RE: Vectorflight extra 300, which size
[quote]ORIGINAL: shzaz28 Has anyone tried the 58" w/ a .61? I have an OS .61 FX I'd like to use. [/quote] Given that both the 58" and 66" are intended to be flown with a 60 2cy to 100 4cy, I think a strong ball-bearing .61 would be more than adequate for the 58". Stay away from the cheapies and certainly any bushing style engine, but I think the FX would do fine. I fly the Sukhoi with a Magnum .91 4cy. It's not a total powerhouse, but it flies just fine, and vertical is beyond MY abilities to keep it going straight up :)
Posted on: 12/20/2004 8:50 PM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=2452724

RE: crash causes? Vote!
[quote]ORIGINAL: Villa I have heard no comment about failures of nylon clevises. These clevises open up under high stress.[/quote] Never had one fail because I've never used them (after my first trainer).
Posted on: 3/19/2004 1:42 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Crash & Rebuild"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1639354

RE: Anyone else spruce up their Robart wheels?
Dude, you did an awesome job on that P38 nosewheel. Looks almost like the real thing :D Seriously though... ya, I've always hated the casting flash on the Robarts... can't imagine why they don't clean them up a bit more. I generally paint the inner pieces flat black to give more of a "dirty shadow" look and leave the spoked cover alone. I used silver paint once and wasn't happy with it, but I bet it would look nice with some weathering.
Posted on: 3/10/2004 2:22 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "RC Warbirds and Warplanes"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1609599

RE: U-Can-Do .40 stab failure
[quote]ORIGINAL: FHHuber LOL... a .91 four-stroke on a .40 size plane... he deserved to have the stab break. That is just plain EXCESSIVE overpowering. [/quote] It all depends on the plane. Remember the 56" span Global/Modeltech P47? That was a .40 sized model, but the recommended 4-stroke was .70-.91. Mine flew like a brick with the .91. It was fast enough once in the air, but had zero vertical pull and took a lot of runway. This was the case with an 11x10.25 4-blade Bolly (and I expected nothing but speed), but also with a 14x6.
Posted on: 3/10/2004 2:07 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1609578

RE: Dual Tank Mod
Not being familiar with the chassis, you're on your own there. Tank #2 (the furthest away from the carb) should be at or slightly below the level of tank #1 so it doesn't siphon through and out the carb.
Posted on: 3/9/2004 1:40 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "HPI Monster Truck Forum"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1605757

RE: Hitec Flash 5 Elevon mixing trim ?
Mixing isn't turned off, it just a matter of where the EPA happens in the mix. When setting an EPA, you are setting the EPA for the channel, not for the control stick. This is why you actually have to make four EPA adjustments... one for "left" and one for "right" on channel 1 (which affects only one wing), and one for "up" and one for "down" for channel 2, which affects the other wing. What you might want to try is running exponential on the elevator. It won't affect the EPA, but if you set the expo very high, your elevator will be very soft around center and only come on quickly if you get the stick near the stop. IIRC, the flash radios did put expo ahead of the mixer so it should work.
Posted on: 3/9/2004 1:29 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Hitec/MultiPlex Radios- Ask Hitec Customer Service"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1605736

RE: Dual Tank Mod
No pictures, but it's pretty simple. We do it in airplanes and helicopters all the time. I'll call tank #1 the tank closest to the engine, and tank #2 the second tank. Each tank has two lines coming out of it... not three, exactly two. Nothing else will work properly without some check valves and other klutzing around. Tank #1's klunk line goes to the carb.. same as any other setup. Tank #1's vent line goes to tank #2's klunk line, so instead of drawing pressure from the pipe, it's drawing fuel from tank #2. Tank #2's vent goes to the pipe pressure nipple (or open air). To refuel, same as normal... remove the line from the carb and put the fuel in. Fuel will flow into tank #1 until it is full. It will continue to flow out of tank #1's vent and back into tank #2 until it is full. Make sure the the vent (especially on tank #1) is the highest spot in the tank so you get that tank 100% full before fuel flows to tank #2.
Posted on: 3/9/2004 1:24 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "HPI Monster Truck Forum"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1605726

RE: How do you match preexsisting holes for a new cowl?
[quote]ORIGINAL: catboatr My hands are way too big to get in the tank compartment. You should hear the cussing when I'm trying to hook up a fueler in there! [/quote] Build bigger planes :D
Posted on: 3/9/2004 12:54 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Tips & Techniques"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1605668

RE: hobbytown usa
They opened one near me that lasted less than a year. The airplane section was about the size of the cash register cubicle at a convenience store, and their stock was very poor. I tried to special order things twice. The first time it took them TWO MONTHS (after 5 phone calls and visits) to get a spinner from Sig that was supposedly made to clear an APC prop. The second time, I don't remember what it was, but I gave up and bought it elsewhere after a month. Two months later (total of three now), they called and said that it was in. This was not a store out in BFE where the only way to deliver parts is by pony express... this is in Chino... near Pomona... less than 40 miles from downtown Los Angeles. They closed about 2 months after a Hobby People opened 5 miles away. There are now 5 Hobby People within 30 miles of me. Good thing too, because THEY never have decent stock levels either :)
Posted on: 3/8/2004 11:49 PM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "RC Car General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1605529

RE: How do you match preexsisting holes for a new cowl?
Reach inside the tank area and put something through the blind nut (like a sharpened screw) to mark the inside of the new cowl?
Posted on: 3/8/2004 11:38 PM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Tips & Techniques"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1605489

RE: Off Comment Joke Saved a Plane
[quote]ORIGINAL: daven the low rate so that the barrel closes just enough to keep you under the limit, then when you are in the air you flip to high rates where the barrel opens wide. [/quote] LOL! Like the F1 rule that the cars had to be at (or above) a specific ground clearance when leaving the pit area. The verbage "when leaving the pit area" was to indicate that the spec was to be met with new tires and a full fuel load. This was interpereted by the crews to mean "when leaving the pit area". They found that by installing a hydraulic system not unlike that on a low rider, they could drop the car to minimal clearance AFTER leaving the pit area. The improved aerodynamics more than made up for the added weight of the lift system.
Posted on: 3/8/2004 7:41 PM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1604526

RE: Off Comment Joke Saved a Plane
[quote]ORIGINAL: tiggerinva I ask you, who needs dual rates on the throttle? [:D] [/quote] Someone with an incredibly overpowered plane that will self-destruct in level flight at full throttle?
Posted on: 3/8/2004 3:00 PM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1603584

RE: Prop for an OS 1.08 on the CG Extra300
Running a 16x6 here. I don't dare fly straight and level for more than a short run at full throttle, has excellent vertical. I do run a Perry pump driven by case pressure.
Posted on: 3/8/2004 2:21 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1601995

RE: Off Comment Joke Saved a Plane
Hmm... not aileron, but throttle/elevator mixing could be used to combat thrust angle problems :D
Posted on: 3/8/2004 12:32 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "The Clubhouse"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1601749

RE: mechanical retracts? Are they durable?
Mechanical or pneumatic makes no difference, the problem is the gear wires tend to flex more, even with the little coils. My buddy's P51 lasted exactly one landing on grass before he couldn't retract the gear. My P47 made two landings on dirt before I had to tweak the wires again.
Posted on: 3/8/2004 12:08 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Kit Building"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1601679

RE: First 3D ARF???
Thanks 3D... good info.
Posted on: 3/3/2004 11:33 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1586382

RE: VectorFlight Sukhoi ARF tips wanted
Took the plunge and ordered one. Been spending the last few evenings working on it. Sweet model! I did fully shape filler blocks for the tail instead of using that plastic cover supplied (I keep hearing that they are going to pre-made filler blocks, but apparently not yet). The blocks are not hard at all to make, if you can find 5/16" sheet stock to "dummy up" the tail surfaces. I couldnt' find it and had to laminate 1/4 and 1/16 balsa together. For the blocks, I used 1" square stock, but I did have to add about a 1" length of 1/4" stock to the top to clear the fuselage. I also used a couple of filler blocks of 5/16 ahead of and behind the horizontal stab. I covered the blocks with TopFlight trim sheets... it ain't perfect, but from 5 feet away, it looks solid and the color is VERY close. I'll post some pictures when I get it to the field. So far, I only have one complaint... and this rant is aimed at ALL current builders: What's the deal with identical or similar color patterns on both the top and bottom?????? This one features a fuselage and tail that look the same, and the only difference on the wing is the crosswise strip of red. I think the worst example I've ever seen was one of the 40 size Ultimate ARFs had a red-white-blue stripe the length of the wings... top and bottom... and bipes are hard enough to orient, especially small ones. Anyways... rant off... :) I put two 6" red strips on the bottom of each wing, and two 2" strips on the bottom of each elevator. I also added a red star to the top of each wingtip. Now the question: Magnum .91 four-stroke (and taking into account the added weight of the tail blocks and 2-56 wire bracing)... what is a good position to mount the engine... fore/aft? I was thinking that 4-1/2" from the firewall would be a comfortable medium range, but I don't want to have to add lead. Should I go ahead and mount it all the way out on the ends of the beams (about 5" from the firewall), or bring it back some? Sig... what's your measurement?
Posted on: 3/3/2004 4:39 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "ARF or RTF"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1585709

RE: First 3D ARF???
Wow. Okay, so far, 4 votes for the UCD-60 and 4 for the new Yak. Has anyone actually had a chance to fly the Yak, or are you guys judging based on the video? If a YS-110 is actually powering the plane shown in the video, then I think it really would be a good way to go. Not cheap, but looks scale, and maybe a bit larger. Hmm...... Tough call. I really expected the Mayhem to have a few fans, but the poll is still young :)
Posted on: 3/3/2004 4:08 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1585682

RE: Packing a box 101 (Warning Rant)
Won't they accept a digital photo of both damaged parts?
Posted on: 3/2/2004 11:37 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1582860

RE: Here it is,EDF Boeing 717-200
Same as with glow... adjust the motor's timing. It used to be easy on glow engines. Most bearing-equipped engines had a separate nose/shaft support casting. Removing that (which held the carb) and rotating it toward the "driver's side" of the engine 90 degrees resulted in a properly timed reversed engine. Not sure how that would be accomplished with a motor (esp brushless), but it's the same idea.
Posted on: 3/2/2004 11:36 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Electric RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1582855

RE: First 3D ARF???
I wasn't aware of the Flip, but wouldn't the 110 be a bit much for it? It is reported to rock on a YS 63. Looking for something larger, but without breaking into the gassers (old eyes need a bigger bird ya know).
Posted on: 3/2/2004 2:57 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1582097

First 3D ARF???
Looking for a good first 3D model. Must be an ARF, and prefer to power it with a YS 110. The poll lists models that appear to be decent choices, but those of you with some experience would obviously know better than I. Thanks!
Posted on: 3/2/2004 12:37 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "3D Flying!"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1581873

RE: Here it is,EDF Boeing 717-200
Ya... pusher works and is very scale. I've seen quite a few '80s using a pair of .049 cox motors pushing 3-bladers. LOL! You could even cheat and say it's a model of the old MD88 "UHB" demonstrator. Dunno if you ever saw that or not, but the UHB (Ultra High Bypass) had a pair of multi-blade contra-rotating props on the back of the nacelle. Never went into production, as fuel prices dropped in 1989. The demonstrator only had the UHB engine on the #1 pylon. http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?airlinesearch=McDonnell%20Douglas&distinct_entry=true Check out photos #405754, 340963, 212668, 166061, 088442, 088343, 088342, 039701, 039600, 039464 And what it looked like as of 1994: 141998 :(
Posted on: 3/2/2004 12:24 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Electric RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1581836

RE: sullivan smoke pump works part time??
Do a search on "sullivan"... there's been a quite a few reports of mysterious problems with this system. I think the best solution was to put the check valve as close to the muffler as practical, instead of between the pump and tank as directed.
Posted on: 3/1/2004 11:56 PM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1581755

RE: Packing a box 101 (Warning Rant)
I know the feeling buddy. One of my suppliers will ship me a solid aluminum part that could survive a drop from 30,000ft and pack it in a box 4-times it's size loaded with packing peanuts. Then they'll ship me a circuit board in a box that is "just okay" size wise... passable with proper packing... but then instead of wrapping the board in bubble wrap, they'll pack the bottom of the box in bubble wrap and lay the board on top!
Posted on: 3/1/2004 10:01 PM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Questions and Answers"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1581352

RE: Here it is,EDF Boeing 717-200
Only problem with doing the MD80 would be the engine size would require the model to be much larger overall if it is to make the same attempts at scale as the MD90/717. If no attempt at scale is being made and the idea is just to have a "concept model", then it would work. Remember, the MD90/717 uses a much larger bypass fan... closer in size to the 737/757 engine. The MD80 used the PW noisemakers like the 737-200. That's probably one reason that we haven't seen any (or many) scale DF models of the MD80... the engine nacelle diameter dictates the scale of the aircraft, which means that and MD80 using a 5" glow DF would be HUGE... the MD90/717 would end up being significantly smaller given the same engine diameter, meaning less weight and better flight. Same goes for the early 737. When Larry Jolly was approached about building the model for the CBS TV-Movie "Miracle Landing" back in 1990, he pleaded with the producers to allow him to deviate from reality and build the model of a 737-400 instead of the 200. He built the 200. There is one photo of the model, flying, without the roof, here: http://www.airodyssey.net/articles/movie-ml.html In-flight filming was done at Mile Square Park and Sepulveda Basin. Larry said that it was pretty hairy flying the jet in low passes for the cameras with fog machines obscuring everything.
Posted on: 3/1/2004 6:40 PM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Electric RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1580607

RE: Avonds F15 build-how involved?
[quote]ORIGINAL: ECalderon Finally, because in the DF version the engine head cover almost touches the hatch, you can't use the dorsal brake. With turbine you don´t have that problem. [/quote] Dorian Andersen did. Not sure if he rotated the engines or what, but it had a fully functional speed brake and operating canopy. This was built around '90 or '91... maybe check with Larry Wolfe and see if he has some photos.
Posted on: 3/1/2004 6:22 PM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "RC Jets"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1580530

RE: stopped by cops???
[quote]ORIGINAL: ICrashThings could they give u a ticket if u were on the back of a moving truck and at the same time having your rc truck/car drive behind you? [/quote] If you are in violation of seatbelt and seating laws, you betcha'. You can't ride in the back of an open pickup truck, and in states that have seatbelt laws, you can't even be in the back of a pickup with a camper or shell on the back unless there's a properly mounted seat with belts.
Posted on: 2/29/2004 10:59 PM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "RC Monster Trucks"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1578079

RE: RPM limits?
Specifications Bore: 1.08 in (27.6mm) Stroke: .98 in (25.0mm) Weight: 20.82 oz Prop: 14x12 RPM: 2,500 - 16,000 Displacement: .91 cu in Crankshaft: 8mm - 1mm There's the basic specs. This engine is reported to produce about 3.5hp, which is .5 more than the OS 1.08. Given the RPM range, I would think that you would want to shoot for the 16,000 range with the gear drive. Here's where it gets interesting. Using ThrustHP, which is generally very generous, spinning an APC 14x12 with 3.5hp only gives you a little over 10,000rpm. Using that as a baseline and exploring other props, here's what we've got. 16x6 at just under 11,000 11x8 at 16,000 Realize that I've never been able to get an engine to match the RPM/HP figures given by this program, so we're talking about absolute best-case here. Throwing in a 5:1 reduction drops your RPM from 16,000 to 3,200 To "burn" 3.5 HP at 3200 rpm would require a 25x19 4-blade prop to attain 50mph These would be rough ballpark numbers, and there's going to be some efficiency losses in the gear reduction. Such a setup would require a LOT of runway... remember that 3200 is not much higher than many engines idle.
Posted on: 2/29/2004 3:50 PM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1576793

RE: reading Prop Specs
[quote]ORIGINAL: ke5in Since the 8x6 turns slower and creates less thrust (Geistware above) is that because it is “working against� the motor more because the pitch is greater than the 9x7 and, therefore, the 8x6 would seem to create the most load? [/quote] I think you misinterpereted his answer... I know I did. You asked about the 8x6 compared to the 9x7, and he gave you the parameters of the 9x7. The 8x6 will probably spin about 2000rpm higher. Top speed would be slightly more, but static thrust would be slightly lower... BOTH of these numbers are very close though, so I'd say that both props would end up being comparable AS LONG AS you aren't overloading the engine with the 9x7.
Posted on: 2/26/2004 1:09 AM by Author "RichLockyer" in the forum "Beginners"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=1565845