RE: Sebart's new pattern ship MYTHOS
Hi Stom. The spinner size is about 85mm. The supplied spinner is 82mm and is not a proper fit (for pentatic). On my WindS I used a 85mm Marquet spinner (before it plowed through the woods due to a Tx failure) and it is the perfect match for this fuselage. Dave K. The Mythos 2m comes with no motor hardware, but for anyone who do not want to build their own mount, there are premade kits available (for instance www.ralphschweizer.com). /David
Posted on: 9/17/2012 2:17 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11231455

RE: Sebart's new pattern ship MYTHOS
Rendegade, the 2m version comes like that. I believe you are confusing it with the 125 version (with clear canopy). luckymacy, the fuse is a GF/CF mix, nicely made in sandwich with a thin foam material. I don’t know the price in any international currency, but to give you a relative difference, in Sweden it is 5400SEK for the 125 and 15000SEK for the 2m. Considering the 125 is only slightly smaller it is definitely better value.
Posted on: 9/3/2012 1:37 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11215979

RE: Sebart's new pattern ship MYTHOS
Deliveries of the 2m Mythos have now begun. The Scandinavian Sebart dealer autopartner.se got their first models about a week ago. I got one of them. I have previously flown the WindS Pro so the Mythos was a logic next step. I have attached some pictures documenting the differences between them. Both models share the same fuselage. Apart from the obvious difference in wing planform, the Mythos wing is 6mm thinner and stab 5mm thicker. The wing also has a bit more sweep. Other changes are rudder in balsawood, conventional aileron servo installation, more tail anhedral and different canopy. Hardware kit is identical so the hinges are better to be replaced by robarts. I’m looking forward to see how it flies. One thing I like about it already... it has a pronounceable name. /David
Posted on: 9/1/2012 11:44 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11214155

RE: 2102 FAI/F3A EUROPEAN CHAMPIONSHIP
[quote]ORIGINAL: serious power Hi J-P, Have you any idea why Sweden were not there ?? Brian [/quote] Huh…. That was a surprising question to find here. I’m glad someone misses the Swedes =) I would say all “veteran� team members have been occupied in one way or the other, and no rookies willing to do the expense and effort of going. We will be back though. Personally I really miss the competition atmosphere. For what has been said about CPLR above, I totally agree. I could not think of a better role model. /David
Posted on: 8/15/2012 3:41 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11194876

18mz and external third party module
I’m considering purchasing a 18MZ. I think it’s an appealing transmitter, but what so far has kept me from doing the purchase is futabas limited range of receivers. For some applications I would like to have broader options. Is it possible to fit the 18MZ with an external 2.4 module to fully cover my needs? David Edit: A better formulation of the question is: is there any external PPM port that could be used to feed an external 2.4 module?
Posted on: 8/1/2012 7:33 AM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Futaba Radios Direct support forum"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11176896

RE: YGE 90HV F3A
I’m running my 4th season on YGE 80HV and I find them to be the ideal F3A controller. Never heard of one burning before. YGE90 however is different in characteristics. The experience people have had in Sweden is that the first generation worked ok, but was not as smooth as the YGE80 in engaging/disengaging brake. Later generations have had problems with misfiring (loosing sync/timing) when throttling up after down lines. This has happened on several types of motors (C50s and Pletty advance). I would assume this is due to variations in firmware on newer controllers. A friend of mine even had his prop thrown off in flight (YS emulator?). Unfortunately there is no way to identify or change firmware on the YGEs. If the YGE 90 is your only choice I would recommend making sure that your dealer is willing to cancel the purchase in case it will not work with your motor. I do not know how common the "bad firmware" version is. YGE in general are very high quality. Small and efficient. I have used them in many sizes with good results. The anti-spark function of the 90 is setting a mark for other esc manufacturers to follow. If you feel lucky there are now also some Chinese YGE clones (think it was himodel), but I would not recommend that. /David
Posted on: 7/23/2012 1:37 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11166149

RE: Contra Rotating Propeller Drive for f3a 2m Pattern Planes
[quote]ORIGINAL: Brenner Here's an interesting effect. It looks like there may be a potential theoretical noise advantage associated with the Contra Drive when using larger pitch, smaller diameter props. The attached charts show a comparision between a typcical single prop setup using a 21x14 prop, a Contra setup using 22x20 props, and a Contra setup using 20.25x22 props. The single prop setup and the 22x20 Contra setup both absorb about 2800W statically on the ground, and 2875W max in the air during a vertical climb, but the 20.25x22 absorbs 2650W on the ground for the same 2875W in the air during a vertical climb. This means that the system is essentially, ATVing the power down to about 95% on the ground when sound tests are taken, and then going back to full power in the air when it's needed, all without using any kind of throttle switch. Would this be cheating? I tend to think not, because there is no intervention by the pilot. It's all in the setup. Brenner ... [/quote] Brenner this effect is typical for high pitch props and comes from the blade partially stalling. Power goes down since less air is accelerated through the prop, however the power that still is absorbed by the prop is translated into turbulence, i.e. more noise. /David
Posted on: 6/15/2012 2:45 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11119522

Tip: Modifying throttle stick for mechanical brake
When I started flying electric some years ago I felt it would be practical to have a mechanical feedback on the throttle stick at the point where the brake is activated. I figured out a way to modify the stick so that I could get this feedback and in a way where both the point of engagement as well as the strength is adjustable. I think it’s a neat little mod that provides good control over the braking. I recently explained on the Swedish F3A forum how to do this and I thought I would explain it here as well. The trick is to reuse the spring mechanism that on many transmitters are installed by default at delivery, but to modify it so that it only engages at the lower end of throttle movement where the brake is activated. Below are some pictures on how I made this on my latest transmitter. The spring loaded lever arm that provides the stick centering looks like this. [image]http://www.f3a.se/forum/showimage.php?pid=2847&filename=spring_arm_2.JPG[/image] It rests on two pins on the stick gimbal, which provides the centering force. What one must do is to provide the lever arm with an adjusting screw with which to mechanically lift it from the two pins. On this particular transmitter (Graupner MC-32) this is already done and is used do disengage the centering mechanism on the throttle stick. This adjustment screw is now set so that contact occurs at the position where the brake should be activated. The front pin on the gimbal must then be disengaged in order to only get the mechanical feedback at the lower end. Either just pull out the front pin, or modify the plastic lever arm accordingly to the dashed line above. The result installed in the transmitter looks like this. [image]http://www.f3a.se/forum/showimage.php?pid=2847&filename=mekanik_2.JPG[/image] With the two marked screws the point of engagement, as well as mechanical resistance can be adjusted to personal preference. I typically have it adjusted so that it barely is felt in addition to the friction that is already set on the brake spring/ratchet. It is all that is needed. The fingers are very sensitive and with too much spring load I find it becomes uncomfortable. This mod was extremely simple to do on the MC-32, but I believe it can be made on any transmitter. Below are some pictures on how I made it on my old MC-24 which uses standard JR stick assemblies. I believe those are the same on many of the JR transmitters. First an M2 screw is installed in the stick assembly. The front pin that lifts the spring arm is also removed. [image]http://www.f3a.se/forum/showimage.php?pid=2849&filename=MC24_2_2.JPG[/image] Then the spring loaded arm is drilled and tapped for the small adjustment screw which is used to set the point of engagement. [image]http://www.f3a.se/forum/showimage.php?pid=2849&filename=MC24_3_4.jpg[/image] Slightly more work on these stick assemblies, but still not very complicated. The mod is also reversible in case one would not like it. I hope it can be useful for someone. /David Lundstrom
Posted on: 6/4/2012 10:02 AM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11105962

RE: Contra Rotating Propeller Drive for f3a 2m Pattern Planes
[quote]ORIGINAL: OhD There must be something in the lower rpm but I also thought I could hear a sound like a twin. I suspect the props were not turning at exactly the same rpm but man it sounded good. I would hope that someone can measure the rpm with a strobe and we can find out what they are turning but it will be hard to improve on what I heard today. [/quote] If you want to measure RPM I suppose the easiest way is to use an eagletree logger with dual rpm sensors. Log the motor rpm using the brushless motor rpm sensor and then the rear prop rpm using the magnetic or optic sensor. Then use the gear ratio to calculate the front prop rpm. It makes me wonder about how the gear ratio is defined for this unit. Is for instance 10.33:1 the ratio from motor to prop if each prop is spinning at the same rpm? Or is it the gear ratio given as if the outer ring is locked in the same way as a normal planetary gearbox? It would be quite interesting to log the rpm, and especially on the popular mixed prop setup. Existing theory on contra props actually suggests that the rear prop should have a lower geometric pitch than the front prop (for equal power and rpm). This is because the rear prop operates in the swirl of the front prop and thus sees a higher angle of attack even if the geometric pitch of the two props is the same. The velocity increase at the rear prop should be marginal and not enough to motivate a higher pitch. Theory and practice however do not always agree. It would be interesting to know more why a higher pitch rear prop is experienced as a better setup (if I have interpreted the impressions in this thread right). Anyone tried with the higher pitched on the front?? /David
Posted on: 4/10/2012 5:44 AM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11035782

RE: Contra Rotating Propeller Drive for f3a 2m Pattern Planes
[quote]ORIGINAL: underdw - Is there generally a need to fly Contra planes more nose heavy than you would with a conventional motor? If so, why? Dan [/quote] I do not have any practical experience with a contra in F3A, but theoretically, yes the CG should be more forward with a contra setup. A propeller in front of CG is always destabilizing. The lower the rpm the worse it gets. Add two of them, spinning at a considerable lower speed then the one they replaced and the effect should definitely be noticeable. It would typically be the worst at the end of down lines when braking effect is strongest, which partially should explain the reduced yaw stability that some has reported. Merry Christmas all!! /David
Posted on: 12/24/2011 2:17 AM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10874017

RE: New Hacker ESC Senstrol
Bryan, Earl already said it above, if they ban the senstrol they also must ban all RC servos, who uses “automatic� control loops (identical to the senstrol) to keep the control surface in position regardless of the control surface load. We would have to go back to the origin of radio control (from the 50s), using actuators without position feedback. Something in line with this. [image]http://www.airplanesandrockets.com/airplanes/images/comet-slarky-rudder-actuator.JPG[/image] It would make the sport more interesting though =) Personally I think the senstrol will be great. It makes sense really. Also the sinus commutation should allow the motor to run at higher efficiency. /David
Posted on: 10/7/2011 2:18 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10752554

RE: Contra Rotating Propeller Drive for f3a 2m Pattern Planes
Brian, yes we met in Portugal. We always ended up at that “fancy� Chinese restaurant [:)] I expressed myself imprecisely. I meant “as good� in terms of noise level. The efactor system already seems to be close to the limit in noise tests (requires innovative throttle curve?). If the Brenner system is equivalent in sound but better in power that is just awesome! I have to argue with my wife about how to spend the family budget this summer. /David
Posted on: 3/31/2011 1:56 AM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10434032

RE: Contra Rotating Propeller Drive for f3a 2m Pattern Planes
[quote]ORIGINAL: serious power On a hard surface it sounds like a big ,in line,4 cylinder motor cycle engine.A very pleasant sound.In the air it sounds just as I remember Seba's ,so that's the same sound/noise but with a lot more performance. I will do noise tests in the next week or so. [/quote] This is good to hear. I hope your noise test will confirm this. This system seems to have the propellers closer spaced then the e-factor unit (silvestri) and thus should have more “blade interaction noise�. I have tested varying the prop distance on a smaller (indoor) counter rotating motor and, as expected, decreasing distance resulted in a seemingly exponential noise increase. There are more factors involved then just the blade distance so hopefully I’m wrong and, as you say, this system is as good as the e-factor. Either way I still want one! /David
Posted on: 3/30/2011 3:46 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10433137

RE: Telemetry in F3A
Well said Alejandro. I think your post is very relevant! There is no doubt that the next generation of 2.4ghz systems will have telemetry built in to them and integrated with the transmitter. I think it is not perfectly clear though when a tx/rx system is illegal. The sporting code says: [i]“Radio equipment shall be of the open loop type (ie no electronic feedback from the model aircraft to the ground).�[/i] Strictly interpreted this would mean that no data what so ever can be transmitted from the model and that the equipment not even can be of the type that could transmit/receive data. Simply turning the telemetry of would not solve the problem as it still is equipment capable of telemetry, and secondly turning of the telemetry does not necessarily mean that no data is transmitted from the model. Data that is used by the system to work may still be sent in the background. Remember how the XPS system worked before the FHSS firmware update (Tx and Rx continuously communicating about what channels to use). I don’t think that this is really the interpretation FAI intended. It would mean that a lot of illegal equipment is out there on competitions already. So how should we interpret this rule? Wee need to ask FAI to clarify this part for future sportingcode releases. Current text is just outdated and needs to be reformulated. The pilot should not be allowed to use telemetry to his/her benefit, but rules should not ban modern RC equipment. David Lundstrom
Posted on: 1/18/2011 1:10 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=10272289

RE: Contra Rotating Propeller Drive for f3a 2m Pattern Planes
Brenner, thank you for explaining! I realized my question could require answering with a smaller essay, but your simplified outline was more then satisfying. Interesting paper! I recently stumbled on a website with a software using, what I believe, that iterative procedure together with an older blade element code “Xrotor� to analyze counter-rotating propellers. If you are interested I can PM you the link when I get back to work tomorrow. /David
Posted on: 8/23/2010 4:11 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9954634

RE: Contra Rotating Propeller Drive for f3a 2m Pattern Planes
Brenner, first of all thank you for sharing this work on RCU. It has been very interesting to follow your progress. Fantastic engineering! I’m curious about the analysis you have done (post 52,54). Could you perhaps explain shortly how you have modeled the propellers? I have done similar design optimizations for single rotors, and are aware of how much uglier it gets for a contra prop. I’m curious what simplifications you have done, and if you have used any specific software propeller analysis tool. Did you for instance treat the contra prop as an equivalent 4 bladed rotor, or have you found any good theories for how to optimize the blades of a contra prop? Best of luck with the continued work. /David
Posted on: 8/21/2010 7:34 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9950418

RE: Carbon E props, what’s your experience?
So two votes for flappy paddle props [:)] Thanks for the info Hans and twoturn! It seems that most rigid carbon props are more or less copies of APC (rasa, PT model), but that copying the unloaded shape does not mean the performance and efficiency will be the same as the APC has loaded in the air. What about the new MPI props that have been mentioned on this forum. Are they also copies of APC? Airtech is another prop that seems APCish, but I don’t know anyone who has tested it. David
Posted on: 8/12/2010 2:52 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9928936

Carbon E props, what’s your experience?
When I started with electrics a few years ago I experimented with carbon props on a C50 14XL, but found no real benefit over APC. I have since only used APC props. I’m now flying a 13XL on a Sebart WindS Pro and with a 21x13W APC prop. It’s a good setup but I just don’t like the fluttering sound of the APC in the snaps of F11. I’m hence considering carbon props again and bought some to test. I though I would share the results Test setup: WindS Pro, C50 13XL, YGE 80HV, DesirePower 10s 5000, Eagle tree logger. APC 21x13W – one P11 schedule, strong winds -> 3250 mAh Rasa 21x13 - one P11 schedule -> 3700mAh Mejzlik 21x13 – one P11 schedule, strong winds -> 4500mAh!! All props consumed about the same current on the ground, 85A. In the air it was quite different. The performance with APC is great. The RASA (APC copy) performed, in terms of speed and “vertical pull�, about the same as the APC. The Mejzlik had much worse performance then the other two and is, in my opinion, not useful for F3A. Its pitch distribution and airfoil seems optimized for static thrust only (probably ok for 3D). I’m surprised about the results. I was sceptic about the mejzlik, but I really thought the RASA would be better, considering it’s a direct clone of an APC. Since playing around with carbon props is expensive I hope that more people can share their experiences in this thread. Are there any that can match the efficiency of the APC? Which have you found to be the best? David
Posted on: 8/10/2010 2:42 AM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9921955

RE: 2010 US Nats... share YOUR story
[quote]ORIGINAL: shannah In reading the Nats News, I see reports of mid airs and also of Masters finalists flying something different than what they started with. What's the scoop? How was the flying in the other classes? [/quote] About the midairs.. From what I can recall from reports of past nationals, midair’s seem to happen from time to time in Muncie. I’m puzzled why this is allowed to happen. I have never been there so I don’t know the circumstances of the flying site, but a question that pops up in my head is if the flying site will be organized differently to prevent midair’s at the worlds next year?
Posted on: 8/9/2010 6:08 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9922014

RE: Sebart Wind S Pro
The spinner supplied with the kit is heavy and slightly too small in diameter. A Philippe Marquet 85mm carbon spinner is an ideal upgrade and is almost a must for this model. /David
Posted on: 8/9/2010 4:40 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9921811

RE: Electric ZN Line Xigris C2 Build Thread
Isaac. Thanks for another quality build thread! I’m looking forward to se how this progresses. I’m curious about your savoxes. Have you tried them yet? After having read positive comments about savox on this forum, and others, I bought two SC1258 for evaluation. Initial impression was good, but after testing them side by side with a JR8401 I have decided to never use them. Speed, torque and centring were good, but it had no where the precision and smoothness of the JR. From my experience I would not recommend savox for F3A. Before you mount them in your model I suggest testing them side by side with the servos you are used to. Mount a long arm to the servo (min 20cm) and se how they respond to the small precise control inputs typical for F3A flight. /David
Posted on: 12/11/2009 6:12 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9322783

RE: what is the best/diffrent ways to secure the batteries for the engine??
[quote]ORIGINAL: Rune the part off the battery tray that is in the model has that some kind off ''click in place'' solution David...looks nice clean . The battery how do you fasten it to the removable part David [/quote] The tray slips into a “tube attachment� (don’t know a proper word) bolted to the undercarriage plate. In the opposite end it is locked with a 3mm screw. Simple and allows a little bit of adjustment length wise to alter CG. I additionally had the intention to make it a full “click in place� solution but with little time I left out the click mechanism. The batteries are fastened to the tray using fiber reinforced tape. It was not completed in the pictures. The objective I had was to do something that would be neat and light weight, allow simple CG change, be easy to manufacture, maximum cooling, and easy to replace/modify for coming battery generations. I guess Velcro would do the same thing, but I just don’t like the uncertainty of when it will separate. Great to see you have decided on a solution Rune. Looking forward to the pictures.
Posted on: 11/21/2009 3:39 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9270305

RE: what is the best/diffrent ways to secure the batteries for the engine??
Rune here are some pictures of a solution I'm using http://www.f3a.se/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=1487#p1487 Not necessarily better then anything else, but I'm verry happy with it. No velcro that wears out. /David
Posted on: 11/21/2009 5:47 AM by Author "Reko" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9269416

RE: YS 160 runs too hot in Genesis
I made some foam inserts in the cowl to guide the air around the cylinder. No extra holes in the front.
Posted on: 11/1/2009 4:42 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=9220610

RE: Receivers for electric models
[quote]ORIGINAL: 67685 The Robbe module ( Faast for MC 24 )will be avaiable in mid August according to Robbe / Norwegian Modellers. Mine is already ordered :) Kjell Olav [/quote] Hmm.. the information I got says this module won’t be out until November (earliest). I hope your info is more reliable. Keith B, I think the 35mhz equivalent of JRPR790 is JR RS77S. I managed to borrow one of those and tested in my model, but it did not improve the glitches. I think going 2.4 will solve the problem with least effort. David
Posted on: 7/14/2008 1:41 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7729703

RE: Receivers for electric models
Well that’s funny… and confusing. Perhaps there is something in my system not working to 100%. Thanks for the help anyway! David
Posted on: 7/11/2008 5:20 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7719938

RE: Hacker C50 mounting
Kjell Olav I recently finished an electric Genesis. I previously have flown with a YS170 powered Genesis. On the electric I started with the same thrust alignment. It worked out quite well. I have afterwards added a bit extra of right thrust. On the YS genesis I however have a bit of throttle to rudder mix so it’s hard to say if there really was any difference. My conclusion is that using the identical angles is a good start. If your side thrust will be too little, and difficult to change, it can always be fixed with a throttle to rudder mix. Since your vertical CG will be different on the electric it would be fair to assume that also down thrust may be affected, but on my models I found no difference. David
Posted on: 7/11/2008 11:10 AM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7718749

RE: Receivers for electric models
Oistein that is great info! What futaba module are you using? Do you have any photos or references explaining how the modification is done? I have heard that the Futaba 2,4 Ghz receivers are using a lower then normal signal level to the servos. Have you had any problems using JR servos with the futaba receiver? Or perhaps you are using futaba servos? David
Posted on: 7/11/2008 10:13 AM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7718595

RE: Receivers for electric models
Bruno thank you that would be nice. You are right also that it is SPCM receivers I’m interested in. should have specified that from the start [8|] I feel that I have done everything I could with the current receiver. It is mounted far aft and antenna is on the outside. All cables are twisted, ferrite rings etc. Interestingly the following webpage states that the SMC19 might be unsuitable for electric flight. http://www.webx.dk/rc/RX-measurements/komplet-listen.htm. In other words I think it will be enough with a different receiver. I just dont want to buy them all to find the best one. Unfortunately the website do not list test results of any other “top of the line� SPCM receivers. Anyone tried ACT S3D 2,4Ghz system?
Posted on: 7/10/2008 5:06 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7716030

RE: Receivers for electric models
I too believe that 2,4 Ghz is the best solution but converting is a bit complicated since I’m using a Graupner MC24 transmitter. The only possibility seems to be IFS/XPS, but I have read too many bad things about that "non hopping" system to put it in my competition model. A better 35 mhz receiver then the SMC19DS could be a temporary solution until Robbe gets their FASST module for MC24 in production (or until I get tired and buy Futaba). Anyone know if a spectrum JR compatible module can be bought for the European 100mW market? I have seen some people modifying them to fit in MC24. David
Posted on: 7/10/2008 2:03 PM by Author "Reko" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=7715366