Allure by Bryan Hebert
09-09-2014, 09:52 PM
#151
My Feedback: (92)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rosamond, CA
Posts: 2,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Bryan. When it's calm out I set the idle to as slow as it will reliably go. That way I can do a little slower, closer in style of flying. To me the larger props just seem to make the model steadier with fantastic acceleration if you need it. If there is wind, to accommodate a further out, larger style, I bring the idle trim up a few clicks as the braking can be too much. I don't play much with changing props for conditions as I think having a very consistent set up is better then making changes at a contest. But if you really need speed put a 22x22 on the front along with the rear and it really goes.
Glad to see you are liking the Contra. I was sold on it over three years ago with the first flight. There has certainly been a lot of development and lessons learned in that time. I currently have 2,400 flights on the Contra in 4 different models. I wish I had paid more attention to getting the model right when I first started using it. But now with what I have learned it's an easy switch in any model.
Glad to see you are liking the Contra. I was sold on it over three years ago with the first flight. There has certainly been a lot of development and lessons learned in that time. I currently have 2,400 flights on the Contra in 4 different models. I wish I had paid more attention to getting the model right when I first started using it. But now with what I have learned it's an easy switch in any model.
09-10-2014, 06:05 AM
#152
Thanks for the input Tony.
I Never doubted the Contra was a good unit. I was surprised at how good it was though. you were right! Very Clever and awesome engineering , pretty forward thinking. I Just Knew that it was getting blamed and credited for trim problems and improvements that could not be . I knew,if set up in most planes correctly, it would work.. Malcolm`s Valiant was a perfect example of that.
I`m glad you guys pushed the development of props and durability. It makes it easy for a guy like me to walk in ,and plug and play.
I will say I`m surprised at the efficiency of the unit with battery usage that was the most reveling thing to me. I thought that might be a problem but it seems ok for now and with Eds Throttle device, this should be a awesome combo!
Dave Lockhart has been helping with the setup and has given me the same advise on the props. I need more time to play with the setups, But with running no brakes whatsoever on the unit there was too much breaking in the plane especially in the wind I went back to the small props and loved them right away. All the props had good power though.
I do agree to make one set of props work for all conditions ,This is how we work it on the glow models as well.
Bryan
I Never doubted the Contra was a good unit. I was surprised at how good it was though. you were right! Very Clever and awesome engineering , pretty forward thinking. I Just Knew that it was getting blamed and credited for trim problems and improvements that could not be . I knew,if set up in most planes correctly, it would work.. Malcolm`s Valiant was a perfect example of that.
I`m glad you guys pushed the development of props and durability. It makes it easy for a guy like me to walk in ,and plug and play.
I will say I`m surprised at the efficiency of the unit with battery usage that was the most reveling thing to me. I thought that might be a problem but it seems ok for now and with Eds Throttle device, this should be a awesome combo!
Dave Lockhart has been helping with the setup and has given me the same advise on the props. I need more time to play with the setups, But with running no brakes whatsoever on the unit there was too much breaking in the plane especially in the wind I went back to the small props and loved them right away. All the props had good power though.
I do agree to make one set of props work for all conditions ,This is how we work it on the glow models as well.
Bryan
Last edited by flyncajun; 10-15-2014 at 01:23 PM.
09-10-2014, 06:35 AM
#153
My Feedback: (1)
Here are a few pictures of how the battery tray is situated to show ease of access to the compartment and a shot to see how far forward the opening is for the canopy on the prototype. This is at the very front of the opening and with the production model, the canopy opening is even longer for the electric / Contra Allure. As in the "First Impressions" video, Bryan has decided to make a second mold for this plane which will feature a non-removable chin cowl and no sub-floor for total access as well as the extended canopy opening. This will reduce weight slightly from an already impressive number and increase strength.
Sunday, I put 11 flights on this airplane beginning to learn it as well as the differences in the application of throttle with the Contra vs. a single prop electric plane. Let it be known that I have not flown the Allure in any other configuration so I'm not at a point that I can say what the differences are without the Contra. What I can say is that this plane and this Contra unit are well matched. The constant speed of this Allure honestly surprised me. We didn't put any braking into the ESC as Bryan felt confident that with the size of the plane, it had plenty of drag. I agreed but still thought the plane would be rather fast on exit of a down line vertical to horizontal. This was not the case at all. The plane exits out of the vertical just wonderfully and, unlike all the other electrics I've flown, you won't coast very much. This is due to the constant speed.
Yesterday, I put another set of flights on this airplane and will fly more today after work. I've played with the CG a little bit but have stuck fairly close to where Bryan wanted it to be. The purpose was to see what the differences were in the flight characteristics based on small CG changes. There really was little difference aside from the spin entry and wind penetration. The further forward the CG, the better these two facets were. Again, my changes were no more than 2% MAC but the good news is that this plane is obviously going to have a wide CG range that it will fly very well at. At this point and with as few flights as I have on it, I just need to learn the plane and figure out my settings for expo and rate. The plane needs no mixes at all except the typical elevator to idle. Not one other mix is in this plane. I still don't understand how Bryan can think of something in his head and just know what to do so that a plane needs no mixing. Sometimes you have to look and wonder if there is something he's doing and not really saying but I'm a witness to the fact that there is no hocus-pocus here. It truly is in the setup and design.
I think the thing that impresses me the most after only 15 flights is how much lift the height of the fuselage offers. You actually wind up waiting to input rudder in rolling maneuvers. The fuse provides enough lift that very little rudder is needed here. What this does, at least for me, is make the rollers much easier to do. It feels like you are simply coaxing the aircraft for the minor corrections it needs due to external forces instead of having to use your pilot skills to do the maneuver. Essentially, it allows you to lean on the plane and use it as a crutch instead of the airplane using the pilot as the crutch.
I've also included the pictures of the trailing edge of the rudder so y'all can see the reverse flair Bryan is talking about. He can go into detail.
Essentially, there isn't anything added to this airplane to make it fly exceptionally well with the Contra. I am honored that Bryan gave me the opportunity to fly this plane for a while. It will be a sad day when I have to give the plane back to him but a great day as well because that means my Allure will be ready to take flight!
Sunday, I put 11 flights on this airplane beginning to learn it as well as the differences in the application of throttle with the Contra vs. a single prop electric plane. Let it be known that I have not flown the Allure in any other configuration so I'm not at a point that I can say what the differences are without the Contra. What I can say is that this plane and this Contra unit are well matched. The constant speed of this Allure honestly surprised me. We didn't put any braking into the ESC as Bryan felt confident that with the size of the plane, it had plenty of drag. I agreed but still thought the plane would be rather fast on exit of a down line vertical to horizontal. This was not the case at all. The plane exits out of the vertical just wonderfully and, unlike all the other electrics I've flown, you won't coast very much. This is due to the constant speed.
Yesterday, I put another set of flights on this airplane and will fly more today after work. I've played with the CG a little bit but have stuck fairly close to where Bryan wanted it to be. The purpose was to see what the differences were in the flight characteristics based on small CG changes. There really was little difference aside from the spin entry and wind penetration. The further forward the CG, the better these two facets were. Again, my changes were no more than 2% MAC but the good news is that this plane is obviously going to have a wide CG range that it will fly very well at. At this point and with as few flights as I have on it, I just need to learn the plane and figure out my settings for expo and rate. The plane needs no mixes at all except the typical elevator to idle. Not one other mix is in this plane. I still don't understand how Bryan can think of something in his head and just know what to do so that a plane needs no mixing. Sometimes you have to look and wonder if there is something he's doing and not really saying but I'm a witness to the fact that there is no hocus-pocus here. It truly is in the setup and design.
I think the thing that impresses me the most after only 15 flights is how much lift the height of the fuselage offers. You actually wind up waiting to input rudder in rolling maneuvers. The fuse provides enough lift that very little rudder is needed here. What this does, at least for me, is make the rollers much easier to do. It feels like you are simply coaxing the aircraft for the minor corrections it needs due to external forces instead of having to use your pilot skills to do the maneuver. Essentially, it allows you to lean on the plane and use it as a crutch instead of the airplane using the pilot as the crutch.
I've also included the pictures of the trailing edge of the rudder so y'all can see the reverse flair Bryan is talking about. He can go into detail.
Essentially, there isn't anything added to this airplane to make it fly exceptionally well with the Contra. I am honored that Bryan gave me the opportunity to fly this plane for a while. It will be a sad day when I have to give the plane back to him but a great day as well because that means my Allure will be ready to take flight!
09-10-2014, 11:18 AM
#154
Have you ever asked yourself Why no one has put a flair on their Ailerons? it should totally reduce the need for Expo !
There are a few airplanes being produced with every trick (add on) conceived to date on it, maybe they will add it later!
Bryan
it should totally reduce the need for Expo !There are a few airplanes being produced with every trick (add on) conceived to date on it, maybe they will add it later!
Bryan
09-11-2014, 05:42 AM
#156
Hi Nial,
Yes it has a Purpose. One is to prove that a good set up and design eliminates the need for a flair. The flair only reduces rudder power. and will give terrible mixes under load in our high demand maneuvers. The other I can`t disclose.
We must remember that the ability for great stability and Agility comes from the Wings. Everything else is an aid to those wings. Fin/Rudder Stabs, Fuse , Power ECT.Learning how to compartmentalize the Job of each part of the airplane and tune them to perform ONLY their job will eliminate most if not all aids. and guide the designer in the right direction for improvements. If you can`t find the boundaries of improvements or failure How can you really improve the design? you won`t find that by just slapping stuff on.
It`s like my Triangulation trimming guide. http://ckaero.net/guides.php Consider it a puzzle. All the pieces are there to make the picture. I have the boundaries, the like colors, the middle section and the main part of the picture there in the box. If you try to put a boundary in the middle part ,or put two pieces not of the same color together, it won`t complete the picture. But when all the pieces are in place , Only then can you enjoy the Picture and all those little pieces start making sense.
I`m not saying all add on`s are bad, some work well I even use some But, Most cause twice as many problems as they fix. Starting with a good foundation of power and purity in design setup will do wonders for high demand maneuvers such as the new schedules are demanding.
I know there is more than one way to skin a cat But here lately, I think the Knife has become a little dull
Bryan
Yes it has a Purpose. One is to prove that a good set up and design eliminates the need for a flair. The flair only reduces rudder power. and will give terrible mixes under load in our high demand maneuvers. The other I can`t disclose.
We must remember that the ability for great stability and Agility comes from the Wings. Everything else is an aid to those wings. Fin/Rudder Stabs, Fuse , Power ECT.Learning how to compartmentalize the Job of each part of the airplane and tune them to perform ONLY their job will eliminate most if not all aids. and guide the designer in the right direction for improvements. If you can`t find the boundaries of improvements or failure How can you really improve the design? you won`t find that by just slapping stuff on.
It`s like my Triangulation trimming guide. http://ckaero.net/guides.php Consider it a puzzle. All the pieces are there to make the picture. I have the boundaries, the like colors, the middle section and the main part of the picture there in the box. If you try to put a boundary in the middle part ,or put two pieces not of the same color together, it won`t complete the picture. But when all the pieces are in place , Only then can you enjoy the Picture and all those little pieces start making sense.
I`m not saying all add on`s are bad, some work well I even use some But, Most cause twice as many problems as they fix. Starting with a good foundation of power and purity in design setup will do wonders for high demand maneuvers such as the new schedules are demanding.
I know there is more than one way to skin a cat But here lately, I think the Knife has become a little dull
Bryan
Last edited by flyncajun; 09-11-2014 at 07:11 AM.
09-11-2014, 07:49 AM
#157
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cork, IRELAND
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Bryan,
Thanks for the detailed response.
It was my understanding from the Contra thread that people were adding the Flair to make up for yaw instability on some designs due to insufficient fin area. Having said that Naruke has been adding flaired rudders since his Asyuler mono and continued that on his bipes on rudder and elevator which has nothing to do with Contra considerations.
Glad you like the Contra so much
Niall
Niall
Thanks for the detailed response.
It was my understanding from the Contra thread that people were adding the Flair to make up for yaw instability on some designs due to insufficient fin area. Having said that Naruke has been adding flaired rudders since his Asyuler mono and continued that on his bipes on rudder and elevator which has nothing to do with Contra considerations.
Glad you like the Contra so much
Niall
Niall
09-11-2014, 08:16 AM
#158
Hi Niall your welcome.
Yes many designers are adding A flair I know, mostly it`s because they just copy others who they think knows something they don`t !
No field testing just copy cat.
Purity is still about design and setup the flair is for the ability to run a rear cg that's it. As is right thrust, and mixing!
The Contra cannot tolerate a rear cg setting. Everybody thinks they can run everything at zero inc. for the (symmetrical approach) with the Contra, it does not work that way. Wings are always lifting. O-O setup is also responsible for the need for down thrust in the up lines. Flawed thinking is causing poor designs, this is where all the mods and add on`s are required. And some how we make them all work ! I`m about purity and advancing design and setup knowledge.
Remember one of my Trim rules , all wings have a limit to what they can do, (lift effeciency ect.)trying to force it to do what it is not capable of doing with more tail weight is where the problems start. #1 rule is Cg limit #2 wing efficiency. #3 incidence.
The wing Is the heart of any plane.
I love the Contra in the Allure. I have flown a few other airplanes with it, I didn't like it so much then But I knew it wasn`t the contra Unit causing the problem.
Bryan
Yes many designers are adding A flair I know, mostly it`s because they just copy others who they think knows something they don`t !
No field testing just copy cat.
Purity is still about design and setup
the flair is for the ability to run a rear cg that's it. As is right thrust, and mixing! The Contra cannot tolerate a rear cg setting. Everybody thinks they can run everything at zero inc. for the (symmetrical approach) with the Contra, it does not work that way. Wings are always lifting. O-O setup is also responsible for the need for down thrust in the up lines. Flawed thinking is causing poor designs, this is where all the mods and add on`s are required. And some how we make them all work ! I`m about purity and advancing design and setup knowledge.
Remember one of my Trim rules , all wings have a limit to what they can do, (lift effeciency ect.)trying to force it to do what it is not capable of doing with more tail weight is where the problems start. #1 rule is Cg limit #2 wing efficiency. #3 incidence.
The wing Is the heart of any plane.
I love the Contra in the Allure. I have flown a few other airplanes with it, I didn't like it so much then
But I knew it wasn`t the contra Unit causing the problem. Bryan
Last edited by flyncajun; 09-11-2014 at 11:57 AM.
09-17-2014, 07:35 PM
#159
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although not specifically related to the Allure, Bryan and Brett have published a great article on the CK Aero blog here: http://www.ckaero.net/blog/2014/09/1...sive-approach/
Cheers,
Jason.
Cheers,
Jason.
09-19-2014, 07:49 AM
#160
My Feedback: (1)
I've now put about 40 flights on the Contra Allure. We've had some pretty good thunderstorms blowing through in Texas and they all seem to pop up right after work on the way to the field. It seems like the good Lord wants me to work on flying in some pretty strong winds. The winds have been 25-30 kts and 90 degrees cross blowing in. The plane seems to handle it well. It immediately crabs into the wind making wind correction and keeping your distance a lot easier. Of course, with that much wind, I was flying each maneuver somewhat smaller but the sequence was taking the same amount of time to complete (about 7:30). The plane did not get bucked around much at all and, due to the light wing loading, recovered very quickly. I've begun to understand the Contra a little better as well. Throttle management and understanding that I'm not necessarily controlling the speed but, instead, the power, has become much better. Through the AMA Masters sequence, I'm averaging about 3500-3600 mah without the wind. Ironically, I was averaging about 3200 mah flying slightly smaller in the wind. This is with the same gears and props that are described in the earlier post. I haven't switched to Tony's recommendation yet as I have a contest this weekend. With this little time to prepare, I figured I better learn what I have instead of experimenting but that will begin after this contest.
I took the Contra unit apart last night as the plane now has 44 flights with it in the nose. The unit was spotless and in great shape. After the contest, I should have right at 50 flights and will grease the unit then. I'm excited to get back and try Tony's gear and prop suggestion to see what differences are in the braking and speed with the Allure. I don't believe in the saying of "this is the best thing since sliced bread" but I do believe in this airplane. Although I don't have that many flights yet, I do feel that this airplane has improved the quality of my flying. Bryan told me that when Brett flew the glow version for the first few times, he said that the Allure is the Alferma in a monoplane. If this is what the Alferma flies like, sign me up for another one of the Allures and 2 Alfermas.
I took the Contra unit apart last night as the plane now has 44 flights with it in the nose. The unit was spotless and in great shape. After the contest, I should have right at 50 flights and will grease the unit then. I'm excited to get back and try Tony's gear and prop suggestion to see what differences are in the braking and speed with the Allure. I don't believe in the saying of "this is the best thing since sliced bread" but I do believe in this airplane. Although I don't have that many flights yet, I do feel that this airplane has improved the quality of my flying. Bryan told me that when Brett flew the glow version for the first few times, he said that the Allure is the Alferma in a monoplane. If this is what the Alferma flies like, sign me up for another one of the Allures and 2 Alfermas.
Last edited by smcharg; 09-19-2014 at 08:03 AM.
09-20-2014, 11:37 PM
#161
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've now put about 40 flights on the Contra Allure. We've had some pretty good thunderstorms blowing through in Texas and they all seem to pop up right after work on the way to the field. It seems like the good Lord wants me to work on flying in some pretty strong winds. The winds have been 25-30 kts and 90 degrees cross blowing in. The plane seems to handle it well. It immediately crabs into the wind making wind correction and keeping your distance a lot easier. Of course, with that much wind, I was flying each maneuver somewhat smaller but the sequence was taking the same amount of time to complete (about 7:30). The plane did not get bucked around much at all and, due to the light wing loading, recovered very quickly. I've begun to understand the Contra a little better as well. Throttle management and understanding that I'm not necessarily controlling the speed but, instead, the power, has become much better. Through the AMA Masters sequence, I'm averaging about 3500-3600 mah without the wind. Ironically, I was averaging about 3200 mah flying slightly smaller in the wind. This is with the same gears and props that are described in the earlier post. I haven't switched to Tony's recommendation yet as I have a contest this weekend. With this little time to prepare, I figured I better learn what I have instead of experimenting but that will begin after this contest.
I took the Contra unit apart last night as the plane now has 44 flights with it in the nose. The unit was spotless and in great shape. After the contest, I should have right at 50 flights and will grease the unit then. I'm excited to get back and try Tony's gear and prop suggestion to see what differences are in the braking and speed with the Allure. I don't believe in the saying of "this is the best thing since sliced bread" but I do believe in this airplane. Although I don't have that many flights yet, I do feel that this airplane has improved the quality of my flying. Bryan told me that when Brett flew the glow version for the first few times, he said that the Allure is the Alferma in a monoplane. If this is what the Alferma flies like, sign me up for another one of the Allures and 2 Alfermas.
I took the Contra unit apart last night as the plane now has 44 flights with it in the nose. The unit was spotless and in great shape. After the contest, I should have right at 50 flights and will grease the unit then. I'm excited to get back and try Tony's gear and prop suggestion to see what differences are in the braking and speed with the Allure. I don't believe in the saying of "this is the best thing since sliced bread" but I do believe in this airplane. Although I don't have that many flights yet, I do feel that this airplane has improved the quality of my flying. Bryan told me that when Brett flew the glow version for the first few times, he said that the Allure is the Alferma in a monoplane. If this is what the Alferma flies like, sign me up for another one of the Allures and 2 Alfermas.
Thanks for the update mate. You say that the Allure has improved the quality of your flying, which aspects of your flying are you referring too? Is it overall or any particular manoeuvre/s?
Cheers,
Jason.
09-24-2014, 09:21 AM
#162
My Feedback: (1)
Hi Jason,
It's definitely overall. Consistency, in my opinion, is key in precision aerobatics. Consistency helps you in every aspect including finding mistakes. If you aren't able to replicate the problem on a consistent basis, there is no way to determine where the problem lies. Once you find the problem, you are able to correct it whether it's the aircraft or the pilot. This plane has increased my consistency so that I can diagnose those areas that I may be having issues with or, indeed, excelling at. Honestly, even with my Shinden, I wasn't able to obtain this level of consistency before and that's a huge benefit.
Scott
It's definitely overall. Consistency, in my opinion, is key in precision aerobatics. Consistency helps you in every aspect including finding mistakes. If you aren't able to replicate the problem on a consistent basis, there is no way to determine where the problem lies. Once you find the problem, you are able to correct it whether it's the aircraft or the pilot. This plane has increased my consistency so that I can diagnose those areas that I may be having issues with or, indeed, excelling at. Honestly, even with my Shinden, I wasn't able to obtain this level of consistency before and that's a huge benefit.
Scott
10-08-2014, 08:03 PM
#163
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Jason,
It's definitely overall. Consistency, in my opinion, is key in precision aerobatics. Consistency helps you in every aspect including finding mistakes. If you aren't able to replicate the problem on a consistent basis, there is no way to determine where the problem lies. Once you find the problem, you are able to correct it whether it's the aircraft or the pilot. This plane has increased my consistency so that I can diagnose those areas that I may be having issues with or, indeed, excelling at. Honestly, even with my Shinden, I wasn't able to obtain this level of consistency before and that's a huge benefit.
Scott
It's definitely overall. Consistency, in my opinion, is key in precision aerobatics. Consistency helps you in every aspect including finding mistakes. If you aren't able to replicate the problem on a consistent basis, there is no way to determine where the problem lies. Once you find the problem, you are able to correct it whether it's the aircraft or the pilot. This plane has increased my consistency so that I can diagnose those areas that I may be having issues with or, indeed, excelling at. Honestly, even with my Shinden, I wasn't able to obtain this level of consistency before and that's a huge benefit.
Scott
I agree, consistency is a key part of success in this game and pretty much any game for that matter....
Have you had a chance to experiment with the different props and ratios on the Contra yet?
Cheers,
Jason.
10-09-2014, 05:31 AM
#164
My Feedback: (1)
Hi Jason,
I've only played with the 9.89 gears and the different props so far. It's been a busy month with two competitions and me putting on a 3rd this last weekend so I haven't had the time to swap out the gears as of yet. What I have found is that there is almost too much braking with the larger 22" props on the 9.89 gears and, in wind, not enough speed (We are in a fairly windy climate). It's not that the aircraft flies bad slow at all but, in the wind, one must be able to have the ability to fly a little faster. The Contra is so good at keeping a constant speed that the plane does not have as much speed as much as I think I need in the wind with the bigger props. I have full intentions to start experimenting with the 10.33 gears and the 22" props as Tony suggested after the 18th which is our final competition for the year. Right now, the prop package of choice is definitely the 20.5 x 20.5 up front and the 20 x 22.5 in the rear. It seems to be a great overall setup with this airplane vs. the 22" props on the 9.89 gears. I am excited to try the 10.33 gears though. Also, an interesting note, with these props you do not hear the normal "syncopation" that most Contras have at all. It's still a deeper tone but you lose that aspect of it which makes this plane incredibly quiet. I'm not sure what to attribute that to as a matter of fact but I do believe that it is the prop combination and how large and stiff the fuselage is as I think this is absorbing a lot of the sound / vibration. A lot of others have noted the same thing.
I have been playing with the throttle curve as a lot of the power is within 20%-40% of stick travel making it more difficult for me to have a smooth response all the way through the maneuvers. I tried an exponential curve but, at this point, I believe using a spline on the Futaba radio will be better suited for what we're trying to accomplish. I'd like to point out that all of this experimentation is to the Contra itself and not changing the Allure aircraft. The plane has been very solid across the board and nothing is being done to it to get better results. It's all about making the individual comfortable with the setup to match his/her flying style. No mixing, no add-on anything. Just a solid airframe and some small tweaking to the power plant. I think that's what I'm most excited about.
I've had a few folks fly the plane including Mark Hunt (US Masters National champion) who had this plane with a single blade before I had it with the Contra. Mark noted that the plane flew almost identical to when he had it with the single prop. This is excellent news and I do believe his word speaks volumes about how solid the airplane is. I asked if he had the airplane what he would prefer as far as keeping the Contra in it or a single prop. His answer? "I'd use the single prop because that's what I know but it really wouldn't matter because it's that consistent of a design." The end result is this airplane is going to do well regardless of the power plant. After the 18th, I'll change out the gears and put the props that Tony suggests and see what I see. I'm hoping for a little more speed without a lot more MAH draw for windy conditions but I don't expect flight characteristics to change at all. I'll keep y'all posted!
I've only played with the 9.89 gears and the different props so far. It's been a busy month with two competitions and me putting on a 3rd this last weekend so I haven't had the time to swap out the gears as of yet. What I have found is that there is almost too much braking with the larger 22" props on the 9.89 gears and, in wind, not enough speed (We are in a fairly windy climate). It's not that the aircraft flies bad slow at all but, in the wind, one must be able to have the ability to fly a little faster. The Contra is so good at keeping a constant speed that the plane does not have as much speed as much as I think I need in the wind with the bigger props. I have full intentions to start experimenting with the 10.33 gears and the 22" props as Tony suggested after the 18th which is our final competition for the year. Right now, the prop package of choice is definitely the 20.5 x 20.5 up front and the 20 x 22.5 in the rear. It seems to be a great overall setup with this airplane vs. the 22" props on the 9.89 gears. I am excited to try the 10.33 gears though. Also, an interesting note, with these props you do not hear the normal "syncopation" that most Contras have at all. It's still a deeper tone but you lose that aspect of it which makes this plane incredibly quiet. I'm not sure what to attribute that to as a matter of fact but I do believe that it is the prop combination and how large and stiff the fuselage is as I think this is absorbing a lot of the sound / vibration. A lot of others have noted the same thing.
I have been playing with the throttle curve as a lot of the power is within 20%-40% of stick travel making it more difficult for me to have a smooth response all the way through the maneuvers. I tried an exponential curve but, at this point, I believe using a spline on the Futaba radio will be better suited for what we're trying to accomplish. I'd like to point out that all of this experimentation is to the Contra itself and not changing the Allure aircraft. The plane has been very solid across the board and nothing is being done to it to get better results. It's all about making the individual comfortable with the setup to match his/her flying style. No mixing, no add-on anything. Just a solid airframe and some small tweaking to the power plant. I think that's what I'm most excited about.
I've had a few folks fly the plane including Mark Hunt (US Masters National champion) who had this plane with a single blade before I had it with the Contra. Mark noted that the plane flew almost identical to when he had it with the single prop. This is excellent news and I do believe his word speaks volumes about how solid the airplane is. I asked if he had the airplane what he would prefer as far as keeping the Contra in it or a single prop. His answer? "I'd use the single prop because that's what I know but it really wouldn't matter because it's that consistent of a design." The end result is this airplane is going to do well regardless of the power plant. After the 18th, I'll change out the gears and put the props that Tony suggests and see what I see. I'm hoping for a little more speed without a lot more MAH draw for windy conditions but I don't expect flight characteristics to change at all. I'll keep y'all posted!
Last edited by smcharg; 10-09-2014 at 05:47 AM.
10-09-2014, 11:01 AM
#165
Hi Jason,
I've only played with the 9.89 gears and the different props so far. It's been a busy month with two competitions and me putting on a 3rd this last weekend so I haven't had the time to swap out the gears as of yet. What I have found is that there is almost too much braking with the larger 22" props on the 9.89 gears and, in wind, not enough speed (We are in a fairly windy climate). It's not that the aircraft flies bad slow at all but, in the wind, one must be able to have the ability to fly a little faster. The Contra is so good at keeping a constant speed that the plane does not have as much speed as much as I think I need in the wind with the bigger props. I have full intentions to start experimenting with the 10.33 gears and the 22" props as Tony suggested after the 18th which is our final competition for the year. Right now, the prop package of choice is definitely the 20.5 x 20.5 up front and the 20 x 22.5 in the rear. It seems to be a great overall setup with this airplane vs. the 22" props on the 9.89 gears. I am excited to try the 10.33 gears though. Also, an interesting note, with these props you do not hear the normal "syncopation" that most Contras have at all. It's still a deeper tone but you lose that aspect of it which makes this plane incredibly quiet. I'm not sure what to attribute that to as a matter of fact but I do believe that it is the prop combination and how large and stiff the fuselage is as I think this is absorbing a lot of the sound / vibration. A lot of others have noted the same thing.
…..
I've only played with the 9.89 gears and the different props so far. It's been a busy month with two competitions and me putting on a 3rd this last weekend so I haven't had the time to swap out the gears as of yet. What I have found is that there is almost too much braking with the larger 22" props on the 9.89 gears and, in wind, not enough speed (We are in a fairly windy climate). It's not that the aircraft flies bad slow at all but, in the wind, one must be able to have the ability to fly a little faster. The Contra is so good at keeping a constant speed that the plane does not have as much speed as much as I think I need in the wind with the bigger props. I have full intentions to start experimenting with the 10.33 gears and the 22" props as Tony suggested after the 18th which is our final competition for the year. Right now, the prop package of choice is definitely the 20.5 x 20.5 up front and the 20 x 22.5 in the rear. It seems to be a great overall setup with this airplane vs. the 22" props on the 9.89 gears. I am excited to try the 10.33 gears though. Also, an interesting note, with these props you do not hear the normal "syncopation" that most Contras have at all. It's still a deeper tone but you lose that aspect of it which makes this plane incredibly quiet. I'm not sure what to attribute that to as a matter of fact but I do believe that it is the prop combination and how large and stiff the fuselage is as I think this is absorbing a lot of the sound / vibration. A lot of others have noted the same thing.
…..
Jim O
10-09-2014, 02:31 PM
#167
Lower pitch and higher gear ratio (lower prop rpm) results in lower speed theoretically. Still might be better overall; I'm not sure what Tony's criteria is. I've never tried that combination.
Jim
Jim
10-11-2014, 10:23 AM
#168
Jim
When I installed the Contra,I took your advise on the prop and gear selection because it made sense to me. Every body else was telling me to go to the larger props, This airframe is so big I knew the larger props would not be a good choice as I was able to fly the Single prop NUE setup without breaking on the speed controller.
after a few flights, I tried the larger prop combo 22" I think and while it pulled fine, it had too much drag on the airframe in moderate winds.
I hope to experiment some more but the 9:89 gears with the APC clones just worked fantastic all around. Good breaks ,good power /vertical or wind penetration, and very quiet. It`s gonna be hard to beat!
Bryan
When I installed the Contra,I took your advise on the prop and gear selection because it made sense to me. Every body else was telling me to go to the larger props, This airframe is so big I knew the larger props would not be a good choice as I was able to fly the Single prop NUE setup without breaking on the speed controller.
after a few flights, I tried the larger prop combo 22" I think and while it pulled fine, it had too much drag on the airframe in moderate winds.
I hope to experiment some more but the 9:89 gears with the APC clones just worked fantastic all around. Good breaks ,good power /vertical or wind penetration, and very quiet. It`s gonna be hard to beat!
Bryan
10-11-2014, 11:23 AM
#169
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jim
When I installed the Contra,I took your advise on the prop and gear selection because it made sense to me. Every body else was telling me to go to the larger props, This airframe is so big I knew the larger props would not be a good choice as I was able to fly the Single prop NUE setup without breaking on the speed controller.
after a few flights, I tried the larger prop combo 22" I think and while it pulled fine, it had too much drag on the airframe in moderate winds.
I hope to experiment some more but the 9:89 gears with the APC clones just worked fantastic all around. Good breaks ,good power /vertical or wind penetration, and very quiet. It`s gonna be hard to beat!
Bryan
When I installed the Contra,I took your advise on the prop and gear selection because it made sense to me. Every body else was telling me to go to the larger props, This airframe is so big I knew the larger props would not be a good choice as I was able to fly the Single prop NUE setup without breaking on the speed controller.
after a few flights, I tried the larger prop combo 22" I think and while it pulled fine, it had too much drag on the airframe in moderate winds.
I hope to experiment some more but the 9:89 gears with the APC clones just worked fantastic all around. Good breaks ,good power /vertical or wind penetration, and very quiet. It`s gonna be hard to beat!
Bryan
Thanks guys.
Cheers,
Jason.
10-11-2014, 12:20 PM
#170
Jim
When I installed the Contra,I took your advise on the prop and gear selection because it made sense to me. Every body else was telling me to go to the larger props, This airframe is so big I knew the larger props would not be a good choice as I was able to fly the Single prop NUE setup without breaking on the speed controller.
after a few flights, I tried the larger prop combo 22" I think and while it pulled fine, it had too much drag on the airframe in moderate winds.
I hope to experiment some more but the 9:89 gears with the APC clones just worked fantastic all around. Good breaks ,good power /vertical or wind penetration, and very quiet. It`s gonna be hard to beat!
Bryan
When I installed the Contra,I took your advise on the prop and gear selection because it made sense to me. Every body else was telling me to go to the larger props, This airframe is so big I knew the larger props would not be a good choice as I was able to fly the Single prop NUE setup without breaking on the speed controller.
after a few flights, I tried the larger prop combo 22" I think and while it pulled fine, it had too much drag on the airframe in moderate winds.
I hope to experiment some more but the 9:89 gears with the APC clones just worked fantastic all around. Good breaks ,good power /vertical or wind penetration, and very quiet. It`s gonna be hard to beat!
Bryan
Bryan
You need to try the Throttle-Tech. Not only does it keep the power consistent throughout the flight but it ends up using less battery capacity if you set it right. It tells me I was wasting power and probably flying too fast early in flight. I set it up to get the desired vertical speed at full throttle and it only draws about 63 Amps peak and it is very consistent. My thinking is if you tried Tony's props on the 9.89 ratio and limited the current to get the same rpm as the 20 inch props, you might get the best of all worlds, speed and thrust. They would probably draw more than 63 A but might still be low enough to not take the battery down too low.
After reading your post again, I can see this will not solve your concern. You didn't complain about speed or battery consumption or variation of power with battery voltage sag. How does too much drag in moderate winds manifest itself? Can't you just add throttle? Or are you saying this happens at full throttle? Perhaps you can't get the same rpm with those props and if that's the case, the Throttle-Tech would not solve that problem.
Jim O
10-11-2014, 10:17 PM
#171
Hi Jim
Lets see if I can write good enough to explain my Logic. Here goes!
My Comparison "for moderate wind" refers to the ability to keep a consistent pace in a 10 mph or greater downwind situation with the least amount on throttle use and keeping the usable throttle band verses pace as linear as possible.
Since Yamada released the YS 175 Engine and now the 185 we have been able to use the same props in any conditions calm or high winds ,mostly because of the increase in midrange torque gave us the ability to have a better prop, you never get behind on power, and the power stays consistent, But! Actually Glow increases on power to weight as fuel burns off.
Throttle use should be smooth deliberate and linear like using the Elevator and actually should be the (second) elevator. When the prop/ power combo is set up right it enables the airplane to rely some on airplane inertia and built in breaking to take advantage of the Brake and Throttle of the Power system, like an equal force opposing each other but flowing seamlessly together in both directions . This is where the Contra has an advantage over straight electric setups in my experiences. Keep in mind I flew this setup with no braking on the speed controller it was not needed at all ,and there was absolutely no wind up on the blades in down lines, the pace stayed constant, till I put the larger props on then it decelerated too drastically off throttle.
I would compare it to driving a Tractor you never coast on a tractor. your pulling on high throttle and pulling on low throttle, but no coasting. Now, add a implement and you have the feeling of too much prop! With the YS we used to get this "feeling"with the three and four blade props. The Allure /contra( propped like I flew it), when you advance the throttle slightly, like a glow motor ,the airplane responds slightly or equal to the application of the input. When you reduce the Throttle slightly the plane reduces forward motion slightly but still pulling and not coasting. Using the drag from the airframe /prop combo for just the right amount of braking you have a linear feel in both directions and there is very limited, to no coasting.
The Allure with the Contra feels like this even in the down lines. The larger diameter Props actually hurt the "flow" and cause too much deceleration. The YS Still has the advantage of the most linear throttle feel. However with the smaller props The Contra has so much torque it can be jumpy around the midrange ( this is where the TT would play a role) and a good throttle curve would come in. We don`t use a curve on the YS motors any more there is no need if the ATV and geometry is set correctly.
That's what the smaller props and the large airframe like the Allure does for you, and Why Brett likes the "Large" Alferma Bipe so much. You have total control over the pace/speed all of the time. because there is no coasting you TELL it how fast to go every second of the flight. The Contra on the Allure is the only other Non Glow setup I ever flew that worked equal or better in that regard. Even when on reduced throttle it had the Tractor feel (always pulling) this gives you absolute control over pace and the ability to concentrate on other aspects of the flight and sequence and easily maintain pace with the least amount of effort.
The Allure Airframe self regulates the Momentum or pace of the flight so you don`t have to rely on the prop breaking so much to do it. This adds the ability to be more flexible in prop selection. Each part of the design aspect/ power setup of this model shares some responsibility for the pace, so its flexible everywhere on setup. With the Large props when you pulled the power back like on the back side of the Cuban there was too much braking, and the speed recovery was to steep so when you came back up wind it was harder to maintain inertia/ speed and penetrate. This made it very hard to regulate pace and you had to carry too much speed on the back sides of the looping portions of down wind Maneuvers with throttle not momentum , so the (grace and pace) the contra would normally give you, was taken away.
The Clover in the masters pattern was another perfect Example of this problem with two looping segments and a roll to complete. it was like I threw out a parachute!
This is not to say the big props don`t or won`t work with this plane ,I just think the Smaller props and the gear you recommended were the best of both worlds for this particular Airframe. At the MomentI do not have this model in my possession Scott Mcharg has it . So far, his feelings are the same. And if I were flying it more often I would definitely have the Throttle Tech devise installed. Earl Haury did a Nice Write up for My website at CKAero.net on the TT, I`m a believer ,But remember my Eggs are still in the YS Basket so My Throttle Tech devise is my left hand at the Moment.
Bryan
Lets see if I can write good enough to explain my Logic. Here goes!
My Comparison "for moderate wind" refers to the ability to keep a consistent pace in a 10 mph or greater downwind situation with the least amount on throttle use and keeping the usable throttle band verses pace as linear as possible.
Since Yamada released the YS 175 Engine and now the 185 we have been able to use the same props in any conditions calm or high winds ,mostly because of the increase in midrange torque gave us the ability to have a better prop, you never get behind on power, and the power stays consistent, But! Actually Glow increases on power to weight as fuel burns off.
Throttle use should be smooth deliberate and linear like using the Elevator and actually should be the (second) elevator. When the prop/ power combo is set up right it enables the airplane to rely some on airplane inertia and built in breaking to take advantage of the Brake and Throttle of the Power system, like an equal force opposing each other but flowing seamlessly together in both directions . This is where the Contra has an advantage over straight electric setups in my experiences. Keep in mind I flew this setup with no braking on the speed controller it was not needed at all ,and there was absolutely no wind up on the blades in down lines, the pace stayed constant, till I put the larger props on then it decelerated too drastically off throttle.
I would compare it to driving a Tractor you never coast on a tractor. your pulling on high throttle and pulling on low throttle, but no coasting. Now, add a implement and you have the feeling of too much prop!
With the YS we used to get this "feeling"with the three and four blade props. The Allure /contra( propped like I flew it), when you advance the throttle slightly, like a glow motor ,the airplane responds slightly or equal to the application of the input. When you reduce the Throttle slightly the plane reduces forward motion slightly but still pulling and not coasting. Using the drag from the airframe /prop combo for just the right amount of braking you have a linear feel in both directions and there is very limited, to no coasting.The Allure with the Contra feels like this even in the down lines. The larger diameter Props actually hurt the "flow" and cause too much deceleration. The YS Still has the advantage of the most linear throttle feel. However with the smaller props The Contra has so much torque it can be jumpy around the midrange ( this is where the TT would play a role) and a good throttle curve would come in. We don`t use a curve on the YS motors any more there is no need if the ATV and geometry is set correctly.
That's what the smaller props and the large airframe like the Allure does for you, and Why Brett likes the "Large" Alferma Bipe so much. You have total control over the pace/speed all of the time. because there is no coasting you TELL it how fast to go every second of the flight. The Contra on the Allure is the only other Non Glow setup I ever flew that worked equal or better in that regard. Even when on reduced throttle it had the Tractor feel (always pulling) this gives you absolute control over pace and the ability to concentrate on other aspects of the flight and sequence and easily maintain pace with the least amount of effort.
The Allure Airframe self regulates the Momentum or pace of the flight so you don`t have to rely on the prop breaking so much to do it. This adds the ability to be more flexible in prop selection. Each part of the design aspect/ power setup of this model shares some responsibility for the pace, so its flexible everywhere on setup. With the Large props when you pulled the power back like on the back side of the Cuban there was too much braking, and the speed recovery was to steep so when you came back up wind it was harder to maintain inertia/ speed and penetrate. This made it very hard to regulate pace and you had to carry too much speed on the back sides of the looping portions of down wind Maneuvers with throttle not momentum , so the (grace and pace) the contra would normally give you, was taken away.
The Clover in the masters pattern was another perfect Example of this problem with two looping segments and a roll to complete. it was like I threw out a parachute!
This is not to say the big props don`t or won`t work with this plane ,I just think the Smaller props and the gear you recommended were the best of both worlds for this particular Airframe. At the Moment
I do not have this model in my possession Scott Mcharg has it . So far, his feelings are the same. And if I were flying it more often I would definitely have the Throttle Tech devise installed. Earl Haury did a Nice Write up for My website at CKAero.net on the TT, I`m a believer ,But remember my Eggs are still in the YS Basket so My Throttle Tech devise is my left hand at the Moment. Bryan
Last edited by flyncajun; 10-12-2014 at 06:52 AM.
10-13-2014, 03:52 PM
#172
Hi Bryan,
If you are flying down wind and going too fast you need more drag/braking to slow down. This could happen as the result of excess speed on a downline (kinetic energy) but in any case you still must be well above the stall speed or the stability goes to hell. I have found I need to get off the brake and on the throttle before I pull or push to level and finding the timing and the right amount of brake and throttle is what I think you are getting at. Just like going downhill in a car or truck. If you get in a low enough gear you can apply a little throttle, or release it to control speed. If you don't have enough drag/brake you are "coasting" and don't have control. The problem with our ESCs is the brake isn't proportional to what the pilot tells it. The brake is either on or off. Therefore, it would seem to me we probably shouldn't be using the ESC brake but should be getting our braking from the props at low rpm. That is something we can control. What do you think?
If you have more than enough power you can't have too much drag.
Jim O
If you are flying down wind and going too fast you need more drag/braking to slow down. This could happen as the result of excess speed on a downline (kinetic energy) but in any case you still must be well above the stall speed or the stability goes to hell. I have found I need to get off the brake and on the throttle before I pull or push to level and finding the timing and the right amount of brake and throttle is what I think you are getting at. Just like going downhill in a car or truck. If you get in a low enough gear you can apply a little throttle, or release it to control speed. If you don't have enough drag/brake you are "coasting" and don't have control. The problem with our ESCs is the brake isn't proportional to what the pilot tells it. The brake is either on or off. Therefore, it would seem to me we probably shouldn't be using the ESC brake but should be getting our braking from the props at low rpm. That is something we can control. What do you think?
If you have more than enough power you can't have too much drag.
Jim O
10-13-2014, 06:36 PM
#173
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very interesting reading guys.
One has to wonder if the contra natural breaking is due to the two big props or the inherent gearbox friction or both? An interesting comparison would be the breaking performance on a hacker or NEU geared motor set-up although I think Bryan may have tried this in the prototype in Thailand... Also the ESC breaking is next to useless as it only works when the throttle stick is off. This means the motor will naturally pick up speed in a 45 or vertical down-line. Then another question arises... Would a sensored motor/ESC help keep the motor speed (breaking) from increasing in a down line?
Plenty of questions... lol
Cheers,
Jason.
One has to wonder if the contra natural breaking is due to the two big props or the inherent gearbox friction or both? An interesting comparison would be the breaking performance on a hacker or NEU geared motor set-up although I think Bryan may have tried this in the prototype in Thailand... Also the ESC breaking is next to useless as it only works when the throttle stick is off. This means the motor will naturally pick up speed in a 45 or vertical down-line. Then another question arises... Would a sensored motor/ESC help keep the motor speed (breaking) from increasing in a down line?
Plenty of questions... lol
Cheers,
Jason.
10-14-2014, 12:05 AM
#174
The Schulze KA type ESCs had a proportional braking system. From 0.75 to 1.5mS receiver pulse width the ESC gave 0 to full power and from 0.75 down to 0.5 mS gave proportional braking. By using a suitable throttle curve it was possible to spread the braking level over the last few clicks of low throttle travel while still leaving the majority of the stick travel for the "power" management.
Schulze were aware of the problem of essentially providing governed motor speed over the whole throttle range but found it difficult to achieve this at low motor motor speeds with sensorless motors. Its a pity that more people didn't buy their products and keep them in business as I'm sure they would have solved this problem given time.
I still have a KA controller and have thought about using it again but don't like to rely on equipment that might fail irreplaceably during the competition season.
Malcolm
Schulze were aware of the problem of essentially providing governed motor speed over the whole throttle range but found it difficult to achieve this at low motor motor speeds with sensorless motors. Its a pity that more people didn't buy their products and keep them in business as I'm sure they would have solved this problem given time.
I still have a KA controller and have thought about using it again but don't like to rely on equipment that might fail irreplaceably during the competition season.
Malcolm
10-14-2014, 04:58 AM
#175
"finding the timing and the right amount of brake and throttle is what I think you are getting at."
Yes Jim, But I think your missing the point of my entire post. I was Afraid of that. My fault for not being clear I guess.
I don`t have a problem going too fast down wind. I was trying to couple the throttle feel and the ability to keep an easy pace and a smooth power/throttle curve application, while taking advantage of the braking mostly from the Airframe. That ability , married with the perfect throttle pull from the motor/prop combo is the goal ,Hence the Tractor Analogy. Too much prop drag kills Inertia ( The Allure and Alferma was designed around this concept ) so my problem is the braking up wind, and down wind off power was too great. I was not able to rely in the inertia /drag profile of the plane as the mitigating factor between power on and power off. Because there is already braking built into the design the props wound up being too big and too much drag all around.
Without experiencing a Large Airplane design concept it`s hard to understand my goals. Even most of the Bipes out there provide little drag and in most cases have less drag than a Mono plane. This is why Everyone says to use the Big props on the Contra, for the drag/brake effect. I don`t need the props for all of the drag effect because of the airframe.
I flew the Allure with the Nue motor and a 21" prop with no breaks set on the esc.( Castle HV Light 80) and really it didn't need the braking from the speed controller. I was able to control, and keep a good pace/power feel easily.
Bryan
Yes Jim, But I think your missing the point of my entire post. I was Afraid of that. My fault for not being clear I guess.
I don`t have a problem going too fast down wind. I was trying to couple the throttle feel and the ability to keep an easy pace and a smooth power/throttle curve application, while taking advantage of the braking mostly from the Airframe. That ability , married with the perfect throttle pull from the motor/prop combo is the goal ,Hence the Tractor Analogy. Too much prop drag kills Inertia ( The Allure and Alferma was designed around this concept ) so my problem is the braking up wind, and down wind off power was too great. I was not able to rely in the inertia /drag profile of the plane as the mitigating factor between power on and power off. Because there is already braking built into the design the props wound up being too big and too much drag all around.
Without experiencing a Large Airplane design concept it`s hard to understand my goals. Even most of the Bipes out there provide little drag and in most cases have less drag than a Mono plane. This is why Everyone says to use the Big props on the Contra, for the drag/brake effect. I don`t need the props for all of the drag effect because of the airframe.
I flew the Allure with the Nue motor and a 21" prop with no breaks set on the esc.( Castle HV Light 80) and really it didn't need the braking from the speed controller. I was able to control, and keep a good pace/power feel easily.
Bryan
Last edited by flyncajun; 10-14-2014 at 11:36 AM.