simon burch Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I only modded mine because I couldn't get enough space around the motor to run wires, it was just a bit too close to the can. Not a problem if mounting at the back of the motor. From memory, I just added another former the same distance back as the length of the motor and then cut off the end of the fuselage. I'd already built mine as per plan, but if I built another I'd just leave the motor out in the wind. Still deciding whether to change up to 500 watts? Edited By simon burch on 20/02/2014 22:51:51 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 brfc7 are we preparing to die in a ditch over this? I have no issue with the motor being proudly on display. I am reasonably confident that a motor in the breeze will be a little cooler. OK, it does not seem to be an issue. As to the wires, that is an easy one to explain. The motor wires are not hidden away at the motor end and are simply withdrawn to switch the feeds, if necessary. Only matters when setting up. Does not matter at all with some ESCs, which can be switched by programming. In essence, none of it matters, it is all personal preferences. Now where is that ditch and give me a gun, its time to take on the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 nice covering Simon all your checkers line up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brfc7 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Posted by Erfolg on 20/02/2014 22:52:24: brfc7 are we preparing to die in a ditch over this? WHAT ON EARTH ARE YOU ON ABOUT I have no issue with the motor being proudly on display. NEITHER DO I BUT IT DOES LOOK BETTER HIDDEN I am reasonably confident that a motor in the breeze will be a little cooler. OK, it does not seem to be an issue. I'D SAY I AM 100% CONFIDENT THE MOTOR WILL RUN COOLER IN THE BREEZE BUT ISN'T NEEDED As to the wires, that is an easy one to explain. The motor wires are not hidden away at the motor end and are simply withdrawn to switch the feeds, if necessary. Only matters when setting up. Does not matter at all with some ESCs, which can be switched by programming. THIS MAKES NO SENSE BOTH OUR WIRES ARE IN THE SAME PLACE In essence, none of it matters, it is all personal preferences. Now where is that ditch and give me a gun, its time to take on the world. LETS NOT FORGET YOURS ISN'T REALLY A PUSHYCAT NOW IS IT SINCE IT HAS A BUILT UP WING baz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Leighfield Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 On mine I brought the motor forward by 1 5/8" and shortened the nose by 3 1/4", an overall reduction of 4 7/8", around 120mm. I re-positioned the motor forward to compensate for any rearward cg shift caused by the shorter noise. Personally I prefer the appearance change this causes because it creates the "De Havilland Venom" sort of look I was after. I decided to stick with the enclosed motor, but visually I think it looks attractive either way, it's purely personal taste. I've given it plenty of ventilation, so I don't think over-heating will be an issue. Mine weighs 26ozs. all up and I understand this is pretty much the same for most of them, shortened or not! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 and very nice its looks Colin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Leighfield Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 You're very kind John. I think they all look good, but different. The PC seems to have a lot in common with dogs, they can be made to look very different, but underneath they're all the same animal! I'm looking forward next to see what Bob Cotsford's is going to look like, particularly as he's decided to make a very simple flat wing with the leading and trailing edges rounded off, no profiling. I bet it will fly just as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 im sure it will Colin a plans just a guide, self expressions ok by me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Miller Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 brfc7: No need to SHOUT we can glean your meaning with out that. I have gone sort of half way with mine as I installed the top and side covers but left the bottom motor cover off because I was concerned about cooling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brfc7 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Ha sorry Dave my last post isn't in capitals to shout it was so you could distinguish between my text and the original members text To build an original PC off the plan it doesn't have a bottom cover over the motor, just a small piece right at the rear about 10mm wide so the hole is about 40-50mm for cooling baz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Leighfield Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I don't think that cooling is a big issue, but have provided a path for air to flow over the ESC and motor, leaving a big gap in the balsa sheeting under the motor for the air to get out. I fitted an "air-scoop" intake behind the cockpit to feed this, but it's as much a styling exercise as anything particularly critical. I seriously considered leaving the motor open because it looks fine to me, but preferred the concealed approach for my attempt at a "semi-scale" interpretation. All I need to do now is to see if I can get around to seeing if it flies when I get home! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Brfc7, I believe we are all agreed that the PC is a brilliant design. In my working life, it would have been described as elegant. This would have in most cases been based on the simplicity of the build process, the aesthetic aspects and finally its flying characteristics. I would have added on additional feature, that is the ability to accept modifications to the concept, whilst retaining the other desirable characteristics.These range from simple motor changes, followed by changes to motor installation, twin aileron servos, modifications to envelope shape, wings which are thinner, built up wings. You can compare favourably the flexibility of the PC with the BMC Mini, which has morphed into the BMW Mini, with Saloon bodies, Cross county Versions, Estate version, 2 seater version and now a larger envelope version coming out. Or perhaps the Beetle(Kaffer) which has seen various styling tweaks, differing engines to the new USA designed current model. I can see that by your own, valid criteria (as valid as anyones) the enclosed motor is optimal. My own criteria is based on what I perceive as optimisation of installation, maintenance and operational aspects as well as aesthetics. Although the picture below was not taken to illustrate the installation, and my current position of having no functioning digital camera, I hope that it can be used to illustrate the following points There is simple easy access to installing the mounting screws. The motor wires, are just poked through, or withdrawn by a easily accessible hole in the bulkhead, with the wires located in a position not liable to damage. The motor is unlikely to suffer from any cooling issues. Examination of the motor and mount is very easy, not being obscured in any way. The aesthetic is in my opinion very interesting, for a number of reasons. Some of which are based on individual backgrounds, therby being very personal. If I use my self as a less than settled opinion and considering why I am where I am, my personal journey. It may be possible to understand others views of beauty. As a child, I had a book, which had a picture of the LMS Coronation Scot, thundering along. This was a thing of beauty in my eyes, the shape, the colours, the speed stripes. My farther was dismissive, he was at the time feeding information on serviceability, fuel usage, draw bar weights and other basic data, from German, French and Belgium steam locomotives into the design process of the BR Standard Class programme. Impatiently he dismissed my love, and the A4s as time consuming to maintain, the streamline casings adding nothing to overall efficiency. The UK vision of beauty of inside cylinders, mudguards over wheels, buried and hidden pipework, lack of consideration of steam passages and so on as a disaster. When I started work, as a young designer, I came to see that there were three major aspects of a successful industrial design, the first is the ease of manufacture, functionality of the working item and ease of maintenance. I still love the Coronation Scot, although my idea of a good design is more likely be a F! car, pig ugly, but does its job, in all aspects. I know others admire B&O equipment and Apple products, where I see a fancy package, clothing ordinary products,. Although grudgingly I do admire the Apple intuitive interfacing. So on that basis i acknowledge your right to hold your values dear, and we do both admire the PC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brfc7 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Another short straight to the point post erfolg as usual.Baz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 brfc7, there is no point, in this area, just people seeing things differently, for various reasons and differing priorities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Cavie Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Sorry, I am not sure I was very clear, I am going to use F4 but just move it forward by the length of the motor, I might carry the sides and top decking over to cover the can leaving the bottom open for cooling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Martin That is what I did, on reflection, it is the motor mount which determines the minimum size for F4, or even how much you could possibly narrow or lower the body if you were so inclined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Leighfield Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 That is pretty much what I did as well Martin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Cotsford Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Posted by simon burch on 20/02/2014 22:51:21: I only modded mine because I couldn't get enough space around the motor to run wires, it was just a bit too close to the can. Not a problem if mounting at the back of the motor. From memory, I just added another former the same distance back as the length of the motor and then cut off the end of the fuselage. I'd already built mine as per plan, but if I built another I'd just leave the motor out in the wind. Still deciding whether to change up to 500 watts? Edited By simon burch on 20/02/2014 22:51:51 Just looked here for CofG hints and the first thing I saw was this photo - guess what scheme mine is> I wasn't copying yours Simon, just using up what film was to hand! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iqon Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 thought it was a place for pushy cat not copy cat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Cotsford Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 I thought the whole idea was to copycat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 great minds think alike Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 What is the experience of under arm launching by the pilot? Or do you need some one else to throw it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Cotsford Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Underarm lob worked for the Funjet so I'll be trying it with this one too. Thought - mix aileron to the rudder stick so you have directional control at launch if you are a right handed mode 2 launcher like me, also set up a launch flight mode with a touch of up elevator to keep the nose up - worked on the FJ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Carr Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Underarm launch every time for pushy cats erfolg Piece of If ken Anderson can do it .....anyone can... Click here for his u tube 4th post down Edited By Craig Carr on 27/02/2014 16:41:35 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken anderson. Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 erfolg-----hold the pc just behind the c of g and with the TX in your left hand open the throttle 3/4 and launch the model facing slightly upwards in to the wind.....it may try and veer to the left a bit so get ready to catch it with the ailerons ...... and if the breeze is 5mph + and you launch slightly off it-the model will go 'quickly' to the left and crash......in no wind conditions it will climb away with little correction on the sticks....and of course watch your hand on the prop...once you've done it a couple of times it's no bother(where did I hear that before) ... ... ken Anderson....ne...1 .....no bother dept.... Edited By ken anderson. on 27/02/2014 16:44:07 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.