RE: Is Pack balancing is a gimmick perpetuated by companies who make balancers
LOL Red.. I was there when you ate that guy. Still cracks me up thinking about it. On the issue of 'balance'.. and for the folks out there trying to sort out what's going on, it's not rocket science. Assuming that there are folks out here trying to make reasonable decisions that protect their investments.. like a 3,000 dollar plane.. a 20,000 truck or a home with a hearth and family beyond price... I'd advise in the strongest terms possible.. use a balancing charger on LiPoly packs. We've learned (some the hard way) that cells have individual characteristics.. left unbalanced in an assembled pack configuration; after a few rapid charge and discharge routines the small normal differences in capacity and impedance can easily become significant enough to force one cell in the pack into an overcharge state before the other cells come to full voltage. A non-balancing charger is unable to see this.. tragedy can result. The same is true in the discharge routine... under a load.. one or more cells may give up their energy a bit quicker, leaving that cell over discharged, possibly damaged.. without a balancing charger, the small differences become larger or worse, lead to a flamer. Like I said.. it's not rocket science. Now on to the cell MFG's.. while it's true that some of the pacific rim MFG's have different production or assembly shops, one huge issue is that virtually all of them share the same raw material suppliers. Watching insulators, plating materials, coatings and the components going into the construction.. same sources. Debris and impurities in insulators, tolerances on materials, alloys, grading, etc.. all done outside of the control of the cell MFG. Raw materials arrive at one end of the plant.. cells roll out the other. And, they are NOT all the same. They can't be. It's a chemical engine, created in conditions that vary from hour to hour, day to day... Now on to the pack assemblers.. and 'matching'. Data point.. take 10 of these mystical cells that match exactly in impedance, capacity and charge retention and put them through a welding and cabling process.. you no longer have 10 matched cells. The heat and duration of the welding and soldering process un-matches the 'pack', but lets assume for a moment that this is done in a DARPA lab under excruciatingly controlled conditions and pack 'match' is achieved... ..It's still a 'pack'. Cells on the outside of the pack will see a different operating environment, temp buildup, cooling rates, physical contact with it's containment, handling pressure on the outer cells jackets.. a few hours into service, it's no longer 'matched'. It's a myth, BS on a grand scale..... matched cell, matching cells.. bleh. Marketing and the hyperbole that surrounds it, particularly when it comes to batteries and chargers is the bane of my existence. I'll let Red fill you folks in on the long list of imaginary issues that charger MFG's have dreamed up over the years so they can sell feature sets to cure them.. [b]suffice to say that a balancing charger for lithium polymer applications has improved the success and safety of that technologies routine use.[/b] Look folks.. I don't even have a dog in this race; I don't sell Lithium Polymer. Since I operate my little shop out of my home, and having had a few flamer packs and cells (matched, according to the cell mfg, no less! LOL!) force a rapid re-arrangement of the kitchen utensils and the destruction of my wife's stainless steel sink.. I don't work with lithium products that can still immolate my family if I do everything right. For me, it's just the law of averages... if I handle a couple of hundred packs a week, what's a .1% immolation rate worth in terms of fire insurance actuaries? To proclaim this technology as not requiring the common sense expedient of using a balancing charger is in my humble opinion, ludicrous. And dangerous. For you folks out there trying to decide on what's the best course of action for the project your working on I'd suggest using common sense, caution and a quality balancing charger. Now, I'll just crawl back into my cave and let this thread run it's course.. being a pack assembler, and seeing Red's comments above forced a healthy guffaw and I felt obliged to chime in with my own limited experience and stilted views on the craziness that leads to contentious claims of primacy of concepts over practical application and observed experience in the real world where people actually have to use this stuff... and somebody's life could depend on it.
Posted on: 5/7/2009 5:56 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8749369

RE: New Schweizer SGS 2-33A 1/4 scale kit
LOL! It started life as a scratch build project.. we have a ball aero-towing and Gunny's Dad and Sister are full scale soaring pilots, so there was plenty of documentation available. The real debate started around the wing; the 'traditionalists' in the group wanted a more sedate airfoil, I insisted that just because the full size was a slug is not a valid reason for the model to be one.. Most of the time here on Long Island, the wind is cranking up a bit... and energy is tuff to come by, so it had to be able to cover a lot of sky on the hunt. We needed an airfoil that would aid penetration without getting cranky when slowed down for thermal turns. I have had great success with the SD7032/37 at that wing load range so we set the prototype up with that and went to 'go seek'.. It surpassed my expectations.. smooth, fast when you need it, slow when you want it; outstanding control response for 'coring' the lift and a rock solid 'feel' even when dotted out. The handling behind the Tug is the best of all our big high performance sailplanes.. no bad habits, no bobbing or hunting. She came out of the grass within 5 feet and immediately parked herself above and behind the Tug all by herself before Gunny unknotted his brain from the surprise of getting airborne so fast. Approach and landing was also precise and without bad habit; the 4 scale spoilers didn't impact trim a bit and she rolled to a stop right at our feet and reluctantly, slowly dropped a wingtip in the grass. Cheering and back slapping all around. I smiled at Gunny and said, "Now THAT'S a winner. Lets kit it." So, we did. :) He did a heck of a job with this project. The scale accuracy is outstanding and the obsessive attention to detail that is the hallmark of a Gunny Built Project abounds.. my hardest task here was keeping him on track and keeping the build simple. I think it was worth the effort, and frankly, I'm proud of what he's accomplished with this project. I'm also confident there will now be many more... Cheers and thanks for the kind words!
Posted on: 2/12/2009 2:24 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8469291

New Schweizer SGS 2-33A 1/4 scale kit
Greetings folks.. just a heads up. The new SGS 2-33A short kit in 1/4 scale has been released. [image]http://webhosting.web.com/imagelib/sitebuilder/misc/show_image.html?linkedwidth=actual&linkpath=http://www.hangtimes.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/2331.jpg&target=tlx_picl22v[/image] We kept this project 'under our hats' during the long development phase so as not to annoy folks with 'we're working on it' replies to inquiries. The assembled kit and an assembled fuselage in the bones will be on display at the WRAM show, and we have cut kits in stock, ready to go. If any questions, please contact Gunny at gunny11@optonline.net The kit can be viewed at www.hangtimes.com Cheers!
Posted on: 2/11/2009 5:16 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "RC Gliders, Sailplanes and Slope Soaring"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8465999

RE: A123 Battery
Hi Red Just got off the phone with Jamie, I'm bringing in the FMA Cellpro Multi-4's. Looks like an outstanding charger for just about anything. Big improvement in convenience having all cell technology support over the original 'lithium only' unit from what I've seen so far. Plus it's got PC connectivity and parameter programing capability. Can't wait to get them in here and start playing with mine!
Posted on: 1/29/2009 9:38 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8417583

A123 Rx and Ignition packs at Hangtimes.com
Greetings Folks! I now have available A123 M1 cells from A123 Racing available as Rx and Ignition packs at www.hangtimes.com Be sure and check the A123 FAQ for Giant Scale flyers here: [link=http://www.hangtimes.com/a123_batteries_for_giants_faq.html]A123 FAQ for Rx & Ignition[/link] Cheers! Steve Anthony Hangtimes Hobies / NoBS Batteries www.hangtimes.com
Posted on: 10/15/2008 12:19 AM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Product Announcements & Manufacturer News"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8050208

RE: 130 Flaps
Guns, regarding the pic size.. when you clcick on the 'larger image' link below your photo's they come DOWN to screen size. Must be something 'weirded out' on the RCU post sequence.
Posted on: 12/1/2006 10:55 AM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Twin & Multi Engine RC Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5061918

RE: 130 Flaps
Hi Jim.. Gunny uses a bit (hell, a lot) more of the grass runway than he needs to rotate out.. his beast gets up to flying speed pretty quick. He's done an outstanding job of paying attention to previous builders' experiences regarding incidence; so his trim requirements are darn near neutral. The weight of the bird is no handicap with the engines he's using.. the thing climbs out with authority when he pulls the stick back. ;) Pretty early on in the project I managed to talk him into cutting a new wing for it.. the one provided with the kit was pretty ugly with regards to the quality of the foam cutting. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to talk him into cutting one with a bit thicker airfoil, knowing he'd wind up a bit heavier than the 'prototype'' kit. He's a bit stubbon at times. ;) As it stands now, around the kit's stock airfoil; the bird flies nice and slow and very stable with his flaps down at about 12 degrees or so. He's set 'em up as 'progressive'.. the inboard set droops a bit lower than the outboard at full deflection, and we expect it'll exibit no adverse tip stall in hard flat turns at low speed. I'd have used a bit thicker airfoil, but honestly can't fault the flying performance of the bird when 'dirtied' up a bit. With the wing clean, it flies pretty fast... and has a 'oh my' sink rate when he backs the throttles down below 70%. With some flap cranked in, he can fly quite 'scale like' at about 50% throttle. Pilot-wise.. Gunny's a superb pattern flyer... and he's got a lotta multi-engine time on various models. The guy uses rudder without thinking about it.. a trick I'm still trying to get my forebrain to assimilate. I have no worries about him getting on the rudder the instant the bird exibits adverse yaw (engine out); meanwhile; he's got a healthy amount of aileron differential, and we cut those new cores with about a 1/4" of washout at the tips. The bird does tight, beautiful scale-like 'flat' turns with just a bit of cross-control.. just like I'd expect it to. As it sits now.. and after looking at if (and harrasing him, arguing with him, teasing him and tormenting him) for damn near 3 years on just about a daily basis as he's worked this project, I gotta say he's done a spectacular job.. and it looks just as good from 3 inches as it does from 30 feet... inside and out. Truly; this is a remarkable scale modeling masterpiece.. all the more so, having endured the abuse heaped on him by myself and his other buddies throughout the project cycle. Heluva Job, Guns! Steve Anthony NoBS Batteries www.hangtimes.com
Posted on: 12/1/2006 10:50 AM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Twin & Multi Engine RC Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=5061889

RE: XFC "Extreme Flying Championship" Coverage
Thanks! Here's a few shots of Yuri Higuchi's bird shot during workups the day before the event. This is a brand new Composite Extra 3.1m 124 with a DA150 and all Futaba Digitals.. Yuri extensively modified it, strenthening the structure with a CF truss system. We provided the packs and most of the set-up amd rigging gear. The birds finished with Dupont Chroma base and clear. [image]http://www.hangtimes.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/Flying_picture_and_Florida_107.jpg [/image] [image]http://www.hangtimes.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/Flying_picture_and_Florida_072.jpg[/image] [image]http://www.hangtimes.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/Flying_picture_and_Florida_066.jpg[/image] [image]http://www.hangtimes.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/Flying_picture_and_Florida_084.jpg[/image] Cheers! Steve Anthony NoBS Batteries www.hangtimes.com
Posted on: 6/12/2005 1:01 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3066373

RE: XFC "Extreme Flying Championship" Coverage
[quote]ORIGINAL: exeter_acres One Crash today (airplane) but for the life of me I can't remember the pilots name! (Breitling airplane) [/quote] Yuri Higuchi's brandy new 40% Composite Extra went in, late recovery from a flat spin. Tail damage, needs a new rudder and stabs. He finished the day on a 35% Composite Extra back up bird loaned by by Ken Meyers. Still hoping to see the scores tonight so we'll know who advances to the final rounds tomorrow. Steve
Posted on: 6/11/2005 10:21 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=3065011

RE: Is this NIMH enough?
One of the interesting discoveries I ran into years ago when flying competition electric sailpanes was the high load performance of a low impedance sub-c Nicad pack in a high load enviornment was better immediately after as fast charge than it was immediately after a c/10 charge. Of course, the current drain I was asking from the pack was 50 amps continuous for 45 seconds. Now, as a data point, that's interesting; and i suppose that's what the charger mfg is refering too. However, it should be considered that the 3C fast charge rates and high current discharge patterns produced a duty cycle lifetime on that low impedance nicad pack that was only about 20 runs tops, and the pack was toast... and using the same 2C or 3C charge pattern and routines on a high impedance NiMH pack lead to total meltdown a lot sooner than that. Using 'car pack' charging techniques on a pack used in Rx applications is mighty abusive to the pack. Since our nominal current draw in big bird Rx & servo applications at idle is about 1.2 to 2.0 amps and at max load about 20 amps peak (momentary) we get the benifit of the low impedance pack being able to shoulder those draws, and c/10 slow charge routines with an occasional fast charge at 1C are not abusive to the cells... a reasonable non-destructive appoach to charger support for packs in moderate draw environments. Next we run into ultra high capacity NiMH AA cells as found in Raul's Tx pack.. VERY high impedance pack.. massive capacity, but the impedance rating is published as 25mOhms and I suspect it's actually a mite higher than that. That lil bugger should NEVER see a charge rate higher than 1 amp and even then it should be monitored very closely with a temp probe. Better to support it at or under the c/10 rate for best longevity. On the up side, it's in a Tx enviornment.. moderate temps, no vibration, constant current load under .5 amps in duty. Good for what it's intended for, but that lil cell in a Rx enviornment is a crash waiting to happen.. vibration, heat and current loads beyond it's ability to shoulder coupled with it's intolerance to fast charging make it a marginal cell even in a .40 sized 3-D plane as a Rx pack.. which is why we don't offer it in any configuration other than as Tx pack. Different cell types & charge profiles for entirely different use profiles... Hope this rambling is of some use!
Posted on: 5/20/2005 8:23 AM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2993089

RE: Is this NIMH enough?
whups.. system hang; double post. Sorry!
Posted on: 5/19/2005 3:00 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2990890

RE: Is this NIMH enough?
[quote]ORIGINAL: RCAddiction I am a bit surprised that people don't care for the 2700 Expert Sanyo NiMH pack: http://www.horizonhobby.com/Shop/ByCategory/Product/Default.aspx?ProdID=EXRB301 I don't know why people are dissing it. I've used the 2700 mah Expert pack (Sanyo A cell) on a 120 sized Giles with all digital servos and it performed very well. Dave Thacker (Radical RC) mentions the Sanyo 2700 NiMH pack on his site [i]"One of my good flying friends uses one of my 2700 packs in a 1/3 scale Aircraft International Extra with 9 JR coreless servos. He has about $4000 in this ship and is one of the most respected pilots in the club. With NiMH, he has a huge capacity reserve and a light weight pack."[/i][/quote] There's not a thing 'wrong' with the Sanyo 2700 AU's.. It was considered the 'gold standard' for years in big IMAC applications, simply because up untill last year it was the 'only game in town' for high capacity and light weight. Up untill we came on the scene most folks just bought packs based on capacity; and no battery assemblers published impedance specs on their battery packs. What's changed in the hobby recently has been the type, grunt and quantity of big bird servo's being offered, the loads they pull and the type and style of flying done with these big birds. Frankly, at 20 mOhms impedance, regardless of capacity; the voltage drop of a SINGLE 2700 in front of 5 or six big digital servos flying a 30 pound IMAC ship thru a 'Wall', 'Avalanche' or repetitive snap rolls can tag upwards of 20 amps for 3-6ms knocking the voltage down to under 4 volts while the loads applied... no bull; we've checked the telemetry. Often this kinda current load is enuff to trigger a fail-safe lockout or a mighty fast trip to the dirt. Several years ago, folks started routinely running the high capacity NiMH and Li-Ion packs in parallel to cut the voltage drop and provide a bigger voltage reserve under load. Again; there's nothing 'wrong' with the 2700's.. they just ain't the [i]best[/i] pick anymore for this type of flying. Nowadays, NiMH cells have become available to us in the hobby that have significantly lower impedance. (ex Sanyo's 1950FAUP at 4.5 mOhms) Further, folks like me started barking about the importance of checking impedance AND capacity against the type of flying and radio gear BEFORE making a choice on which cell type and size to use; we were the first to publish impedance data on our spec sheets & the website to help folks compare impedance vs capacity and make better decisions. Better cells for the applications we fly and better assembly techniques coupled with good setup and load support gear like HD switches & powerboxes make the difference between a 'marginal' setup and one that can shoulder loads without tripping the low voltage hooter. Hope this helps!!
Posted on: 5/19/2005 2:39 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2990887

RE: Selecting the correct type, voltage and output power for a battery
^^^ good advise above.. can only add my wailing lament about hobby mfg's that make 9 channel 10 model memory radio systems equipped with four or five 90oz torque high speed servos and ship 'em out with AA 700ma Rx & tx packs. ;) Most digital servo mfg's and some module ignition system makers now have a 'use with Nicad packs only' disclamer in their spec's.. this should read 'use low impedance packs only' as there are several NiMH cells available to the hobby now that have very low impedance when compared to similar nicads. As a rule, in an agressive aerobatic or high load application the nominal system impedance number to 'get under' (nicad OR NiMH) is about 10-12 mOhms to avoid signifcant voltage drops under load. Hope this helps!
Posted on: 5/18/2005 6:28 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2988174

RE: Is this NIMH enough?
Hi Zope! Last time I checked the 2700 'A' NiMH cell had an internal impedance of about 20 mOhms.. compared to most 'AA' sized nicads at about 10 mOhms this could be the source of the issue.. although you've got plenty of capacity with that 2700 pack, high servo loads can cause a shockingly pronounced voltage drop while the loads are applied. It's not just a NiMH issue.. high impedance nicads behave the same way. You can get high capacity, LOW impedance NiMH packs, but generally the capacity is a bit less than high impedance cells in the same dimensions. The way most modelers with big birds beat the impedance problem of the 2700's is by running the packs in parallel.. in essence running two packs, two switch harnesses. This cuts the impedance in half (now down to 10 mOhms) and doubles the capacity of the system. An effective move in 25lb 3D airplanes, not such a popular move in lightweight pattern and .60 to 1.20 sized 3D birds due to weight gain. In your shoes with a small DP Ultimate, I'd switch to a low impedance NiMH pack like a Sanyo 1950 FAUP.. smaller than your 2700 pack, yet VERY low impedance.. about 4.5 mOhms as compared to the 2700's 20 m Ohms. Impedance is like a golf score.. the lower, the better. In your situation you'll have plenty of 'grunt' to handle high drain servo's without the scary voltage drop while the loads are applied, and you'll find you saved a bit of weight also. Hope this helps!
Posted on: 5/18/2005 12:19 AM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2985878

RE: Eloy Marez & Parallel Packs
Red, 100% agreement here. As you know, I've spent better than 20 years on the bench and in the field dealing with power systems for military, commerical and hobby applications. Not less than once a week I get a breathless phone call describing how a parallel system saved an application from destruction. As you suggest, the parallel 'crosstalk' myth seems to be insidiously difficult to stamp out.. and being such an easy 'self test' condition, I find it amazing that folks would rather believe a motivated parts salesman than their own eyes when it comes to making a decison about several thousand bucks worth of flight gear and aircraft. There is no safer system in the air than a simple parallel pack and switch system... time, testing and expericence have proven this to be the case, yet every month I see some other gizmo that sits on the power leg and increases system risk just by it's presence alone being hyped in the press... Note: Congrats on the Model Aviation Column! Looking forward to your 'No Nonsense' approach to the modeling press!
Posted on: 5/17/2005 11:03 AM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2983483

RE: How to cycle a Transmitter battery
The OEM pack inside the 9Z's cassette is usually a normal 'Tx Square' configuration 8 cell (9.6v) 1100ma Sanyo Nicad AA pack. Normally, discharging is accomplished with a cycler designed for the task, (accucyle, digipace, trition, etc) and if the load is 300ma the cutoff voltage under the load would be 1.1v per cell, or in your situation 8.8v. If the load is 500ma, the cutoff voltage should be reduced slightly, down to 1v per cell (8v). Modern Nicads don't exhibit much if any memory issues.. so cycling is a not necessary between charges. Normally; we cycle and slow charge nicad packs three or 4 times per season to check capacity and the occasional slow charges helps to re-balance the pack after repetitive peak charge routines. Hope this helps.. Steve Anthony NoBS Batteries www.hangtimes.com
Posted on: 4/5/2005 10:48 AM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2844990

RE: Battery and charger advice please
[quote]Will someone else jump in here and see if they can bail me out please. [/quote] Red... If you think your brain is losing capacity, we suggest cycling with a 500cc load of scotch. Repeat as required to confirm condition. If diminished capacity is present, consider upgrading to burbon. Cheers! ;)
Posted on: 2/20/2005 3:53 AM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2678605

New Sanyo HR3U 2500ma Transmitter Packs
NoBS Batteries has just introduced the new 2500 milliamp Sanyo HR3U transmitter packs for Computer Transmitters. These packs provide run times in excess of 8 hours with a 300ma load. [image]http://www.hangtimes.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/DSCN5761.jpg[/image] The 2500ma Super Upgrade pack (replacing standard 700ma to 1100ma packs) is available for the following transmitters: [b]Futaba, all models including 7C, 9C, 9C Super, and all versions of the 9Z as a cassette reload JR, all models including the 8103, 9303, 10SX and all versions of the 10X as a cassette reload Hitec, all models including Spectra Airtronics, all models excluding Infinity Polk's Tracker 3[/b] Charger support is easy and inexpensive; a 120-180ma output wall wart will suffice admirably for formation/slow charging and overnight support. After forming, these packs can be fast charged at a 1 amp rate with a NiMH capapble field charger. Available exclusively at Hangtimes Hobbies [link=http://www.hangtimes.com/txpacks.html]Hangtimes Hobbies Tx packs[/link]
Posted on: 2/19/2005 12:18 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Product Announcements & Manufacturer News"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2676179

New Wiring & Rectract Support Gear for Giant Scale
Hangtimes Hobbies is pleased to announce the release of 13 new products from Aviation Concepts for big bird & IMAC flyers. [b]Clear 36" Aileron Extension Tubes Wiring Twist Clips Loop Clamps Tandem Tubing Clamps Harness Spiral Wrap Gorilla Grip Servo Tape Zip Ties Pack & Tank Straps Wheel Chocks No-Kink Air Lines Air Line Bulkhead Mount Couplers Tubing Cutter Tygon Fuel Line[/b] [image]http://www.hangtimes.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/DSCN1512.jpg[/image] [image]http://www.hangtimes.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/DSCN1541.jpg[/image] [image]http://www.hangtimes.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/DSCN1520.jpg[/image] [image]http://www.hangtimes.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/DSCN1533.jpg[/image] For more info please visit [link=http://www.hangtimes.com/chargers.html]Hangtimes Hobbies[/link]
Posted on: 2/14/2005 12:24 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Product Announcements & Manufacturer News"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2657189

RE: Paralleld receiver packs
[quote]What is the advantage of two 500 ma paks over one 1000 ma pak[/quote] Hi CrownVic! Most folks buy packs by the 'capacity' number.. and overlook the impedance value. When you run a pair of packs in parallel to total impedance number for the system is cut in half.. Example: An 800ma AA Sanyo nicad has an impedance value of 12 mOhms. Running two packs cuts the impedance tp 6 mOhms.. close to what a big Sub-C nicad pack would have. Granted, a trainer is not likely to benefit much from (beyond the doubled flight time) a parallel system with a couple of 500ma packs.. but a guy flying a 40-60 aerobatic / 3D type aircraft with digital or hi-torque servos sure would. In case some of the folks are wondering 'what's impedance got to do with anything', allow me to point out that whan a loads applied, the pack voltage drops wile the current is being delivered. The lower the impedance in the system, the lower the voltage drop when loads are applied. In agressive applications, this can be the diffrence between a bag full of busted airplane parts and the aircraft completing the high load manuver. Next, another nice advantage of parallel pack systems is redundancy.. if two packs and switches are used, no single pack, switch or connector failure is likely to immediately lunch the airplane... It's the simplest, safest and most cost effective improvement you can make to dependability in your power system. (more birds die from faulty/intermittent switch and connector contacts than failed/busted packs) Further, doubling up the switches and cabling effectively further reduces the impedance (voltage drop) in the system relative to getting the power from the packs to the servos and radio. Lastly, doubling packs with a Y to one switch can be done.. you just have to make sure you charge the packs individually. You CANNOT charge 'em in parallel. On the other side of the coin, a decent HD switch is only 7 bucks, weighs about a 1/4 ounce. Why pass up the chance to protect yourself from the more likely cause of a disaster (intermittent switch or connector failure) for 7 bucks... when a decent Y costs 6 bucks? And, you can check and charge each pack thru it's own switch. And.. Gringo Volador, thanks for the kind words regarding our packs. Much appreciated. ;) Hope all this helps!
Posted on: 2/4/2005 6:22 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2621714

RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
[quote]PLEASE CHARGE THE BATTERIES OUTSIDE OF THE AIRCRAFT or bad things could happen ! [/quote] Amen! ;)
Posted on: 1/31/2005 12:38 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2605102

RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
[quote] but combustion is almost always as a result of a cell being overcharged or suffering a dead short. [/quote] You are correct, there's almost always a charger involved at the time of combustion. It should be noted that failures often occur after minor physical damage (sometimes 'invisible') to the pack. Usual scenario is minor crash damage to the pack, the damaged cell 'balloons', and sometime thereafter (usually while on the charger) catastrophic combustion. It should be noted that just dropping the pack on the floor of your workshop can be all it takes to setup the 'failure chain'. Other lil problems can contribute to a Li-Po Failure Chain. Over discharging, cell imbalance, momentary dead shorts can all start the cascade.. but 747drvr is correct; at the time of 'light-up' there's usually a charger present. Good news is that the technology is improving.. stronger tabs (nickel alloy) and more robust (heavier) matrix layups MAY improve the situation near term, also; improvements in 'smart charger' individual cell monitoring via taps on each cell will reduce the 'Pyro' situation. As it stands right NOW, as Maudib points out, the weight/cost/reliability balance would make it less feasible than Li-Ion systems.
Posted on: 1/31/2005 12:25 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2605054

RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
The Li-Poly wafer-matrix is very fragile.. the interconnect 'tab' (a very thin aluminum alloy strip) is embedded in the cells matrix during it's layup and is a big weak point; vibration stress knocks 'em apart and degrades the layup pretty easily. Temperature is a problem for 'em too; also contributes to matrix breakdown. Failure mode on Li-Poly tends to be kinda spectacular.. the vast majority of failures involve pyrotechnics. Regardless, I'm seeing more of 'em on board fuel powered applications all the time... One most unusual application we put one into is Kevin Shaw's Komet.. (recent MAN cover shot) The pack powers the ignition sequence for the rocket motor... we figured that one way or another, we'll get a show every time he uses the pack. ;) Speaking of Kevin, turns out the Yak he just got is the Morris Hobbies 'reject' discussed up thread. He's not charmed with what he thinks might be a sheeting to LE delam or the wing to fuselage pocket fit... anything else he needs to know that he ain't found yet?
Posted on: 1/31/2005 11:07 AM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2604812

RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
J... Thanks for the reasoned response. I'll be editing the white paper in the near future and will consider adding the Fromeco gear (with the correct price and weight specs) to the comparison, pending evaluation. I'll also delete the reference to the fail-safe switches. [quote]Lastly, it's unfortunate that you feel it's required to insinuate that you are an expert and I am some "self annointed expert". I am not an electrical engineer... but I have spent a sufficient amount of time and effort in reseaching what is best for me personally. I weighed as much facts as I could gather from the manufacturers and "experts" out there and have based my preferences on those facts. [/quote] Most unfortunate that you would step into this thread with 'NoBS is all BS'. Fact of life, kick a guy in the 'nads; expect a punch in the nose. I've been at this as a profession for a very long time; my handiwork and expertiese is in more airplanes than you've ever seen.. who's the expert? Then you came back with faulty data, incorrect pricing and nebulous unsubstantiated claims regarding weight, price and capacity differences. Bad enuff you didn't do your homework before you posted the first time, worse, it had to be corrected after you finally turned it in. I'm not gonna change the hobbies 'operating unencumbered by the facts'. MFG's pass around sponsorships and free gear to the top fliers for a reason.. seems that folks don't like to do their own thinking and even more, it's human to go into denial when they discover that their mercedes is just another car built by chrysler. As mentioned in the white paper, battery technology ain't at a standstill, and better systems are comming into play all the time. A key example is that new Sanyo 1950FAUP.. Nicad sub-c punch in a short A cell is remarkable.. and unnoticed by IMAC folks because ain't nobody passing 'em around for free to the current IMAC champs and contenders. Maybe I should do that... ;) I hear good stuff in the press and at the field regarding the Fromeco packs.. and if it's the current favorite flavor of Li-Ion power, then it deserves further investigation and inclusion in the comparison. If somebody show's up at our field with 'em I'll load the telemetry gear and see how they do vs the redundant/parallel Duralites... and as noted up-thread; inclusion of the fromeco packs in the comparison won't materially change the impact or point of the article one bit. Regardless, I will include it. [quote]It isn't my "job" to inform anyone of your mistakes, but I have the right to defend perfectly good (and in this case superior) technology and products. Funny... I don't sell batteries, switches or regulators. I don't benefit from the sales of these items... I just fly them in my planes. [/quote] What mistakes? Mentioning 'fail safe' switches? Lordy.. all three technologies under comparison have their shortcomings. None are 'perfectly good', none are 'superior'. You need to rinse that pre-disposed tendency to rush to the 'defense' of your favorite energy bar outta yer hair and aknowledge that aircraft power systems, like women, have qualities that should to be evaluated against need. ;) If you want ultra light and are willing to compromise cost, longevity and durability, then you've got the right 'girl' for you. That does NOT make her the right girl for everybody else. Comprende? Again thanks for the reasoned debate, and my apologies to the folks that came hear to read about the Yak (awsome aircraft, guy in our club just got one, can't wait for some stick time) and got snowed in with battery diatribes. Peace!
Posted on: 1/25/2005 1:46 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2582751

RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
v[quote]...your comparison is blatantly flawed being based on worst case scenario vs. best case scenario. [/quote] Enh? The NiMH pack setup I used is heavier and supplies less capacity and costs more than the commonly aknowledged (one poor soul even called 'em the 'gold standard') Sanyo 'A' sized 2700AUX packs. How do you accomodate my use of a heavier, lower capacity system in the comparison as 'blatantly best vs worst'? [quote]I'm sure it never occured to you that in fact there are Lion solutions that are very closely priced to your noBS NiMH solutions, while providing 1/2 lb savings of weight and 20% more capacity. [/quote] C'mon.. who you trying to kid here? a "half pound" which sounds so dramatic, is still 8 cottin pickin ounces... on a 240 ounce airplane, that ain't jack ****, escpecially when you factor in that this is the heart of the aircraft. I submit it might be a bit more prudent to look someplace else to 'cut corners'. (the actual weight difference turns out to be 4.6 oz BTW.. see below) Next; "20% more capacity".. Ok, lets think about what that really means in terms of [i][b]flight[/b][/i] time. One flight? Maybe? Since Li-Ion capacity ratings don't at all reflect the actual useable capacity at the current levels we fly at, one could argue that Li-Ions rating system is unjustly 'rigged' to present a capacity advantage that may not even exist! Case in point.. When your load meter sez 'don't fly' have you cycled the pack to see how much capacity still remains? NiMH and Nicad and in particular 5 cell setups deliver as 'flyable' capacity a lot larger percentage of the stored energy. Perspective, remember? Cripes, if it's nickles yah wanna squeeze, Batteries America and Radical R/C have packs that cost less than mine.. (they ain't built as well, but the do "cost a few bucks less", at least; initially ;)) Since my prices run a bit higher than theirs, why not use their prices for the comparison? [quote] Since we are on the subject of accuracy you list the Duralite #7194 pack as being a 2 cell pack weighing 4.4oz... then state you need 2 of them... It's a 4 cell with built in redundancy and only ONE pack is required to have redundancy of the pack. [/quote] Redundant parallel in Li-Ion is the ONLY way to get the pack's impedance down to a remotely COMPARABLE level of a SINGLE Sanyo NiMH pack. By doubling up the redundant Li-Ion packs you cut impedance.. kinda pointless to have a 20 amp regulator in front of a pack that drops voltage to unuseable levels when big servo loads get applied. And impedance is a plane killer. If we're gonna compare systems with similar ability to maintain voltage under load, then a redundant parallel Li-Ion pack, while still not capable of the 'grunt' a NiCad or NiMH system can deliver, is at least a little closer to the load carrying spec a big bird with big servo's requires. While your griping about the apples and oranges your buzy swapping in bananna's and grapefruits. Since the idea was to compare systems of roughly equivelant quality and performance capability, I used Duralite redundant 2S2P packs with more 'grunt' than your favorite fromeco 2S1P setup. [quote]I'm sure you'd agree that by comparing apples to oranges and leaving out the latest Lion solution providers, pricing and capacities that your comparison and conclusions are outdated and therefore could be misleading to consumers.[/quote] Nope. Not at all.. what's misleading is the hobbies self annoited 'experts' that hang out at the field and on the internet expousing BS about battery systems without having any more practical experience in system applications beyond what sticker is on the side of the current plane being used by this months champion at the last IMAC meet. In short, in the hobby, and in particular with respect to battery technology, most folks operate pretty much unencumbered by the facts. I'd go so far as to say that if <insert your champion of choice's name here> flew naked on one leg, the flight line would fill up pretty quick with nekkid one legged pilots. [quote]Perhaps you will add a comparison group of Fromeco batteries to your site and a link to their site too?[/quote] I take it you are actually offended I used Duralites instead of Fromeco's in the comparison? I chose Duralites simply because they offered the very best Li-Ion packs you could get for the hobby, have invested a considerable sum in the development of SAFE Li-Ion technology for the hobby and support their product very well. Further, they have an excellent reputation. Since I've never flown a Fromeco pack, have no personal experience with their products, it would be kinda tough for me to fairly compare quality, reliability or service and support criteria. Certainly I'll be glad to use their packs for a comparison.. anybody care to donate a set? [quote] Yet your comparision doesn't include the regulated failsafe switches.... [/quote] Nope. I don't reccomend 'em, and I don't use 'em. Why? Because of the myth that NiMH & NiMH 6v systems 'must have a regulator'. While there are still some old digital or coreless servo's that can't use 5 cell setups, I'm not aware of any in current production that currently can't handle 6v packs without the jitters. FACT: With far and away the vast majority digital high torque servo's being shipped today there is no need for a regulator with a 6v pack. 'Regulated Fail Safe' is just another "BOO!!" to induce modelers to buy something. If our subject system runs a single 6v pack, and the system demonstrates a need for a regulator, then a 'Fail Safe Switch/Regulator' combination can save a bit of weight and add a bit of safety. On the other hand, Why not just run two decent quality HD switches thru a Y to one 20 amp regulator? It won't weigh any more, provides switch redundancy, won't drain and ruin your Li-Ion packs when it's switched off and if yer into the nickel rubbing thing on mission critical system components like packs and switches in your $3,000 airplane; it's actually cheaper. Ok, lets looks at it again; using your 'preferred' Fromeco packs: [quote]LI-ON 3 Fromeco 2400 mah Lion packs 9.9 oz $81.00 3 SmartFly regulated failsafe switches 1.5 oz $135.00 Total Cost: $189 Total Capacity: 4800mah receiver, 2400mah ignition Total weight: 10.4 oz. [/quote] What yah missed here was the happy little qualifier on that cell spec.. "capable of continious current of 4 amps". That means as a parallel system, those two packs can handle no more than 8 amps load before voltage drop becomes an issue. Not a happy scenario. A better setup would be a prallel 2S2P setup that can at least handle 15 amps, but we'll do it your way. Yah also missed the correct spec on the regulated smart-fly switches. The regulator is a half ounce, the switch & mount hardware is another half ounce. Add the connectors and cabling the actual weight of the regulated switch is about 1.24oz. EACH. So let's adjust your weight spec accordingly and add in the missing 2.1oz associated with those 3 regulated failsafe switches. Edit: You've also got the total price wrong; $81.00 + $135.00 = $216.00. Regardless, let's carry on here, and compare the 'gold standard' Sanyo HR-2700AUX packs from Batteries America (20 amp capability) and their published specs rather than our own heavy and pricey 1950FAUP NiMH system. Since Fromeco is 'bargain basement' pricing compared to Duralite, I fell confident you won't object to using BA 'bargin basement' pricing as the trial horse against Fromeco. [b]NiMH System (sanyo)[/b] 2 Sanyo 5 cell 2700 HR-AU, 13.6oz ; $65.00 (ours are $1.00 more, total) 1 KAN 1050 Ignition pack, 3.2oz $16.00 No regulators, but 3 HD switches would weigh 1.3oz total, $20.85 Total Cost: $101.85 Total Capacity: 5400ma Rx, 1050ma Ignition (1.5hours @ 500ma draw) Total weight: 18.1oz Total Continuios Load carrying Capability: 20 amps. [b]Li-Ion (fromeco)[/b] 3 Fromeco 2400 mah Lion packs 9.9 oz $81.00 3 SmartFly regulated failsafe switches 3.6oz $135.00 Total Cost: $216.00 Total Capacity: 4800mah receiver, 2400mah ignition Total [i]real[/i] weight: 13.5 oz. Total Continuious load carrying capability: 8 amps. Looks like the Fromeco Li-Ion setup still costs more than twice as much as the 'Gold Standard' NiMH setup and thats before we add in the cost of Li-Ion field and the requisite saftey equipment and consierations, let alone the learning curve relevant to care and feeding 'em. The NiMH 'Gold Standard' 2700 setup pounds your fromeco setup with regards to capacity. Your "1/2 pound less and 20% more capacity" statement is misleading, dontcha think? Further, the system you've submitted to compare is an exceptionaly marginal setup for an agressive aerobatic application, 8 amps max load is well under my reserve power comfort zone and comapred to any NiMH or the redundant/parallel Duralite setup it ranks dead last. All that Li-Ion hype and cost for what? 4.6 ounces? On a 240oz airplane? C'mon, who's spreading the BS? Look, as I said in the article, if you wanna compete with the current National Champ, hey I can see why you'd HAVE to go with the lighter setup. If your a sport flyer looking at his first big IMAC project, (the point of the article) or into club and local competition please tell me again why it's best to use Li-Ion? Just for Yucks, lets just plug in our overbuilt [b]NoBS Sanyo 1950FAUP [/b] system again: 2 Sanyo 1950-5 Rx packs (NoBS assembly & finish) 14.4oz $39.95 ea ($79.90) 1 GP 1100 2/3A NiMH (NoBS assembly & finish) 3.3oz $23.95 3 HD Chargeport switches, 1.5oz, (17.95 ea) $53.85 Total Cost: $157.70 Total Capacity: Rx: 3900ma, Ignition 1100ma Total Weight: 19.2oz Total Continuous load carrying capability: 45 amps. Weight difference between this and the Fromeco: Ours is 5.7oz more. Cost diffrence: $58.30.. less. While I grant you the diffrence is not as 'dramatic' with regards to weight and cost of our premier setup and the Fromeco packs, there's the intangible of reliability and durability. Nothing tops Nicad or NiMH in system reliability and current delivery under load, vibration and temperature extremes. [i][b]Period.[/b][/i] For those that are happy with the performance of their Nicad or NiMH equipment and intend to just fly and have fun (with their clothes on) I submit (again) that there's no pressing need to hop on the Li-Ion band wagon yet. If those 4 to 6 ounces on a 240oz plane are what rules your flying life, then by all means, hop on the Li-Ion bus! [quote]I'm also curious as to where I can purchase the failsafe regulated switches you mention in your white paper for $30 I didn't see them offered for sale on your site. If I used your suggested regulated failsafe switches at $30 ea. instead of Smart-Fly's at $45...I would save another $45... making the Fromeco Lion solution $39 cheaper than your noBS 3900 system. [/quote] Maxx MPI stocks 'em; PN#ACC407 (6v) and PN#ACC409 (5.4v) Input voltage is rated at 7.4v, 20amps peak draw, 10 amps continuuous. As stated above, I don't stock 'em because I don't buy into Myths. If you already have 2 packs and intend to use two regulators and switches, what point is there in having both those switches 'failsafed'? Up to now, I have yet to see two switches fail silmutaneously; using a pair of good HD switches provides the redundancy, failsafing 'em with a constant current draw circut board that puts the packs at risk in storage from overdischarging is just pointless. (IMHO) Lastly, allow me to apologize for my 'bulldog' approach to all this; tact is not my strong suit. Frankly, I named the company 'NoBS' because I'd spent far too long in the presence of a 'spinmeister' that gleefuly used 'BOO!' tactics to sell hugely overpriced battery packs.. the scars may never heal. I enjoy my work and the hobby immensely... unitll the Li-Ion vs NiMH and Nicad debate starts up, which is why I wrote that cottin-pickin article to begin with. When asked, I make it a point to offer clear, concise advice regarding what works and what doesn't relevant to the application under discussion and normally I avoid the 'internet debating society' untill someone sez something like "NoBS is all BS". This is my living, it puts food on our table, clothes on the family's back. I'm an honest businesman, and have spent the last 25 years working [i][b]professionally[/b][/i] with low voltage power systems and battery technology every single day. Imply I'm a crook, selling smoke and mirrors and misleading the public regarding application suitability and characteristics and I'm liable to get a bit testy... Thanks for your understanding!
Posted on: 1/25/2005 11:55 AM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2580652

RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
[quote]ORIGINAL: flatlandmike i stand behind the numbers of the outdated items sarcasm sarcasm lol the poor slums that fall for that will be upset why don't we tell people the weight numbers of old ARFs to to show that this one is better lol 27 pound 50 cc plane compared to this plane is 16 pounds so this yak is clearly better lol lets skew the facts just a little and maybe some one will buy what im selling haha every one else sorry for the rant but this is so freakin funny [/quote] Outdated? PN# 7194, Duralite redundant 1900 (3800ma) pack, 121g (4.3oz) now sells for $72.95. If it's outdated, why on earth do they still sell 'em? If yah wanna compare NON-redundant Li-Ion systems against NON-redundant Nicad or NiMH packs then that's kewl, show me your non-redundant system pick for Li-Ion, (MFG, PN, spec, weight and cost), and I'll pick out a system built outta NiMH or Nicad that'll cost less, be less complicated, deliver big current with rock solid dependability and work with the field equipment most folks already own... with 8oz or less in system weight difference. The point made in the article is about [i][b]perspective[/b][/i] (which I suspect has been totally missed here): if the plane weighs 18lbs (288oz) then the 6-8 oz difference (about the weight of a 1/2 tank of gas) in NiMH system weight vs. the added complication & cost of a comparable [i]redundant[/i] lithium ion system makes picking a better prop a more useful excercise in improving power to weight for most [i][b]sport[/b][/i] flyers. For myself, I use a parallel 6v 1950 Sanyo FAUP NiMH pack setup, no regulators, 2 HD switches. Simple, easy to take care of; utterly reliable (redundant packs!), fast chargeable, has about 4000ma of total capacity, 2.5 mOhms resistance (better load performance than a big sub-c Nicad pack) and weighs 16oz all up, including wiring, connectors and switches. Cost is less than a hundred bucks INCLUDING the chargeport switches... and I'll get three seasons at least outta 'em. If I need to 'save' weight, I can use one HR-2700AU NiMH pack with two leads and two switches.. at about 8oz all up. If I want Huge capacity, I'd use two 2700's.. about the same weight as the 1950 parallel system above, gives 5400ma of capacity. [quote]every one else sorry for the rant but this is so freakin funny[/quote] Yah. Kinda reminds me of a South Park episode... Cartmann and the 'Yellow Mega-Man'. Cheers!
Posted on: 1/24/2005 4:01 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2578788

RE: Extreme Flight 87" Yak 54 - Build & Fly
[quote]ORIGINAL: Maudib I don't care for the NoBS "comparison"... he is using "older" lion techdata and Duralite pricing... simply not the case in "today's lion world". 1900 & 950 mah batteries? 4.4 oz EACH? Maybe 2-3 years ago... Today a 4000, 4200 or 4800 mah pack weighs 6.6 oz and the 2400mah pack is only 3.3 oz. Pricing for a 4 cell 4800 pack is only $54 compared to the $137.90 price that is quoted for two 1900's EVEN if you set it up the same way: Three 2400's at $27.00 - three smartfly regulators with failsafe switch at $45 each your total cost is: $216 for 4800 mah with a total weight of about 14 oz. Compared to "NoBS's" Sanyo NiMH 3900 package costing $167.40 and weighing 18.3 oz So instead of the hundreds of dollars of savings... we see only a difference of $48... and we save 1/4 lb of weight have 30% more battery on the receiver and 230% more battery on the ignition. And in a plane the size of the Yak... we can use a 4800 pack, a 2400 pack and 2 regulators... $171, 6 oz lighter than the Nihms and still way more battery life. The whole NoBS comparison is, in my view, total BS.... It is such a blatant attempt at misdirection it isn't funny. [/quote] I just double checked the Duralite pricing, specs and part numbers.. part numbers and specs are valid; however their prices went up. About 5 bucks on each of the Duralite packs used in the comparisons. The other pricing and material used in the comparison, the philosophical points made and the conclusions drawn I still stand behind as applicable to decision making regarding the technologies under comparison. I'm kinda less than thrilled with your post.. while I support your right to have an opinion and express it, perhaps you'd care to edit the slander out of it? Thanks!
Posted on: 1/24/2005 2:14 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2578439

RE: How many chargers do you have?/Whats your favorite?
[quote]Do you really think you have more fun flying a gas plane than I do flying the foamie? Somehow, I doubt it. [/quote] Ahh, Mike; it's all totally subjective. Do you have fun? I know yah do, or you wouldn't do it. Is it as much fun? I don't think so, but that's just the view from my side of the fence. Yah see, I've 'been there, done that' with a whole range of electric projects.. and I can hugely appreciate the 'no stress' factor when it comes to risk with the foamies.. but to me flying on the computer is just as 'easy', costs less, offers the same thrills and of course, there's no stress, no risk. Using that logic, why bother flying electrics? ;) ..but I humbly submit that 'risk' is a big part of the fun, part of the thrill of doing it well. If Risk is the big objection, then collecting stamps or running lionel trains might be a better 'hobby'. Building and flying big birds just ain't much of a 'hobby' for someone who's more worried about a loss than enjoying the thrill of flying. For me it's the pure adrenaline rush of a blistering fast gas powered warbird when it howls past.. no drug, no wussy lil electric sparks my fire like blasting around the pylon course with an old Dynaflite PT-19 with a gasser under the cowl, wingtip to wingtip with a like minded pilot. It's especially rewarding when the plane didn't come off an assembly line that was stamping out McDonalds 1/4 pounder bun warmers last month. :D For some of us, this just ain't a hobby; it's an addiction.. an obsession at the least. We scrape and save, put off buying unnecessary things, refuse to be teased away from the bench by 'lesser' hobby expenses (like foamies) and patiently work our birds from the bench to the field. Sometimes it takes years to get a project in the air. We're not fooled by the promise of 'from the box to the field in 45 minutes'.. there's still a few of us left that appreciate the thrill that's consummate with the sacrifice. The harder you work, the better we feel when the gear finally come up. Satisfaction is in getting it right, getting it up and wringing it out. The thrill is in flying a piece of history, crowding the 'edge' and bringing it back whole. Sure there are losses. And yah, it's gut-wrenching when we discover we went too far and crossed the line in structures. It's how we find out where the limits are. 'Dumb Thumb' gets our planes every now and again too. Such is life.. 'no pain, no gain'. Is the learning curve steep? Yup.. especially if you insist on re-learning the lessons the hard way. On the other hand, if you 'paid attention in class and did the homework' it's no more difficult to do it sucessfully than flying a foamie or anything else. The biggest investment is paitience.. not cash. Are foamies 'fun'? Yup. Are they [i]ultimately [/i] satisfying? Not for me... I have higher expectations. :D But that's just my opinion.. I could be wrong. :) I happily support all flying.. everybody should fly and be happy, regardless of what form that flight might be in.. foamie, computer, pattern, heli, sport, scale, turbines, giants, IMAC; full scale.. it's all good. All steps on the road to personal satisfaction... trying to compare the 'fun level' of flying a foamie with flying scale giants is like comparing the kiddie coaster with the 'green monster' at Six Flags. Some folks just prefer their rides to be more (or less) demanding... and even if you do prefer the kiddie coaster right now, there's always the Monster waiting if your decide you want more of the 'good thing'. (hang sees the car & buggy crowd sparking up torches... pulls the nomex hood up, kicks the soapbox, bolts for the door..)
Posted on: 12/8/2004 11:30 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2415584

RE: How many chargers do you have?/Whats your favorite?
[quote]One type cannot survive a crash, requires constant maintenance and is in constant danger of systems failure leading to total loss. It requires constant cleaning and is large and difficult to transport and requiers a truckload of supporting equipment. The other type requires almost no maintenance or cleaning, can survive almost all crashes repeatedly, is small and easy to transport and requires no supporting equipment. Like I said, they both fly...so why bother? [/quote] BZZZZZRRRRRTTT!!!! Wrong answer!! ;) I've got a 106" Super Cub.. Zenoah G-38 power. Takes me less than 5 minutes to set it up, fuel it and it'll fly for 56 minutes on .25 cents worth of gas. Requires no starter, no cleanup afterwards and will do anything short of a hover for aerobatics. Friend of mine has an old Midwest 80" Extra on a Zenoah G-45... same thing, and he can hover. I also hace a giant scale mustang with retracts and all the goodies, that takes 10 minutes to set up.. and the air for the retract system is free. Mike you got 'glow' confused with 'gas'. Ain't the same thing AT ALL, and big gas birds pound the heck outta electrics in 'field ease'. There's no 40 minute wait for a charger between flights, no massive field battery (dead halfway through the day usually) to support all those packs. No 100 dollah smart chargers, no 100 dollah battery packs. Our engines last decades, we don't need to replace the power system after a 100 flights... it's just about broken in then. If the bird has a 2 piece wing (most do) then transport in a car is no problem at all. They fly better, they handle wind better, they look better they smell better and they give back every bit of effort put into them as big happy smiles that match the big beautiful air[i][b]craft[/b][/i] that they are. Big Birds are [i][b]real[/b][/i] miniature aircraft with full house controls, (whats a ship without a rudder?) and are powered by real internal combustion engines... not little plastic and tape kiddie toys on steriods with a power train scalped from what's left of uncle joe's electric shaver. ;) (...hang reaches for nomex flame suit)
Posted on: 12/8/2004 5:08 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2414318

RE: How many chargers do you have?/Whats your favorite?
[quote]ORIGINAL: Flying Geezer Most of us are not flying electric foamies. Our battery packs are padded with foam and fastened in place firmly. I have seen some battery packs that were less accessable than the connectiing rod in the gas/glow engine. Forget the "dark side", come on over to "real airplanes", you'll love it. [/quote] Aha! A purist! I wuz one of them once. ;) Nice thing about this hobby.. there's room in it for whatever suits on any given day. I fly giant scale (gas).. almost exclusively now... and I've seen battery installations in gas 3D and IMAC pattern giants that meet your accessibilty description perfectly... doofus installations ain't found in just electrics. I've had heaps of abuse piled upon me at the field for bad-mouthin the 'goofy lil hamburger plate airplanes' on more than one occasion. Regardless and like it or not, the foamies are becoming more popular all the time. While I still prefer some wood in the stuff I fly, there are ever increasing numbers of those that DO carry around a park flyer (or two) in the trunk... any wide spot in the road is a handy flying field. I may get a couple of 'outdoor' foamies myself just for the full contact combat sessions that are springing up on our field in the twilight hours after the big stuff gets put away. Looks to me like them guys are having waaaay too much fun! Mike; with a single 3S1P 10C 1050 Lipo running above 50 bucks average, the packs ain't all that much cheaper than a good Lipo charger. And, since diversity in personal airlane inventories is the rule rather than the exception, a lotta guys wind up flying planes with different pack and power system configurations. While some folks do have 'one' plane with multiple packs, others fly different planes with different type or configuration packs; charging one while flying something else. If you've got two or more 'different' planes, your likely to have two or more chargers. Cheers!
Posted on: 12/8/2004 4:43 PM by Author "Hangtime" in the forum "Batteries & Chargers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2414235