[NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for receiver

[Keith Hoard]

Is Moonshine made from fossil fuels?

Keith Hoard
Collierville, TN
khoard at gmail.com




On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM, trexlesh at msn.com <trexlesh at msn.com> wrote:

> Ya fossil burner! :-)
>
> R
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "astropuppy" <astropuppy at gmail.com>
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for receiver
> Date: Wed, Jan 25, 2012 12:47 pm
>
>
> You know you want to go E Jim. As they say in Oregon: "Just do it".
>
> Mike
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:47 AM, J N Hiller <jnhiller at earthlink.net>wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>> Having judged these sequences I absolutely agree that they have become
>> more demanding. Do you think you could fly the current schedules with 2006
>> battery technology?****
>>
>> Not in a hurry to go E-Power but interested.****
>>
>> Jim****
>>
>> ** ******
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:
>> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]*On Behalf Of *Del
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 25, 2012 6:55 AM
>> *To:* General pattern discussion
>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for
>> receiver
>>
>> ** ******
>>
>> *Dave.. Love how you win your discussions.. lol .. ;+}  *****
>>
>> * *****
>>
>> *    Del*****
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- ****
>>
>> * *
>> *From:*
>> Dave Lockhart <DaveL322 at comcast.net>
>>
>> ****
>>
>> *To:* 'General pattern discussion' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> ***
>> *
>>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 24, 2012 7:07 PM****
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for
>> receiver****
>>
>> ** ******
>>
>> 2006****
>>
>> 9411sa x2 for ailerons****
>>
>> 8417sa x1 for elevator****
>>
>> 8411sa x1 for rudder****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> 2009****
>>
>> Changed to 3517 x2 for elevator (in the same plane)….no change in mah per
>> flight****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> 2010****
>>
>> Changed to 8611A on rudder (in the same plane)….no change in mah per
>> flight****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Flight times are about 45 seconds shorter now.****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> I still have the Prestige I flew in 2006, so no change to control surface
>> size or throw.****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> I’m pretty sure it is the changes in maneuvers flown and higher average
>> watts used by the motor in the course of the flight.  J****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Regards,****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Dave****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:
>> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of *Peter Vogel
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 24, 2012 6:59 PM
>> *To:* General pattern discussion
>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for
>> receiver****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Digital servos *definitely* draw more power than non-digitals, but they
>> are much more precise and hold their position better, it's worth the higher
>> draw for pattern.****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Peter+****
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Doug Cronkhite <seefo at san.rr.com> wrote:
>> ****
>>
>> I suspect the servos also draw more power than they did years ago.****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Doug
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone****
>>
>>
>> On Jan 24, 2012, at 3:40 PM, "Dave Lockhart" <DaveL322 at comcast.net>
>> wrote:****
>>
>> When I first started flying electric pattern…..mah per flight was
>> noticeably lower than now, going from 40-60 per flight to 60-80 per
>> flight…..flying whatever was the current P/F sequences.  I suspect the
>> increase is due to higher average flight speeds (much more watts at the
>> motor now) and more demanding maneuvers (snaps and KE).****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Regards,****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Dave****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:
>> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of *Keith Hoard
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:02 AM
>> *To:* General pattern discussion
>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for
>> receiver****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Anthony,
>>
>>    On a typical flight, I'm guessing the radio only uses around
>> 100-150Mah of power, while the motor is using 4000Mah, so that's about 4%
>> more draw on those two cells.  In practice, I haven't been able to see any
>> difference in the radio cells when I hook them up to my charger at the end
>> of a flight.  Sometimes cells #1 & #2 are the high cells after a flight, so
>> I think the power draw of the radio is negligible to our motor packs.
>>
>> The problem with two regulators plugged into the same 10S (or 5S) pack is
>> that you are creating a dead short between the cells thru the ground wires
>> (typically a straight wire thru the regulator).
>>
>> Say you plug Regulator #1 into cells #1&2, and Regulator #2 into cells
>> #6&7.  The regulator's *ground *wires now have 5 cells of voltage
>> potential (5 X 4.2V = 21Volts) between them since they are plugged into
>> cells # 1 and #6.  When those two ground wires are then plugged into your
>> receiver either thru a switch or direct connection the magic smoke will
>> escape and your retailer will rejoice.
>>
>> Also, if you have both of your regulators plugged into your motor pack
>> and the packs eject like Goose in Top Gun, you've lost both of your
>> redundant power sources.  However, if you use a tiny 2S LiPo that is
>> physically separated and secured inside your plane, you have both
>> electrical and physical redundancy.
>>
>> Hmmm, just thought of something . . . maybe we should tie down the
>> receiver so the main regulator can't take the receiver out with it. . . so
>> many contingencies, so little weight . . .
>>
>> Keith Hoard
>> Collierville, TN
>> khoard at gmail.com
>> **
>> ******
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Anthony Romano <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com>
>> wrote:****
>>
>> Seems like a great idea but I have two questions. Do the packs come down
>> out of balance since two cells are serving extra load? Is there a problem
>> with parallel operation of two regulators?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Anthony
>>  ****
>>  ------------------------------
>>
>> From: joddino at socal.rr.com
>> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:25:00 -0800
>> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Main battery redundant lead for receiver
>>
>> I've been using this setup for sometime and it is working great.  I have
>> my two cell LiPo charged to 7.5 volts and it is connected to a 6.0 volt
>> regulator into the receiver.  The cable connected to the balance connector
>> on the "bottom" 5S is connected to a 6.3 volt regulator so it supplies all
>> the current to the system and the 2S pack never needs charging..  I'm using
>> an 800 mAh pack but it could be even smaller.   ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Jim O****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> On Jan 23, 2012, at 2:09 PM, Scott McHarg wrote:****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Guys,
>>    Chris Moon just e-mailed me about some leads that were done at the
>> factory.  These leads run off your balance leads to a voltage regulator and
>> allow your main battery pack to be utilized as a redundant receiver
>> battery.  It is NOT meant to be a primary but it will save 20+ grams if
>> you're running 2 rx batteries.  You still have to run the 2nd regulator for
>> true redundancy but you eliminate the 2nd battery.  These leads are factory
>> made and eliminate the need to make them yourself with the concern about
>> plugging in to the wrong cell.  I know in my article, I was pretty much
>> against doing this as a backup but, with Chris having this made at the
>> factory, he has all but eliminated making a mistake by tying to the wrong
>> cell.  I have the link that I'll e-mail you off-list or you can just go to
>> his website.  I don't want to break the NSRCA list rules by advertising for
>> him even though he advertises with the NSRCA.  The leads are only $3.99
>> each and are found under the Connectors/Adapters listing.
>>
>> Thank,
>> Scott
>>
>> --
>> *Scott A. McHarg*
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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****
>>
>>
>>
>> ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> -- ****
>>
>> Director, Fixed Wing Flight Training****
>>
>> Santa Clara County Model Aircraft Skypark****
>>
>> ****
>>  ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20120126/49e2f6a4/attachment.html>