Okay, lots to report on about the second day out with the twin test bed... and it's all good!
First off, the timer problem that I thought I had was not a glitch in Will Hubin's programming. I just neglected to fully read the programming instructions. We adjusted the timer as per Will's instructions over the phone, and now the "Full Monty" is working.
On the first day we flew several five minute flights and then checked to see how much battery we were using. It turned out to be 2,450 mAh. Note, this was with the gear extended. Today we retracted the landing gear and flew a five minute flight and recharged the battery to find that we only used 1,800 mAh! Approximately 25 percent less! That should once and for all answer the question about landing gear drag... We then upped the flight time to the normal 5:45 setting and flew several patterns. I have not yet charged any of those batteries (too anxious to make this report...), but I will later today and report back.
We opened the handle about 1/2 inch per side (one inch total wider spacing of the lines) added just a touch of tail weight (about a quarter ounce), and added a bit more tip weight. The ship came alive with these changes and in now capable of an honest 45 degree pattern, although we still took it a bit easy... The ship turns just a bit better inside than outside, but it feels like the flap and that elevators are not yet in perfect alignment, so we'll experiment with that until the turn is equal. Inside loops are very clean and it tends to slide the tail just a bit on outside turns. The flap/elevator adjustment should remedy that.
This thing is not hurting for thrust. We flew the first few patterns today at about 5.6 to 5.8 second laps. Then we upped the RPM a bit and flew around a 5.4 second lap. Again, no power or thrust problems. The ship tracks through round loops beautifully and it transitions nicely. Again, it will get better with the aforementioned adjustment and even a bit more speed.
My son, Robby, took some quick time videos, but I have no clue as to how to upload them here. I'm sending them to Bob Storick and he'll post the link in another message on this thread (Thanks, Bob...).
Remember, this is just the second day out with the ship, and the very first full pattern flights that also had the gear going up and down (That part works flawlessly by the way...). Unfortunately, the videos are short and don't show too much of the pattern. I think you'll enjoy the "spool up" video, however...
And since we are proposing good ideas that will never pass a vote...
Why don't we combine the Nats and Team Trials. I know that we would have to convince AMA to let us use our own rules (AMA) to select a team, but I think it would be a much better way to do it. It would certainly benefit anyone who competes at the Nats and the Team Trials. I am sure the AMA wouldn't mind not having to deal with us twice in a year too. Someone who wants to try for a team spot would just pay the extra $100 entry fee to be eligible. If you were flying an ARF and/or were only trying for the team you would only pay the TT entry fee and you would not be eligible for any Nats trophies.
I think most or all of the RC teams are selected at their Nats...
Hi That has been brought up many times before,and rejected, it does have many problems, I have talked to several AMA people about this, and yes AMA does mandate how we run this contest, they have NO problem If we do it at the NATs, provided we do it the way AMA describes in the book that is an AMA publication, any other way we would need to have the criteria changed by AMA
That's good to hear Ward. I had to lean into the hyperbole a bit here though!! I think it's way better to encourage guys to come out and see stuff in the flesh than sit around at home or bat stuff back and forth on the interweb. It will be fun! Tom
Chris...Well, it split across the lower end of the hoop...parallel to the crankpin, in line with the rod centerline. Picture showed no sign of a bushing, as I recall. I would guess that too much press would be a good explaination for the problem. Since the hole in the rod would be reamed, my guess is that the bushing was o/s from the CNC lathe that probably made them. Likely was the last bushing turned before the insert was changed. I'd think those things would go through some sort of high-tech semi-automatic gauge, but I don't know much about what the current technology is. Wouldn't expect a micrometer to be applied to each bushing, anyway. Maybe some sort of go/no go gauge?
Maybe Mike will post the picture, because I didn't save it. Like y'all, I was totally shocked when Mike said it was a .46LA. I was kinda expecting it was a Chinese Super Tigre G.51, because he runs those also. Steve