[NSRCA-discussion] Electric/IC ...was Arming Plug/ReceptacleProblem

Vicente "Vince" Bortone vicenterc at comcast.net
Mon Feb 9 18:04:47 AKST 2009



Chris, 



Well said.  I have two Abbras one electric and the other one YS .  Both  electric and glow are good.  In my case, the  pilot is the only bad stuff.  I would like to see the YS -CDI in the market soon.  That will make pattern even more interesting.  Also, I wish that someone makes a gasoline engine in small size with the power density we need.  I saw 3-4 years ago someone using a 4 cycle gasoline engine.  I wonder if they add fuel injection and supercharge in 4 cycle engine we will get good results.     



Vicente "Vince" Bortone   
----- Original Message ----- 
From: " krishlan fitzsimmons " <homeremodeling2003 at yahoo.com> 
To: "General pattern discussion" < nsrca -discussion at lists. nsrca .org> 
Sent: Monday, February 9, 2009 8:33:11 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central 
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Electric/ IC ...was Arming Plug/ ReceptacleProblem 

Glow is good, Electric is good!!! Those of us that choose to stick with Electric have our reasons. As stated before, don't forget, we used to fly glow.. This is a silly conversation really. Everyone has their own individual needs and likes out of their plane. 
And as far as I can tell, E power is having little trouble for the most part making weight. I haven't had a problem yet. Now, if when I was weighed, if I had an allowance to fly heavier than 11lbs would I? At the nats , heck yes. IMO, in the wind it is an advantage to be a little heavier. 



Chris 




--- On Mon, 2/9/09, Budd Engineering < jerry @ buddengineering .com> wrote: 


From: Budd Engineering < jerry @ buddengineering .com> 
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Electric/ IC ...was Arming Plug/ ReceptacleProblem 
To: "General pattern discussion" < nsrca -discussion at lists. nsrca .org> 
Date: Monday, February 9, 2009, 6:22 PM 

Really? Your fuel tank weighs 42 oz when full of fuel?!! Wow! 

Jerry 

Sent from my iPhone 

On Feb 9, 2009, at 6:08 PM, "Dennis Cone" 
< patternpilot @ verizon .net> 
wrote: 

> If your fuel tanks weighed more with fuel Ron, then there is a point 
> here. 
> An IC tank weighs more when full of fuel. Sooooo there is no 
> argument. IC 
> wins as it should. :-) 
> 
> Aloha, 
> Dennis 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: nsrca -discussion-bounces at lists. nsrca .org 
> [ mailto : nsrca -discussion-bounces at lists. nsrca .org] On Behalf Of Ron 
> Van Putte 
> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 12:03 PM 
> To: General pattern discussion 
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Electric/ IC ...was Arming 
> Plug/ ReceptacleProblem 
> 
> 
> I beg to differ. The rules are already slanted to favor IC : the way 
> the airplanes are weighed. IC airplanes are weighed without fuel; 
> electric airplanes are weighed with fuel (batteries) and both may no 
> more than 5 kilograms. OMG , here we go again! 
> 
> Ron 
> 
> On Feb 9, 2009, at 3:54 PM, James Oddino wrote: 
> 
>> I've been at this longer than most and have known from the 
>> beginning that the propulsion system is the key to winning in 
>> Pattern competition. It can also be the most frustrating due to 
>> constantly changing conditions. I found that the gas engines with 
>> spark ignition were a lot more consistent than glow and that 
>> reduced the frustration. I have more recently convinced myself 
>> that electric is the least frustrating. A few folks have gone back 
>> to glow after playing with electric to get more power for windy 
>> conditions. We are now getting close to getting more than enough 
>> out of electric systems (3 to 4 HP?) and when that happens we 
won't 
>> have these discussions anymore. However, before that happens, the 
>> rules will probably be changed to favor IC . 
>> 
>> Jim 
>> 
>> 
>> On Feb 9, 2009, at 12:39 PM, Jerry Voth wrote: 
>> 
>>> I've been lurking for a long time and after reading all the 
things 
>>> that one needs to do to successfully fly electric, it makes one 
>>> wonder how things would be if electrics were the norm from the 
>>> beginning of powered R/C models. It might go like this; 
>>> 
>>> Hey guys, I just bought this little IC engine and I tried it on 
>>> one of my Pattern models and it works really well. "Look what 
it 
>>> will do; 
>>> 1. It has just as much power as our electric motors. 
>>> 2. The only batteries you need are for the flight pack, glow 
>>> igniter and the electric starter if you don't like to flip by 
hand. 
>>> 3. All you have to do is pump fuel into the tank, spin the engine 
>>> with the starter and fly.The tail gets a little oily, but what the 
>>> heck, it's fairly easy to clean up.(Switching the radio on 
first 
>>> is a given.) 
>>> 4. You don't have to haul a generator or an extra car battery 
>>> around to charge motor batteries." 
>>> 
>>> Please don't take this the wrong way. It is tongue in cheek 
and 
>>> just an observation. I also have too much time on my hands these 
>>> days. 
>>> 
>>> JJV 
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jay Marshall" 
>>> < lightfoot @ sc . rr .com> 
>>> To: " 'General pattern discussion' " < nsrca - 
>>> discussion at lists. nsrca .org> 
>>> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 1:50 PM 
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Arming Plug/Receptacle Problem 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> A 100 ohm resistor may be enough to charge the caps and make 
the 
>>>> ESC 
>>>> "active". Bad idea... 
>>>> 
>>>> Jay Marshall 
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message----- 
>>>> From: nsrca -discussion-bounces at lists. nsrca .org 
>>>> [ mailto : nsrca -discussion-bounces at lists. nsrca .org] On Behalf Of 
>>>> Ron Van Putte 
>>>> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 1:14 PM 
>>>> To: General pattern discussion 
>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Arming Plug/Receptacle Problem 
>>>> 
>>>> Good. I will try it. What wattage 100 ohm resistor? 
Let's see, 
>>>> doesn't sustained power equal voltage squared, divided by 
the 
>>>> resistance? If so, 42 squared, divided by 100 is 17.64 watts. 
>>>> That's probably overkill, since the current surge is 
transitory. 
>>>> How 
>>>> about a 100 ohm, 10 watt resistor? 
>>>> 
>>>> Just thought of something: With the 100 ohm resistor across 
the 
>>>> arming plug receptacle, won't the ESC be on whenever the 
batteries 
>>>> are plugged into the circuit? 
>>>> 
>>>> BTW, what about Castle Creation's statement that the 
"spark is your 
>>>> friend' ? 
>>>> 
>>>> Ron 
>>>> 
>>>> On Feb 9, 2009, at 11:55 AM, James Oddino wrote: 
>>>> 
>>>>> Put a 100 ohm resistor across the arming plug receptacle. 
Then 
>>>>> the 
>>>>> capacitors in the ESC will charge without a spark as you 
connect 
>>>>> the batteries. When you connect the arming plug, no 
spark. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Jim 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 9, 2009, at 8:08 AM, Ron Van Putte wrote: 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have a problem which I am sure many other E-powered 
airplane 
>>>>>> owners have that I'd like to solve. I use an 
arming plug to 
>>>>>> connect the two 5S Lipo packs to the ESC . On initial 
contact of 
>>>>>> the arming plug with the receptacle, there's a big 
spark thrown. 
>>>>>> Eventually the contacts on the arming plug and 
receptacle get 
>>>>>> burned to the point where the electrical contact is 
very bad. 
>>>>>> Yesterday I had to land my airplane deadstick because 
(I think) 
>>>>>> the ESC saw what it thought was low voltage out of the 
battery 
>>>>>> that was actually due to the burned arming 
plug/receptacle 
>>>>>> contacts. BTW, I am using high-amp Anderson Power 
Pole 
>>>>>> connectors, which are probably more susceptible to 
having the 
>>>>>> contacts burned than would Deans Ultra connectors. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have thought about putting a BIG capacitor in 
parallel with the 
>>>>>> arming plug, that would damp the initial current surge 
which 
>>>>>> causes the spark. The capacitor could be removed 
before flight. 
>>>>>> However, I'm wondering if there's a more 
elegant solution. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ron Van Putte 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
>>>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists. nsrca .org 
>>>>>> 
http ://lists. nsrca .org/mailman/ listinfo / nsrca -discussion 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
>>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists. nsrca .org 
>>>>> http ://lists. nsrca .org/mailman/ listinfo / nsrca -discussion 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists. nsrca .org 
>>>> http ://lists. nsrca .org/mailman/ listinfo / nsrca -discussion 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists. nsrca .org 
>>>> http ://lists. nsrca .org/mailman/ listinfo / nsrca -discussion 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --- 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>> ----------- 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> No virus found in this incoming message. 
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
>>> Version: 8.0.233 / Virus Database: 270.10.19/1941 - Release Date: 
>>> 02/08/09 17:57:00 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists. nsrca .org 
>>> http ://lists. nsrca .org/mailman/ listinfo / nsrca -discussion 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ 
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists. nsrca .org 
>> http ://lists. nsrca .org/mailman/ listinfo / nsrca -discussion 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
> NSRCA-discussion at lists. nsrca .org 
> http ://lists. nsrca .org/mailman/ listinfo / nsrca -discussion 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
> NSRCA-discussion at lists. nsrca .org 
> http ://lists. nsrca .org/mailman/ listinfo / nsrca -discussion 
_______________________________________________ 
NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
NSRCA-discussion at lists. nsrca .org 
http ://lists. nsrca .org/mailman/ listinfo / nsrca -discussion 


_______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion mailing list NSRCA-discussion at lists. nsrca .org http ://lists. nsrca .org/mailman/ listinfo / nsrca -discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090210/446deadc/attachment.html>


More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list