[NSRCA-discussion] Electric/IC ...wasArmingPlug/ReceptacleProblem
Matthew Frederick
mjfrederick at cox.net
Tue Feb 10 16:26:01 AKST 2009
Hahaha... Maybe for those who don't know how to maintain their own engines... Me, I just choose not to loan money to the in-laws. I've been running 140 DZ's and FZ's for 3 years now with no problems whatsoever. I even assembled a complete 140 FZ at the field in 20 minutes using spare parts a friend gave me... back-flipped to start on the very first try, runs like a top.
Matt
----- Original Message -----
From: Keith Hoard
To: General pattern discussion
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:02 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Electric/IC ...wasArmingPlug/ReceptacleProblem
I don't look at a YS engine as an investment . . . more like the "loan" you make to one of your in-laws who "promises" to pay you back . . .
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Ron Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net> wrote:
Matt - I disagree with part of your statement #1. I like electrics and I love the smell of burning nitro too.
One of my fondest memories is going to contests up in Ohio, Michigan and Indiana with Don Lowe in his old Pontiac station wagon, which had the aroma of castor oil, that came from the fuel that had dripped on and seeped into the carpet in the back.
I totally agree with #2.
Ron
On Feb 10, 2009, at 5:20 PM, Matthew Frederick wrote:
I'm afraid I must take issue with two of your statements:
1) I'm not afraid of electric, I just don't like it. Part of what I like about the hobby is the engines, I love the smell of burning nitro in the morning, smells like victory
2) There's no such thing as too many YS engines to those who like them
Matt
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Ferrell" <johnferrell at earthlink.net>
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Electric/IC ...was ArmingPlug/ReceptacleProblem
It is an interesting question for sure...
Can you think of any other form of aviation where empty weight is more important that Gross or take off weight?
Of course one cannot blame the IC fans for being afraid of electric technology.
Personally, the bad news is that the new knee joints I had installed last year are not permitting me to squat or kneel. It is tough to deal with tending an IC powered airplane with that limitation.
The good news is that electrics do not appear to require the operator to squat/kneel.
Unfortunately there remains the problem of recovering the investment of too many YS engines and the accompanying airplanes...
John Ferrell W8CCW
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -- Edmund Burke
http://DixieNC.US
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Van Putte" <vanputte at cox.net>
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 5:03 PM
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 at 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
--
Keith Hoard
Collierville, TN
khoard at gmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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/20090211/200b60f6/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list