Re: [RCSE] Nimh charger help, please
On 7/27/03 8:42 AM, Andrew E. Mileski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find that A mode works best. LITCO SPECIFICALLY warns NOT to use the A program for NiMH packs. This goes for the S and W programs as well. ~~~ Bill Malvey RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] Nimh charger help, please
Bill Malvey wrote: On 7/27/03 8:42 AM, Andrew E. Mileski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I find that A mode works best. LITCO SPECIFICALLY warns NOT to use the A program for NiMH packs. This goes for the S and W programs as well. Ya, I know, so what! It works best for me :) -- Andrew E. Mileski Ottawa, Canada http://isoar.ca/ RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] What's your favorite charger for NiMH packs?
On 7/27/03 6:05 AM, walter higgins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whats your favorite charger for the higher capacity 1650 mAH rx and tx NiMH battery packs? LITCO A4 on the bench, Sirius Quad Charger at the field. The Quad is very nice. 4 ports ALL at 1 amp each. Perfect for my large aerobatic planes with 2 RX packs and the ignition pack plus the TX. Sirius also has a 2 port charger that does 2 amps per port that would be nice as well. ~~~ Bill Malvey RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] Nimh charger help, please
On 7/27/03 9:15 AM, Andrew E. Mileski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bill Malvey wrote: LITCO SPECIFICALLY warns NOT to use the A program for NiMH packs. This goes for the S and W programs as well. Andrew E. Mileski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ya, I know, so what! It works best for me :) Classic. You know better than the folks who make the thing. OK then. But I think you forfeit all right to complain if it burns up a pack. I also STRONGLY recommend others NOT to follow your lead in ignoring the instructions of the manufacturer. I may not be as smart as some, but I figure if the guy who designed it and makes it tells me NOT to do something, then maybe he knows what he is talking about. I'm just one of those silly people who thinks the manufacturer knows more about his product than I do. Oh well. ~~~ Bill Malvey RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE]
Okay D.O. :-) So you pulled some nose weight and it seems like a lotBut no where do I state or have mentioned that pulling a lot of nose weight has anything to do 20 with 'balancing' your sailplane. Jeese, Gordy: You get so defensive when given credit!! What I was saying concerning my BoT was that instead of adding nose weight to kill the bobbing, I removed weight as suggested in your article and used more down trim. Nothing more, nothing less. I also said that the things I did (moving bat and rx) moved the CG back 3/4 from where it was. These statements were information only... not instructional. A response to a query from another modeler shared with everyone. My plane flew better. That's what I said. That's what the plane did. There is only ONE way to check the balance of a sailplane, and that's by=20 flying it inverted. You'll forgive me as I declined to fly the ship upside down; I don't feel it's necessary. I don't think it's necessary for full-sized sailplanes either! Some might interpret some statements as to imply that weight is always the enemy. Clearly, this is not the case. Many times, it is necessary to add ballast to penetrate in windy conditions. Where I fly, we do so frequently. Making you ship lighter overall, isn't always the answer to better performance, especially when the winds get above 10 mph or so. Sometimes a heavier wing loading is also beneficial in other situations. I routinely fly with 4oz ballast in my SuperV 2M. . When it's really windy, like in Wichita, Ks, I use 8 oz. I never fly it dry because it just doesn't fly as well, regardless of where the CG is placed.
[RCSE] MFG don't know more than we do...? :)
I may not be as smart as some, but I figure if the guy who designed it and makes it tells me NOT to do something, then maybe he knows what he is talking about. I'm just one of those silly people who thinks the manufacturer knows more about his product than I do. And if this were true you'd balance your models the way the plan showed, have all the throws the same way they recommended. Wouldn't add reinforcements, would only use the motor, servos, radio, pushrods, clevis' etc. and we wouldn't have any new developments from our suppliers if others didn't experiment with their products. How many guys brought out the 6 channel on their micro 5 channel RX's... or went to a rubber ducky, or use a different RX brand than the TX? Okay if someone burns up a battery pack 'trying' a setting different than the instructions say, then what? Life as we know it ends on earth? Nope we burn up a pack and get to cut some more lawns to get a new one. :-) Who cares why instructions say to do or not do things...its a boring topic and when all is said and done more will have been said than done. We are hobbiest, and part of the hobby is trying, experimenting and testing. Instead of the 'DON"T DO IT!" why not, hey if you try it let the rest of us know how it worked out for you?... or "The mfgr says not to do it , so I'm going to contact them to find out their opinion since it is working well for you." Both of those are more fun than don't step outside the lines :-) Gordy Still in the after glow of the NATs :-)
Re: [RCSE] NiMH packs?
The Quad is very nice. 4 ports ALL at 1 amp each. Perfect for my large aerobatic planes with 2 RX packs and the ignition pack plus the TX. This brings up another question, I have been flying some large planes with 2600 nimh flight and ignition packs. They are the most current cells that can supply over 5C (I don't need that much current) I am amazed at the daily loss of charge, they lose over 600mah per day just sitting there You have to charge these things every time you go flying if it has been more than a day. Is this normal with the low resistance cells? I think they are great for E-power, but for the flight packs on large gas, I think I would rather have NiCd or Lithium just to avoid having to charge every other day whether I use them or not.. Be very careful charging them, I know of a couple people that have had them explode on charge during a conservative charge cycle. Mark Mech www.aerofoam.com RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] NiMH packs?
Aerofoam wrote: This brings up another question, I have been flying some large planes with 2600 nimh flight and ignition packs. They are the most current cells that can supply over 5C (I don't need that much current) I am amazed at the daily loss of charge, they lose over 600mah per day just sitting there You have to charge these things every time you go flying if it has been more than a day. Is this normal with the low resistance cells? Ni-MH cells don't like to sit. It's a chemistry thing. Charge 'em and use 'em immediately! The 600mAh loss/day is a bit extreme though, and I'd look for a bad cell in the pack. -- Andrew E. Mileski Ottawa, Canada http://isoar.ca/ RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] The 'FULL SIZE card :-)
No guess my attitude as being defensive, I am in a hobby that is a ball, so if you want to read some intent into my posts, it one of having fun. The emial writter can supply only the content the reader gets to guess at the intent. So guess the right way :-) You'll forgive me as I declined to fly the ship upside down; I don't feel it's necessary. I don't think it's necessary for full-sized sailplanes either! Too often when faced with a lack of valid arguments, the trend is to offer up either the safety card or the full size card in RC Competition Sailplaning. Notice I didn't write RC Soaring. There's a difference. Competiton Sailplaning is about completing a task,,,not about soaring. It has nothing to do with having a man inside or being a replica of flying full size sailplanes, or Sunday soaring. Make the time, hit the spot. Don't make the time, don't hit the spot, don't get the wood, then go soaring. :-) Why it would be sacreligious to fly a model upside down as part of a regime to diagnois trim and balance doesn't register. However, the statement above is valid... its not necessary to fly a full size upside down to determine balance, BECAUSE full size has to live within the confines of a pilots safety, so the speed, stability, g force, etc window is pretty small. Models don't have any pilot considerations like that to take into considerations. RC Contest ships, as the BOT is going to be use for, have the luxury of being able to be tuned up for optimum performance. Lead is empowered by gravity, elevators are empowered by airspeed. If you have more lead than is needed to maintain the wing, then the elevator has to be trimmed up. When flipped inverted that now counts as down, and gravity can have its way. When right side up, and flown slow..as in thermal turns or stretched skegless landing, the gravity can grab the nose, and yank it toward the ground. The elevator out of authority lets the nose have its way. That makes for hot landings and long slides ;-) and flying with elevator drag. Again, getting your plane tuned up perfectly is likely NOT to get you another minute of time or another 25 landing points, but it will allow your models tail to be lighter and the over model to be lighter and fly slower. Lighter lift will be able to lift your model's tail and your model in general. All sounds okay to me and worth flipping inverted once or twice :-) BY the way guys, D.O. and I are pretty good buds :-) Gordy
Re: [RCSE] Nimh charger help, please
Bill Malvey wrote: Classic. You know better than the folks who make the thing. OK then. But I think you forfeit all right to complain if it burns up a pack. I also STRONGLY recommend others NOT to follow your lead in ignoring the instructions of the manufacturer. I may not be as smart as some, but I figure if the guy who designed it and makes it tells me NOT to do something, then maybe he knows what he is talking about. I'm just one of those silly people who thinks the manufacturer knows more about his product than I do. Oh well. This entire hobby is an exercise in finding new ways to use existing parts and materials to benefit the flying experience. If I did what the manufacturer suggested, I wouldn't be using a starter motor for a winch, ejector pins for wing rods, an automotive battery charger as a foam cutting power source, bolts for soldering tips when making packs, a 5 gallon air tank as a vacuum resevoir, flourescent light ballasts as building weights, etc. I don't see any benefit in concealing information. I leave it up to each individual to decide for themselves the value, and risks, in any endevour before they attempt it. Thank you though, for pointing out the manufacturer's warning. -- Andrew E. Mileski Ottawa, Canada http://isoar.ca/ RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] Whats your favorite charger for NiMH packs?
Currently using the Dymond Super Turbo...previously used the Sirius Pro+. Both are great chargers, but I find the Dymond much more flexible. I have standardized on a 2000 MAh NiMH RX pack and my TX has an 1100 MAh NiCD. Tom - Original Message - From: walter higgins [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 6:05 AM Subject: [RCSE] Whats your favorite charger for NiMH packs? Whats your favorite charger for the higher capacity 1650 mAH rx and tx NiMH battery packs? RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] Prism V tail angle?
Guys, Just came across a great deal on an old Prism V tail. I flew one a while back; it was actually my first TD ship. Sorry if my nostalgia doesn't include monokote Anyway, the instructions from my first one indicate a V angle of 95 degrees. The one in my basement looks to be about that, but it just doesn't look right. Most V tails today seem to be a bit flatter. My trimming skills were non-existent with the first one. Anybody out there remember any set up tips for these things, maybe save me some trial and error? TIA Lee E. Overland Park, KS
[RCSE] A tale of two sailplanes from the 2003 NATs
Just home from the 2003 NATs and, while riffling through the many email messages awaiting me, I noticed comments about sailplanes at each end of the price spectrum, the AVA and the new ARF BOT. I got my first look at an AVA (you gotta like a plane named after one of your childhood movie star crushes) when Jim Bacus put his up on an F3J tow in very light air. It proved to be a good choice for the occasion and I was most impressed with the workmanship. Yesterday was the RES/NOS event at the NATs and the conditions were not ideal for bent-wing sailplanes. A stiff breeze which got stiffer as the rounds progressed presented a challenge to anyone who flew. There were several planes damaged on tow - victims of the combination of a stout winch and stiff breeze. Among the victims were two AVA's - one from a blown stab; the other from a blown wing panel. At lest two of the new BOT ARFs were also victims of blown wing panels. I had a chance to examine the remains of one of these and, while the outside of these ships look great, the construction methodology employed leaves something to be desired at the competition level. As the event wore on, Aspires were placed into service as backups in the RES class. Sorry to report at least one of these blew up on launch as well. Hmm... it looks like RES and Nostalgia are events are such that the winning models must be built and built right to win. One observation - it was cool to see the planes in these events as they did not look like they were all made with a cookie cutter and a check book. Results of this event are probably posted on the AMA web site by now. Joe did not win these events. And, by the way, the second place in RES was taken with a beautifully crafted Nostalgia sailplane. Home from what my wife calls Jim's Summer Camp, Jim Deck RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] NATS !!
Just got home from, probably the best NATS that we have had to date. Many thanks to the CONTESTANTS, and the Staff... 9 days of this stuff is just the start, Its gonna take me some time to get the LSF site updated with Pix and alike, but will keep you updated. Congrads to Joe Wurts, who basically swept the NATS !! ; Larry Jolly Lee Gray Award Winner , and the wonderful Donors for the workers raffle. More Later.. Jack Jack Strother LSF President Loveland, OHLSF 2948 LSF Level IV (ALMOST V) CSS Silver 2003 LSF/AMA Soaring Nationals Event Director http://www.silentflight.org Automation Consultant LOL RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] New email address for Dave Darling
Please note new email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Dial Broadband has arrived in California! Up to 5 times faster than traditional dialup connections from $13.33/month! See the demo for yourself at http://www.BigValley.net RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
