Truckracer

My Feedback: (19)

I hope I didn't leave the impression that I was against the proposed switch setup. I simply stated what I have done in the past and why I did it just to point out some issues the OP may not have considered.

As far as being an old guy, well I guess I qualify now. It doesn't seem like very many years ago when I was the young, new guy and believe me when I tell you those years pass quickly and one day you wonder where along the line young became old(er)!

As far as using choke servos, most of my planes just use a mechanical linkage. But in some cases when the carb is especially buried or mechanical linkage just isn't practical, I use a servo activated choke. Sometimes its just way easier to install a servo than it is to figure out how to install a mechanical linkage. Each installation is its own special case.

BarracudaHockey

My Feedback: (11)

LOL I knew that was coming sooner than later.

Futaba wrote that in 1937 when they were selling AM radios that you had to solder the tubes into before you could use them

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

I agree, I have been mounting throttle servos on the bottom of engine boxes for years and using the turnbuckle push rods and ball links. Being that the smallest gasser I have ever owned was 50cc the distance between ignition module and RX is not an issue. In the 15+ years I have been around gassers I have seen dozens of setups, they all worked to the owners expectations or they got changed.

Truckracer

My Feedback: (19)

With modern radios and ignitions, about the only time you see ignition interference is when a plug cap is not pushed on far enough or if the shielding is severely worn on a plug lead. In extreme cases, it won't matter whether the radio to ignition separation is 3" or 3', there will probably be a problem.

I respect Dan's strong feelings regarding radio to ignition separation but don't feel it is a real issue these days. With even minimal maintenance, any potential for a problem should be reduced to almost zero.

ahicks

My Feedback: (2)

Truckracer, I should have writtten that a little differently - to include myself as one of those "old guys". And should have just mentioned something about just keeping an open mind - something most of the guys here still do? Didn't mean to offend at all! -Al

Truckracer

My Feedback: (19)

I knew what you meant!

Writing in these forums is difficult at best because without the face to face contact you would have in a conversation, many times people understand things completely different than what we mean to say. My normal writing style is very brief and to the point but I find that almost impossible on forums as so many people just don't have the experience to fill in the blanks. So .... things tend to get a bit wordy and repetitive with the hope that the ideas get across. Alll in all, the system works but it can have its moments as I'm sure you have experienced.

acerc

Gaps? What gaps? Wood filler or bondo type gaps? Blanks, paper blanks, casting blanks? Man I am lost! Anyone here speak English, or, uh, is it I don't?

CafeenMan

Bob - OK, but I've already got one so unless it shows problems I'm going to use it. I'll look into smart-fly switches on future projects. The fuselage for the Checkmate is a cavern and the leads on the switch are plenty long. There shouldn't be any problem keeping it away from everything else.

Bob Pastorello

My Feedback: (198)

Al - you know that I am "old" also, and thought you meant me, anyway....I've been known to be sort of a crotchety stick-in-the-mud curmudgeon who's been in a bad mood for 20 years or so. But I do still like to learn new "good" stuff....as my budget doesn't readily permit learning (or re-learning) "bad" stuff. But it's all good....

Truckracer

My Feedback: (19)

Add hermit to the above description and you pretty much described me! Well on some days anyway.

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

I think that your set up is totally viable. I cannot think of a drawback really. Interesting, I was thinking exactly about the standardized switch set ups, while reading this thread, before it was posted. I have one plane that utilizes a retract switch differently than another plane, and it has caught me off guard. We are creatures of habit.

I seem to recall someone talking about using the servo controlled choke, as their kill switch. This was with a mag engine I believe. He claimed that it pre-primed the engine, making it start easier for the next flight. I have noticed some times I have to re-choke when I fly again.

This thread is somewhat timely for me, as I have just installed my first servo for my choke control. The reason why? Well, normally I run a cable to the choke, and I have access to it from a side hatch/panel on my plane. Well, for some reason on this new engine, a DLE 55, to open the choke, I had to pull the cable out. To close the choke I had to push it in. Well, this is opposite of my other engines. If I have to have my cable pulled out for the engine to run, I could not close my hatch! So something on the DLE 55 is oriented differently than my DL 50 and DLE 20. My solution was to just put a servo on it. So far, I really like it. Kinda nice to have it all in the radio.

With all of that said though, I plan to keep my ignition kill on a different switch from my choke. In the pic, you can see I put the digital tach in there as well. Kinda cool. Also the unpainted hole where the choke cable was originally. Still needing to be painted over.