stunthanger.com
Building Tips and technical articles. => 1/2 A building. => Topic started by: Douglas Ames on September 27, 2013, 06:52:42 PM
-
Anyone electrified a W. Musciano kit with sheeted wing?
Curious if there is room for the battery package/ ESC?
-
My electric attempts with 1/2A have been more limited by balancing the plane than having space for stuff. End result is I haven't electrified any 1/2A, although I have converted a A payload 1 channel RC to electric 3 channel. Getting the nose heavy enough is still a struggle due to how light electric is compared to glow. You can put 2 times the motor on and it still will weigh less than a Cox bee! (a bee is about 75W output, 150W motors are still lighter than a back widow.)
Due to a fixed nose wheel that had a slight turn it it, I hit a post and broke the nose on my Bootstraps. Repairs are done, but I am extending the nose some to accommodate the lighter engine and new steerable nose wheel.
Phil
-
If the electrics are lighter, why not put the battery under the motor?
-
Doug,
Don't see why not. I think I would make the wing removal ala RC. The battery and esc should be able to be put far enough forward to solve any balance issue.on some 1/2A profiles I've converted, I made the firewall thicker and added weight to get the balance right
John
-
Electric Muciano? Sacrilege!
-
Electric Muciano? Sacrilege!
Ditto!
-
Electric Muciano? Sacrilege!
Well, we've got Electric take-apart Ringmasters flying around. So I had to ask.
-
Someone ask Walt what he thinks of the idea.
-
Judging by what Walt Musciano has designed, the idea was to get lots of them flying. If an electric motor accomplishes that...
... If you need weight forward, I totally agree on moving components forward, where ever there is space.
-
If you need the battery and motors to be further forward to balance the weight I wonder if that model somebody else here is considering would make a good form for electric...
The bobcat. Put the battery in the nose???
-
Found an old model I built about 40 + years ago. It was missing a few parts so I had to improvise. Don't know it name.
Stuck an HXM2730-1500 on it with a 5.5 x 4.5 3s 370 nano tech and a 12 amp HK speed controller and a simple timer.
3 second laps +- on 35 ft lines. n~
The battery would fit inside nicely if I took the time to rebuild it and with a little cable/wire management.
This may be a good test bed for speed vs thrust.
-
Found an old model I built about 40 + years ago. It was missing a few parts so I had to improvise. Don't know it name.
Stuck an HXM2730-1500 on it with a 5.5 x 4.5 3s 370 nano tech and a 12 amp HK speed controller and a simple timer.
3 second laps +- on 35 ft lines. n~
The battery would fit inside nicely if I took the time to rebuild it and with a little cable/wire management.
This may be a good test bed for speed vs thrust.
Will it stunt and who supplies the HXM2730-1500 ?
-
Hobby King was my source for the motor. hexTronik 24gram Brushless Outrunner 1500kv (USA Warehouse)
As fast as it was going, it should do a loop or two. I was a little shocked it even flew at all. AUP was 5.25 oz. I plan to swap around a few different props to see what the best combo is for doing a few stunts, speed vs thrust.
I'm kinda just getting back into the hobby and electrifying all the junk I still have from my youth.
-
There are two HK motors I use on 1/2A's ;the AX 2306N 2000Kv and the Turnigy 2730 1700Kv unfortunately the turnigy does not seem to be available any more, but there is a Hextronik that probably is the same thing.
The AX is very much like a reed valve. 17500 on a 5x3 and 3 cells. The lower Kv motor want larger props. I use 5.5x4.5 usually on 3 cells.
-
I don't know that any of my cox .049's ever hit 17k. I don't ever recall this plane ever flying very well or even very long but as a kid flying was only a part of the adventure. Once I bash and test this one up a bit, a new hollow log will be purposefully built for the electric.
I'm a little surprised not to see a few more folks having done the electric thing with these.
-
Cleaned up the wiring and placed the speed control inside. Extended the nose a bit so the screws wouldn't contact the battery. All this made it a little more balanced. Hopefully fly it again soon with these changes.
-
Went with a 7 x 3.5 and a 3s to start today. A little slower than the 5.5x4.5 but still better than it ever flew on gas. Made a make-shift one man hand launch. The first flight/launch was a little unnerving but it worked surprisingly well. Large loops were no problem but with half the battery hanging on the outboard wing I think it was a little too much. Second flight was with a 2s battery and that was more like I remember this little plane flying (Kind of anemic). Flight #3 was the 2s again and a 6x4 prop. A little more speed but not enough oomph for any stunts but ok for training. with only 54 sq in of wing I am thoroughly amazed. This winter will bring a new hollow log and a few more planes as well with a bit more wing area. I hope no one is offended but part of the plan is to build something out of dollar tree foam board similar to the Musciano hollow log designs.
This is becoming just soooo much fun!!!!! ;D
-
That sounds great and with more flying and maybe different props it will be better than you remember. How about a picture of your one man launch system.
-
The balsa on this plane is soft from all the oil/gas still soaked into it. I believe it will find a place on the wall now or maybe even the trash it's that bad. Now that I know I'm on the right path a Pitts Special is first on the wish list of store bought hollow logs.
If I showed a picture of my one man launch thingy I would probably be banned from the forum and given several lectures on safety, however, it was along the lines of the StevensAero - SpoolUP device.
As kids, we slapped these things together, daubed on some paint and it was off to the field. I still have a couple big planes, (Ringmaster Imperial, Jr. Satan) to electrify but these little ones should get a grand kid or two interested and with the way they fly on electric should keep them interested.
-
Pull everything out of the plane. Remove as much paint and coverings as convenient (ALL if possible) Mix up a paste of denatured alcohol and corn starch. Apply a thick coating to all the oil soaked parts (1/4 inch thick). Allow dry overnight in a ventilated space. Dispose of the now-oily cornstarch. Repeat several times.
No, it isn't fun. It will work and after most of the oil is out the wood is going to act more like wood. A couple coats of highly thinned clear dope will stabilize any extra soft spots that might develop.
Phil
-
Many Thanks Phil!!
I always wondered how that was done. Had I known, I might have saved my Yak.
Maybe someone can help me with this little issue. This plane when flying at a medium or slow speed is very manageable but when it's fast with the 5.5x4.5 prop it wont stay level it's up and down all over the place without any change in the control input.
-
If it is up/down without input then it is tail heavy.
I suspect de-oiling the wood will make it more tail heavy since the nose is where the engine was. However, it will be preserved and ready to rebuild.
Phil
-
PF,
Any slack in the control system, binding, or stiffness (hinges?) can also cause a hunting problem, so check those items as well as the balance.
Bill
-
Every little tweak helps this little thing. Lightened the tail and went with 2s and a 7 x 4 on the start of this bit of testing. Once again, the make-shift one man launcher was a great success! speed was good but the power seemed a little low but I got brave and after a couple loops it was a perfect figure 9. The firewall came off but with no other damage. Surprised it lasted this long. With the great advice of the folks here, this will continue as winter project. I plan to de-oil the wood, extend the nose a tad more and maybe make it a little more appealing to the eyes. I know I can get all the electrics inside the log as well as the battery.
I would really like to see what others have done with these and electric power. This is just way too much fun for me to be the only one.
Many thanks to all!!
-
I've never had much luck with 1/2A on 2s, unless you want to use it as a slow speed trainer. I always use 3s
-
I don't mean to hijack the thread but the hollow log was my second step when I was a child. Started with several plastic planes, cox and wen mac and worked my way up to bigger planes like my Yak-9, VooDoo and the Ring Master Imperial. I plan to do the same now on the slightest budget possible with the goal, flying my Imperial under electric power as well or even better than it flew with the Enya 35. There will be a lot of carnage along the way, working out the kinks in my flying ability and impulsive nature to push beyond the limits of the plane (and my lack of skill) in hopes the Ring Master will survive another 40 years. :)
So, John, I agree 3s would have been a wiser choice to try any stunt but I think I have to grow up all over again #^
-
With 2S use the APC 6x5.5 electric prop.
-
Dennis what motors and KV do you use with 2s? I have a 1320 KV but it uses the APC 6x5.5 on 3s. Maybe a high KV motor and light plane?
-
Hi John
In this thread there were many references to 4- pitch props and disappointment with 2S packs. My initial pioint was thus that with 2S the 6x5.5 will get a pick more airspeed & suitability.
On my Brodak systems the 2205 motor has kv-1560, so with 2S & the 6x5.5 there is plenty of thrust available. Of course, that combo on 3S is a wee bit hotter!
BTW are the Blackhawk hollow logs still available?
-
Hi Dennis,
The owner of Blackhawk models has come out of retirement, and is now back in business! ;D
Saw a message from him somewhere that said he is now under contract with one of the Chinese companies (Hobby King?) to supply kits, so he should be around for a while.
As you may know, Hobby King is also selling Cox engines from Bernie in Canada.
Bill
-
Dennis,
I don't have that motor but I do have a 1700 KV that is similar. I fly it on 1/2A type models like the SIG Skyray, Beechcraft, and Renger Skyfire, along with some homebuilt's using the APC 6x4 EP on 3s. My simulation program says that combo produces produces about 13 oz of thrust. All up weight on models like this are about 6.5 to 8oz ready to fly. The APC 6x5.5 shows about 7oz on 2s. When I can fly CL again ( I'm on a medical hold due to a back operation) I'll try it and see what I think. As an old combat flier I probably like to go faster than most stunt fliers like to fly #^ .
John
-
Dennis,
Found the message from Larry Rice of Blackhawk models. I'm not sure I should post it here, as it's on one of the RCGroups forum threads.
Attn forum admin! Delete the following info if you find it inappropriate for posting here.
Here is the text of that message from Larry Rice.
"On my retirement; my wife informed me that I can not retire. While we have signed on with Hobby King to supply them with control line models and we are having out best year ever, wife's health is still in doubt. Her cancer has returned and we are currently waiting to see how bad it will be. She will not let me quit as long as her health is good. I am currently making Black Hawk Models more efficient so that I will not need to work so hard and we will be able to get the models out more quickly.
We get very little mention in model magazines, but we average 1,000 kits per year and this year we have 1,200 sold in 6 months. There 6 Musciano contest in the U. S. and Black Hawk Models are the majority models that are flown in these contest. Well that is enough tooting my horn.
WATCH for NEW model kits!!!
Larry Rice
Black Hawk Models"
Bill
-
Larry, my thoughts and prayers are with you and your wife. But i am glad you are still producing your wonderful kits!
-
Prayers for the Rice family and best wishes for the Hobby King venture!
...and LONG LIVE CAPT BLACKHAWK! #^
-
The Brodak/Arrowind 2205 is ok on 3s? Have one of those too so, hummm.....
Wondering what a good prop would be to keep all the electronics happy and smoke free on 3s?
On 2s it does a nice job with a 6x5.5 on my baby clown. I used the other motors on the log as they were lighter and I figured any weight savings would be a plus.
-
Steve
If that is the 2205-22 1650KV motor I think about 10amps would be the max. Start with small props, measure the current and work up in size.
John
-
John, unfortunately I don't have a watt meter yet. The Arrowind motors don't show up in the calculators I use and Arrowind doesn't give the internal resistance of their motors to help with getting in the ballpark with those calculators. I may just have to do it the old fashioned way and work up the prop size till something smokes then mack off just a bit. The little extra weight of the Arrowind might be a plus with getting the cg right without extending the nose.
Thanks.
-
John, unfortunately I don't have a watt meter yet. The Arrowind motors don't show up in the calculators I use and Arrowind doesn't give the internal resistance of their motors to help with getting in the ballpark with those calculators. I may just have to do it the old fashioned way and work up the prop size till something smokes then mack off just a bit. The little extra weight of the Arrowind might be a plus with getting the cg right without extending the nose.
Thanks.
Get a watt meter. You should have a ballpark of what the maximum allowable draw for the motor is, so by measuring the draw at the battery you can prop it to suit the ESC and/or motor without burning up parts.
Phil
-
Phil
Good advice. The Hobbyking HK-10 is only $20 and is in the US warehouse.
-
Steve H:
I do not know what motor constants you need for your calculator, but a somewhat deeper set of specs for the Arrowinds can be found at their site:
http://www.arrowindhobby.com/hobby/en/BL_Motor/BL_Motor(Outrunner).asp
The 2205 motor is rated for a max of 11A. I do not put a lot of stock in static loads (using a wattmeter) because air loads are quite a bit lower.
The first Baby Clown experiment for Brodak used the (18g) 1806 motor and (I think) a 6x4 prop. Flyable. Next iteration was with the (34g) 2205 motor and the 6x5.5 prop, still on 2S - works a treat and balances better!
Weren't the hollow log airplanes designed with a too-long front end so that you could use a light OK Cub instead of the longer/heavier Cox reedies? My first concern with building an electric log would be in getting the right balance - by getting the pack far enough forward.
-
Most of my hollow log Scientific kits showed the OK Cub .049. The Babe Bee's was a good alternative.
-
Dennis, the constant I am looking for is the internal resistance of the motor. I use eCalc and I haven't smoked anything yet. The internal resistance seems to play a big part in efficiency.
The log model I posted in this thread has the leading edge right at the firewall so getting the balance was a bit tough with the lighter motors I have. I'm thinking a mount built out with the ESC inside will place the prop closer to where the Bee would put it and help with the balance of future logs.
The 2s battery that came with the Brodak electric clown package is about 3/4 inch longer than my 3s batteries and weighs .25 oz more. Being able to run the Arrowind on the 3s and a lower pitch prop would be an asset for balance purposes.
No matter what, the reason for all this is just unbridled fun.
I'm growing up all over again. :)
Thanks.
-
What kind of RPM is needed for 1/2 A stunt?
-
What kind of RPM is needed for 1/2 A stunt?
Well, it all depends on how you set it up... a larger prop can turn slower, so can a steeper prop. I would run the stuff through a calculator looking for static thrust about the same as total , or all up model weight.
try
http://www.ecalc.ch/
Phil
( a 6x3 at 13k should pull 200g)
-
...............and I thought 1/2A would be the last to succumb to the electric disease. How wrong could I be?!!!!!!!
Andrew.
-
Most of my hollow log Scientific kits showed the OK Cub .049. The Babe Bee's was a good alternative.
John,
I think many if not all of the Scientific "hollow logs" were re-designed in the seventies. Changes included a shorter fuselage to accommodate tank-mounted engines like the Babe Bee, Cub .049A, etc. Also the airfoiled wings were replaced by 1/8" sheet wings. This was, I believe, to remain competitive.
I remember sanding the airfoil on the wings just enough to remove the mill marks and hollowing the fuselage just enough more to fit a "Perfect" tank inside. Sigh...those were the days! :)
George