AmericanSpectre505

Anyone else flying one of these with a YS?

Thank's

Bill Holsten

MTK

I bought a Griffin from Mike (F3AU) a couple years ago. Now that model is designed to be electric all the way. There is no pipe tunnel and no chin cowl. In addition, the canopy is the long version that extends to the nose ring. A real rattler in waiting.

The model is exceedingly light especially for one built by Extreme Composite (compare to the Shinden at 1lb heavier). I am in the process of converting this one to gasoline. The rudder was the first thing rebuilt. I have the landing gear converted already to my "patented" set-up that I've discussed before. Much stronger and much much lighter than the original.

I have just completed refashioning the canopy, adding the front 7" permanently to the fuse. I cut a chin cowl out of the nose and am in process of fitting it to the fuse.

Point is that even a lightly built airframe like the Griffin is plenty strong for gas or glow. Soft mounts enable that. But I don't recommend the Griffin for conversion. As you saw above, quite a bit of work involved. The only reason I am doing it is because of its lightness and it's worth it.

On the other hand I saw Lachowski's Invitation a couple weeks ago at the field and this model has the chin cowl and extra strength up front from the canopy's front section being a part of the fuse already. If I recall, he said the construction was balsa glass sandwich which is stronger than glass foam. The Invitation would make a simple conversion to gas. I don't know how heavy the Invitation is. Maybe someone has weighed theirs? Please post here...

BTW- the model presents well; better than many others I've seen. It is draggy enough to be slow. The GT33 would be a terrific match for this model. The 185 also.

AmericanSpectre505

The Invitation is actually designed for either power plant EP/GP, so no conversion is necessary. It comes with all the wood for either installation.

On another note, I was going to do the same with my Nuance. Converting the Nuance would be nearly impossible, due to the high position the YS would need to occupy. I decided to MOD. the vertical stab and add an adjustable T-can/fin into the canopy. Something to play with design wise.

Look forward to seeing that Griffin conversion.

Bill Holsten

MTK

Oh, I didn't know that Bill. Thanks for the clarification. Since the electric guys are bringing it in under the weight limit, gas/glow wouldn't be any different. Smart move on Park's part.

AmericanSpectre505

Hey Matt,

Yea, if you look a the photo's of the Invitation on F3AU site, it has the standard fuel line plumbing on the nose area. I'm glad B.J did that too. I'd like to see B.J. add the option of glassed wings/stabs for the glow version or some small carbon fiber rods inside the wings, probably wouldn't hurt for longevity running a YS.

BH

time907356

Bill,
I bought a Nuance a couple of weeks ago, and am picking it up the middle of Nov. I'd love to get some details about the t-can you add, as I was thinking the same thing. No doubt, the plane will be a better flier than I am, stock, but like you said, something to play with.
I was anxious to use gas in a 2M, but I'm going to fly intermediate again next year...having just flown my first contest in 23 years, I have a lot of ground to make up! Electric was exclusive to all classes, and I have to learn in. The only other guy with nitro (including me and my OS120AX 2S) in FAI flew a YS 185 cdi, in a Galactik, and it was SWEET! -SO quiet. I'd love to do that, but again, in lower classes, not needed.

MTK

Factory glassed/painted would run up the bill quite a bit I think. But heck, it's only money... Seeing how most of us no longer want to do any building/finishing, what's another 25%? For many of us it seems money is easier to come by in the US than in other countries. Lucky us.

Bill, if you want to see my Griffin conversion, I'll send you some photos. Send me an email.

AmericanSpectre505

time907356,

The Nuance doesn't need a T-can, it flies fine without it (has tons of rudder authority). The vertical stab is actually a bit to short to mount a T-can in the tradition spot on the top turtle deck (small area). I did something similar to the Episodes t-can, except I lowered it in to the canopy area and made the incidence adjustable. I also added more vertical stab area.

I would recommend adding two dorsal fins underneath about where the wing tube center is and make sure you put the stab fences on, if they are not already. I can send you some photo's of mine when I get back home (upper T-wing). I haven't flown it yet, but I know it will be fine, minus some fine tuning.

Bill

AmericanSpectre505

Matt,

I meant for the YS/glow/gas version. It would be nice to have that extra strength.

drac1

My Feedback: (4)

While glass/painted wings look nice, it's not really needed to add strength. We used to build foam/balsa/covered or built up wings and they used to stand up OK. It's the fuselage that benefits the most from being glass.

Most ARF's composite wings seem to be quite a bit heavier than foam/balsa and covered.

MTK

Here's a vid of one of my 2 meter designs on petrol. Lower classes is exactly where it's likely needed most. You get to fly two schedules back to back on wet power which means you maximize your practice efforts. Well, come to think of it, it's handy for me too since I have just returned to flying after a too long hiatus due to health...

BTW- the gas tank size in Aesthesis is 11 ozs. I fly 15 minutes and have almost 3 ozs in reserve on landing. Petrol takes economy to extremes...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAd8dRxtNbQ

AmericanSpectre505

Yes, foam wings would be the preference, no one but CA Models provides foam cores anymore. I could cut my own, but kinda defeats the purpose.

Bill

AmericanSpectre505

glad to have you back MATT. Thanks for the video.

AmericanSpectre505

Matt, What engine is that?

Bill

time907356

Nice flying Matt. I wish I did as well after my long hiatus! I've really grown to like my OS, and it looks/sounds as if you're comfortable with the 33. Maybe I should re-think the Invitation with gas? F3A suggested sticking with electric, and it's dominance on the flight line seems to agree.

MTK

Thanks, but this video was shot when I was still flying competitively. The thing I wanted to point out with the vid is the quietness of the piped GT33 gasoline engine on a soft mount. The power should be easy to see. There is no need to lead the plane into vertical stuff. Simply point and add throttle as you would with the YS185. It turns the same props are the same rpm as the 185 does. The 185 has a slight edge on throttle response. It's a thoroughbred afterall so it should do SOMEthing better. Both engines put out well over 4 HP and both take 11-12 pound models to unlimited altitude and the mid range is similar in terms of torque so to me it's a matter of inexpensive, simple petrol operation or expensive, less simple glow operation that requires rebuilds every year.

As far as e-dominance at the flight line, no argument there. Electric in this size appears about maxed out in terms of weight versus useful output. Larger set-ups exist of course (look at e-helis and even IMAC) but at considerable weight penalty. Bottom line, electric takes no special skill to get quiet, is smoother, and has a much larger set of options available anymore with more options coming out every year as designers figure out how to modify the electron flow better and better. The contra rotators becoming more available are possibly the best argument for electric.

But I have no interest in E-Pattern so don't look at me for any innovations in that area

time907356

One of the things that struck me was how SLOW the planes are flying...putting two+two together, I think it's one of the limitations of electric, determining the style of flying being done. I propped up to slow down on my OS120, and guess what? I had 1/3 of a tank of fuel left after a round! So, point made: fast flight takes more energy, or considerably more weight for e-flyers. The justification I was given for the one FAI flyer using the YS was consistent power. He also flew faster. That performance is another nod to wet fuels, nitro or gas.
Here's one question; isn't your exhaust temperature much higher with petrol than nitro? I was thinking gas burns hotter, while nitro burns quicker....So do you need to take special precautions when burying pipes, couplers, etc. vs. nitro??

MTK

No, the YS 4 stroke puts out hotter exhaust than gasoline 2 strokes. I have designed-in additional cooling to the exhaust system and the engine, not because the engine runs hot but rather for noise reduction. Cooler exhaust is quieter. The baffling I show in the video wasn't necessary, at least not in NJ. I simply wanted the engine cooled more inside a cowl; full power never bogs the engine down from too much heat. If I lived in too hot Texas or any of the southern states, summers might get the engine too hot, I don't know. On the other hand, I never use full power for any sequence. Half throttle is where the engine lives, between 4K and 6K rpm.

I use the ESComposites carbon composite pipes and highly recommend them. Never any problems; just don't get hot enough. But I also know that Ed Skorepa, Mr. ESC, no longer offers his carbon mufflers for 4 strokes because guys were burning through the epoxy he uses. It was likely a combination of too hot exhaust and poor cooling design.

Using gasoline I had to develop my own pipe couplers since most anything else readily available that I tried (plain silicone or Teflon) did not perform to my satisfaction. I've described this elsewhere in other threads so need to repeat here. This thread has been hijacked enough probably. We can take further discussion directly to emails...





.

time907356

I fully acknowledge the hijacking...but it's a dead thread...I'd love some updates on the Invitation, but no one is biting. I did read your write up about the couplers, and will revisit if I get to go gas.

mups53

My Feedback: (41)

Bil even CA models is converting over to built up wings and stabs.
Marcelo and I are in constant communication.
Also to date there are very few who intend to build the Invitation with a YS. As stated before it is capable of handling one.
I do have one customer who is in line waiting for our shipment that is on the ship right now that intends to make it a YS plane.
We are taking deposits on this shipment due later this month.
Mike Mueller
Mike Mueller

Malydilnar

My Feedback: (1)

Another option for YS is the Arixtra by aerocompet. Has a glass fuse and foam wings, which have held up very very well over these past two seasons for us. The plane is designed with the ys in mind, so no conversion necessary, and the CG is perfect. Both of mine weighed around the 4400-4500 mark, and are perfectly competitive against anything BJ Craft or Oxai has to offer

AmericanSpectre505

Good to know Mike.

I am leaning that way, just on the fence with the power plant. I have two YS 170's still, but have been told they may not be enough for FAI? All my electric stuff is shot, trying to use what I have for glow. This time, if I go back electric it will be a Pletty and quality batteries. The 5100 I bought from you two years ago is still doing very well. I know you have 5400 and 6000 packs.

Did B.J. ever release or finish testing the other wings? The last thing, on the standard scheme could I get the white changed to yellow?

Thank's

Bill

AmericanSpectre505

Thank's Alex,

I like both air frames, but I don't have the time to build.

V/R

Bill

mups53

My Feedback: (41)

Hi Bill
Custom schemes are difficult. I need to take the money upfront and have the planes direct shipped.
Time to produce is usually quite lengthy too.
We normally bring planes over via sea shipments.
Anything is possible just costly.
Mike

AmericanSpectre505

Mike,

We are only talking about changing the white to yellow on the standard scheme? The upfront deposit is fine, as I understand it's not the standard color.

Thank's

Bill