The Big Question ?

[martin collins 1]

In for a 109 next winter, particularly a B of B E, i will place my order now.............

[gillyg1]

Yes please, 109 with a i/c option and retracts, you know me ,  55" or there abouts will do for me , as above next winter 😉

[Paul Johnson 4]

1 hour ago, gillyg1 said:

with a i/c option

No Problem.....IC = integrated circuit = Electronic Speed Controller....😛

[GBG]

I would certainly be interested in an EDF model. It would make a pleasant change from assembling and flying foamies. Also depending on the size of the battery bay it could be flown on 4 or 6S depending on what you have. I have an Arrows Marlin that was converted to 6S purely by fitting an Arrows MIG-29 motor. It uses a 6S 1800 pack (actually a 4S and 2S pack in series) instead of the 4S 2600 pack it originally used and gives the same flight time.

[GBG]

I should have added that I had to fit a new 6S capable ESC which I had in the spares box. The new motor was the only part I had to buy.

[Ace]

I have most of Richards right back to a balsa 109 but a EDF large enough for retracts off grass, would most likely need more than my largest battery limit - 4000 4s. As an avid WR supporter I would probably give a full fat EDF a miss. 

[leccyflyer]

Yep - in my experience, which isn't huge, EDFs need to either have tarmac runways if fitted with retracts, be super powerful if aiming to use retracts on grass,  be small enough and with sufficient excess power to be hand launched or need a bungee. Fixed gear is right out. My clubmates have had lots of success with the wee Arrows 50mm Hawk and T-33, my attempts with the tN Gnat and Jet Provost have been much less successful.

 

If you are really into jets, those hurdles are surmountable with some effort, but as a dyed-in-the-wool propellor fan I'd have to think twice about whether to go for a large EDF build. Unless it were a Hunter, or maybe a Harrier, or a Phantom. 🙂

[RICHARD WILLS]

22 minutes ago, Ace said:

I have most of Richards right back to a balsa 109 but a EDF large enough for retracts off grass, would most likely need more than my largest battery limit - 4000 4s. As an avid WR supporter I would probably give a full fat EDF a miss. 

That would be my reservation too . I wouldn't want to have to buy three or four large batteries that I couldn't use for my regular fleet . 

In fact that is what puts me off buying the rather nice Motion RC F86 . ( also I prefer the satisfaction of making  my own ) .

On the experimental side , I have modified the Arrows Marlin to carry light retracts and also turned it into a Red Arrows Hawk ! 

That has been flown quite a bit last year on my regular 4s 3300 packs . Its a quick bodge with a foam rear deck new canopy and false nose . 

It does prove that on a budget 4s power train , you can have quite an exotic model . Duration is only about 3.5mins but it certainly can be an exciting flight !

Its probably something I will experiment with , perhaps going slightly bigger but still light and trade in some speed for endurance . 

[Lipo Man]

22 minutes ago, leccyflyer said:

Yep - in my experience, which isn't huge, EDFs need to either have tarmac runways if fitted with retracts, be super powerful if aiming to use retracts on grass,  be small enough and with sufficient excess power to be hand launched or need a bungee. Fixed gear is right out. My clubmates have had lots of success with the wee Arrows 50mm Hawk and T-33, my attempts with the tN Gnat and Jet Provost have been much less successful.

 

If you are really into jets, those hurdles are surmountable with some effort, but as a dyed-in-the-wool propellor fan I'd have to think twice about whether to go for a large EDF build. Unless it were a Hunter, or maybe a Harrier, or a Phantom. 🙂

I built a TN Hunter last year - my first balsa build attempt (FW190 was the second). I have never really been comfortable flying it - which was one of the reasons I was (unnecessarily) so nervous for the FW190 maiden.
 

After having so much fun with the 190 I decided to revisit the Hunter yesterday and see if a smaller battery (and therefore reduced weight) would help. Switching down from a 2200 3s to a 1300 3s transformed how it flew - but WOT is really straining the pack and flight duration was two and a half minutes. It looked great on a slow flyby, but the FW190 I also flew was much more fun in the air. 

I would definitely consider an EDF after the success with the Focke, but that market is quite well catered for with the TN kits in various sizes. I’d love to do something bigger than the 190 next, but obviously the majority will prevail. 

I’ll continue to follow with interest!

Edited April 22 by Lipo Man

[Chris Walby]

Mr doom and gloom here!

 

On the EDF front (yes I would like one), but I think its a very emerging area of the hobby. There are some real winners out there mk1 Habu, but here is the catch as on tarmac they are a dream to get off the deck (4S3300/4000), but short grass and you have to peel it off, wet or long grass don't bother it will end in tears. Now these have fixed gear so look pants when flying around. If you had launch with the gear its very marginal, but without the wire gear (not even the weight of retracts) its a piece of cake. So what does that tell you about margins.

Now roll on the mk2 Habu...why does it have fixed gear, why is it 4S or 6S compatible, IMO because its all still very marginal. 4S off tarmac ok, off grass it has to be yanked off. 6S and grass and it gets off ok, but its hammering the battery in the process (yes I get LVC on the ESC, but with 1/2 to 3/4 the rest of the 5 minute flight is possible),

 

I have a SU47 (twin 70mm) that can kill a 6S4500 lipo in 2 min 15 sec and its so marginal flight performance its bike clips at all times. I has such aggressive cheat holes that with UC it actually sucks it to the deck on roll out...back the throttle of and it lifts off the ground...but not for long before its aggressive stall catches up! The most successful launch is to remove the retracts (still weighs 2.6kg) and hand launch with stabilisation/safe on. Its that marginal it just misses the ground but then it up to me then get a few circuits before belly landing!

 

IMO Arrows have cracked it, small and light models powered by 3S2200 and guess what...no retracts, no wire UC, no flaps and not even a rudder, why? because they know its all about power to weight.

 

I tried a FT kit that could be pusher or EDF and what was surprising was the loss of EDF performance once you add and induction and thrust tube + it wants to implode on full power! So something like an A10 is doable but its been done and expensive.

 

Not flown one but the HK Vampires are very popular and fly very well, what's the winning formula?

 

Looks like we are back to single engine WW2 fighters with popular (common) at one end of the spectrum or unpopular/ rarely modelled at the other end....or dolly launched twin... but people will want retracts, then flaps and wonder why the retracts come out of the wings on a rough grass strip! 

 

[RICHARD WILLS]

15 minutes ago, Chris Walby said:

Mr doom and gloom here!

 

On the EDF front (yes I would like one), but I think its a very emerging area of the hobby. There are some real winners out there mk1 Habu, but here is the catch as on tarmac they are a dream to get off the deck (4S3300/4000), but short grass and you have to peel it off, wet or long grass don't bother it will end in tears. Now these have fixed gear so look pants when flying around. If you had launch with the gear its very marginal, but without the wire gear (not even the weight of retracts) its a piece of cake. So what does that tell you about margins.

Now roll on the mk2 Habu...why does it have fixed gear, why is it 4S or 6S compatible, IMO because its all still very marginal. 4S off tarmac ok, off grass it has to be yanked off. 6S and grass and it gets off ok, but its hammering the battery in the process (yes I get LVC on the ESC, but with 1/2 to 3/4 the rest of the 5 minute flight is possible),

 

I have a SU47 (twin 70mm) that can kill a 6S4500 lipo in 2 min 15 sec and its so marginal flight performance its bike clips at all times. I has such aggressive cheat holes that with UC it actually sucks it to the deck on roll out...back the throttle of and it lifts off the ground...but not for long before its aggressive stall catches up! The most successful launch is to remove the retracts (still weighs 2.6kg) and hand launch with stabilisation/safe on. Its that marginal it just misses the ground but then it up to me then get a few circuits before belly landing!

 

IMO Arrows have cracked it, small and light models powered by 3S2200 and guess what...no retracts, no wire UC, no flaps and not even a rudder, why? because they know its all about power to weight.

 

I tried a FT kit that could be pusher or EDF and what was surprising was the loss of EDF performance once you add and induction and thrust tube + it wants to implode on full power! So something like an A10 is doable but its been done and expensive.

 

Not flown one but the HK Vampires are very popular and fly very well, what's the winning formula?

 

Looks like we are back to single engine WW2 fighters with popular (common) at one end of the spectrum or unpopular/ rarely modelled at the other end....or dolly launched twin... but people will want retracts, then flaps and wonder why the retracts come out of the wings on a rough grass strip! 

 

I have to agree with all of that Chris . You cant have your cake etc . 

I have a long grass strip which is nice when dry . Even the little Arrows Marlin /Hawk goes off , but of course we have to consider that its a different story in other clubs . 

We like all of our gang to be able to join the projects so there has to be enough flexibility to make that possible . 

The Tempests will be flying the nest soon , so it will be interesting to get some feedback on the method of construction and the flying grin factor . 

Results could be indicative of the next move . 

[GrumpyGnome]

@leccyflyerAgree 100%. I'd still like a Hornet though....... 

[RICHARD WILLS]

Hornets , Whirlwinds , I'd like them both but we both know the numbers wont stack up . If its a twin , it will be a Mossie . 

My first choice would be the Whirlwind but we would get maybe five hands up .

Even the Mossie may not get as many votes as we hope . 

It would depend on what the barriers are with those versions already available on the market . 

Even so , I am slightly baffled about the reluctance to try a twin . 

 

 

Edited April 22 by RICHARD WILLS

[Piers Bowlan]

 

9 hours ago, RICHARD WILLS said:

Even so , I am slightly baffled about the reluctance to try a twin . 

 

 

More expense ( two motors/ESCs, wiring and bigger batteries) may put many people off a twin? 
Traditionally IC twins need to be bigger because of the weight, to keep the wing loading sensible. Bigger models take longer to build and a ‘scale’ mossy with its oval  fuselage cross section will certainly be more challenging to build, which puts off people who just struggle to build a fuselage that is straight ( I empathise 🤣).

HOWEVER, with Richard’s WR USP of simple ‘scalish’ build lines, foam wings and E-power using a couple of ubiquitous 2200mAh LiPos, it could be very appealing indeed ❤️.

60in span could be the sweet spot in terms of span if that wasn’t too big for a couple of 2200mAh batteries?

 

Edited April 23 by Piers Bowlan

[leccyflyer]

Could it just be a carry over from the days of IC twins when the dreaded engine out was pretty much a death sentence? I  watched a group of clubmates - all experienced modellers - build a big scale twin every winter as a joint project, equip it with a pair of intrinsically unreliable strimmer engine conversions and do the engine out spiral of death on the maiden flight three years running before they eventually gave up. That fear should be missing from an electric twin - it isn't actually, for example on my first twin adventure I lost a prop on climbing out and did that engine out death spiral anyway 😄

 

 

[Paul Johnson 4]

1 minute ago, leccyflyer said:

lost a prop on climbing out

Mmm ... screw loose... I know I have 

[Learner]

The fact that they are more of a challenge to build and fly is the reason I'd buy a twin.

I can't see the fascination of all these warbirds that all fly/ look the same.

If I wanted that I'd camouflage my acrowot! 😉

 

[GrumpyGnome]

Can't say a Tempest looks like a P51.......... but each to their own....I for example am not a fan of Edge/Extra aeroplanes

[Eric Robson]

I've always been a fan of extra aeroplanes 😃

[Learner]

30 minutes ago, GrumpyGnome said:

Can't say a Tempest looks like a P51.......... but each to their own....I for example am not a fan of Edge/Extra aeroplanes

A Big Beautiful Doll schemed Acrowot, cool!👍

[leccyflyer]

1 hour ago, Learner said:

The fact that they are more of a challenge to build and fly is the reason I'd buy a twin.

I can't see the fascination of all these warbirds that all fly/ look the same.

If I wanted that I'd camouflage my acrowot! 😉

 

For me it's about the desire to research and replicate certain key, historical aeroplanes, which means that, even for aeroplanes which are exactly the same model and so which do fly exactly the same as their duplicates, the associated history and interest in realising those colour schemes and wee tweaks, gives me immense pleasure. To that end I do have multiple duplicates of a number of aeroplanes, some different marks, but some which are exactly the same mark and exactly the same kit, which works for me. Personally I can't see the fascination of even scale aerobats, like Edges, but even there I do have a favourite one, which I quickly sought out a duplicate, just in case the original ever get broken.  I've flown the duplicate Edge just once in a dozen years. Different strokes for different folks.

[Chris Walby]

New day and less gloom and doom!

 

Ooorr don't get me on the subject of twins...and beside the fact that I have had more one engine/motor outs on electric than IC brings me to simple point of preparation and care + a good dose of plan B in readiness when it goes Pete Tong. IC twins I have are 3 Tiger Cats, Mossie and Dual Ace and the point there is NEVER take off unless everything is 100% as it will only get worse!

 

Not adverse to electric twins with OV 10, P38 (two!) BH Mossie, WooHoo, Grumpy Tiger Cub and the Focke Stick, so sticking to the subject the foam P38, OV 10, are interesting in this discussion along with the Grumpy Tiger Cub (balsa)

 

The foam P38 is a surprise as its 63 inch wingspan and AUW is just short of 3.7kg (over 8 lbs) and flies really well, but has that presence of don't push me or I might just bite back (if you do something silly). Three blade is nice and the 2 blade/motor upgrade is outstanding! hence why I have 2.

 

The OV 10 is another surprise, but with a twist its 55 inch and weighs more that the P38! with 2 x 4S4000 packs..and the twist? it has more wing area! Can't beat a thick wide plank of a wing! 

 

Last is the Grumpy Tiger Cub and talking to Peter (the designer) it is very tolerant of single engine operation. 55 inch and AUW 2.5kg (5 1/2 lbs) and I can vouch for this as Mr dumb nuts repeatedly flew it with a duff 4S4000 causing one of the ESC to latch in LVC (the ESC continues but only up to 50% throttle), no drama and on one occasion carried on to the end of the 5 minute flight.

 

Now for a word of caution with a couple of bitter experiences, both of my doing.  The first was the demise of my first BH Mossie, gear down, flaps 1/2 and slowed it up resulting in it dropping a wing at 25 ft. BH use to jig build these so they are very light, but when the UC hits the ground it rips the entire nacelle out of the wing, near total write off. The other was my Ta154 Moskito ic twin that turned out just plain heavy and a rather (massively understated) rearward C of G. Was it nice to fly...hell no and prop hanging a 18lb 80 inch warbird at 250ft due to loss of elevator authority was a very memorable moment! 

With Richards help we did tame it a bit

 

Broken record time, build light without UC or flaps, dolly launch or hand chuck. Then once you have the hang of it add the weight and the expense if you want

 

Edited April 23 by Chris Walby

[Chris Walby]

Sorry to head off at a tangent, but if you do have a dog of a model why not share it with the club instructor and great guy Dave! 

 

I rest my case with selecting an unproven design, high wing loading and rearward C of G! None of this will be relevant with Richards designs, but just be carful what you wish for on the extras list 🙂  

 

 

 

 

[GrumpyGnome]

The pilot must have been suspicious as he seemed to try and bale out at take off.....

[leccyflyer]

Few good saves on the video there - when I saw the spindly legs at the beginning of the video I wondered how the landing would go, but superior pilot skills worked their magic.