Is wet power a dead end?
03-17-2010, 12:15 AM
#1
Is wet power a dead end?
I've been watching the advances made by lipo battery technology the past few years, and read a lot of articles on advances currently in laboratories. This month I read about a new pack from Venom that has an output of 50C with a 10 second burst at 100C.
What does this mean?
Well, a 29 oz pack of 6 cells rated at 5000 mAh can discharge at 10kW for 10 seconds. That is roughly equivalent to 13 HP. If you took a Q40 model and replaced the 3 HP Nelson with a power system capable of 13 HP, the speed could increase from 190 to above 300 mph. Even at the lower output given by a 50C discharge, the airspeed could reach 250 mph, all in level flight.
The stuff that is still in the labs will make today's batteries seem rather crude in another few years of development, with gains in weight reduction for the energy stored.
What does this mean?
Well, a 29 oz pack of 6 cells rated at 5000 mAh can discharge at 10kW for 10 seconds. That is roughly equivalent to 13 HP. If you took a Q40 model and replaced the 3 HP Nelson with a power system capable of 13 HP, the speed could increase from 190 to above 300 mph. Even at the lower output given by a 50C discharge, the airspeed could reach 250 mph, all in level flight.
The stuff that is still in the labs will make today's batteries seem rather crude in another few years of development, with gains in weight reduction for the energy stored.
03-17-2010, 04:33 AM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: south, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
I hope its not the end of wet fuel.Talking down wet engines in favour of electrics is a common conversation.
Its existing together with electrics allready as another avenue,just as jets exist too.
There is no doubt electrics has a rightful place to contend against high speed nitro engines.Charge and fly,no mess.
Some electrics are swinging tiny props at 35k so there is a mosqueto wine sound to enjoy there too.
Some dont know how to tune an engine or get fed up trying to start it, that steers them to electrics. Fuel cost/plugs etc or dont like the sound.
High 'c' disschage is new technology with lipo packs, every other month a new pack arrives claiming to be more 'c' than the last, a nifty way of keeping you interested.
Big lipos still cost alot, thats offputting,crash and the packs usually ends up like a banana. Then in order to put the pack out of its missery you plunge knife through it in a bucket of salty water!!
Compare an Electric ducted fan with a jet turbine and most will agree that the jet turbine sounds better.
Compare an electric prop and nitro tuned pipe set up, well thats up to you to decide to preserve the nitro soul..
I keep hearing 'Bursts' with lipos. Now that means throttle management. ***!!.
Full throttle,full flight nitro means no protecting the lipo,motor from heat caused by high current.
Personally
2 stroke sound on a tuned pipe!
4 strokes, nice low end grunt.
radials, Awesome
Jets,awesome
edf,different
electric prop,dead sound unless high pitched wine
pulse jet, awesome
rubber band, ***
But hey, I'll try 10kw of available power!
I've found that 50 flights with lipos give top power but its downhill after that, unless i'm sucking too many amps out of them!
Its existing together with electrics allready as another avenue,just as jets exist too.
There is no doubt electrics has a rightful place to contend against high speed nitro engines.Charge and fly,no mess.
Some electrics are swinging tiny props at 35k so there is a mosqueto wine sound to enjoy there too.
Some dont know how to tune an engine or get fed up trying to start it, that steers them to electrics. Fuel cost/plugs etc or dont like the sound.
High 'c' disschage is new technology with lipo packs, every other month a new pack arrives claiming to be more 'c' than the last, a nifty way of keeping you interested.
Big lipos still cost alot, thats offputting,crash and the packs usually ends up like a banana. Then in order to put the pack out of its missery you plunge knife through it in a bucket of salty water!!
Compare an Electric ducted fan with a jet turbine and most will agree that the jet turbine sounds better.
Compare an electric prop and nitro tuned pipe set up, well thats up to you to decide to preserve the nitro soul..
I keep hearing 'Bursts' with lipos. Now that means throttle management. ***!!.
Full throttle,full flight nitro means no protecting the lipo,motor from heat caused by high current.
Personally
2 stroke sound on a tuned pipe!
4 strokes, nice low end grunt.
radials, Awesome
Jets,awesome
edf,different
electric prop,dead sound unless high pitched wine
pulse jet, awesome
rubber band, ***
But hey, I'll try 10kw of available power!
I've found that 50 flights with lipos give top power but its downhill after that, unless i'm sucking too many amps out of them!
03-17-2010, 06:35 AM
#3
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
No way! I have tried the electric fad and have become a born again nitro inhaler! 
There is a place for the electric thing and i do use it on my foamie deltas which i can basically fly anywhere but i have little interest in pursuing any more complicated aircraft without that all too familiar nitro smell. I admit that it is convenient to get a quick fix in the back yard with my trex and i will continue to use up what i have until it's all gone but i'm sticking with the wet power for now.
There is a place for the electric thing and i do use it on my foamie deltas which i can basically fly anywhere but i have little interest in pursuing any more complicated aircraft without that all too familiar nitro smell. I admit that it is convenient to get a quick fix in the back yard with my trex and i will continue to use up what i have until it's all gone but i'm sticking with the wet power for now.
03-17-2010, 08:20 AM
#4
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
Yes and no but leaning to yes... In fuel speed I have 230mph F3D Nelson powered Richard verano Special, down to the slowest of what I call "speed" a lowely Magnum with the Weston modified Webra Speed .50 at 160mph at best. In electric I have a 229mph Neu powered F5D down to an Escape at 165mph. I have to admit I have not flown any of them much but I do fly the electrics more because all you do is charge and go, no fiddling around with the settings, blowing plugs, and still not going fast.
Anyone want to buy some speed?
Anyone want to buy some speed?
03-17-2010, 09:02 AM
#5
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: townsend,
GA
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
It won't go away, electrics are great for small stuff but right now to get a 40 size plane moving will cost you big bucks in batteries. Yes EDF is much better then glow ducted. Also my electric control line stuff is judt great beats a 29% castor oil mess from the fox 35. But that Fox sounds awsome with no muffler
03-17-2010, 09:18 AM
#6
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
By big stuff you omean big speed? I agree, big elecrtic speed is expensive but so is big fuel speed. Control line is rather easy electric.
Pics of big electric and C/L electric on the cheap.
Pics of big electric and C/L electric on the cheap.
03-17-2010, 10:25 AM
#7
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
30 or 40 years ago the NHRA put a ban on jet and rocket powered cars competing against the fuelers.
The ban wasn't so much about safety, the NHRA just didn't want to see the piston engine cars made obsolete. Watching a guy open a couple valves in a hydrogen peroxide car, then go whooooosh down the track is relatively boring. There is no thrashing in the pits between rounds, no traction problems, no nitro fogging the crowd....just pure speed and empty seats in the stands.
Renegade rocket car tours have been tried and they flopped.
Electric cars wouldn't be much different, it would kill the sport.
People will watch a little of this stuff, but not a whole weekends' worth of it.
For maximum viewing pleasure, the internal combustion engines are still king.
So.......I thought we've been at the point with model planes for a few years already where if you have enough money, your electric set up can blow the doors off any fuel powered rig?
For my interests, whatever electric or turbine is capable of is irrelevant. Divided interest in the equipment we choose to power our speed toys weakens the engine sport..but that's just too bad.
Once Jett, Cyclon, Fora, Profi, MB and Nelson closes their engine shops it will be interesting to see if fuel powered pylon racing is able to continue at the same level, or if it all converts to electric power due to no more commercially available racing engines.
The ban wasn't so much about safety, the NHRA just didn't want to see the piston engine cars made obsolete. Watching a guy open a couple valves in a hydrogen peroxide car, then go whooooosh down the track is relatively boring. There is no thrashing in the pits between rounds, no traction problems, no nitro fogging the crowd....just pure speed and empty seats in the stands.
Renegade rocket car tours have been tried and they flopped.
Electric cars wouldn't be much different, it would kill the sport.
People will watch a little of this stuff, but not a whole weekends' worth of it.
For maximum viewing pleasure, the internal combustion engines are still king.
So.......I thought we've been at the point with model planes for a few years already where if you have enough money, your electric set up can blow the doors off any fuel powered rig?
For my interests, whatever electric or turbine is capable of is irrelevant. Divided interest in the equipment we choose to power our speed toys weakens the engine sport..but that's just too bad.
Once Jett, Cyclon, Fora, Profi, MB and Nelson closes their engine shops it will be interesting to see if fuel powered pylon racing is able to continue at the same level, or if it all converts to electric power due to no more commercially available racing engines.
03-17-2010, 11:50 AM
#8
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: townsend,
GA
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
Our club is loaded with electric. We also get a tone of spectators and they always enjoy seeing and hearing the YS 45FR on the pipe mounted on arrow delta. They think the electrics are kinda boaring and will usally leave if no glow planes are flying. Most of our newer club members who have started with electric all say I really want a glow plane! They all have enve when our old scat cats are running around the poles and when my Super Tigre Combat 35 Voodoo is turning a 55' circle at 115MPH. Is never going to end, OS and Evolution are still makeing new glow engines. Can't wait to get my hands on the EVO 60!
03-17-2010, 12:43 PM
#9
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
I flew almost nothing other than 65% nitro burning Formula One pylon racers for a decade. Thousands of flights between test flying and contests. I loved the sound of 4 of them firing up on the line with open exhaust, the smell and fog of heavy nitro fumes, the Doppler shift as a model bears down on pylon 2 at above 175 mph, the hard turns, midairs and crashes from giving a competitor bad air.
Nothing was like it, but it no longer exists.
Costs killed that form of racing, what with a $5 plug and $5 worth of fuel for each run and engine life was usually about one weekend before a new piston, sleeve, head, and bearings. In a typical 4 plane heat, half the time you would not have 4 airplanes finish due to bad needle settings and crashes. When you are in the hunt for points, you can not set the needle overly rich to protect the engine, you go as close to the limit as you can because it is the only way.
In spite of how much money you toss at a nitro open exhaust motor or piped motor, it is unlikely you will exceed 7 HP per cubic inch. Which is the level of power the battery I mentioned is capable of on a continuous basis for about a minute.
At current technology limits, you can either double the power of a 40 sized engine or briefly hit 4 times as much power as the 40 (with about a 1 pound weight penalty).
300+ mph true airspeed is possible. If that sound boring, then I doubt you have flown anything above 200 mph ground speed. It is interesting to note that in the states, turbine jets are limited to 200 mph by the AMA. However electric jets from BVM have exceeded that speed and are legal to do so.
It is expected that the power to weight of today's batteries will improve by a factor of 10 over the next decade due to nano technology.
Nothing was like it, but it no longer exists.
Costs killed that form of racing, what with a $5 plug and $5 worth of fuel for each run and engine life was usually about one weekend before a new piston, sleeve, head, and bearings. In a typical 4 plane heat, half the time you would not have 4 airplanes finish due to bad needle settings and crashes. When you are in the hunt for points, you can not set the needle overly rich to protect the engine, you go as close to the limit as you can because it is the only way.
In spite of how much money you toss at a nitro open exhaust motor or piped motor, it is unlikely you will exceed 7 HP per cubic inch. Which is the level of power the battery I mentioned is capable of on a continuous basis for about a minute.
At current technology limits, you can either double the power of a 40 sized engine or briefly hit 4 times as much power as the 40 (with about a 1 pound weight penalty).
300+ mph true airspeed is possible. If that sound boring, then I doubt you have flown anything above 200 mph ground speed. It is interesting to note that in the states, turbine jets are limited to 200 mph by the AMA. However electric jets from BVM have exceeded that speed and are legal to do so.
It is expected that the power to weight of today's batteries will improve by a factor of 10 over the next decade due to nano technology.
03-17-2010, 01:02 PM
#10
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: townsend,
GA
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
I don't know much about the electric stuff but is it possible to put a Q25 plane in the air electric have it go the same speed 90 mph'ish and only weight 3.25lbs and cost less then a OS 25??? I doubt it
I put one of the Sokol planes in the air with a nue motor ect.. It was fast and BOY DID IT COST ALOT!!! I had a rough landing and it killed the pack.
I put one of the Sokol planes in the air with a nue motor ect.. It was fast and BOY DID IT COST ALOT!!! I had a rough landing and it killed the pack.
03-17-2010, 01:41 PM
#11
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
Actually yes. OS AX25 is $150 has a power output of about 600 Watts. Same amount of power is being used in the new E- Formula One event. Cost of the motor, controller, and two battery packs is $130. Just need the charger, but don't need fuel, starter, glow plugs etc.
BTW, a clean quickie with a .25 should reach 100 mph.
Forgot this link to E F-1
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_89..._2/key_/tm.htm
BTW, a clean quickie with a .25 should reach 100 mph.
Forgot this link to E F-1
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_89..._2/key_/tm.htm
03-17-2010, 01:57 PM
#12
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: townsend,
GA
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
Good to know but the 25AX is overpriced junk. We have club members running old 25SF that are doing great. As for the electric set up yup its low priced but will that last 7 years like my 25FX???? which has had many gallons and many wrecks and it still runs great. But hey what this whole thing boils down to is what you like their are pros and cons for both.
03-17-2010, 02:29 PM
#13
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Middleboro, MA
Posts: 3,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
Hp,
I would say that as far as power to weight wet is going to be hurting severely.
I love the sound of a well tuned engine setup and nothing will replace that, but unless there is a major boost in power output from a fuel engine, the electric motor is going to relegate them to museums much in the same manner the turbine replaced the radial in aircraft.
While the cost is still high for an electric setup a 1.5 KW setup sells for less than a third of what it cost three years ago, and it is going to get cheaper in the future.
Besides the next thing you know catalytic converters will be required for our engines, not to mention oil recycling setups...
Edit to add a picture of a 1.5KW electric setup build in process.
I would say that as far as power to weight wet is going to be hurting severely.
I love the sound of a well tuned engine setup and nothing will replace that, but unless there is a major boost in power output from a fuel engine, the electric motor is going to relegate them to museums much in the same manner the turbine replaced the radial in aircraft.
While the cost is still high for an electric setup a 1.5 KW setup sells for less than a third of what it cost three years ago, and it is going to get cheaper in the future.
Besides the next thing you know catalytic converters will be required for our engines, not to mention oil recycling setups...
Edit to add a picture of a 1.5KW electric setup build in process.
03-17-2010, 04:29 PM
#15
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
When the USAF starts yanking out their fuel burning turbines and replacing them with electric motors, then I'll concede that the AGE of the ENGINE is over.
Or when I get passed by an electric powered semi.........
Glow engines might have reached a "dead end" but I'll bet not many guys in this hobby have reached or ever will reach that "dead end".
Or when I get passed by an electric powered semi.........
Glow engines might have reached a "dead end" but I'll bet not many guys in this hobby have reached or ever will reach that "dead end".
03-17-2010, 04:53 PM
#17
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Middleboro, MA
Posts: 3,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
I doubt that you will see the air force scrapping turbines in the near future...
But it is possible that you will see electric powered semi in a couple of years. As they improve the power to weight density of batteries, and environmentalist having there way electric vehicles will become common place for us if we want them or not. I still miss my GTO with the 400 with a couple of Holly 750 double pump 4 barrels on it, but there is no way I could afford to drive it today, it was painful enough at 39 cents a gallon let alone $3, it could pass anything but a gas station. And talk about sound, it sounded pretty mean with a set of headers and a cam...
Glow engines are not going to go away overnight, but I think they will start to fade quickly in the next couple of years, at least for competitive type of events.
But it is possible that you will see electric powered semi in a couple of years. As they improve the power to weight density of batteries, and environmentalist having there way electric vehicles will become common place for us if we want them or not. I still miss my GTO with the 400 with a couple of Holly 750 double pump 4 barrels on it, but there is no way I could afford to drive it today, it was painful enough at 39 cents a gallon let alone $3, it could pass anything but a gas station. And talk about sound, it sounded pretty mean with a set of headers and a cam...
Glow engines are not going to go away overnight, but I think they will start to fade quickly in the next couple of years, at least for competitive type of events.
03-17-2010, 05:02 PM
#18
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: townsend,
GA
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
ORIGINAL: iron eagel
Hp,
I would say that as far as power to weight wet is going to be hurting severely.
I love the sound of a well tuned engine setup and nothing will replace that, but unless there is a major boost in power output from a fuel engine, the electric motor is going to relegate them to museums much in the same manner the turbine replaced the radial in aircraft.
While the cost is still high for an electric setup a 1.5 KW setup sells for less than a third of what it cost three years ago, and it is going to get cheaper in the future.
Besides the next thing you know catalytic converters will be required for our engines, not to mention oil recycling setups...
Edit to add a picture of a 1.5KW electric setup build in process.
Hp,
I would say that as far as power to weight wet is going to be hurting severely.
I love the sound of a well tuned engine setup and nothing will replace that, but unless there is a major boost in power output from a fuel engine, the electric motor is going to relegate them to museums much in the same manner the turbine replaced the radial in aircraft.
While the cost is still high for an electric setup a 1.5 KW setup sells for less than a third of what it cost three years ago, and it is going to get cheaper in the future.
Besides the next thing you know catalytic converters will be required for our engines, not to mention oil recycling setups...
Edit to add a picture of a 1.5KW electric setup build in process.
As for weight OS 25AX 12.6oz Standard servo 1.3= 13.9 (25FX lighter and a micro less)
A good electric set up such as eflite not some cheap junk. E-flite 25 outrunner 6.7oz Eflite 60esc 2.3oz 4s 30c 2450 thunder power 9.8oz =18.8 4oz of glow fuel does not make up the differeance lets not compare price, yes you can get that cheap electric gear but it will never last as long as a OS25 but the discribed e power system will cost way more than the OS. I don't think even the high end stuff will last as long as my 27 year old passed down very well used Fox 35. They said RC would kill control line but its keeps going and electric still haven't killed off glow 1/2a I WILL NEVER STOP RUNNING MY COX AND NORVEL STUFF. No way you came match the power and weight of a TD 051 with electric. If you like electrics great some folks have no choice. But don't be so smuge show some respect to wet power (which is a dumb turn) Has made this hobby what is is.
03-17-2010, 06:08 PM
#19
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
With all this talk about electric i got one of my SU-34's down from the rafters and decided to fix the landing gear servo. (that's all three that i have replaced now) While i was at it, i set it up on my brand new Futaba 10CG. (maybe that was bad luck) [X(] Got the landing gear servo replaced and set up and thought i would be flying it this weekend until i ran the throttle up and heard the left motor die every time i went past 1/4 stick. The motor was running fine the last time i flew it. It was only down because the last remaining stock landing gear servo failed and i haven't had time to fix it. This one is back in the rafters along with the other SU-34 and F-5E. I'll correct my previous position and direct my dissapointment solely at EDF jets for now. Every time i take one out to fly something else is wrong with them. Must be the EDF fairy is guess. I'll admit that i have a ton of flights on my foamie delta with a cheap BP hobbies motor and TP lipos but i'll ride the nitro train for as long as it lasts. The 20 year old TT pro46 on my weston magnum starts every time and runs great. And, i can hover my raptor 90 in the back yard and kill every mosquito within a two mile radius. Let's see an electric do that! 
Let's see an electric do that!
03-17-2010, 06:44 PM
#20
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
ORIGINAL: mk1spitfire
Evan,is the twin bandito going to make a 2010 appearance?
Evan,is the twin bandito going to make a 2010 appearance?
I checked it out and took it out and ran the motors last fall. I really would have to be a special occasion to get me to fly it as I have cut down on my speed stuff. I cycle through my interests. Last year was a helo year, I built 8 I think. I really am more into electrics even making my big Quaker electric. I just ordered a box of compat control line ships from eastern europe, I hope this isn't a sign of what this year will be... [
]
03-17-2010, 06:52 PM
#21
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: townsend,
GA
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
No I think control line electric is great I fly a super clown and a baby clown. I fly them right in my sub-division, for thoes that think modern glow fuels are a mess try 26% all castor. could you send me a link for thies combat ships you spoke of
03-17-2010, 07:27 PM
#23
Senior Member
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
ORIGINAL: combatpigg
When the USAF starts yanking out their fuel burning turbines and replacing them with electric motors, then I'll concede that the AGE of the ENGINE is over.
Or when I get passed by an electric powered semi.........
Glow engines might have reached a ''dead end'' but I'll bet not many guys in this hobby have reached or ever will reach that ''dead end''.
When the USAF starts yanking out their fuel burning turbines and replacing them with electric motors, then I'll concede that the AGE of the ENGINE is over.
Or when I get passed by an electric powered semi.........
Glow engines might have reached a ''dead end'' but I'll bet not many guys in this hobby have reached or ever will reach that ''dead end''.
Nevertheless, electrics' output capacity, however short lived, is at level where internal combustion has never been nor is likely to ever be. So what?
MattK
03-17-2010, 07:30 PM
#24
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
Just look for all the manufacturers of engines below the 25 size. Tower list the TT07 as their only half A, and the pickings for .09 to .20 is pretty thin. Yes, people will be running old stuff for years to come, but don't expect to see too much new stuff, except for a few high performance 2.5cc competition engines. The money and market is not there to support new development of sport engines, and if the numbers of units sold continue to decline, well there is always eBay.
My original question was "Is wet power a dead end?" Really don't care about turbines that the Air Force flies. Really don't think that I could exceed 230 mph with a racing 40 with any flyable speed design, but think it would be "off the shelve" to reach 250 with electric and beyond with present technology.
Hope I can find this thread in 5 years to see where we are then.
My original question was "Is wet power a dead end?" Really don't care about turbines that the Air Force flies. Really don't think that I could exceed 230 mph with a racing 40 with any flyable speed design, but think it would be "off the shelve" to reach 250 with electric and beyond with present technology.
Hope I can find this thread in 5 years to see where we are then.
03-17-2010, 08:07 PM
#25
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Middleboro, MA
Posts: 3,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Is wet power a dead end?
HighPlains,
I think you are right.
With the development and progress made of electric power systems just in the past 3 years it going to put a real dent in at least the smaller glow engine market. Even power systems for the .40- .90 size aircraft is really starting to work as well as their glow counterparts. In the past two years the number of guys showing up at the field with electrics has more than doubled, and over that same period of time electrics have gone from something that barley got around to being some real power houses. With the improved performance and lower cost as I told CP I think glow will be replaced with electric at least in competition in the near future.
At this point I am pretty sure electrics are at the point of being able to obtain 250 MPH or better. If the proper airframe can be mated with a 2KW power system I don't see any problem with having an off the shelf combo that is capable of 250 or better. The plane that I posted a picture of is my first attempt at a pure speed plane, while it is no pylon ship in a straight line it ought to be pretty quick. Although this build is a lot heavier than I had hoped I should be able to cut a good 3-6 ounces off of it weight with a few rather minor changes to the design. The airframe as it sit right now weighs around 16 ounces and is pretty much all there with the exception of the winglets, elevons, and skin on the nose none of which should add all that much more weight (I hope). This plane is based on Mike Connors PQ which shredded itself at 130MPH due to flutter, hopefully I have cured that issue and what you see is an airframe that should be able to come closer to a VNE of around 200 or better.
I think you are right.
With the development and progress made of electric power systems just in the past 3 years it going to put a real dent in at least the smaller glow engine market. Even power systems for the .40- .90 size aircraft is really starting to work as well as their glow counterparts. In the past two years the number of guys showing up at the field with electrics has more than doubled, and over that same period of time electrics have gone from something that barley got around to being some real power houses. With the improved performance and lower cost as I told CP I think glow will be replaced with electric at least in competition in the near future.
At this point I am pretty sure electrics are at the point of being able to obtain 250 MPH or better. If the proper airframe can be mated with a 2KW power system I don't see any problem with having an off the shelf combo that is capable of 250 or better. The plane that I posted a picture of is my first attempt at a pure speed plane, while it is no pylon ship in a straight line it ought to be pretty quick. Although this build is a lot heavier than I had hoped I should be able to cut a good 3-6 ounces off of it weight with a few rather minor changes to the design. The airframe as it sit right now weighs around 16 ounces and is pretty much all there with the exception of the winglets, elevons, and skin on the nose none of which should add all that much more weight (I hope). This plane is based on Mike Connors PQ which shredded itself at 130MPH due to flutter, hopefully I have cured that issue and what you see is an airframe that should be able to come closer to a VNE of around 200 or better.