Hammbone

My Feedback: (309)

No

Jake Ruddy

My Feedback: (40)

My reasoning is quite simple.. I bet you I saw 4 regs fail on different planes and different ppl between my field and IMAC contests last year. So why not switch to a servo that can use 7.4 and make things even simpler as well as trim the number of servos that are needed in some cases.

I don't see it as a case of needing more and not doing things right at all. I view it as having more torque, less gismos, and a simpler system. I don't even use matchboxes.


Whether it's JR or Hitec.. both have an option that will suit this application.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Flatspin hits pretty close to where I'm coming from. Just how expensive does a plane need to be to be both fun and accurate? How many whistles and bells are needed to make it fly well? How many widgets are required to place or win in a contest? Will any of those widgets offset higher skill levels? Are any of them going to make YOU, the operator, a better operator? Note I deliberately did not say pilot. Are all the latest and greatest products driving people away from the upper end of R/C flying?

I work in a flying industry where the latest, greatest, most unique technology is constanly changing and in use. Experience has shown that products frequently move forward before the previous release is fully understood and/or utilized. Because of that, and other reason, defects found in the original products are not corrected aqnd move forward with new product versions. Engineering will NEVER admit to error.

So ultimately we fail to note that we have all we ned to do as well as can be done. We dump buckets of money for products that, at best, marginally provide any improvement. In many cases that marginal amount of improvement was nowhere near worth the expense, and worse, forced the need for other changes (improvements?) that push the cost even higher. There's a thing called a declining rate of return. With servos we are already there. A Seiko servo easily handles the need for a couple of 8711's, right? So what's the point of developing new "super servos" if we aleady have them? Does the new seriously upstage the old or does it simply line the vaults of the manufacturers a little better? Engine standoffs are another wonderful little wasted money pit. Everyone just has to have so and so's super anodized aluminum standoffs. What a crock We can keep going if we only tried a little.

Too many people are acting like they are slaves to whatever any given manufacturer tosses on the table as "new and improved". They'll slather all over themselves in their haste to open and dump the contents of their their wallets without understanding they didn't have a need until a manufacturer told them they did. Hell, they didn't even have an inkling there was a need until the manufacturer came out with that new little widget. Have we become so simple minded and blind that we truly believe all the hype and advertising thrown at us? Do we no longer recognize that every sign we see going down the highway says little more than "Spend Here"?

Hammbone

My Feedback: (309)

So lets not make any improvements to anything.

Do you still use analog servos? Planes used to fly fine with them, why switch to digital?
Do you use NiCad batteries on everything, they work, why seek improved battery technology?
Do you use old 6 channel gold band radios? They worked, why make better radios systems?

You guys are ridiculous, but if you want to live in the past, go ahead and do so. It's your plane and you have every right to do so. When you come on here and say that improving products to make them better is useless, just know that the rest of us are shaking our heads and laughing at you.

Now I know why some of you don't like PE's. It's because it's something new and improved and you like to live in the past.

I also know not to waste any more of my time arguing with you now.

Jim

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Hamm,

I not argueing with you. Really, I'm not. I'm just presenting another side of a coin. There's some truly advanced technology flying everyday of the week using analog servos and nimh batteries. Why? Because more isn't needed. Improving some products is a good thing but we need to be a bit more selective than we have been to date in determining what needs improving. Thre are many areas where remaining "as is" could be considered an improvement simply because we know how they work and can plan accordingly.

Just to clear the air I hink PE's are kinda neat and simplify situations for a lot of people. There have been times I've considered using one but so far I've been able to effectively work around and without them.

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

Ummm, I was actually defending you. I heard/read what you posted from someone else, somewhere else before. Thought it was even from Robert Ritchey himself.
I won't try to defend you anymore - sorry.

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

Higher voltage is far superior to higher amperage. With higher amperage comes power lost in the form of heat and weight added in the form of heavier gauge wire to carry all those amps. A single standard servo leads could easily support 4-6 high-powered servos if we were using a 12V power system, because instead of a servo drawing 3 amps under a near stalled condition at 6V it would only draw 1.5A at 12V. Voltage is more efficient than amperage. That's why power is transported to your home at 10's of thousands of volts through small wires and then stepped down, instead of the other way around.

bodywerks

My Feedback: (4)

The problem with straight li-ions is the linear voltage drop. And the voltage drops pretty steadily under a load. I think I could tell the difference under certain conditions, like how quickly my plane recovers when you want to stop a snap. As the voltage drops, the servos slow down, so snap recovery slows down. Or in two consecutive KE loops, the second one might have less rudder authority than the first. Also, even if the amp capability didn't affect the way you fly, if you are attempting to pull more amps out of the battery than it is capable of, you risk damaging the battery.
However, lipos have a more stable voltage and can handle more amps. When all the electronics I use say they can accept the higher, unregulated voltage of a lipo, I might switch to them for the ultimate lightweight battery setup.

thevirginian

Hammbone;
I think you totally misunderstand TOM , or should I say you don't want to understand him. I don't think TOM is a "past time dweller", who believes only in the "good ol' days". I think what he tries to say is, that we don't have to rush out and buy the latest gimmicks and gadgets to be able to enjoy our hobby. I just bought a bunch of 5985's for two new projects, instead the newer 7900', which would have cost me more. I believe the 5900's will do the job just as fine for less. I also bought a used Hitec programmer HFP-10 for 50 bucks, instead of the new HFP-20 for $154. And the same applies for the PE. The bottom line is, we don't need them to enjoy save flying. We don't need a 14 channel super duper radio for $1500 to enjoy flying. Yes, you can fly with "old fashion" 4-channel radio using "out dated" NiCad's and still be safe. I think that's the point TOM is trying to make, which you don't want to accept. Tell me if I am wrong.

MIXMASTER

My Feedback: (15)

It also comes down to "bench time" to flying. Some dont want to spend extra time cutting,soldering, modifying things when they can just assemble & fly. There's something to be said for each mindset, if I was retired I would most likely spend the extra time, right now, the P.E. looks like a good alternative. Hitec followed up their e-mail stating that the 2 amp/servo was a heavy load rating and that more normal current would be closer to 1-1.5 amps. That makes more sense to me now, I've been flying 2 30% with one rcv(8amps), one batt(2700mah Nimh),5- 5955TG and not a single problem, so 2 amp must be closer to worst case load.

Jake Ruddy

My Feedback: (40)

This applies to all walks of life really... how many people do you see driving cars from the 80s? or old computers. or insert newer technology here Every day radio worked for many years but all the sudden there are millions paying for satellite radio.

Will I personally use 12 channels on a radio? No never.. but I like triple rates and flight modes so I can have triple rates in IMAC mode and triple in 3D mode. Honestly dual rates in each mode would be plenty.. but the 12x has triple rate switches already.

Flyfalcons

I usually find the folks that are very hung up on having to have the latest and greatest gadget in anything they do (mountain biking, RC airplanes, golf etc) are the ones who actually use them the least. Or have the least skill. Nothing wrong with new technology but stating that you need to be running this equipment is a bit silly at best.

Having said that I am actually planning on using a power expanding device in my new 43%er simply because I don't have enough channels to drive 13 proportional servos plus a proportional smoke channel, and the power expanding device will cost roughly the same as the matchboxes, extra receiver, and regulators that it will replace. To each their own.

qldviking

well guys this has been an interesting thread, and I can see both sides clearly. While there is a lot to be said for a lot of the new you beaut hi tech goodies available, not all of it is necesary or even up to the hype surrounding it. Take 2.4g systems which have gotten quite a few mentions here, I have seen and have had happen to me (DX7) numerous glitches, last one cost me my fave glider, which I totally lost all connection with about a min after bungy launch. That glider had just been refitted with all new rx, battery (4500mah), 2 new servo's, and wiring. It happened 3rd flight of the day, battery was checked before launch, and all was well during launch and after, but then a total loss of control, and my baby crashed in a total wipeout. I have now gone back to 36mhz, which while having its own set of probs, they are at least known. I have never gotten an answer as to why.
I have a 40% Edge on the building board, and I have been told I am a fool for wanting to use a seiko servo/3s lipo on rudder, and 2 matchbox's on ailerons running 3 servo's a side with own A123's. and a 12 channel rx with 2 batteries feeding in. the 2 elevator servos will run a channel each from rx then again, maybe a matchbox there too? I will also be making my own extensions with heavy gauge wire solder directly to the servo's. anything wrong here?
While I have been flying for quite some time, and I have an ultimate set up with digi servo's and all the goodies, I dont see any imrovement on my flying compared to how it/I flew prior to going all mod on it. I feel my limited funds could have been better spent else where.
also in the pipeline I have a 35% Extra 230, which I will look at using a power board and doing my own checking on performance figures.
I still believe that the latest and greatest isnt always justifiable or necesary, even the computer I am writing this blurb on is 7 yrs old, but its capable still of doing a lot more than I am with it.
just my 2 bits worth
cheers Johnno

JohnVH

My Feedback: (38)

I dont think that if you dont use a power expander your living in the past. My largest plane has 14 digital servo's and no power expander, has been working that way for about 4 years now? I love living in the past! It works! (and saves me money)

Nogyro

My Feedback: (10)

I don't know how much you fly, but you should also consider the cost of gear replacement in the 5985 servos. I ran the 5945's for several years, which the 5985 is the upgrade for. You will be replacing the gears after about 350-400 flights. I've got some 5955 TG's with over 750 flights that are still as tight as they were when new. Again, it all depends on how much stick time you put on a plane....... I tend to have one favorite plane and fly the heck out of it most of the season.

I think we're lucky to have all the new technology being developed in RC and in everyday life. Nothing wrong with using the older stuff. I prefer it as well, but you also can't ignore the advances in electronics either. Some is good for our hobby, other things haven't been proven yet. I still use a wall wart and timer on my transmitter battery..... Didn't own a peak charger until 3 years ago or so, and I've been flying for 15 years. Do you have to have all the latest and greatest? Heck no. To each his own. Nothing wrong with keeping on open mind though. As we all know, this hobby can be very humbling at times. LOL

thevirginian

Nogyro;
Well said. Exactly my opinion, too. I am not against progress at all, but I don't have to have the latest and greatest the minute it hits the market. I usually wait out the first recall. Regarding the 5985MG vs. the TG, I guess I can live with a life span of roughly 450 flights. Before then the airplane will be sold to make room for a new project.

qldviking

One problem I see with cutting out servo's is the matter of flutter, with the increase of control surfaces for the 3d people the servo's act as stiffeners too, My last giant 120" laser had 3 servo's of 150 oz torque listed, I contacted the designer and asked if 2 @ 300oz would do, and he said no, I would have problems with flutter and flexing, was the same for elevators which had 2 per

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

I won't even try to debate the need for more servos on long and wide surface areas. Few of the larger ailerons are stiff enough to be accurately and effectively driven using only one servo per "super" surface. Same with more than a few elevators. It's too bad rudders don't use multiple drive attach points like elevators and ailerons, it woud simply many things involved with rudder operations. The question is whether or not those servos, or drivers for a better term, need to have 400 or more ounces of torque. Usually they do not need anywhere close to that amount so the new and upcoming stuff is pure overkill at unneccessary expense.

If we take the time to think installations through we would not need to throw as much money at them while still having an excellent system installation.

Nogyro

My Feedback: (10)

I'm sure the guys flying 40% and larger planes will love the 400 oz servos, but the ONLY place I can see using them in a 100cc bird is on the rudder. Personally, I think the 5955's are overkill on the ailerons on a 35% plane. I could live with the 5985's if it had the TG gear train. The TG gear train combined with Hitecs programability make their servos hard to beat.

I'm also am dubious to running one servo on a 35% aileron, yet several of the mfg. are designing their airframes around it. That's one place I'm not comfortable with trying to loose a few oz of weight at.

thevirginian,

I wish I had a market to sell some of my planes after a season or two. Then I could upgrade a bit more often without taking a beating. [&o]

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

I have a 35% Edge that is designed around only one servo per aileron. It actually works well but anyone going that route needs to keep speeds down when they go for the big moves. Ailerons can be made much stiffer than they curently are but most would complain about either an increase in weight or an increase in cost. No free rides here.

As far as torque, even the 40% birds would work out just fine running three of the old 5925 servos on the ailerons. We've just been convinced via market forces that we needed more. We fail to note that manufacturers are first interested in[ their bottm line, not our happiness. They have to pay for all those sponsored flyers somehow.

For those that that just got their feathers rufflerd over the sponsored flyers comment, please smooth them back down. The consumer has always paid for the promotional costs of manufacturers. Those costs have nver been given away. Perfect example is Nike. Before they had a bunch of big name players attached you could buy their sneakers for $5.00 or less a pair. They aren't made any better now than they were before sponsored players. It gets even worse when you consider that we now pay for graphics that promote manufacturers. We are paying extra again to do their advertising. Looks cool but it's pretty stupid. Used to be they provided a few decals when you bought from them....

flatspinjim

My Feedback: (3)

A case in point. About 4 or 5 years ago when Hanger 9 came out with the 90 size Funtana I was one of te first ones to get one. I set it up with 3003's on the elevators and 3151's on the ailerons. These were the very bottom of the torque ratings of this plane. I took my time, set up the control surfaces so there was no binding, paid attention to the proper geometry and flew the plane the way it was meant to fly, low and slow. I've put a at least 300 flights on this plane, goes to the field everytime I do. Well soon after it came out there were a couple of cases of these planes coming apart in flight. I have no doubt that these instances were from guys not paying attention to setups and flying them like pylon planes. They post their failures on the web and pretty soon everyone is saying you have to have servos with over 100 ounces of torque and metal gears to keep the plane in one piece. Hmmm

qldviking

Some very good points here, and I also wonder at not only the way the plane was flown, but also at how it was built and assembled. I recently saw a large yak (100cc) self destruct in the air during a hi speed snap roll, and a post mortem on the remains and the vid taken showed that there were several factors involved. first of it was a cheaper chinese kit, and all timbers were minimal. Then what was there was poorly glued in, with many components only having a few spots of glue actually bonding the join. the break up actually started from an aileron coming loose from the tip, and then flogging the fuse and breaking the stringers which led to the fuse folding up at the tail wrist. Later examination showed that there were no diagonal bracing at all in the whole of the fuse. Further examination showed that the supplied ca type hinges ( the ones with the furry covering) had peeled the furry stuff of leaving the hard inner to slide out. The incident happened when at hi speed going into maximum roll rate. the pilots first comments? "I knew I should have used bigger servo's"
The bottom is really a trade of between price, weight, structural integrity and performance envelope.
I flew my scratch built 121" laser with 3 jr 8411's per aileron, 2 8411's per elevator, and 2 hitec 5995 on the rudder, all in the design spec's sizes, and it flew well with no issues of any kind. By todays standards tho that plane would be considered porky at least wieghing in at 43lbs dry, but she stood up to a huge amount of abuse.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

You brought up some very good points. Not the least of which was the high quality level of the 8411 servos. Installed correctly they will still perform well in most giant scale applications. The big difference between the 8411 and the 8611 was metal gearing....

We want light, we want cheap, we want appearance, and we want durability. It's not possible to have everything without sacrificing something. Of more importance is the education of the end user in the correct manner of installation and operation. I've blown a wing off a plane in flight for the same reasons you noted above short the fast roll rate. Unfortunately we don't know how whell they are made until they come apart. Glue is everything!! Lack of the stuff eventually leaves you with nothing.

qldviking

which is why I prefer to build my wn, either kit or scratch build. The last 3 ARF's I have bought left a lot to be desired in both structure and gluing, but looked good outside. Unfortunately the last one was a trainer I bought for my lady, it made like a butterfly and folded both wings just past the joiner rod on its maiden flight while still trimming on its second lap of the field [:'(]. Inspection of the wing showed spars were nearly non-existasnt, and both front and rear were heavily notched out for ribs, there was no shear webbing either, and tis on a plane to be used to teach people to fly? dumb thumbs and all? The response from the people I bought the kit from was basicly suck s^^^. I will never buy another ARF

zx32tt

My Feedback: (9)

Let me see if I understand all of this. If I use a DA fuel dot on a 30%, I probably don't need a PE. If I use a PE on a 35%, I don't need a DA fuel dot (or McFueler) but could get by with a golf tee? Did I miss something? I'm using a Smartfly PE & A123's on my 35%, simply because I don't want to use y's on any the Hitec 7955's.
zx32tt[sm=spinnyeyes.gif]