messy/failed abort. Of course a lean check should be carried out too. Have no fear about this, just be fussy about getting it right.

Once run in and tuned then unless there are very good reasons for it you do not need to keep re-tuning it - if problems occur the are more likely to be somewhere else (e.g. glow plug, fuel supply & leaky plumbing). I have noticed that people that retune their engines often have lots of dead sticks.

Not preaching, just trying to help.

[Turbycat]

Personally I like having an IC engine in my planes. I do have a couple of small electrics for a quick fly. These run on the cheap/ popular 3s 2200mah size battery and I have enough batteries to give me up to an hour flying. My IC stuff is mainly 90 2 stroke size upwards to 30cc petrol stuff. The electrics are fine for sticking in the car and having a quick 1/2 hour on the way back from work, but if I've got a day off I'll fly all day and find IC better for this.

I can see electric getting more popular as noise issues continually seem to arise and they are generally quiter. Also battery tech seems to be promising ever more performance so it will definately be an interesting area to watch.

Andy

[Thomas Barwick]

Im a pure electic bloke and love it,but the sound is alot better with 4 strokes But it depends on personal preference(as mentioned alot before) Im now going to not say any further

[Mark Powell 2]

Posted by Andy Ennis on 05/08/2012 00:41:33:

"I'm sorry, but I think the SC70 will be too small for the TopFlite Spit.....and these kits are notorious for building heavier than their quoted weight. TF quote a finished weight of 7.5 to 8.5 pounds, but the reality is going to much closer to 10 or 10.5 pounds"

You are so right. Mine, with an OS 81 came out at 10.5 lbs, including retracts, flaps,the cockpit kit (very poor) and 14 oz of lead in the nose.

It's a poor kit anyway. The wing is far too thick for realism, much of the balsa was either rock hard (Admiral Nelson would have been proud of it) or too soft to be useable. And does it really need 3/8 sq hardwood main spars?. It did not bother me, I am pretty experienced, but joining the wings to the centre section is impossible if you obey the instructions, the supplied fixed undercarriage wires (I used retracts) have the inside end pointing the wrong way, down instead of up, and it has detailed fabric covered ailerons whereas the real ones are metal covered.

I have flown it a few times, but it is too heavy. I am now using the plan as a basis for a much lighter one. If you must build one of these poor kits, lighten the tail end as much as possible, and get rid of the ridiculous main spars.

Topflite stuff is heavy, heavy, heavy. I was tempted by the twin Cessna 310 ARTF, (love the plane but couldn't be bothered to draw up a plan myself) but when even they admit to 20 plus pounds for its mere 81 inch span I gave up the idea in disgust. It would end up as a 'Hanger Queen' like the Spitfire.

[Mystar]

Posted by Mark Powell 2 on 05/08/2012 08:22:03:

Posted by Andy Ennis on 05/08/2012 00:41:33:

"I'm sorry, but I think the SC70 will be too small for the TopFlite Spit.....and these kits are notorious for building heavier than their quoted weight. TF quote a finished weight of 7.5 to 8.5 pounds, but the reality is going to much closer to 10 or 10.5 pounds"

You are so right. Mine, with an OS 81 came out at 10.5 lbs, including retracts, flaps,the cockpit kit (very poor) and 14 oz of lead in the nose.

It's a poor kit anyway. The wing is far too thick for realism, much of the balsa was either rock hard (Admiral Nelson would have been proud of it) or too soft to be useable. And does it really need 3/8 sq hardwood main spars?. It did not bother me, I am pretty experienced, but joining the wings to the centre section is impossible if you obey the instructions, the supplied fixed undercarriage wires (I used retracts) have the inside end pointing the wrong way, down instead of up, and it has detailed fabric covered ailerons whereas the real ones are metal covered.

I have flown it a few times, but it is too heavy. I am now using the plan as a basis for a much lighter one. If you must build one of these poor kits, lighten the tail end as much as possible, and get rid of the ridiculous main spars.

Topflite stuff is heavy, heavy, heavy. I was tempted by the twin Cessna 310 ARTF, (love the plane but couldn't be bothered to draw up a plan myself) but when even they admit to 20 plus pounds for its mere 81 inch span I gave up the idea in disgust. It would end up as a 'Hanger Queen' like the Spitfire.

Mark

Sorry you have had a bad experiance with Top Flite kits, i am curently building a TF Sea Fury and over the years i have flown many TF models, all of them have flown very well.

Any model will come out heavy if you slap on lot of glue and paint and don't take care when you build it. I have found the kit i have is very good, i am half way through the build and have been weighing each of the sub assemblies and have been happy with the weight of them whithout modification.

Anyway back to this thread, i think for small/medium sports models electric is ideal, but for scale warbirds I.C. is the only way to go for me. I am putting a Saito 115 in my Sea Fury. lovely engine, sounds great and best of all it will fit in the cowel of the Sea Fury with nothing pocking out

[Mark Powell 2]

Mystar

My experiences with the Spitfire are just plain facts. The specific faults I mention, such as the undercarriage wires, poor wood selection, etc. truly exist. As I said, I am an experienced builder, so it did not bother me, but I thought it rather silly after all the hype about 'Revised Gold Edition' and 'computer aided design'. Re weight, the Topflite adverts say 7-8 lbs, the instructions say 'our prototype weighs 9 1/2 lbs' (film covered). But of course you don't see that until you have purchased the kit.

Back to power. I have a fifty fifty mixture of glow and electric. The electrics are mainly quite small, up to 50 inch span, including a Flair Atilla and a Sig Rascal (kit, not ARTF). I feel electric is ideal for such models. I also have some EDFs, an own design '90 sized' BVM Electra copy , a Chris Golds Supermarine Swift, from the published plan, and an RBC (kit) Panther. They all proved VERY expensive, not that far short of small turbine cost when you include my initial mistakes with motor selection and the short life of LiPos at these power levels.. Yes, you can do it cheaper with foam toys, but I wanted a real 'jet-like' ability.

Reliability? I have had three speed controller failures, all on the small models. Maybe just bad luck, they were not being overstressed. In ten years with OS glows, both two and four stroke, I have NEVER had an in flight engine failure. I certainly agree with Ian Jones about not messing with the settings. I don't touch the idle or main needle setting or any of my engines from one year to the next.It is the inveterate 'needle fiddlers' who have engine failures. Every time I see one I think ''certain engine failure'.

I don't really have a view one way or the other. But on the larger sizes electric is still more expensive, plus all the fuss of charging, needing a minimum of two packs per plane (though I have largely standardised on batteries). On medium to large helis I am not yet convinced. My two are both glow.

I have been tempted by the Sea Fury for some time

 

Edited By Mark Powell 2 on 05/08/2012 10:31:54

[Concorde Speedbird]

Tony Nijhuis' Spitfire (the 62 inch span one) flew fine on an ASP 61, so this should be okay on the 70 if he builds it light.

But the SC 91 is not much more expensive, you may just need to cut a bit more cowl away. You won't notice it when it is flying along at high speeds, doing victory rolls!

CS

[Nickaliath]

Maybe i should go for the 91 to be safe???? The only thing putting me off this is the fact i may have to cut the cowling, which i do not want to do!

Im finding this threads starting to get rather confusing!!!

[Concorde Speedbird]

Go for the 91, it will be better. Don't worry too much about cutting the cowling, it isn't very difficult and will not effect the look of the plane much at all, you won't see it when it is flying. Remember this plane is designed for IC, so you won't have to modify the bulkhead or tank bay.

It is a very confusing subject! Hope that helps.

CS

Edited By ConcordeSpeedbird on 05/08/2012 15:20:34

[Nickaliath]

Well as long as its not too much cutting, I may be able to hide it still with a slight bit of modifying?!