Hi-Performance and Sailplanes RC hotliners, electric pylon racers, F5B, F5D, sailplanes and gliders

Lengthen nose for correct CG

Old 04-20-2011, 11:34 AM
  #1  
SBS_Pilot
New Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13
Default Lengthen nose for correct CG

Hello

I have a vintage Precedent Hi-Fly which I bought, built, and made a few half-hearted bungee starts with it in the late 80:ies. It has laid in storage since then, but a couple of years ago I restarted with rc flying, and now I have begun to restore the Hi-Fly to a flying ship again, this time with a brushless electric motor.

The first flight was a little bit disappointing because of the ratio between powered and unpowered flight (total flying time 7:38 with 2:31 motor run time).

I have now exchanged the old 50g servos for two 9g servos, replaced the bowden-cables (is that the correct term? I mean a flexible nylon rod inside a flexible nylon tube which is glued to the fuselage) with carbonfibre rods, changed to a lighter battery (from 3S,800mAh,79g to 3S,450mAh, 45g).

My problem now is that no matter how I place the battery, the center of gravity is too far aft (approximately 1.5cm), which - considering my flying skills - I don't dare trying to launch with. I therefore plan to extend the nose to be able to mount the motor even further ahead of the battery.

My questions are therefore:
1. are there any negative effects of lengthen the nose, or should I just extend is as long as is needed to get the balance correct?

2. Is there anything else I could try to get the balance correct? I was thinking of stripping the covering from both the horisontal and vertical tail fins and bore some holes in the solid balsa before covering them again, but I am not sure if it is worth the effort.

I am glad for any advice

/Stefan
SBS_Pilot is offline  
Old 04-20-2011, 01:46 PM
  #2  
JetPlaneFlyer
Super Contributor
 
JetPlaneFlyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 6,122
Default

I hate adding nose weight too!

The best way IMHO to sort the CG would be to replace the all sheet tail surfaces wing a built up structure. A simple built up tail structure could be knocked up in an hour or two and would probably be quicker and easier than extending the nose, plus it would result in a lighter model.

Regarding extending the nose; there is a down side. Having the weight further from the CG causes a greater momemt of inertia. A model with a long lose will have more sluggish response to elevator and rudder and will also take longer to settle down after being disturbed by a gust or whatever.... The difference may be quite subtle and may not cause problems but this is the reason glider noses are usually kept quite short.

Steve
JetPlaneFlyer is offline  
Old 04-20-2011, 10:51 PM
  #3  
Leadchucker
Curmudgeon
 
Leadchucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lower Slower Delaware
Posts: 268
Default

Originally Posted by SBS_Pilot View Post
..... the bowden-cables (is that the correct term? I mean a flexible nylon rod inside a flexible nylon tube which is glued to the fuselage)
Yes, you are correct. The "pushrods" as you describe them are indeed Bowden cables. Very few people call them by thier correct name so you're off to a great start.
Leadchucker is offline  
Old 04-24-2011, 02:43 AM
  #4  
FlyWheel
Ochroma Pyramidale Tekton
 
FlyWheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Clover, South Carolina
Posts: 3,033
Default

Posted via Mobile DeviceLeadchocker: Does the correct term "Bowden cable" vs. pushrod extend to the wire versions as well?
FlyWheel is offline  
Old 05-03-2011, 03:00 PM
  #5  
AEAJR
Community Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NY, USA
Posts: 5,867
Cool

Originally Posted by SBS_Pilot View Post
snip...

My questions are therefore:

1. are there any negative effects of lengthen the nose, or should I just extend is as long as is needed to get the balance correct?

2. Is there anything else I could try to get the balance correct? I was thinking of stripping the covering from both the horisontal and vertical tail fins and bore some holes in the solid balsa before covering them again, but I am not sure if it is worth the effort.

I am glad for any advice

/Stefan
Appearence aside, an extended nose will likely be more prone to damage in a crash or even a nose first touch on a hard landing. It is a matter of leverage. The longer the nose the greater the stress on the fuselage in a nose first hit. Landings that would damage a "normal" nose may snap an extended nose.

We have some club members who extended the nose on their Bird of Time kits. They have shown a treat tendency to break the nose area.
AEAJR is offline  
Old 05-05-2011, 12:54 PM
  #6  
vonveska
Member
 
vonveska's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 107
Default

I think it's a good idea to extend the nose if the low weight is important (gliders). I extended the fuselage in my electric glider the way that I installed the motor on brackets made from 3mm Alum about 30mm wide on front of the fuselage. The motor had better cooling and it flew even better than with the extra weight balance because it was overall lighter.



I made an extra cover on the motor to protect it from dirt on landing.
vonveska is offline  
Old 05-05-2011, 03:37 PM
  #7  
mred
Super Contributor
 
mred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glenwood, GA
Posts: 1,025
Default

There is one thing that you need to consider when putting that smaller battery in. What is your flying time going to be?? If you put to small a battery in there, you could very easily run out of battery on a long flight. As for extending the nose, that depends on how far you are talking about extending it. I added 1.5 inches to my Vista and didn't notice any big differences in the way it flew, but don't get to carried away with it. I added a 1/32" plywood doubler to the nose to re-enforce it and it worked out great. Most gliders need a good size piece of led in the nose to get the CG right, so you may end up adding led anyway. That battery is going to cut your flying time to less then half of what it was before too, so watch the flight time.

Ed
mred is offline  
Old 05-08-2011, 12:23 AM
  #8  
SBS_Pilot
New Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13
Default

@JetPlaneFlyer: Thank you for the advice. I didn't have any balsa in suitable size at home, so I cut a horisontal tail surface out of depron instead, and that was light enough to let me get the CG even behind the recommended spot, so now I have room for adjustments.

@Leadchucker: Thank you for the clarification of the terms. Translation of technical terms to or from English are always cumbersome and too often incorrect for us non-english-speakers.

@AEAJR: The crash-reistance is definitely an important consideration for me. I have now maidened the old girl, and more than once (I refuse to tell how much 'more than once' actually are) I managed to stall her at 2-3 ft height during the landings, followed by a nose-first sudden stop in the grass. I really need to practice those landings....

@vonveska: Nice covering. My motor is currently fully exposed to all dirt and grass particles that may want to find a new home inside my motor, so I will consider adding a covering like yours.

@mred: My battery-motor-propeller-combo now delivers 150W peak, and 120W constant power when climbing. If I have calculated correctly a 460 mAh battery will last for a one minute climb, followed by a seven minutes thermalling. My ultimate goal is to learn to thermal good enough to be able to participate in a web-based monthly eight-minutes thermal soaring contest which is held here in Sweden. I'm not sure this baby is a good enough soarer to stay flying for the full eight minutes, but since my hobby-budget isn't big enough to let me make any investments in an Ava or similair, I'll stick to her for now and use her as a learning platform.

Anyway, this is what she looks like at the moment.

/Stefan
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Precedent Hi Fly electrified.jpeg
Views:	211
Size:	46.9 KB
ID:	148066  
SBS_Pilot is offline  
Old 05-09-2011, 01:16 AM
  #9  
mred
Super Contributor
 
mred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glenwood, GA
Posts: 1,025
Default

No a bad looking glider really. It looks great to go out and have fun with, but watch that battery. I keep saying this because if you get any kind of lift and start flying it a little longer, you could very easily run out of battery before you get it back down again. If you can't afford an Ava, welcome to the club. Not everyone can and not everyone wants one. You could always get something like a Gentle Lady or anything in that class. It is a great flying glider and you can learn a lot from one, including how to thermal. I have had many 30min flights with one and some quite a bit longer. You REALLY don't what to put that little battery in that one. I don't think there are many gliders that will beat that Gentle Lady for a beginner. They are easy to put together and a really good flier. Try one, I think you will like it.

Ed
mred is offline  
Old 05-09-2011, 02:10 AM
  #10  
vonveska
Member
 
vonveska's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 107
Default

Originally Posted by mred View Post
You could always get something like a Gentle Lady or anything in that class. It is a great flying glider and you can learn a lot from one, including how to thermal.
Ed
Fully agree. Gentle Lady (or Green Sleeve) are great gliders to start with thermal flights. I prefer to design and build my own planes but I have seen a few polyhedral gliders about 2m wingspan flying by happy owners.
vonveska is offline  
Old 05-09-2011, 01:13 PM
  #11  
SBS_Pilot
New Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13
Default

I was out flying for a while today, and I totally agree with you regarding keeping an eye at the timer to make sure I'm not running out of battery.

I had wonderful flying weather at around 20 degrees centigrade, almost no wind, and totally without clouds. After my fourth change of battery I got a nice climb to around 200 meter, circled around the field and glided away to the layward edge of the forest surrounding our flying field, because there I had a lift a couple of days ago, and a buzzard had circled there 10 minutes earlier. I hit a thermal, and either it was rock steady or else it was really, really big, because I didn't hit any sink at any time I circled there. It felt like I could just continue circling there for hours, but after four minutes I decided to let go, partly because I were very aware of your warnings about that battery, and partly because I wanted to see if I could get down close to the eight-minutes-point to make it a practice round for that soaring contest I mentioned i my last post.

I will charge the batteries tonight to find out how much margin I had when I got down. How much margin do you recommend? Do you calculate in terms of percentage or flying time?

Anyway - I have got myself a nice plane for practicing and I am quite happy with it. I will also follow your advice of getting a nice, slow, polyhedral glider as my next one. In fact, I have one that I crashed on its maiden a couple of years ago, and which have laid in the attics since then. My plan is to just keep the wings and build a new pod-and-boom fuselage for it, quite much like Geckito, which was included as a free plan in the latest (05/2011) issue of FMT (Flugmodell und Technik).
SBS_Pilot is offline  
Old 05-11-2011, 03:32 PM
  #12  
mred
Super Contributor
 
mred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glenwood, GA
Posts: 1,025
Default

Sounds like you were having a great day. I love going out and just play around, although I just play, I never go to contests to fly in them. I do watch every once in awhile, but just never had the desire to fly in one.

As for how much battery I fly out, I don't fly in contests like I said, so I am always trying to hit thermals and see just how long I can keep it up there. I use a 2200MAh battery in my 2M and it gives me plenty of room to thermal all I want and I have never come close to flying that battery out. I never discharge my battery more then 75% to 80% and then re-charge it. That helps with longevity and also gives me plenty of battery to land on without worrying about running out of power. I am flying a 2M Chrysalis and that thing will really thermal and it is not uncommon to hit 45 minuets on a flight with good thermals about.

For your contest flying where you are going to be flying 8 minuets max, then I would pick a battery to get a good 12 minuet flight without worrying about running out of battery. That will give you a safety margin and allow you to land with enough battery so that you are not deep discharging the battery. That is making one climb and the rest gliding around. No more climbs allowed, since you can't do that in a contest anyway. That will give you enough battery to bring a glider back up wind if you happen to go to far down wind and also enough for a flight without discharging the battery to much. A LiPo will last longer if you keep the discharge to 80% or less.

If you fly it for 8 minuets and then change it, you should be able to find out how much you are discharging the battery on a flight. I always figure the discharge in percent, but you can also convert that to minuets of flying too. Take your total charge in ma and divide that by the number of minuets you flew and that will give you an average of ma per minuet of flying so you can see just how long you can fly. That is not exact, but will get you close. Just make sure you have some reserve left when you land. Hope you do great in your contest and let us know how things turned out.

Ed
mred is offline  
Old 05-20-2011, 10:29 AM
  #13  
SBS_Pilot
New Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13
Default

A little update about my progress:

i have been flying a couple of times since my last post, and I am very pleased with the both the plane and the electric conversion - even more so since I am (slowly) learning to trim her a little bit. So far I have moved the batteries further aft which has given me a lot better rudder response.

The first launches were quite a little bit "interesting" since I had got the motor angle the wrong way so it pointed upwards which gave a few loopings if not corrected by an awful lot of down-elevator. This is now corrected, but not fully, I still need a little bit of throttle compensation mixed in.

Question: Is it optimal to adjust the motor mount to achieve neutral rudders during full throttle, or are the losses in power due to thrust offset equal to the losses due to drag when using down elevator.

My first flights I had a very, very steep climb (i would guestimate it to about 60-70 degrees), partly because of that logical error I made in the motor mount, and partly because I was under the impression that that would be the most efficieant way to get up to starting height. But after I adjusted the motor mount I have experimented a little with much flatter climb angle (maybe 20-30 degrees). To my very inexperienced eye it seems that both strategies seems to get the plane up to my start-height at about the same time.

Question: Is the climb-rate really independent of the climb angle. If not - how do I find out which climb angle is optimal? (I guess I could use my logger, but I am not very good at keeping a constant climb-angle yet so I don't think the result would be very accurate.)

My impression was the is was easier to control the plane when using a flatter climb angle. It was also easier to observe the plane. One thing I did notice was that when using my smallest batteries (the 460mAh packages mentioned in an earlier post) the angle flattened out after a while, probably due to the change in voltage when the used capacity increases. The change was so big that I decided to not use those batteries for thermal hunting with that plane anymore - the only possible use is for training short climbs and landings I think. However, the observation made me think that the same phenomena must be present in all flights regardless of which batteries I use - it might just not be so obvious.

Question: Have you veterans observed the same phenomena with your setups or is it only observable when using too small batteries? If you have observed it - do you change your climb angle or make any other corrections due to this drop in climb rate?

When making turns the plane banks quite a lot a looses an awful lot of height. I know I have read somewhere some guidelines concerning how to make efficient turns with a R/E glider, but I can't find it now.

Question: Can someone provide the link(s?) or a good description of how to make nice, efficient turns?


Thank you all in advance for any help or hints

/Stefan

Last edited by SBS_Pilot; 05-20-2011 at 10:48 PM. Reason: Added more questions
SBS_Pilot is offline  
Old 05-21-2011, 01:18 AM
  #14  
mred
Super Contributor
 
mred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glenwood, GA
Posts: 1,025
Default

Originally Posted by SBS_Pilot View Post
A little update about my progress:

i have been flying a couple of times since my last post, and I am very pleased with the both the plane and the electric conversion - even more so since I am (slowly) learning to trim her a little bit. So far I have moved the batteries further aft which has given me a lot better rudder response.

The first launches were quite a little bit "interesting" since I had got the motor angle the wrong way so it pointed upwards which gave a few loopings if not corrected by an awful lot of down-elevator. This is now corrected, but not fully, I still need a little bit of throttle compensation mixed in.

Question: Is it optimal to adjust the motor mount to achieve neutral rudders during full throttle, or are the losses in power due to thrust offset equal to the losses due to drag when using down elevator.
If you are thinking of flying in contests, then you need to get rid of every bit of drag you can. Drag only slows you down and the more you have the more it affects your glider. Mine will climb with no down elevator and no rudder input unless it is disturbed by a gust of wind. I have to give it up elevator to get it climbing and then it will stay where I put it unless something acts to change that like turbulence.

[/QUOTE]
My first flights I had a very, very steep climb (i would guestimate it to about 60-70 degrees), partly because of that logical error I made in the motor mount, and partly because I was under the impression that that would be the most efficieant way to get up to starting height. But after I adjusted the motor mount I have experimented a little with much flatter climb angle (maybe 20-30 degrees). To my very inexperienced eye it seems that both strategies seems to get the plane up to my start-height at about the same time.

Question: Is the climb-rate really independent of the climb angle. If not - how do I find out which climb angle is optimal? (I guess I could use my logger, but I am not very good at keeping a constant climb-angle yet so I don't think the result would be very accurate.)[/QUOTE]

The only way to find the best angle is to time it. It will depend on how much thrust you have as to how steep you can climb. You want a nice steady climb, not just hanging on the prop scratching for every foot you get. It sounds like your motor is a little small for a really steep climb, so it may very well be that you can climb faster at a shallower climb angle.

[/QUOTE]
My impression was the is was easier to control the plane when using a flatter climb angle. It was also easier to observe the plane. One thing I did notice was that when using my smallest batteries (the 460mAh packages mentioned in an earlier post) the angle flattened out after a while, probably due to the change in voltage when the used capacity increases. The change was so big that I decided to not use those batteries for thermal hunting with that plane anymore - the only possible use is for training short climbs and landings I think. However, the observation made me think that the same phenomena must be present in all flights regardless of which batteries I use - it might just not be so obvious. [/QUOTE]

You are going to be using your battery during the climb and you have full power applied, so you will get some drop, but it should be very small. If you are seeing a big drop in voltage, then the battery is to small and you will need to go to a bigger battery. I use a 2200MAh 3S in my 2M and that was mostly to get the CG right, but it also gives me plenty of battery to fly on. I can get 6 good strong climbs on that battery or a very long flight. Yours is to small with that 460 and can find yourself in danger of running out of battery if you push it to hard.

[/QUOTE]
Question: Have you veterans observed the same phenomena with your setups or is it only observable when using too small batteries? If you have observed it - do you change your climb angle or make any other corrections due to this drop in climb rate? [/QUOTE]

My rate if climb is great at about 70 degs, but that is the motor I am using along with the prop. The battery drops very little in the climb and I really don't notice it until I get around the 5th climb when it starts dropping off a little. Your simply using to small a battery if you are getting a big drop off in voltage during the first climb. If it is almost going level from the climb then you are way to small on the battery and don't have enough to maintain the climb like you should. You should be able to get up at the same angle all the way and still have enough battery for a good long flight. I have had 45 minuet flights and if you try flying that small battery, then somewhere during that flight you loose your control and there goes your glider.


[/QUOTE]
When making turns the plane banks quite a lot a looses an awful lot of height. I know I have read somewhere some guidelines concerning how to make efficient turns with a R/E glider, but I can't find it now.

Question: Can someone provide the link(s?) or a good description of how to make nice, efficient turns?[/QUOTE]

It sounds like you are using to much rudder for your turns. Try giving it a little less rudder and use the elevator to keep the nose up. Any time you go in to a turn the nose is going to drop some. The more you bank the glider the more it will droop it's nose. You are directing the lift at a different angle when the wing is banked so you have to add elevator to make up the difference in lift that is going up instead of at an angle. With the wings level the lift is directed up, so you have level flight. In a turn, some of the lift is directed to the direction of the turn so the lift straight up is less and the nose drops. In order to get that lift back, you will have to give it some elevator to keep the nose up and not go into a spiral. The more rudder you give it the more elevator you will need to give it too. You don't want to give it to much rudder in a turn unless you are trying to make a sharp turn. For thermals, you need gentle turns so the glider is not loosing a lot of lift and can rid the thermal better. If you make sharp turns in a thermal, you are loosing the help from the thermal and you won't climb as fast.

[/QUOTE]
Thank you all in advance for any help or hints

/Stefan[/QUOTE]


Hope this helps a little. If you have any more questions, don't be afraid to ask. Someone will get back to you.

Ed
mred is offline  
Old 05-22-2011, 09:43 PM
  #15  
SBS_Pilot
New Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13
Default

Thank you Ed for your fast and detailed answers. I will adjust that motor mount and then get a lot of practicing done. I'll get back here with more questions when they arise.

/Stefan
SBS_Pilot is offline  
Old 05-23-2011, 12:06 AM
  #16  
kyleservicetech
Super Contributor
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 8,952
Default

Originally Posted by SBS_Pilot View Post
My questions are therefore:
1. are there any negative effects of lengthen the nose, or should I just extend is as long as is needed to get the balance correct?

2. Is there anything else I could try to get the balance correct? I was thinking of stripping the covering from both the horisontal and vertical tail fins and bore some holes in the solid balsa before covering them again, but I am not sure if it is worth the effort.
I've checked a number of my models on this subject. The average measurement from the Center of Gravity and the tail is about 2.5 to 3 times the measurement from the CG to the prop.

That said, I have a model that was last flown with Nicads, and substituting A123 cells made it really tail heavy.

So, the propeller was extended three inches forward by using 1/8 inch lite ply, and balsa sheeting. I'm kicking my self for not taking photos of the project until it was completed. That slight notch in the bottom of the fuse is where the original firewall was located. The nose of the fuse is also 1/2 inch wider than the original.

Power is a 6S1P A123 pack, and an extra Hacker A40-10L motor, with a 13X6.5 prop. That motor has been previously used at over a Kilowatt with a 6S2P A123 pack. But I'm limited to what the 6S1P A123 cells can put out. (And don't want to go to Lipos)

Take a look at the results, per attaached.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Limbo Dancer WF.jpg
Views:	199
Size:	151.5 KB
ID:	148572  
kyleservicetech is offline  
Old 05-23-2011, 09:22 AM
  #17  
SBS_Pilot
New Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13
Default

Nice work - that extension looks like it was designed that way from the beginning.

Have I understood correctly if I think you have the plywood as firewall and only balsa in the fuselage from the old firewall to the new one? How thick balsa did you use?
SBS_Pilot is offline  
Old 05-23-2011, 07:55 PM
  #18  
kyleservicetech
Super Contributor
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 8,952
Default

Originally Posted by SBS_Pilot View Post
Nice work - that extension looks like it was designed that way from the beginning.

Have I understood correctly if I think you have the plywood as firewall and only balsa in the fuselage from the old firewall to the new one? How thick balsa did you use?
Thanks
The left and right sides of the extension are made from a sheet of 1/8 inch lite plywood. The top and bottom is made from pieces of 3/8 balsa scraps, with triangle balsa strips placed in the four corners to allow rounding the corners.

Then 1/8 inch balsa sheeting was glued over the lite ply to allow for sanding to proper shape.

The firewall is 1/4 inch regular model plywood. The lite ply and balsa sheeting were extended past the firewall for the cooling air intake, and for behind the spinner. The area just behind the spinner is another piece of 1/8 lite ply cut and sanded to fit.

Dang, wish I'd taken photos of the project.
kyleservicetech is offline  
Old 05-26-2011, 12:49 AM
  #19  
quorneng
Super Contributor
 
quorneng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Cheshire, UK
Posts: 2,036
Default

SBS pilot
You said you calculated your 460mAh LiPo would last about a minute. That is a discharge rate of 60C which will do the cells no good at all.

A reasonable discharge rate is 20C or 3 minutes duration. This suggests you should be using a 1300mAh battery.

How steep you climb is dependent on the thrust to weigh ratio of the plane. There is nothing wrong with a steep climb but it will take a bit of trial and error to find out what gives the true maximum.
quorneng is offline  
Old 05-26-2011, 10:23 PM
  #20  
SBS_Pilot
New Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13
Default

Well, actually I did it the other way round. I measured the current at full throttle to approximately 15A. Fifteen ampere in one minute draws approximately 250mAh. That leaves me with 100 - 150mAh for receiver and servos, which I guesstimated would be enough for 5-10 minutes of gliding. But I agree completely with mred who in an earlier post pointed out that it is too small margin.

Anyway, the issue is from now on merely of academic interest to me. I lost the plane today. After a good motor-run I lost sight of it about twenty seconds after I cut off the motor. One second it was there - the next it wasn't. I think I might had hit a thermal I wasn't even aware of, or else I believe I would have seen it on its way down. I had recently changed to my best receiver, the only one with failsafe, but I hadn't taken time to set it to a useful state yet - it still was in my test-state which was neutral rudders with motor off. When I realised that I was prepared to kick myself for not adjust it to something more useful.... Well, it's a lessoned learned the hard (and expensive) way.
SBS_Pilot is offline  
Old 05-29-2011, 07:09 PM
  #21  
mred
Super Contributor
 
mred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glenwood, GA
Posts: 1,025
Default

Sorry to hear about your loss SBS. That is one of the hazards in flying a glider. I lost one too, but it was not from loss of sight, it was electrical. THe reason I say that is because I lost total control of anything. It just stayed in it's turn and keep getting smaller and smaller until finally it was gone. I chased after it with a car, but was not able to find it that way. I never saw it come down, so I have no idea where it went. I know it was not the battery being to small, because I used a larger battery in it and that thing should fly for well over an hour.

If you are having a good day for flying and then you want to get ready for a contest, you could take more then one battery with you. That way you can have one on charge and flying the other one. At least that way you can get some great flying and as an added bonus you can pratice your spot ladings after the flight.

Ed
mred is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DanWard
3D Flying
14
04-15-2011 01:41 PM
ATPL
Beginners
31
01-28-2011 07:07 PM
engriso
Foamies
5
12-14-2010 12:56 PM

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Quick Reply: Lengthen nose for correct CG


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.

Page generated in 0.12241 seconds with 16 queries