Jump to content

Please disable your Ad-Blocking software to continue using our website.

C.A.M.F.C - Members & Visitors area


Club Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About Martin

  • Rank
    Group Captain

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I would assume from Evolution Models. Their website seems to be a work in progress and doesn't show it, but it does have a "sales" email address. http://evolution-models.com/ sales@evolution-models.com Personally, I am quite interested in the glider that James was talking about.
  2. I can't edit user permissions, but I can edit posts, so I've done that as the next best thing. Can you please check it to see that I've done it correctly. I'm not sure why you can't edit the post - I thought all users could edit their own posts.
  3. I have a backup of the old website CMS database that I took on 28th February last year. I checked, and the SMAS article does appear in the backup. I've managed to extract the article text and HTML formatting, have fixed some punctuation that got broken in the process, and I have this in a file on my computer. I can email it to you or anyone else, but I don't have access to the new website to put it back.
  4. Is it the 39 or the 36 that they're selling with the WOT4? When the guy from Ripmax gave a talk at a club night a couple of years ago he gave the impression that they had loads of Irvine 36s, which is why at that time they were doing a giveaway bundle price for the engine with their Jive funfly ARTF. I think these were still the UK-manufactured 36s, too. I know that it says 39 on those pages, but I just wonder if wires have got crossed somewhere. Or maybe the "39 Special Edition" is some modification of a 36! As far as I'm aware, the 39 and 53 are both pretty much impossible to get other than second-hand, and even there people hang on to them. The odd unused one might pop up from time to time, but that's it. Certainly when the Ripmax guy was asked about the 53 he said that Ripmax have no stock and none were being manufactured as they hadn't worked out a way to do so cost-effectively. The last generation of the 46 and 53 had been manufactured by O.S., but that deal had finished. Martin
  5. No - this just means the pack is capable of supplying 66A if called upon to do so. Generally people will allow a bit of a safety margin when specifying ESCs and batteries. From the motor specification at https://www.emaxmodel.com/gt2826.html , the motor is quoted as drawing 51A off a 4S pack with a 14x7 APC prop, so around 60A capability for ESC and pack seems fair. Generally, people will select the pack capacity based on size and weight once the number of cells is chosen. The required C rating then comes from the motor's rated maximum current draw divided by the pack capacity - in this case 51A divided by 3.3mAh which is about 15.5C, but to allow a bit of headroom and because no-one makes batteries under about 20C they specify 20C. The required C rating is only ever a minimum requirement - anything higher will be fine though usually more expensive.
  6. What does the recovery do? I assume return to vertical, but does it return to a static hover or just to a state where the only acceleration is 9.8m/s/s downwards? (That would require the ability to detect velocity/position rather than just acceleration, so I assume it's just return to vertical.)
  7. Interesting. I have an MCP-X (the old brushed version) which I bought as an upgrade from an MSR-X. (Actually, I have two, as Wheelspin were selling them so cheaply when the brushless version came out that I bought a second one to have a supply of spare parts.) How capable is the recovery mode in the new ones? With me it wouldn't be recovery from 3D, more recovery from basic flying like trying to turn without having to come to a static hover first...
  8. Ah! I had missed that in writing my post. That might explain why Hobbyking didn't have any motors matching that size and kV - I did think it seemed odd that the offered ranges (considering both kV and stated numbers of winds) were so far disjoint. Thanks for the great information. I nearly did write in my original post that you'd really be the person to ask about this! Also, your mention of "on their own site" made me check again, because I'd posted a link to emaxmotor.com which has no mention of case size being bigger! I have since found the page: https://www.emaxmodel.com/gt2826.html which does indeed include the drawing of external dimensions as you say - I assume this is the official site and emaxmotor.com is a reseller? Confusing!
  9. A 2826/06 and a 2826/09 are both the same size, and will both look the same from the outside, but they are not equivalent motors. "2826" simply means that the motor is 28mm in diameter and 26mm in length (not including the shaft). The "/06" or "/09" refers to the number of turns of wire in the motor. This affects the "kV" rating of the motor, which is also often quoted for motors, and refers to the speed (in rpm) that the motor will turn for a particular supply voltage. Using a motor with a different kV rating may require you to change any or all of the prop size, the battery pack cell count, and the ESC. If you just substitute a motor without doing the calculations then you could end up with insufficient power, or overload your motor/ESC. If you want to use a different motor, it's better to instead look up the specs of the recommended one, and try to find another motor with the same kV rating. I found the specs of the Emax motor here: http://www.emaxmotor.com/emax-gt-2826-p ... -1235.html (Note that the name of the page is wrong - they describe the /06 one as equivalent to a "Power 32" not a "Power 25".) This page says that the 2826/06 is a 710kV motor. It should be OK to substitute another 2826-size motor with similar kV rating. I had a quick look on the Hobbyking motor finder, but didn't find any, unfortunately - they seem to only sell significantly higher kV motors for this physical size. If substituting parts (even ones with similar specs) into an electric powertrain, you may also want to check the result with a wattmeter to make sure that your motor, ESC and battery are all being asked to perform within their specified maximum current.
  10. Do you think they deliberately put it on late in the day at that airshow so people could see the flames? The sky looks pretty dark in the video.
  11. Well, when you say "turns over perfectly", does that include still having the same feel to the compression as it did before? Merely spinning round freely with little or no compression is a very bad sign! But as you say, we can have a look at it tomorrow.
  12. Oily residue from the exhaust is normal, though obviously more than usual may indicate something wrong. If there is genuinely residue coming out somewhere other than the exhaust or a tiny amount from the front bearing, this is definitely a problem! Have a look to see exactly where it seems to be coming from, and also check that everything that should be tight is. Is the plug still tight? Is the silencer still tight? Is the cylinder head still tight? Don't force anything tighter than it should be, but do check to see if things are loose. Heavy bits attached by a couple of screws (such as silencers, rear needle assemblies, etc) have a tendency to vibrate screws loose. I once lost one of the screws that held the backplate onto an OS 46 LA because they also held the rear needle assembly - when I noticed the problem one of the screws was gone and the other one holding the needle assembly was loose by several threads. (The engine still ran fine in that case though - I just noticed the needle valve rattling when I was refueling for another flight...) Of course, if there is a lot of oily residue coming from the silencer it may have just covered everything else and there may not be a specific leak. I would also check the plug - if you ran the engine very rich it would produce a lot of residue and may have gummed up the plug. Everything covered in "black oil goop" sounds like very rich running to me. Is there anything else unusual about the engine? Is there any discolouration to the engine after you've cleaned the oil off? Does it feel different when you turn it over slowly? Did you notice anything unusual before the engine cut (e.g. a loss of power)? What were you doing at the time (e.g. mid-throttle circuit flying, or part way through an aerobatic manouevre)?
  13. You've included two electric-only WOT4s on your list of possibles, but you should also know that the "normal" WOT4 ARTF also now has designed-in electric support: http://ripmax.com/Item.aspx?ItemID=A-CF ... ry=010-020 Note that the new Chris Foss ARTFs all need an "IC" or "EP" option pack, sold separately. The latest version of the WOT4 ARTF now follows this approach. I think most of the newer Seagull models also support electric as designed. It's pretty common on current ARTFs, though some do it better than others!
  14. I keep all of my fuel planes indoors, hanging engine-upwards on the wall, so any fuel/oil residue inside the engine drops to the back of the engine. There was a thread about this on the forum a couple of years ago: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=3715&p=21037 - I keep meaning to update this with photos of what I now do (using horizontal storage rails and hooks from B&Q). To avoid getting oil everywhere, I do two things: Clean the plane off with detergent at the field before putting it back in the car. I personally use "Flash" brand lemon flavour kitchen surface cleaning wipes from supermarket - I find these more effective than supermarket own-brand. Other people seem to use various detergent sprays and paper towels. Plug the silencer outlet with a small twist of paper towel or tissue. If you don't do this then you will definitely get drips as oil slowly runs down inside the silencer. Make sure to use a big enough twist that wedges in well to plug the hole, and do check that it's still there before you hang the plane up! Some brands of fuel are much cleaner than others - usually the ones with a high synthetic oil content. I use Optipower "Optimix" fuel (18% fully synthetic oil) which I find very clean, even though I tend to run slightly rich for safety. This is slightly out of specification for some engines (I think it's Irvine that specify a minimum of 20% oil and minimum 3% castor), but I've never had a problem. If you sit the plane on its undercarriage on a flat surface, rather than hanging up with prop shaft upwards, then you may get drips from the front bearing. I've never had any such problem since hanging the planes up. Don't rely on things like cowl shape to keep oil in - if anything you're probably better off with a cowl-less aircraft where you can definitely get at the whole engine to clean it off with a detergent wipe! I wouldn't bother keeping the plane in a bin bag - if that's necessary then you're not keeping it clean enough in the first place! If you're really worried then I'd just put something sacrificial like a piece of cardboard under the aircraft. You don't want to leave oil residue on the airframe even if dripping isn't a concern. Another view, of course, is that if you're mostly interested in electric, and you're worried about mess, then why bother with an IC aircraft at all? If electric works for you then it's capable of powering anything designed for IC, not just foamies. The main things that might be an issue are flight time (a bigger battery adds a lot more weight than more fuel) and the cost of multiple batteries per aircraft so you don't have to sit around waiting for them to recharge. Most modern aircraft that support IC are also designed with electric support - the issue tends to come with older designs which you might need to modify to fit a battery hatch to avoid having to dismantle the whole thing to change the battery. Electric doesn't have to mean foamie!

UK Web Hosting | PC Repairs Croydon | Cloud Hosting in London | UK Dedicated Servers | UK Reseller Hosting | UK Shared Hosting

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.