[NSRCA-discussion] Receiver packs

John Gayer jgghome at comcast.net
Sat Feb 14 11:16:15 AKST 2009 

Having had some battery problems in the past, I am now using two 
completely  independent battery circuits with two tech-aero 
switch/regulators set to the same value. Using the switches I confirm 
that each circuit is working prior to takeoff. When recharging, I 
confirm that the ratio of charge used from each battery is relatively 
constant.
This insures that I will never take off with only one system functional, 
and I will notice a weakening battery immediately after recharging. I'm 
using two 800 mah lipos.

John

Rex wrote:
> I've been using 2 cell lipo's for quite a few years for my 
> receiver/servo power.  I treat them just like any
> other part that goes into a $3k plane...  I break them in and test 
> them in a little foamie plane.  I torture
> them enough to see that they have the capacity that they should.  I 
> generally fly them five or six cycles
> before I actually put them in the pattern ship.   I use them for two 
> seasons, then change them out for
> new ones.  I haven't had any reliability problems whatsoever, using 
> lipos in this manner.
>  
> Rex
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: pamrich47 at hotmail.com
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 12:37:42 -0600
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Receiver packs
>
> Jerry--just a couple thoughts:  I will probably never use a battery 
> for a receiver/flight pack again that I haven't been in charge of its 
> history.  If you've been paying attention to its characteristics since 
> new, we can generally tell when they start to lose capacity--and for 
> me, there was a point on the ESV when it got there, I got a little 
> nervous about going up 'one more time'.  When it would approach 
> that point after about five flights, then I would figure it was 1. if 
> early in its career--then to cycle and 2. if in to the second or third 
> year(sometimes longer) it was time to retire it.  Nicads for me have 
> been pretty reliable that way and I've been comfortable running one 
> pack.  You can still go to five cells in nicads for additional 
> capacity and power with a regulator and still have that reliability.  
> I think most of the guys that have gone to lipos can enjoy the 
> increased capacity and power along with an increased discharge rate in 
> a smaller, lighter package.  But I don't get the impression that they 
> trust them like nicads.  Probably the best thing to do is monitor your 
> batteries of any type with a good, loaded ESV to keep an eye out 
> for any unusual battery behavior.  The two battery debate is a little 
> like the single versus twin debate in full scale airplanes--some guys 
> think twins just have double the chances to fail.
> All that said, I understand some of the new receivers are a little 
> touchy regarding low voltage situations.  I had an older receiver in 
> an airplane that I bought used with a 'new' battery--turned out the 
> battery was bad--but got a warning(hold) and was able to land--but 
> showed NO volts afterward.
> Chances are with the newer stuff, it may not have made it back on the 
> ground in one piece.  So using a 5 cell nicad or 2 cell lipo with 
> regulator may not be a bad idea and monitor with a good loaded ESV.
> FWIW
> Richard
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: jjvoth at mtelco.net
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 20:32:46 -0600
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Receiver packs
>
>
> Thanks for the info guys
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Vicente "Vince" Bortone <mailto:vicenterc at comcast.net>
>     *To:* General pattern discussion
>     <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>     *Sent:* Friday, February 13, 2009 8:28 PM
>     *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Receiver packs
>
>     Hi Jerry,
>      
>     I have been using two li-po using the tech-aero double regulator
>     http://www.tech-aero.net/plr5-dr2.htm  The capacity I am using now
>     is 930 mah, 2 cells  batteries.  I know that I can fly at least
>     6-8 times.  After that, I am brain dead.
>      
>     VB
>      
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: "Richard Strickland" <pamrich47 at hotmail.com
>     <mailto:pamrich47 at hotmail.com>>
>     To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>     Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 8:01:03 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada
>     Central
>     Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Receiver packs
>
>     Jerry, I think the short answer is no.  But there has been much
>     discussion regarding dual packs for back-up.  An example ot single
>     pack usage is using a 2 cell lipo at around 780-800ma for practice
>     and 340-380ma for contests to make weight.  These are used with
>     voltage regulators with variing outputs.
>     RS
>      
>     > From: jjvoth at mtelco.net
>     > To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>     > Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:32:25 -0600
>     > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Receiver packs
>     >
>     > Sorry, I said that wrong. I meant are two packs needed to power
>     the flight
>     > pack.
>     > ----- Original Message -----
>     > From: "Jerry Voth" <jjvoth at mtelco.net>
>     > To: "NSRCA" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>     > Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 5:23 PM
>     > Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Receiver packs
>     >
>     >
>     > > This has probably come up many times but I'd like to know if it's
>     > > necessary
>     > > to use two Li-Fe packs for the radio and servos
>     > > _______________________________________________
>     > > 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: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1951 - Release
>     Date: 02/13/09
>     > 06:51:00
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>     > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>     > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>     See how Windows connects the people, information, and fun that are
>     part of your life. See Now
>     <http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/msnnkwxp1020093175mrt/direct/01/>
>     _______________________________________________ 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: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1951 - Release Date:
>     02/13/09 06:51:00
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with 
> Windows Live. See Now 
> <http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/msnnkwxp1020093185mrt/direct/01/>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20090214/47c93051/attachment.html>

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list