[RCSE] Pushrod Installation for Pod/Boom
I'm building a Hobby Club Danny 3 m RES sailplane, which is one of the pod and boom style of fuses, a la the Bubble Dancer, Topaz, Ava, etc, etc. I'm debating whether to install the rudder/elevator pushrods inside or outside of the boom. The pushrods I have are .070 carbon fiber from CST. I've done some research and it seems that either method is used to good effect. The only other pod/boom airplane I've assembled is an XP-4 DLG and I did put the pushrods on the outside as suggested by the instructions. Of course an XP-4 boom has a LOT smaller diameter than a Danny boom. It seems that putting the pushrods on the outside will be: - easier to build - easier to support the pushrod all along the run - straighter run - ugly, ugly, ugly - the preferred method of Dr. Drela Pushrods on the outside - cleaner aerodynamically - aesthetically more pleasing I've heard of a CA/cotton ball method of supporting the pushrods in the boom, which sounds a little crazy, but easy if it works. Anyway, I'd appreciate any advice... 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] "He still sees no need for Dial a channel, but I have -- for years"
Those rotary switches on the synth modules are not designed for continuous use. They're similar to the old circuit board mounted DIP switches (the ones that you had to flip with the tip of a pencil), they're great for occasional configuration changes but the contacts and detents wear out quite fast if you use them repeatedly Martin Usher 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] "He still sees no need for Dial a channel, but I have -- for years"
In a message dated 2/21/2006 10:54:40 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The other factor involved IS the dial a crash potential. ALL of the current synth modules use the tiny dials, with tiny digits. It was why I urged all recently to invest in the Frequency Checkerby turning on the Freq Checker BEFORE you turn on your TX after dialing your channel you can quickly verify that you have indeed chosen 53 instead of 52, or 35... NO! ALL of them DON"T! Synth module + scanner (at least three such available) best set-up so far. Good Lift!
Re: [RCSE] Carbon Supra #48 flies - weight < 61 oz !
In a message dated 2/21/2006 10:44:21 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 99.9% of you guys will never build the line tension Mark is referring to. AMEN! Good Lift! 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] Servo Performance - Real World
Excellent post Simon! Thanks for all that detail! Gordy
[RCSE] "Grunting while Launching, servos that is ;-)"
Hi Don, I have been watching this one waiting for this endingbecause it is totally out of context of what is 'needed' for our contest planes. What is needed is 10mins exactly and 100 landing points in every round. Every plane prior to today's ships have been 10 to 20ozs heavier, with stiffer surfaces, and servos that were gimpy and weenie in spec comparison, yet all managed to create a fun day and 1000 point rounds. How would the calculations account for the guy who won a contest flying a Sharon with all HS81's on all surfaces? I know of a plane that's done over 300mph with Volz HPs. I personally use standard Micro Maxx on 4 cells and manage to get into the air pretty well each time :-) I'm not sure where your comments are headed with the "if one can believe the advertisements" comment. Why wouldn't one? The only servos that use high torque carbon brushed motors, a gear train that I have yet to see damaged (can't launch if you have a chipped tooth, er I mean if your flap servo has a chipped tooth). Michael Volz is a pilot and a close friend, and a guy who many of the world's and America's contest pilots have met (can you say the same for the owners of JR or Futa, or Sanwa?)... he chose to make servos specifically for high performance competition sailplane use...kind of explains why they match the need. About 10 years ago he created a servo with a mounting system, connector system, torque and speed that almost matches popular digitals todayspecifically for use in competition sailplanes, versus most brands that have models that can be adapted for use in high performance sailplanes. It was Volz that inspired the cool mounts now available from Craig Greening (German supplier) for other brand servos. In any case, lets not inflate the importance of servos by implying 'need'. All we need is to make the time and landings...and that's been done over and over with weaker less precise servos, in heavier less precise airfoils and models with more flex in surfaces than give in servos. And AVA's with zero flap servo torque have been out scoring full house planes with 5 cells making digital servos sweat on flaps. Interesting thread for sure. Gordy Ft Lauderdale tonite, but not for long This is indeed a very interesting post by Mark Drela on servo requirements.Did anyone else notice that the calculated flap servo torque requirement (62in-oz) is higher than the specs on all commonly used servos other than theVolz Micro Maxx HP. The JR DS368 is spec'ed at 53 oz-in. The thin wingservos, JR DS-168 and Hitec equivalent at 46.6 oz-in. The Volz Wing Maxx XPoptimistically is only 59 oz-in while the regular Wing Maxx isoptimistically at only 49 oz-in. The regular Volz Micro Maxx is advertisedat 56-67 oz-in and may work if one can believe the advertisedspecifications.The advertised specification for the Volz Micro Maxx HP is 67-82 oz-in, butit was independently measured to have a maximum torque with 5 volt input of3920 g-cm or 54.4 oz-in. Seehttp://www.teaser.fr/~osegouin/aeromode/servos.phtml or more easily (since Idon't read French)http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5010862&postcount=43If I am interpreting things correctly.This really gets one thinking about the flap servos and what one is/has usedfor flaps.don
[RCSE] Servo Performance - Real World
Seems folks are overdure for a reality-check on the care and feeding of their servos; Specifications derived to advertise servo torque specifications utilize a benchtop fixed voltage power supply which will supply current in excess of the unit under test (UUT). Every test I have seen utilize such a supply. In real world servo applications the voltage varies, as seen by the servo motor, as a direct result of the applied load. The series-losses to achieve those great specifications put forth by the OEM are limited to the length of the pigtail. In the real world applications the factors that depress voltage as seen by the servo motor include: - series resistance from the lead type and gauge (expressed as awg) - battery impedence (internal - NiMH has more resistance than NiCD) - switch losses - connector losses With the above losses present as soon as you turn on your radio, The voltage at the servo motor is already significantly lower than what is present at the O/P of the battery pack, with no flight loads present. Under maximum load, say during launch, whatever that may be for a given airframe and type(s) of servos employed, the voltage seen at the hardest working servo(s) will be the lowest. It could be 2/3 or less than what the pack measures at it's O/P. So now you have a servo attempting to hold a position under launch, on a control surface whose surface area meets or already exceeds the torque requirement as set out by the manufacturer's specifications. It should be pretty clear that multiple servos under similar loads and attempting to hold a commanded position will fail and move to some other position. Other things folks should start to realize about now is that if someone with X airframe states that 10 degrees of camber will give the highest launch, the next guy running the same airframe who compromized on his set-up, or has a superior set-up, comparisons become futile. This aircraft with an inferior electrical system will possibly require 12 degrees or more, in an attempt to achieve the same desireable launch camber. I say "attempt", because at some point no matter what is commanded, the servo may never achieve the desired positon due to inadequate PWR at the load. The motor literally goes backwards against current flow until the load seen be the control surface abates. Remember...the OEM specifications are derived at a fixed voltage with whatever the current the servo desires from the power supply to determine maximum available torque (this commonly recognized measurement is taken @ 1.0" from the output shaft to move a load a fixed distance). No matter what, the servos in your aircraft will NEVER come close to this. If your goal is to see the best flight performance from whatever airframe you employ, don't scrimp on the electrical system. Simon Van Leeuwen RADIUS SYSTEMS PnP SYSTEMS - The E-Harness of Choice Cogito Ergo Zooom 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] "He still sees no need for Dial a channel, but I have -- for years"
Nor the 14MZ. Totally wireless connection. No dials, no nothing. All electronic. Dan Ahearn wrote: "...The other factor involved IS the dial a crash potential. ALL of the current synth modules use the tiny dials, with tiny digits..." Not the Evo. interface via the LCD screen. You have to power off to change. DJA 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] "He still sees no need for Dial a channel, but I have -- for years"
"...The other factor involved IS the dial a crash potential. ALL of the current synth modules use the tiny dials, with tiny digits..."Not the Evo. interface via the LCD screen. You have to power off to change.DJA
RE: [RCSE] Carbon Supra #48 flies - weight < 61 oz !
<> 99.9% of you guys will never build the line tension Mark is referring to. But...this brings to light a thread from awhile back regarding servos and being smart about your linkage geometry... design your linkage so that you don't work that servo harder than you need to. Long arm on the flap... inboard hole on the servo to get no more than the required throw... give yourself that mechanical advantage... D __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
[RCSE] "He still sees no need for Dial a channel, but I have -- for years"
With my travels it didn't take long to figure out that I was going to be sitting out while some other pilot sat on a freq all day long, especially on slopes. So I bought up all 50 Xtals and carried them along...but the next realization was that I was over working the sockets...they were never made for the in and out frequency that I had to do. However it went beyond thata couple of times I hadn't brought my xtals along and I didn't the luxury of having a clear channel at a contest or slope...and it cost me planes. When I did the article on the Stylus/Spectra adoptions, I made it clear that for 90% of the guys flying, guys who seldom travel to contests or fields where they have not established their 'ownership' and relationship with other club mates who might share a freq with them...it was a waste of time and money to do. The other factor involved IS the dial a crash potential. ALL of the current synth modules use the tiny dials, with tiny digits. It was why I urged all recently to invest in the Frequency Checkerby turning on the Freq Checker BEFORE you turn on your TX after dialing your channel you can quickly verify that you have indeed chosen 53 instead of 52, or 35... Unfortunately the thread got lost in trying to use the Freq Checker to check 'others' radios. So here's what I have seen on the road, around the world's flying sites. Don't get a Synth module if your intention is just to have a cool gimmick. IF you don't use it often, you WILL make a mistake. If you don't need to change frequencies a lot, don't get it. I use Polk Seeker 11 Synth RX's and the Spectra Module. I get my equipment tested and tuned every year and sometimes if the friend is equipped I get it checked more often. I use alcohol, and sometimes for cleaning my antenna :) Clear channel is always safest...but that doesn't mean the only way to have it is to use a Synth Module. Gordy Back in the USA! Florida, better have great weather this Saturday!
RE: [RCSE] Carbon Supra #48 flies - weight < 61 oz !
This is indeed a very interesting post by Mark Drela on servo requirements. Did anyone else notice that the calculated flap servo torque requirement (62 in-oz) is higher than the specs on all commonly used servos other than the Volz Micro Maxx HP. The JR DS368 is spec'ed at 53 oz-in. The thin wing servos, JR DS-168 and Hitec equivalent at 46.6 oz-in. The Volz Wing Maxx XP optimistically is only 59 oz-in while the regular Wing Maxx is optimistically at only 49 oz-in. The regular Volz Micro Maxx is advertised at 56-67 oz-in and may work if one can believe the advertised specifications. The advertised specification for the Volz Micro Maxx HP is 67-82 oz-in, but it was independently measured to have a maximum torque with 5 volt input of 3920 g-cm or 54.4 oz-in. See http://www.teaser.fr/~osegouin/aeromode/servos.phtml or more easily (since I don't read French) http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5010862&postcount=43 If I am interpreting things correctly. This really gets one thinking about the flap servos and what one is/has used for flaps. don -Original Message- From: Mark Drela [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 11:08 AM To: soaring@airage.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [RCSE] Carbon Supra #48 flies - weight < 61 oz ! Molded Supra launch hinge moments are listed below, for a 200 lb tow load (hard F3j launch). For smaller tow loads, hinge moments will be proportionally smaller. wing camber = +10 deg rudder defl = 30 deg wing CL = 1.2 lift = 200 lbs q = 0.16 psi = 1104 Pa V = 95 mph = 42.5 m/s Flap hinge moment = 4.87 in-lb = 78 in-oz = 5.62 kgf-cm Ail. hinge moment = 3.15 in-lb = 50 in-oz = 3.60 kgf-cm Rud. hinge moment = 2.12 in-lb = 34 in-oz = 2.45 kgf-cm To get the servo moment (torque), this hinge moment must be multiplied by a linkage geometry factor, which is approximately by the ratio of servo/surface horn lengths. This is between 0.7 - 0.9 for most installations. Assuming a horn length ratio of 0.8, the servo moments are: Flap servo moment = 62 in-oz Ail. servo moment = 40 in-oz Rud. servo moment = 27 in-oz 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
[RCSE] Reminising about radios
This is without a doubt, one of the most refreshing strings we have had in a lng time. I flew Min-X reeds, badly, with Bonner compound escapement for rudder/elevator and a Royal escapement, I think, on throttle in a Bill Winter designed Kracker Jack around 1961 or 1962 and have remained hooked on r/c ever since. First propo was a DB Quadraplex followed by a Bonner Digimite,great radio but Howard Bonner was certainly entertaining to deal with for service. Flew Proline for a while and still have a pristene Custom Comp 7 with rx, servos and charger. And the list after that is too long to bore you with tonite. Keep it going. And by the way Bubba, my Supra #16 required 41/4 oz nose weight with the 1200 mah nimh battery at 31/4 oz for a total auw of 65 oz. Regards, Dave Corven. 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
[RCSE] For Sale: Eraser XE (Electric)
Fully molded electric version of the Eraser Extreme. NIB fuse and elevator. Some very minor work done on the wings. Everything is included. All control horns have been factory installed. The workmanship is outstanding. More information can be found at the following site: http://www.icare-rc.com/eraser_xe.htm Asking $775 or will trade for electric Graphite. Buyer to pay postage. Bob
[RCSE] Nats Entries Are Coming In
Just a reminder that nats entries are open and already close to fifty are in the books from 15 states. Appreciate all the entries that have come in, all the info is on www.silentflight.org under the 2006 Nats heading. Barry Anderson will gladly take your entrie. Looking forward to the summer! Marc Gellart 2006 Soaring National Championships Event Director 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] Carbon Supra #48 flies - weight < 61 oz !
Mark I enjoy reading your posts, very interesting. Makes me think of Spock. :-) What about elevator loads? And elevator servo moment? How would that be calculated? At 10:08 AM 2/18/2006, Mark Drela wrote: Molded Supra launch hinge moments are listed below, for a 200 lb tow load (hard F3j launch). For smaller tow loads, hinge moments will be proportionally smaller. wing camber = +10 deg rudder defl = 30 deg wing CL = 1.2 lift = 200 lbs q = 0.16 psi = 1104 Pa V = 95 mph = 42.5 m/s Flap hinge moment = 4.87 in-lb = 78 in-oz = 5.62 kgf-cm Ail. hinge moment = 3.15 in-lb = 50 in-oz = 3.60 kgf-cm Rud. hinge moment = 2.12 in-lb = 34 in-oz = 2.45 kgf-cm To get the servo moment (torque), this hinge moment must be multiplied by a linkage geometry factor, which is approximately by the ratio of servo/surface horn lengths. This is between 0.7 - 0.9 for most installations. Assuming a horn length ratio of 0.8, the servo moments are: Flap servo moment = 62 in-oz Ail. servo moment = 40 in-oz Rud. servo moment = 27 in-oz 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
[RCSE] Supra Question
I really hate to interrupt the discussion on who was the first to invent the radio (my vote goes to Nikola Tesla) but I have a question for the Supra owners out there. Would anybody care to hazard a guess as to what the combined weight of their battery and ballast is? If you are flying with some super light tail, foam filled tail boom, or way forward CG this info would be less useful to me. Thanks for the bandwidth, you may return to the rant of the day now. Rob Glover 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] The First Synthesized TX Module
Prolines were build in Athens, Alabama and was built from precision lab quality electronics and Ron Chidgney's stick assembly. The control sticks from the Proline Competition transmitters still have not been equaled. I worked for Pro-Line after they moved to Phoenix and just after Jim sold the company. I built those sticks. Each and every one was hand made and tweaked. They were a nightmare to make but were pure silk once they were done!! I still see no need for Dial-A-Crash. Bad name that really does not apply any longer. I really know of no instances of this. I am sure they have happened, but I know that fixed channel shoot downs are a far more common occurrence. We had a guy buy a used radio and it took him a few months to figure out it was on 50 and NOT 37 like he thought. Meanwhile we had several unexplained shoot downs on 50!! I happen to love the ability to change channels. I fly at VERY crowded sites in a VERY crowded ares (SOCAL) It is great to be able to pick an open channel and not have to worry about waiting for the pin. Plus at contests I will use an open channel, or the one with the fewest conflicts. Good stuff!! WEM 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] The First Synthesized TX Module
Since we are into reminiscing about the good old days, I witnessed more radio control development than most currently active modelers. I got my first radio in 1953, It was a Berkley Aertrol that I paid $49 for and received a bag of resistors, condensers, tubes, and wire along with an escapement, transmitter case, and a 27.255 crystal. I was in college during most of the reed era so missed that phase. I watched Space Control, Sampy, and Orbit analog proportional systems being developed and finally managed to afford a 1967 Microavonics system that cost a monath's take home pay. At that time, a lot of the local fliers were using the first Kraft digital proportional system with servos using wire-wound feed pots that needed to be cleaned periodically. The hot radio for pattern fliers in 1967 was EK until several top pattern fliers including Jim Kirkland, Ron Chidgney, Jim Whitley, Doc Edwards, and other top fliers got together and hired Jim Fostgate away from EK and set up Proline to develop a radio to their specifications. The early Prolines were build in Athens, Alabama and was built from precision lab quality electronics and Ron Chidgney's stick assembly. The control sticks from the Proline Competition transmitters still have not been equaled. In 1969, I bought my first Proline transmitter when they were still in Athens Alabama 100 miles from Tullahoma, I was flying pattern contests at that time and switched to single stick Prolines in 1971. I continued to fly Proline until 1993 when I began flying full house sailplanes and needed mixers. I flew single stick Micropro transmitters until 2000 when the Micropro began showing it's age. I tried Futaba and Hitec but was very unhappy with the ToysRUs styling, awkward feel and balance, and programming that I never really understood.Then I discovered the Multiplex Cockpit which led me to the Evo. Now if only I could get an Evo with a Chidgney single stick, I would never need anything more. I still see no need for Dial-A-Crash and don't use a lot of the features of my Evo. All my models are on the same channel and use the same setup so my models will always fly when I launch no matter which model I have selected. It might not be in trim but it will at least be flyable. Guess why I developed this setup. :-) Maybe when I can get a cheap, reliable synthesized receiver no bigger than my Superslim receiver Chuck Anderson 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] The First Synthesized TX Module
In fact, I still have a Dial-A-Crash, that has all 20khz spacing 72mhz channels, acquired around 1982-83. It has been recently tuned and is 1991 narrow band legal on all but channel 39. Coupled with a Kraft KP-7C MkIV tx, can make a nice tug radio. Tom Kallevang Wheeling, IL LSF President & Webmaster LSF #303 Level V #103 AMA L292 SOAR (Chicago) __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
RE: [RCSE] Carbon Supra #48 flies - weight < 61 oz !
OK, good information. Taking Mark's estimated servo moments and converting to back to kgf-cm and going to http://www.teaser.fr/~osegouin/aeromode/servos.phtml or more easily (since I don't read French) http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5010862&postcount=43 and getting the amp draw for a Volz MicroMax HP servo (the figures are assuming a 5v source) Flap servo moment = 62 in-oz = 4.46 kgf-cm = 1.3 amps (servo maxed out) Ail. servo moment = 40 in-oz = 2.88 kgf-cm = .85 amps Rud. servo moment = 27 in-oz = 1.94 kgf-cm = .63 amps Each half of the wing is pulling on the order of 1.3+.85 = 2.15 amps, or 4.3 amps for the total wing. Add in the rudder and holding the elevator on launch easily could add another amp for a total draw in the battery of about 5.5 amps. I will put on my flame suit and also say I am very comfortable with single set of 24 gage power and ground wires going to each half of the wing servicing both the flap and aileron servo. This is why I use IB1200 NiMH batteries which will not blink when 5.5 amps are requested (assuming you are not flying in really cold weather). Some of the A and AA NiMH packs will not allow such a large amp draw without plummeting voltages. This is why I also wire the wing plug in the fuselage with single pair of heavy gage (20 or 22 gage) power and ground wire going to the switch (just on the other side of the battery) and not going to the rx bus. The rx bus is wired with another set of heavy gage wires directly from the switch. don -Original Message- From: Mark Drela [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 11:08 AM To: soaring@airage.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [RCSE] Carbon Supra #48 flies - weight < 61 oz ! Molded Supra launch hinge moments are listed below, for a 200 lb tow load (hard F3j launch). For smaller tow loads, hinge moments will be proportionally smaller. wing camber = +10 deg rudder defl = 30 deg wing CL = 1.2 lift = 200 lbs q = 0.16 psi = 1104 Pa V = 95 mph = 42.5 m/s Flap hinge moment = 4.87 in-lb = 78 in-oz = 5.62 kgf-cm Ail. hinge moment = 3.15 in-lb = 50 in-oz = 3.60 kgf-cm Rud. hinge moment = 2.12 in-lb = 34 in-oz = 2.45 kgf-cm To get the servo moment (torque), this hinge moment must be multiplied by a linkage geometry factor, which is approximately by the ratio of servo/surface horn lengths. This is between 0.7 - 0.9 for most installations. Assuming a horn length ratio of 0.8, the servo moments are: Flap servo moment = 62 in-oz Ail. servo moment = 40 in-oz Rud. servo moment = 27 in-oz 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] The First Synthesized TX Module
Here's a good thread with some great history and photos: http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_3678063/tm.htm 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] The First Synthesized TX Module
At 09:43 AM 2/21/2006, you wrote: Sorry guys, neither Hitec or Futaba was the first. Kraft had the earliest version that I know of, in the 1979-1980 time frame. It was affectionatley termed "dial-a-crash" after the notion that a forgetful or malicious person could dial in a frequency that caused another to crash. This was in the days of only 8 frequencies. It was a bulky unit and didn't really catch on, and the Japanese invasion (Futaba, World) was occuring which pretty much doomed the American made radios. There used to be a bunch: Orbit, Kraft, Milcott, Ace, Heathkit, etc. Kraft as long since gone the way of the other RC pioneering companies. Only one left that I am aware of is Ace by virtue of diversifying into other areas of RC. Jim Thomas I was wondering how long it would take for someone to remember Kraft's Dial-A-Crash system. And the ACE we knew is gone too. If they were still in business, I would still be flying Micropro Single Stick transmitters. Chuck Anderson 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] Synthesized RF module vs multiple fixed modules?
Where is my brain? That will teach me to start typing before I wake up For some reason I was thinking about the recent 9c radios (I own 2) instead of the Z. I had the first hitec radio with the spectra module and specifically looked for synthesized modules (early 90's?) when I bought my first 8ua?, I don't remember futaba even having one, but this is strictly empirical, not conclusive. It appears that I need to start chowing down on some crow! So when did futaba have their first module and when did hitec come out with one. As the one of the other posts, I remember the "little red brick"(not so little) My first airplane had one. I wish one of the new guys on the block would come out with a sub micro brick with 2 servos, rx and esc... Mark Mech www.aerofoam.com > >> No disrespect to the futaba module, but the hitec spectra module existed >> long before >> the 9Z radio hit the market. I used the hitec module on my futaba 8uaf >> over 10 years >> ago and on my hitec radio almost 20 years ago. I think futaba is >> relatively new player >> in the freq. module game by comparison. I am sure they are fine though, >> this is all very > > > Wow, so Hitec had a synthesized module out in 1986 or earlier?? I had no > idea. Sorry if I was incorrect on that. I hardly recall Hitec radios at > that time, so hence my confusion. My first 9ZWC module was purchased in > 1995 and I know they had it out with the first generation of the radio the > 9ZAP around 1992 or 93, so if Hitec beat Futaba out by 8 to 10 years, then > I stand corrected. > > I bought my first computer radio 20 years ago in 1986, a Futaba 8UHP. No > synthesizer on that one for sure and I do not recall anyone else having > one that far back, but then again I really only paid attention to either > Futaba or JR in those days. It had mechanical pots on the back, no display > screen, etc. Really bare bones compared to what we have now, so Hitec > being that far ahead of the game that far back is truly impressive. > > WEM > 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and > AOL are generally NOT in text format > 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] The First Synthesized TX Module
Forgot EK. I had a red brick I'm not sure when they got dual rates, but they may well have had the first true proportional radio, although it had to be before the early70's. I started flying RC in 1969 with a Cannon radio that was fully proportional. Kraft was already an established name at that time too. Weird side note. An EK radio was used in the murder of a reporter (Don Bolles) for the Arizona Republic in 1976. The killer used it to detonate a device under the reporter's car. They identified it by the red plastic pieces!!! It was a mob hit in reprisal for articles Don had written. Walter Carter wrote: Also don't forget EK which I understood to have the first "proportional" system with their "Logictrol" unit, late 70's I think. That must be erroneous though since, according to Bill, Pro-Line already had dual rate in the mid-70's. Historians please comment. 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] The First Synthesized TX Module
Also don't forget EK which I understood to have the first "proportional" system with their "Logictrol" unit, late 70's I think. That must be erroneous though since, according to Bill, Pro-Line already had dual rate in the mid-70's. Historians please comment. - Original Message - From: "Bill's Email" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 9:49 AM Subject: Re: [RCSE] The First Synthesized TX Module [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There used to be a bunch: Orbit, Kraft, Milcott, Ace, Heathkit, etc. Kraft as long since gone the way of the other RC pioneering companies. Don't forget Pro-Line. We built the first radio with dual rates back in the mid-70's!!! 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] The First Synthesized TX Module
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There used to be a bunch: Orbit, Kraft, Milcott, Ace, Heathkit, etc. Kraft as long since gone the way of the other RC pioneering companies. Don't forget Pro-Line. We built the first radio with dual rates back in the mid-70's!!! 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] Synthesized RF module vs multiple fixed modules?
Bill's Email wrote: industry wince WAY back (all the way to Pro-Line back in the 70's). He may WINCE when he remembers how long it has been SINCE he got into the industry!!. I paid $330 for a 50channel radio in 1971. After booth review it appears that this was only a FIVE channel radio, not 50 channels!! Note to self - coffee first, type second. WEM 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
[RCSE] The First Synthesized TX Module
Sorry guys, neither Hitec or Futaba was the first. Kraft had the earliest version that I know of, in the 1979-1980 time frame. It was affectionatley termed "dial-a-crash" after the notion that a forgetful or malicious person could dial in a frequency that caused another to crash. This was in the days of only 8 frequencies. It was a bulky unit and didn't really catch on, and the Japanese invasion (Futaba, World) was occuring which pretty much doomed the American made radios. There used to be a bunch: Orbit, Kraft, Milcott, Ace, Heathkit, etc. Kraft as long since gone the way of the other RC pioneering companies. Only one left that I am aware of is Ace by virtue of diversifying into other areas of RC. Jim Thomas
Re: [RCSE] Synthesized RF module vs multiple fixed modules?
I just exchanged emails with Steve Helms who is the head Futaba guy (Futaba Corporation, not Hobbico) in the US and who has been in the RC industry wince WAY back (all the way to Pro-Line back in the 70's). He reminded me that in fact it was KRAFT who had the first synthesized module back in the late 80's. Then Futaba came along in the very early 90's and then Hitec sometime after that. I'd forgotten about the Kraft module!! But I do remember my first Kraft radio. I paid $330 for a 50channel radio in 1971. No servo reversing, no end points, no mixing, no nothing. That is over $1,600 in today dollars!!! We live in fortunate times to be sure as far as this hobby is concerned. Bill Brian Chan wrote: I think futaba is relatively new player in the freq. module game by comparison. Mark Mech www.aerofoam.com Sorry Mark, I have a moduled Futaba Radio before Hitec-RCD (the company)even existed. Brian 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] Synthesized RF module vs multiple fixed modules?
I think futaba is relatively new player in the freq. module game by comparison. Mark Mech www.aerofoam.com Sorry Mark, I have a moduled Futaba Radio before Hitec-RCD (the company)even existed. Brian -- -- * Brian Chan, * AFDD Instrumentation Group, US Army Research Support * Ames Research Center, Mail Stop-215-2, * Bldg 215 Room 120 * Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 * 650-604-0389 FAX 650-604-5173 * e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
[RCSE] 3 m fox FS
3 M fox slope ship RTF rec, bat, servos, ect. $355 delivered CONUS Tom T&G32 Mount View DrAfton, VA 22920 540 943-3356
Re: [RCSE] Synthesized RF module vs multiple fixed modules?
No disrespect to the futaba module, but the hitec spectra module existed long before the 9Z radio hit the market. I used the hitec module on my futaba 8uaf over 10 years ago and on my hitec radio almost 20 years ago. I think futaba is relatively new player in the freq. module game by comparison. I am sure they are fine though, this is all very Wow, so Hitec had a synthesized module out in 1986 or earlier?? I had no idea. Sorry if I was incorrect on that. I hardly recall Hitec radios at that time, so hence my confusion. My first 9ZWC module was purchased in 1995 and I know they had it out with the first generation of the radio the 9ZAP around 1992 or 93, so if Hitec beat Futaba out by 8 to 10 years, then I stand corrected. I bought my first computer radio 20 years ago in 1986, a Futaba 8UHP. No synthesizer on that one for sure and I do not recall anyone else having one that far back, but then again I really only paid attention to either Futaba or JR in those days. It had mechanical pots on the back, no display screen, etc. Really bare bones compared to what we have now, so Hitec being that far ahead of the game that far back is truly impressive. WEM 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] Synthesized RF module vs multiple fixed modules?
> > The Hitec Spectra has probably had the >> longest run/best chance for positive evolution. Now JR, Fut & Mpx have >> similar units, but relatively little consumer field experience. > > > Huh? Futaba came out with a synthesized module for the 9Z series of > radios long before Hitec had the Spectra module. No disrespect to the futaba module, but the hitec spectra module existed long before the 9Z radio hit the market. I used the hitec module on my futaba 8uaf over 10 years ago and on my hitec radio almost 20 years ago. I think futaba is relatively new player in the freq. module game by comparison. I am sure they are fine though, this is all very old technology, our cell phones have been far more advanced during the same time period, but there is a much larger consumer body driving their development. The new spread spectrum stuff will force the companies to get competetive on a new level in order to stay in biz. and not become dinosaurs (like our current radios were the day they were built). I hope they can eventually do the spread spectrum on lower freqs. like , maybe 72mhz. h, we already use that freq, 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
Re: [RCSE] Synthesized RF module vs multiple fixed modules?
> The Hitec Spectra has probably had the longest run/best chance for positive evolution. Now JR, Fut & Mpx have similar units, but relatively little consumer field experience. Huh? Futaba came out with a synthesized module for the 9Z series of radios long before Hitec had the Spectra module. The Futaba unit has had a long history of successful operation in a variety of applications including pattern, scale, jets, helicopters, and soaring. The (9Z unit had electronic frequency selection at the transmitter and the receivers (R309DPS & R319DPS) used small rotating dial switches to select the channel. The 9C unit came along later, perhaps that is why you think Hitec was first. Futaba is now first with full wireless frequency selection that eliminates the mechanical switches that were used early on. And they will shortly have a synthesized module and RX on ham band for the 14 and the new 12ZAP. Spread Spectrum is certainly the coming thing, but I suspect it is a few years off before the change over is in full swing. WEM 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. Email sent from web based email such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
[RCSE] Looking For ROGER TAYLOR ...
Hi All: Any help locating OFB ROGER TAYLOR will certainly be appreciated ... Roger was US Navy and retired in San Diego and worked for Union Carbide ... he left and moved to Las Vegas (Henderson) to do some contract testing work on military aircraft ... came back to San Diego and moved to Chiliquin, Oregon, where I lost touch with him ... Roger is a consummate builder, dating to the time of stick, tissue, rubber motors and dope and built 'more than many' Airtronics designs for Lee Renaud to determine their ease of construction, completeness of instruction and marketability ... A sailplane pilot, builder and friend supreme Thanks, Pepper Kay
Re: [RCSE] Synthesized RF module vs multiple fixed modules?
In a message dated 2/21/2006 12:38:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 2/21/2006 12:15:36 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Any RF savants out there that can explain in scientific terms why a synthesized TX RF deck is either a good or bad idea? If one wants the option of more than 2-3 freq choices (to facilitate contest entry, crowded flying field conditions, etc), then a synth deck is the cheaper option (ditto with receivers). Good Lift! Ah, but you said "scientific terms", so maybe cost is not your primary concern - some other considerations: The current and future trend out there is "smart radios", consider pagers, cell phones, military radios, wireless computer links, FRS, etc - applications that number at least in the 100s of millions of units - so where is the most advanced (and best tested by experience) and (by volume) low cost technology available?! (but not in big numbers on our 72MHz band, the recently introduced Horizon DX6 on 2.4 GHz DSSS is the best benefit we've had - may there be more!). By comparison, our single freq RC modules are very low density obsolete antiques - not necessarily bad (but probably not made with the best available components either, I've experienced 2-3 off freq Xtal failures in 45+ yrs of RC), unlikely to improve (no money in it), maybe at some point not even not practical to manufacture (but not quite yet). The biggest volume is in cheap toys - not constructively relevant. Synth freq technology is not new to RC, but has not existed in great volume/experience. The Hitec Spectra has probably had the longest run/best chance for positive evolution. Now JR, Fut & Mpx have similar units, but relatively little consumer field experience. Did they benefit from Hitec and maybe other tech development & experience? Who knows? In our hobby, bad reliability = market death, so we can hope they were prudent! Now all that wasn't very "scientific" either, but the detailed independent analysis/testing that would be isn't out there (nobody is paying for it!). Good Lift!
