ORIGINAL: burtona


So how much $$$ to buy 2-4 sets of new batteries to replace the perfectly good ones I have now?

Elecric Integral, Pletty 30-10 EVO, 3241sa on elevator, 9411sa on Ailerons, 8411sa on rudder, CC Ice 80HV esc, CF prop, no spinner, Valient gear (lighter than stock), CF replacement wing tube, MK tailwheel, Zippy Flitemax 15C 5,000mah battery, 850 mah lipo receiver pack, Jaccio regulator. Not the newest but certainly a modern 2m design and still lot around and available from CARF. I don't believe anyone can make weight with this plane using all stock stuff in electric without compromising on safety. I've had two of them and have the same issues with both.
I assume you are opposed to a weight change, so give me a rational reason for having a 5Kg max limit - What advantage does a heavier plane have that you are so concerned about?
Dave

When I was attending the nationals back in the 90's, the stock market had hit 10,000 for the first time, gas was under a dollar a gallon, I was driving around in a gas guzzling Durango with a trailer, unemployment was at or around 4.3% or something, salary's were stable, life was good and we still were doing well to hit 100 contestants at the Nats. 20 to 25 contestants at local contest were at or near maximum attendance hear in the south. I thought I had died and gone to heaven when I first moved down here from the north as at the time we were lucky to get 13 contestants up there in District 4. So your position on low participation and attendance is not adding up. How is it that you are so convinced a rules change will not drive down costs and or increase participation when your rationale for its stagnation is so out of touch with reality? Take another look at the survey on weight again. It is quite evident to me that we will pick up a few more contestants at the national level by making one simple and minor adjustment to a current rule that holds no merit in the first place. No folly here, just thinking in terms of the possibilities and the willingness to try something new in an effort to move the goal posts a little. No harm in that is there? Back to my bomb proof bunker...

ORIGINAL: RC_Pattern_Flyer

Flightmax zippy 5000 mah batts. 689 each 5S is 1378 grams......48.6 oz

Sky Lipo 4400mah batts. 569 each 5s is 1138 grams................40.2 oz


Thats almost 8 oz difference and you have plenty of battery with the 4400mah... even at 3500mah usuage if you fly a BIG masters pattern.


Just my 2 cents.

Chuck Hochhalter

ORIGINAL: cmoulder

What was AMA membership in the '90's and what is it now? Forget the personal anecdotal stuff because it provides no hard facts. In addition to the economy, there are also natural cycles of increasing and waning interest in any activity.

Consider what might - or probably would - happen with a higher weight limit in all classes, including worldwide FAI. This is the dream, right?

In the short term, guys will be able to fly their marginally overweight models.

But in the long term the really competitive types, and those who can afford it, will absolutely, positively use the new latitude for ever more powerful and expensive motors, exotic drive systems, super-duper ESCs that can handle 6000 watts, and expensive 7000mAh LiPo's to drag all these expensive new gizmos around the sky. Our clever expert airplane designers will come up with wings with more square inches that still fit within the 2-meter limit, except they'll cost more.

Then we'll be right back where we are now, and the same people complaining now will be complaining again about how this new, expensive stuff is ruining Pattern and once again demanding ''a level playing field.''

You seem intent on being a cranky pants and you use a l

http://www.hobbypartz.com/77p-sl4400-5s1p-20c-5555.html

each 10 S set costs 80 bucks.

Chuck

_____________________________

Mark Hunt Designs

ORIGINAL: petec

Then again no one said an competitor needs to use a 2Mx2M airframe at the NATS either, that is a choice. If they CHOOSE to go to the size maximum, then they MIGHT bump up against the weight limit.

If pattern is really about the best pilot then you really don't need a 2M airframe do you? I will never be at the top of the Masters class and really don't need a 2M airplane but I have one because I wanted one. I can lose just as well with a smaller airframe.

ORIGINAL: RC_Pattern_Flyer

I have never used that much on a Masters pattern.

What is your setup and plane?

Chuck

ORIGINAL: nonstoprc

rtx,

Do you mind post some info on your plane? Is it way over-weight?

ORIGINAL: RC_Pattern_Flyer

I think you are speaking from frustration. There are inexpensive strong motors on the market.

I fly Dualsky 6355 motors and the one that flies on 10S is 578 grams and the motor costs $225. It will be back at 2DogRC in mid april i believe.

Replacing the prop is a purchase that keeps on giving no matter what you fly as long as you dont break it.

Are you using the Great planes lightened back plate spinner? it is 12 dollars, you trim of the front for additional cooling and loose a bit more weight.

Honestly ... if you are going to be moving to masters and you have been flying this airframe for 2 years, it may be time to purchase a new one and you can make the changes in the new airframe and pay for them by selling the old one.

Good Luck, feel free to contact me if you need any other assistance.

Chuck

ORIGINAL: cmoulder

The last few ounces are the ones that count.

If you can remove something, remove it. No switch is necessary to plug the reg into the Rx. In fact, it's one less point of failure.

Are you using a serial adapter for the battery packs? These things are heavy! If so, connect the packs directly together in series and then make a common plug to the ESC.

Can you post a photo of your arming switch? I am guessing you have the packs (perhaps along with their serial adapter) plugged into one side of the arming switch adapter and the ESC plugged into the other side of the arming switch. You can save at least a half ounce by wiring the arming switch directly into the ESC power wire, per photo.

Depending on exactly what you're using with regards to the above, the suggest changes could save 2 oz or more and the cost is ZERO.

The 'heavier' Falcon CF prop is $72 (from maxxprod.com), but it still saves more than 2 ounces.

Those 4400 packs Chuck suggested are $39 apiece - very nice quality and 40C rated.

Also, as suggested, the GP e-spinners are very light and very inexpensive.

ORIGINAL: petec

Then again no one said an competitor needs to use a 2Mx2M airframe at the NATS either, that is a choice. If they CHOOSE to go to the size maximum, then they MIGHT bump up against the weight limit.

Why is there an FAI style spinner? I need one to make length on my plane instead of a longer profile spinner. I think the size rule should be removed as it is archaic and makes me spend money on things I wouldn't have to if it did not exist. That will help breathe life into pattern, right?

Any limitation can be argued as to why it should not be there, but the fact is if you want to compete, especially at the National level, then you will have to comply with the rules. Competition, no matter what venue, costs money. Once you cross the line into competition your cost goes up. I used to race cars and motorcycles, as soon as I crossed the line from just enjoying a high performance vehicle to competing it cost me cash....same vehicle in my first entry level classes was an immediate cost increase just to meet the rules. Argue these rules until you all have carpal tunnel syndrome but those are facts. Change the weight rule if you can get enough support and it will cost the competitor money to use what they PERCEIVE as needed equipment when the game changes to meet the new rule limit. No ifs or mights, nature abhors a vacuum and someone will take advantage of and leeway given.

If pattern is really about the best pilot then you really don't need a 2M airframe do you? I will never be at the top of the Masters class and really don't need a 2M airplane but I have one because I wanted one. I can lose just as well with a smaller airframe.

Ok time to go and get my 5 year old ready for a day of adventure.

ORIGINAL: rix


Appreciated...I like the Powerbox switch as its two regulators are built into the single case and it has nice safety features built in which illuminate leds on either side when it detects any issue in the system whether it be a low cell in one of the packs, one of the regulators going bad and or electrical failure on either side, so I am not willing to give those features up. My packs are connected in series using 4m bullets. I use bullets on everything. My castle 80 has been sent back for the recall, but I will check when I get it back and re-address how I am configuring it. Any of the Falcon props look nice and i am sure they are but even at $72 It would be prudent to have two as I know they are prone to tip chipping and would render a $72 display on my work bench. Then one would need to spend an additional $72 to get the backup in place again. My $15 APC performs beautifully and I simply cannot justify the Falcon cost as the performance that I need, the APC delivers. The only time I ever used CF props were with the YS140's as they did produce a little more efficiency in that setting and I justified the cost because of it. When it comes to performance I will always justify a cost. I would not consider using 4400's as it is not enough for me personally. It might be for others, but I put 3700, sometimes more back in on windy days and I am not going to sacrifice my plane or my batteries to save a few ounces. 4900 or 5000 is what I use and would not feel comfortable using anything less. The GP spinners and lightened back plate comes with the Vanquish hardware package.

ORIGINAL: rix


I went through all of this on another thread somewhere I think, but, I am flying a Vanquish (which I really like...allot) using all stock stuff and less expensive zippy 5000mAh 25c batteries, a redundant Rx power system with two 350mAh batteries, dual regulator (Power box 12), an APC 20.5x14 prop an arming switch, and a Himax 210 motor, I came out at 5100. That’s cutting it close for attending the nats in Advanced so I went out and spent more money on lighter packs which brought me down to 4998. Comfortable for Advanced this year but next year when I move to Masters I am too close for comfort again and will be forced into an elaborate set of choices and or expense, for example:

1) Make my equipment less safe by pulling out the arming switch, removing the redundancy system and or replace it with the a slightly lighter system such as using the flight packs for redundancy and or remove an Rx switch altogether and only use a regulator, or purchase expensive HV servos so I will not even need a regulator.
2) Pull out my wires from the elevator servos and let the two share a common pos and neg pair of wires too lose weight and remove my redundancy their in the event one of those pos and neg wires chafe and or the one cable pulls from the receiver leaving me with no Elevator control at all. I guess I could also take the dremel to my really nice airframe and start gutting it in strategic places.
3) Drop my sexy wheel pants.
4) Replace my $15 prop with a $90 one
5) Replace my $4 spinner with a $130 one
6) Replace my really nice CF landing gear that came with the kit with a set of $40 to $80 lighter ones.
7) Replace my $279 Himax motor with a $500 to $800 lighter one
8) Replace my really nice Futaba digital and BLS servos with HV ones so I can remove the regulator altogether.
9) Continue to purchase more expensive flight packs.

Anyway, these are my experiences and choices, currently.

ORIGINAL: rix

Petic...The size rule is in place for obvious and rational reasons.

ORIGINAL: rix

Appreciated...I like the Powerbox switch as its two regulators are built into the single case and it has nice safety features built in which illuminate leds on either side when it detects any issue in the system whether it be a low cell in one of the packs, one of the regulators going bad and or electrical failure on either side, so I am not willing to give those features up. My packs are connected in series using 4m bullets. I use bullets on everything. My castle 80 has been sent back for the recall, but I will check when I get it back and re-address how I am configuring it. Any of the Falcon props look nice and i am sure they are but even at $72 It would be prudent to have two as I know they are prone to tip chipping and would render a $72 display on my work bench. Then one would need to spend an additional $72 to get the backup in place again. My $15 APC performs beautifully and I simply cannot justify the Falcon cost as the performance that I need, the APC delivers. The only time I ever used CF props were with the YS140's as they did produce a little more efficiency in that setting and I justified the cost because of it. When it comes to performance I will always justify a cost. I would not consider using 4400's as it is not enough for me personally. It might be for others, but I put 3700, sometimes more back in on windy days and I am not going to sacrifice my plane or my batteries to save a few ounces. 4900 or 5000 is what I use and would not feel comfortable using anything less. The GP spinners and lightened back plate comes with the Vanquish hardware package.

ORIGINAL: petec


As I have said before, the rules form the boundary that we compete within. If you remove a limitation without imposing an equal limit you will see escalation due to the fact the this is competition and we, as competitors, want to gain any edge we can. You may certainly disagree, and I expect some do, but it would seem that the leeway given the lower classes for weight did not reach to Masters for a reason. By the time you compete at the National level in Masters you have decided to commit time and resources to this hobby that those in the developmental classes may or may not. Now whether that is the sole reason or not is not a concern of mine but it is a valid statement nonetheless.