Glow Engine Vs. Electric Engine for 2 m' pattern plane

[Jerry Budd]

>John,
>           I think that you might agree that what appears to be 
>working for "sponsored" pilots may not yet be that realistic for 
>those who spend their own hard earned dollars on the hobby.

I don't think that I agree with your assessment above and I would 
suggest that I'm as qualified as anyone to comment on this since I 
was the highest placing non-sponsored electric pilot at last years 
Nats.  :-)

As we've seen the past few days it all depends on how you do the 
math.  If you're starting out from scratch with no existing support 
equipment it's nearly a push.  If you're converting over from glow it 
can appear to be a bit pricey at first (watching your cherished tools 
and accessories become obsolete can be difficult to accept), but 
there's still an economic "break even" point to be realized at some 
point in time.

>I really don't feel that electric is that viable yet. Not from a 
>technology point of view, but much more of a durability and 
>reliability point of view. I note that the pioneers are starting to 
>use less amps/volts in the motors to get more longevity out of not 
>just  the motors but also the controllers and the battery packs. (A 
>few months ago you did not hear this type of statement.)

I think you're missing the mark here.  The reliability of the motors 
(at least with the Hacker setups) hasn't been much of an issue for 
most of the last year.  And the problem with the controllers has been 
zero since switching to the Acro 90.  The only real issue is battery 
longevity and from what I have seen lately (meaning witnessed with my 
own eyes, not anecdotal evidence, not "someone claims", but my own 
personal firsthand observations of the equipment in use over an 
extended period of time), is that we're really close to having the 
battery problems licked.  The impedance of the newest Thunder Power 
batteries is now low enough that the batteries come out of the 
airplane after a flight no warmer than when you put them in prior to 
the flight.  Let me repeat that - there's no noticeable increase in 
battery temperature over the course of a (F3A) flight.  This is 
significant because it means that the battery is now being operated 
with some margin and isn't being pushed to it's limit, which means a 
likely increase in battery life expectancy.  This is huge.

As far as the reliability of electric vs glow is concerned it really 
isn't even a debatable point anymore.  A properly configured electric 
setup is (IMHO) probably an order of magnitude more reliable than the 
best glow setup.  Maybe even better than that, time will tell.

>I also note that it feels like and may well be true, that you have 
>to know a lot more about the limits of electric motors and the 
>associated equipment to be successful and safe. I contact many of 
>the "electric" suppliers and find it very hard to get definitive 
>answers on what I should and should not do as regards the set-ups 
>and the limits.

The equipment suppliers can't help much because (for the most part) 
they don't know as much about this as we do.  Most of them don't fly 
pattern and they are relying on us, those who chose to give electric 
a go, to tell them what works and what doesn't.  For the last 20 
years or so pattern has fallen behind wrt pushing the technology, 
compared to R/C cars and helicopters.  Prior to that pattern was 
where all the latest "whiz bang" developments could be found.  For 
the first time in a long time pattern is now pushing a technology 
(electric power) harder and farther than anything else in use.  Some 
of the other areas that push electric technology such as the electric 
FAI events are impressive in their own right, but they pale in 
comparison to what we now expect out of our equipment to fly pattern 
with an electric plane.

>Where this leads me is that I am currently on the side of caution 
>with this stuff because you can use up a very large amount of money 
>before you realize that you have not gone the right route. With glow 
>most of us can sort out the enthusiast vs. the zealot vs. the 
>professional user of the equipment. With electric I can't.

That's only because you have some experience with glow setups to 
balance against the BS that someone may try to feed you (and there's 
a lot of that out there with glow motors to contend with).  I would 
submit that the electric is much easier to setup since there's fewer 
variables to contend with.  In essence, it's a far simpler setup to 
install, support, and troubleshoot.  As far as the professional user 
is concerned, there's only three fully sponsored pilots in the US 
flying electric: Jason, QuiQue, and Chip (Frackowiak isn't fully 
sponsored, he buys most of his electric equipment, some of it at a 
discount, some of it at street prices like many of us).  Of those 
four Jason is active in this forum and has been very open about the 
setups he's used the past couple of years.  QuiQue isn't active here, 
and he's played around with the electric 3D stuff for a while, but 
the electric pattern setup is still relatively new to him.  Chip just 
flew his first contest with an electric Genesis at Vegas a week and a 
half ago, to be honest he's the newbie among the group and likely 
knows the least about the ins and outs of it all.  Frackowiak has 
been flying, and competing, with his ePartner in F3A since January 
2004, and he now has something like 700 flights on the airplane (I 
only flew it for 3 weeks last summer, including at the Nats, and some 
people consider me an expert on it!).  Tony is far and away the most 
experienced electric pattern competitor out there and he's been 
pretty open about sharing what he's doing with anyone who 
(legitimately) wants to know.  Also, there's loads of info on RCU on 
what Frack has experienced with his "conversion" to electric, all you 
have to do is Google it.

>I read about the rave reviews of how well a certain system performs 
>and then I get the flow of private e-mails with more factual and 
>less glowing (No joke intended) realities of the set-up. In most 
>cases I can't print what I am sent but it does concern me that when 
>I tried to emulate the top system of the day it was both expensive 
>beyond my expectations and did not perform all that well.

I have no idea what setups you've been looking at but I can say this 
with absolute certainty.  The setup that Frack's been using in the 
ePartner for the last 16 months (Hacker C50-14XL6.7-1, Hacker Acro 90 
controller, APC22x12e prop) with the Thunder Power Pro Lite 10s3p 
6000 cells has significantly more vertical performance than ANY other 
2M plane I have seen to date, my Webra 160 powered E=MC3 on Magnum #1 
included.  And that's saying a lot, my E=MC3 on Magnum #1 is pretty 
spectacular but the ePartner is better.  And the new 5300's that TP 
has are lower impedance yet which means even better flight 
performance (not that it matters anymore).  I will likely be flying a 
pair of electric powered Abbra's at the Nats this year in Masters. 
They'll be electric because my experience suggests that electric is 
better than glow, and well, see my last comment below.

BTW - In case anyone is wondering, I'm not sponsored by anyone, in 
any way (other than my wife, Rosana, and our two dogs, Buster & 
Millie).  I pay for all my stuff, including fuel, so you can take 
what I write for what it's worth (although Horizon did tell me to 
keep the Webra 160 I borrowed from them for the 2003 Nats).

>It was not enough to put me off pattern, but I had been a beginner 
>it might easily have sent me away.

Interestingly, what we've seen out here at some meets in California 
is somewhat the opposite.  There's been an interest in flying pattern 
being shown by pilots who've never flown a glow airplane before. 
They're interested in flying precision aerobatics, but not if they 
have to mess with a glow or ignition motor to do so.

One last point.  Outside of the Abbra's I don't even own any other 
electric planes, not even a "foamie".  So it's not like I'm anti-glow 
or anything like that.  I just like winning.  ;-)

Thx, Jerry
-- 
___________
Jerry Budd
Budd Engineering
(661) 722-5669 Voice/Fax
(661) 435-0358 Cell Phone
mailto:jerry at buddengineering.com
http://www.buddengineering.com
=================================================
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.