The top three Intermediate fliers also used electric power...

Bob Hunt

I heard a rumor that Jeff Traxler got 2nd place in Intermediate with and electrical airplane. Could this be true ? 

The top three Intermediate fliers also used electric power...

Bob Hunt

I've noticed an avalanche is rolling on people going to electric over the last 2 years.  And just think, "electric is at its worst"!   

Electric is simply the newest thing...Yes it works well.  That doesn't spell DOOM for IC engines.
What I see now is that electric seems to work as well as IC in the hands of top fliers.
It has some advantages and disadvantages.
Everyone forcast the same doom for two strokes when four strokes first started being used.
How many four strokes won anything at the Nats...how many were even used.
Right now it simply looks like the top fliers will win no matter what they use.

I still haven't seen an electric that works any better in bad conditions than a good IC set up.

They are quieter and cleaner, unless of course they catch on fire, or the motor bell housing begins to grind itself to powder...seen that happen several times, even with front mounting.

Given the number of parts involved in an electric set up compared to the number of parts in an IC set up I think a reliability analysis would lean slightly to the IC engine.

The best fliers will win...whatever they decide to fly!

Randy Cuberly

I never said anything about doom for IC engines or any comparisons.  Just that a lot of people are going to electric. 

Electric is the clean power for stunt.   Might not work well in other venues but definitely the right power for stunt where consistent speed is required.  I saw it coming in RC 25 years ago and flew a lot of early electric stuff then. It just took longer in control line.   The LiPo battery advancements with reduced weight accelerated the process. For me biggest advantage is flying field accessibility.  I still like IC but can see that I will use it less and less as.

Joe

One should never jump blindly on the latest bandwagon unless they have a desire to tinker. The database of knowledge on how to properly run piped engines is still vastly larger than electric. My hat's off to the trailblazers that are moving electric forward and building that database of knowledge. That said, the pace of changes in the field of electrics is still counted in months, not years. For some of us, this is too much of a change and we are waiting for the pace of change to slow down.

I would like to share what I saw at the NATS:

Weather at this year's NATS Qualifying was very hot,humid with barely any wind. Models were struggling, especially electrics. Not all electrics, of course. Top 20 guys had their equipment working perfectly and the model were getting through just fine. This tells me one thing: Top 20 guys know how to prepare, REGARDLESS of the power system. The corollary of this is: pilots that did not know how to build light or how to accommodate for weather conditions struggled as much with electrics as they did with IC.

During the three days of judging(I missed top 5 day), there were two obvious situation where IC fliers underperformed due to motor issues. One was an overrun and another was too slow of a setting. On Electric front, there was just one. What was even more disappointing is that the flier was having the flight of his life! He has never made Top 20(I believe this was his second year entering in Open) but his flight was in the Top 5 territory! It looked like he was going to pull it off and all over sudden BAM! The motor shut down from the heat.

I remember well when Pipes swept the top pilots.  There was a clear advantage using a pipe versus a muffled engine at the top level starting off.  After a while, when usage was "stabilized", the usage was seen all through the skill levels.  Now running a pipe is a pretty much "plug and play" event.

I can see where electrics can have real advantages, already.  But how long, with the technology changing almost daily, will it become truly "plug and play" for the Intermediate or Advanced local pilots?

I do know that some cannot overcome the initial outlay of money.  There are points brought up that "fuel costs" will offset the initial outlay, but having a system like Paul, Bob, etc., is just out of financial reach for some.  Especially some of those who have sufficient numbers of engines and equipment already.

I believe the overall cost of start up will fall and then there will be even more "converts".

BIG Bear
RNMM/AMM

1st place was won on Ap points not by how it flew.

Ha!  I didn't think this was right until I read Ted's writeup.

the other thing is the battery on a angle has to effect how the plane flies.

This isn't right, though.  

I've mentioned this before and so have others. Let me state categorically (head on the block!) that a simple cheap electric system with one of my governor timers, or similar will perform as well, or better than any IC setup. The "or better" part comes from the fact that in weather changes you can still fly the same setup, or simply add or subtract rpm if you need it. Just flying it as it was will also work because it will just stay as set. This basic setup will cost a lot less than a decent tuned pipe setup, and it is already plug n' play if you check out the RSM or Brodak websites, and some others around the world. These days with stores like Hobby Kings, even starting up with electric is no train smash. Chargers and batteries are now really affordable, and the cost of flying is below using fuel, so really guys, this is a far better way to get into flying good stunt, especially for beginners. A system like I've just mentioned is way better than any of the low cost engines like the LA, or FP types. Sure the guys that enjoy their engines, can continue to do this, (I'm one of them) but it's time to realise that electric stunt is here with a vengeance and it's really hard to beat.

Keith R

The pace of change has slowed down.  Inertia accelerators will be the next thing to be worked out, that may have any impact.
It won't be for everyone just like pipes are not for everyone.Everything else is already in play and good enough.
 Battery tech will not rapidly change much.  And it doesn't need to. Motors will be motors. some a little expensive, some inexpensive.
And there are excellent inexpensive controllers/ sequencers ( like Keith's excellent products) ,
Expense is not a real issue any more.  The weight difference is not even an issue. 
The real differences have already been stated, and they have been known for years. And they are all good.
 1. Quiet flights, so fields will not be lost, and most any field large enough will do, without notice.
 2. Consistent , repeatable flight performance to enhance the pilot's learning curve.  Better flights, quicker.
 3.  Clean, Smooth, airframe friendly flights with instant torque response. So smooth, the quietness is often mistaken for mediocre power
      which is  not true ( Kieth's and other controllers allow for adjustable governor acceleration which also somewhat controls "windup" )
      We are using 1 plus horsepower equivalent potentials and batteries that can deliver  75 plus amps.

We have said all this before - for years - people are just waking up to it now.  Because of environmental concerns alone,
It will inevitably overtake all other systems. 

Bob & Dan,
      Thanx guys!!!!!!The rumor is true.Lets go flying sometime soon.You guys going to Detroit next month?

(snip) This basic setup will cost a lot less than a decent tuned pipe setup, and it is already plug n' play if you check out the RSM or Brodak websites, and some others around the world. These days with stores like Hobby Kings, even starting up with electric is no train smash. Chargers and batteries are now really affordable, and the cost of flying is below using fuel, so really guys, this is a far better way to get into flying good stunt, especially for beginners. (snip)

Keith R

Hi Keith,

As you know, I have one of your timers.  I am looking forward to using it.  My comment above about cost is relative.  Let's compare some of my, and Aaron's (my oldest son), pipe systems and a comparable electric system.

1. PA .40 w/header, connector, pipe and three props: $125 (still running perfect over 10 years later)

2. PA .61 w/header, connector, pipe and prop: $170 (still running perfect)

3. PA .61 w/header, connector, pipe and prop: $215 (still running perfect)

4. Fuel for all is the "added cost".

Aaron got a NIB PA .61 for Christmas one year so that single engine was $329.00  The next highest priced PA was $250 for a unrun refurbished .40.  The 7 or 8 PA engines we have will easily last me the rest of my life and quite possibly Aaron.

These are actual totals from engines we have bought and used well in contests.

Aaron got a completely NIB Brodak Super Clown electric "turn key" combo for $125 plus shipping ($15 ??)  You will not find this every day, in fact I doubt we will ever find it again............. and is not comparable to the three set ups I have quoted above.

I also do not know the cost of an electric system that is comparable to a PA .61 w/ pipe.  The same quality and performance.

I would like to see all the costs of such a system to be able to compare.

I AM NOT BASHING ELECTRIC!  I see all the benefits of electric.

Bill

This thread went from "Congrats" to electric still sucks WTF

Hi Bill & Derek,

Sure you do get failures with both systems ......no argument at all. Electric has "different" problems, but of course Murphy's Law still applies. The difference in reliability shows up more in bad weather where you it is a lot easier to set up and know that you will have a good motor run without fuel mixture problems. Lean or rich will cause a lousy flight. Set and electric system a bit fast or slow and it will stay as set and fly pretty well either way. On the price story, a system like Igor's with active regulation is the best you can get and will cost quite a lot. A constant rpm setup like Bob Hunt was flying did pretty well (or what??) and is very predictable in wind and mucky weather, and costs a lot less. Let's now take a system to replace your PA 61 and pipe:

E-Flite Power 32 $75.00
50 amp ZTW esc $50.00
KR Governor timer system with programming card (you only need one programming card for any amount of timers) $49.50
Total = $174.50

The "fuel" for this system will be a 5-cell lipo, and the prop could be an APC 12 or 13" E-prop. Batteries, like fuel are not part of this equation for the power package. Some get 150 to 200 flights on a pack, and other like Igor get over 400 flights. That setup will fly your existing stunter as well or better than the PA 65. If you really want a top class motor like the MVVS 8,0/680 with Swiss quality military spec bearings and workmanship 2nd to none, I see that you can buy them in the USA for around $145.00. Lets just say it all costs $250.00, this is half the price of your suggested $500.00

Bill, the prices you paid for the PA engines are from a while back, and as far as I know, you cannot buy PA engines any more. Be that as it may, let us take the popular .40 sport setup with the standard LA .40 or .46. A basic electric motor like the E-Max/Arrowind 2820 will outfly any LA or FP 40 setup for very much the same price. I have done a lot of work with this size of setup and there are loads of customers out there who will attest to this fact. So sure, you had great value from your PA engines over the years. They were the standard for top class engines. Henry Nelson engines with superb mods by Randy Smith really lead the way and set a standard that was hard to beat for that time. Electric brushless outrunner motors are straightforward things with no spinning armature and only bearings to pack up. Sure some magnets do come loose but on the better quality motors, this is not a problem.

In the last world champs, Loren Nell from New Zealand and I both used cheap E-Max 2826 motors with APC 12 x 6 pusher props and 4-cell Nanotech lipo's. We had plenty of power and control in the bad conditions. None of us were blown out in the violent wind in qualifying. He was flying a  Thundergazer, and if you take a kit from RSM plus a basic power package like I've just mentioned, you are not talking about big bucks, but you will have a high performance system that is basically Plug n' Play. Sure....... Loren and I only placed somewhere in the 30's but that had little to do with our power packages! I felt really pleased about placing in the middle of the bunch with such a low cost system. I paid around $45.00 for my E-Max and used it to show what could be done with a low cost motor and simple electric system. I had an MVVS motor as well, so it wasn't that I did not have a high quality motor. A real bonus for me was that I did not have to put up with lousy fuel from the contest organizers! That is my 10 cents worth!

Keith R

Just tryin' to keep some of the rain off the parade.I saw most of the flights on Saturday standing a couple steps behind the judges.I witnessed the best PA of my lifetime and the method of thrust did'nt seem to matter at the time.Everyone brought the A game.The show was darn near as good Friday.Did'nt want to ruffle feathers,just keep the celabration going.