Glow Engine Vs. Electric Engine for 2 m' pattern plane
Richard Strickland
richard.s at allied-callaway.com
Tue May 31 09:05:03 AKDT 2005
Bob,
My knowledge of controllers is VERY limited. I DID suggest to FMA that
regeneration would be a potential project for them down the road--Why waste
all that energy! Apparently, there were (maybe are) some brushed type
controllers that did a little of that--but since I only jumped into the E
side of things last fall--I don't know much history. The battery set-up
weighs about 2lbs., 5oz. including the discharge protection modules. Greg
Covey has an Icepoint E evaluation coming out soon on RCU that shows the
config. with some smaller batteries. At 67 amps usage, I'm getting about a
57 degree average rise and Orland at 62-4 amps is getting about 10-15
degrees ave. rise cooler--and he's getting through the pattern with decent
performance and reserve. Both airplanes have solid CF nose ring mounts
with end grain reinforced balsa rear containing mounts with as little
material as possible remaining. The motors and controllers seem to be
handling the amperage OK--HackerXL50/14s 6.7:1 and Master 90 Acro
Controllers. We went for 3:1 ventilation--not quite there but almost.
COOLING IS A BIG DEAL--Get as much as you can through the fuse! I suggest
having a least one exit close to the batteries. BTW, the canopy is still
tighter after 45 flights than after a couple with the same airplane with IC
and soft mount. Pretty amazing.
Sorry, I get started on this stuff and I can't quit.
Richard
Original Message -----
From: "Bob Richards" <bob at toprudder.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: Glow Engine Vs. Electric Engine for 2 m' pattern plane
> Richard,
>
> You mentioned braking in the downline, do any of the
> electric controllers have regenerative braking?
>
> Bob R.
>
>
> --- Richard Strickland <richard.s at allied-callaway.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Tom,
> >
> > As of yesterday, 45 complete flights-P05 in an
> > all-up converted 10lb.-15.5oz.Temptation, Hacker
> > with a 22/12, FMA/Kokam 10s1ps 3200s with cell
> > protection modules. We are experimenting with using
> > a little less amperage to extend battery flight time
> > (and to stop abusing the eq.)--but I have made it
> > through all flights in any wind and landed with
> > power. It uses more power in a calm day than
> > windy--I've got some thoughts on that--but it'll
> > take more evaluation. It's about equivalent to a
> > Bully 145 with a 16oz. tank flight time. Wide open
> > power is a little more than we need. Flying is a
> > little different--torque comes on differently and I
> > haven't mastered the correct way to handle downline
> > braking and spins as far as where to have the idle
> > set. Flys like a pattern airplane.
> >
> > I have an Impact ready to go and got it JUST under
> > the max. wt. I suspect I'll be able to fly it a
> > little slower and extend flight times. Orland McKee
> > and I have been working with FMA helping with the
> > battery evaluations. They will have some nice
> > features soon that will hopefully extend battery
> > life and battery available power for flight time. I
> > have been chatting mostly via e-mail with Jerry
> > Budd, Tony Frakowiack, and Jason Schulman and each
> > guy has been very helpful and encouraging. The guys
> > at FMA have some great ideas also and are working at
> > having some very competitive battery systems and
> > chargers. Yes, we are getting a break on
> > batteries--but not free--and we are purchasing
> > everything else at street prices. One very cool
> > item they have is we can charge up both 5 cell packs
> > with one charger--but you only get a few charges out
> > of one deep discharge 12v battery. But it is rare
> > that I get the time to fly more than 4-5 flights so
> > I'm not impacted as of yet. A second charger and
> > another deep-discharge batt. would be needed. You
> > need three sets of flight batteries. Don't go nuts
> > buying batteries as they are changing all the time.
> > There is some VERY cool stuff coming down the pike!
> > I charge on a power supply at home. I'm becoming
> > an expert with Velcro. Good luck.
> >
> > Richard
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Koenig, Tom
> > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 5:54 PM
> > Subject: Glow Engine Vs. Electric Engine for 2 m'
> > pattern plane
> >
> >
> > Ed and others
> >
> > I'm not so sure it is such a silly comparison for
> > people outside of the US, where costs can be
> > considerable in the fuel department. Our figures
> > indicate that at we would be at 'break even' point
> > if we get 100 flights a pack. Anything more and its
> > gravy. We are not including things like I/C engine
> > rebuilds etc either. We simply treated the packs as
> > 'fuel' in our estimations. Like anything,
> > maintenance and correct installation is an
> > issue/learning curve...and done properly I can see
> > Electric making economic rationale.
> >
> > Now if anyone can just give us more info on how it
> > actually 'feels' to fly the FAI pattern?
> >
> > Anyone...please????
> >
> > best regards
> >
> > Tom
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
> > [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ed
> > Alt
> > Sent: Monday, 30 May 2005 8:39 AM
> > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > Subject: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM]
> > Re: Glow Engine Vs. Electric Engine for 2 m' pattern
> > plane
> >
> >
> > Yes and you need to figure out the jump in your
> > electric bill. Getting silly isn't it? It's a 2:1
> > comparison, assuming the batteries last, which
> > apparently, they don't.
> >
> > Ed
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Nat Penton
> >
> >
> ************************************************************************
> > *PLEASE NOTE* This email and any attachments
> > may
> > be confidential. If received in error,
> > please delete all
> > copies and advise the sender. The
> > reproduction or
> > dissemination of this email or its
> > attachments is
> > prohibited without the consent of the
> > sender.
> >
> > WARNING RE VIRUSES: Our computer systems
> > sweep
> > outgoing email to guard against viruses, but
> > no warranty
> > is given that this email or its attachments
> > are virus free.
> > Before opening or using attachments, please
> > check for
> > viruses. Our liability is limited to the
> > re-supply of any
> > affected attachments.
> >
> > Any views expressed in this message are
> > those of the
> > individual sender, except where the sender
> > expressly,
> > and with authority, states them to be the
> > views of the
> > organisation.
> >
> >
> ************************************************************************
> >
> >
> >
>
> =================================================
> To access the email archives for this list, go to
> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
>
> List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the
list.
>
=================================================
To access the email archives for this list, go to
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.
List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the list.
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list