RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic >> RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread
Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread - 9/19/2008 11:14:24 AM   
BaldEagel



Posts: 4305
Joined: 10/12/2005
From: Wychling, Kent, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: online 		I have not found it neccesary to put another former in the tail, but it is neccesary to close off the rear cockpit former at the bottom, have a look at post 13 page 1, the former I put in was in line with the rear cockpit line i.e. it sloped forward in line with the canopy and went all around the top edge as well.

Mike

_____________________________

No matter what anyone says 100% is the maximum you can get.

(in reply to BaldEagel)
       Post #: 101

RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread - 9/19/2008 11:26:09 AM   
BaldEagel



Posts: 4305
Joined: 10/12/2005
From: Wychling, Kent, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: online 		I notice from you pics that you are going to use the supplied servo extension arms, if this is the case DO NOT USE BALL LINKS ON THEM, the side load will crack and eventually break the so called Phenolic arms, much better to get metal arms from the start IMO.

I would much rather the manufacturer did not supply any hardware than the rubbish they put in most ARF's, the only exception I have found are SebArt and QQ Aircraft Company, and even then QQ supply flat ended towers for the surface horns that have to go onto a tapered surface, but at least they are metal and substantial.

Mike

< Message edited by BaldEagel -- 9/19/2008 12:09:53 PM >

_____________________________

No matter what anyone says 100% is the maximum you can get.

(in reply to BaldEagel)
       Post #: 102

RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread - 9/24/2008 2:55:45 AM   
cranet561


 

Posts: 52
Joined: 1/4/2007
From: Wellington, FL, USA
Status: offline 		it's funny my LHS sears that the BVM phenonic are the best option and the sponsored pilot for BME, and Fromeco tells me the phenolic is the best and I am crazy to use anything different. I actually have airwild metal arms for this bird, and I wanted to use hanger 9 hardware with titanium rods. In addition I was told A123 batteries do not work. So with all of this advice from my LHS sponsored hobby pilot who believes in the "KISS" theory is the best I decided to try, but at the end of the day I amd using metal servo arms, I have reinforced the fuse in 3 places and I really am only listening to you guys who are not paid to fly this plane. Thanks for the input I will post some more photos as I progress. I also have the 2X6 castrol version but I don't have all the stuff to finish, so after I master this baby I will move on to the peter brady brother, unfortunatley I can not afford the greg brady monster 43% beast.

(in reply to BaldEagel)
       Post #: 103

RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread - 9/24/2008 3:15:36 AM   
RTK


 

Posts: 4035
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: CENTRAL , CA, USA
Status: online 		I have built and flow 3 composite planes and the phenolic horns supplied work fine. On my composite arf I used all supplied hardware and it is 3 years old. The others I did use aluminum servo arms, with clevises on the phenolic horn and ball links on the servo.
Nothing wrong with A123, I use them in about half of my planes and am just waiting to replace the others when they give up the ghost.
I too like the KISS principle, but that goes for everything including the electronics. That is why I am migrating to A123, no more regs etc. My comp-arf extra has nothing special. I have 4 power inputs into the RX from 2 batteries and have not had any problems to date.

(in reply to cranet561)
       Post #: 104

RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread - 9/26/2008 12:20:21 AM   
BaldEagel



Posts: 4305
Joined: 10/12/2005
From: Wychling, Kent, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: cranet561

it's funny my LHS sears that the BVM phenonic are the best option and the sponsored pilot for BME, and Fromeco tells me the phenolic is the best and I am crazy to use anything different. I actually have airwild metal arms for this bird, and I wanted to use hanger 9 hardware with titanium rods. In addition I was told A123 batteries do not work. So with all of this advice from my LHS sponsored hobby pilot who believes in the "KISS" theory is the best I decided to try, but at the end of the day I amd using metal servo arms, I have reinforced the fuse in 3 places and I really am only listening to you guys who are not paid to fly this plane. Thanks for the input I will post some more photos as I progress. I also have the 2X6 castrol version but I don't have all the stuff to finish, so after I master this baby I will move on to the peter brady brother, unfortunatley I can not afford the greg brady monster 43% beast.


Ask those sponsored pilots what their Phenolic horns are made out of and watch the puzzeled look on their faces, when you tell them that Phenolic is a process of extrusion, not the material, and the horns could be made out of the timber shavings off the workshop floor, you would not trust them as you don't know what they are made from, Additionally they are risking the safety of others by doing so, a bit extreme no doubt, but think about a law suite where you are asked what the cause of the crash was and what materials you used.

The two examples of the Phenolic extruded control horns I have are so different in hardness, flexability and colour they are possibly at the two extreams of manufacture, both came from Composite airframe kits.

Mike

EDIT: one other thing the composition of NiMh batteries has been changed recently to make them more environmentaly friendly on disposal, this has concequencies on the charge life of the batteries, their memory and the holding capacity of the cells, A123's do not suffer from any of these effects, they are in nearly all my planes.

< Message edited by BaldEagel -- 9/26/2008 12:24:19 AM >

_____________________________

No matter what anyone says 100% is the maximum you can get.

(in reply to cranet561)
       Post #: 105

RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread - 9/26/2008 12:40:55 AM   
RTK


 

Posts: 4035
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: CENTRAL , CA, USA
Status: online 		BaldEagel To date I have not heard of any failures of the control horns on any composite plane when used correctly. As I stated, mine all have functioned fine for over 3 years, and on one plane they even held up in a pancake crash.

(in reply to BaldEagel)
       Post #: 106

RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread - 9/26/2008 2:30:18 AM   
scaleMan


 

Posts: 182
Joined: 4/15/2002
From: Bend, OR, USA
Status: offline 		Hey Mike do you have any real proof that Phenolic horns are dangerous as you have stated or are you just saying why take the chance? I have searched left and right on these forums and have not found a single case where when used as per the instructions they have failed.....

(in reply to BaldEagel)
       Post #: 107

RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread - 9/26/2008 3:04:24 PM   
BaldEagel



Posts: 4305
Joined: 10/12/2005
From: Wychling, Kent, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: online 		The whole crux of the matter is the wording "Used as per the instructions" I have never said they are dangerous just that I would not trust them on any of my airframes, I have never had one fail as I never use them, plenty of reports of failiers on RCU, but mostly after a crash and not possible to know if its the reason for the crash or the result of the crash, personally I have never had a horn fail even in a crash, this is what leads me to my own personal conclusion that they are just not worth using if you value your airframe.

I would never use anything as a structural part of something I was building airframe or not, if I did not know its make up and was confident of its strength and integrity.

Mike

_____________________________

No matter what anyone says 100% is the maximum you can get.

(in reply to scaleMan)
       Post #: 108

RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread - 9/29/2008 4:51:35 AM   
scaleMan


 

Posts: 182
Joined: 4/15/2002
From: Bend, OR, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BaldEagel

The whole crux of the matter is the wording "Used as per the instructions" I have never said they are dangerous just that I would not trust them on any of my airframes, I have never had one fail as I never use them, plenty of reports of failiers on RCU, but mostly after a crash and not possible to know if its the reason for the crash or the result of the crash, personally I have never had a horn fail even in a crash, this is what leads me to my own personal conclusion that they are just not worth using if you value your airframe.

Mike


hmmm, you sure sound like a politician sir.. there are reports but only in a crash? Spit it out! Are you saying they broke before the crash? Lots of things break in a crash... You did say they could possibly be dangerous when you said "Additionally they are risking the safety of others by doing so". Is that not saying using them could be dangerous? I do understand what you are saying.. If I use the included phenolic horns and use a ball link bolted to the side, they could break as the instructions tell you NOT to use them in that way. Understood! But!!!! If I use them the way CARF instructs me to use them as per their manual, are you saying they are destine to fail? If so, please explain or describe the experiments or tests that you have conducted to come to this conclusion. If you can't back up your claims, then its meaningless....

(in reply to BaldEagel)
       Post #: 109

RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread - 10/5/2008 1:42:36 PM   
BaldEagel



Posts: 4305
Joined: 10/12/2005
From: Wychling, Kent, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: scaleMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: BaldEagel

The whole crux of the matter is the wording "Used as per the instructions" I have never said they are dangerous just that I would not trust them on any of my airframes, I have never had one fail as I never use them, plenty of reports of failiers on RCU, but mostly after a crash and not possible to know if its the reason for the crash or the result of the crash, personally I have never had a horn fail even in a crash, this is what leads me to my own personal conclusion that they are just not worth using if you value your airframe.

Mike


hmmm, you sure sound like a politician sir.. there are reports but only in a crash? Spit it out! Are you saying they broke before the crash? Lots of things break in a crash... You did say they could possibly be dangerous when you said "Additionally they are risking the safety of others by doing so". Is that not saying using them could be dangerous? I do understand what you are saying.. If I use the included phenolic horns and use a ball link bolted to the side, they could break as the instructions tell you NOT to use them in that way. Understood! But!!!! If I use them the way CARF instructs me to use them as per their manual, are you saying they are destine to fail? If so, please explain or describe the experiments or tests that you have conducted to come to this conclusion. If you can't back up your claims, then its meaningless....


scaleman

You have tried very hard to put words into my mouth, I did not say they where dangerous no matter how you interpreate what I said and I did not say they are destined to fail again, no matter how you interperate what I said, I have not made any claims on the structural integraty of these horns either, just that I don't like the flexible nature of them and I don't like trusting one of my airframes to a material that is non descriptive and that the manufacturer says is not torsionally capable of taking the loads.

If you wish to carry on this disscusion I suggest we take it elsewhere as it is way off the point of this thread.

Mike

_____________________________

No matter what anyone says 100% is the maximum you can get.

(in reply to scaleMan)
       Post #: 110

RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread - 10/12/2008 7:20:47 AM   
scaleMan


 

Posts: 182
Joined: 4/15/2002
From: Bend, OR, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BaldEagel


quote:

ORIGINAL: scaleMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: BaldEagel

The whole crux of the matter is the wording "Used as per the instructions" I have never said they are dangerous just that I would not trust them on any of my airframes, I have never had one fail as I never use them, plenty of reports of failiers on RCU, but mostly after a crash and not possible to know if its the reason for the crash or the result of the crash, personally I have never had a horn fail even in a crash, this is what leads me to my own personal conclusion that they are just not worth using if you value your airframe.

Mike


hmmm, you sure sound like a politician sir.. there are reports but only in a crash? Spit it out! Are you saying they broke before the crash? Lots of things break in a crash... You did say they could possibly be dangerous when you said "Additionally they are risking the safety of others by doing so". Is that not saying using them could be dangerous? I do understand what you are saying.. If I use the included phenolic horns and use a ball link bolted to the side, they could break as the instructions tell you NOT to use them in that way. Understood! But!!!! If I use them the way CARF instructs me to use them as per their manual, are you saying they are destine to fail? If so, please explain or describe the experiments or tests that you have conducted to come to this conclusion. If you can't back up your claims, then its meaningless....


scaleman

You have tried very hard to put words into my mouth, I did not say they where dangerous no matter how you interpreate what I said and I did not say they are destined to fail again, no matter how you interperate what I said, I have not made any claims on the structural integraty of these horns either, just that I don't like the flexible nature of them and I don't like trusting one of my airframes to a material that is non descriptive and that the manufacturer says is not torsionally capable of taking the loads.

If you wish to carry on this disscusion I suggest we take it elsewhere as it is way off the point of this thread.

Mike


no interpretation necessary, I just quoted what you said....


(in reply to BaldEagel)
       Post #: 111

Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Giant Scale Aircraft - 3D & Aerobatic >> RE: Xtreme Composite Edge 540 build thread
Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]





Jump to: