Has anyone ever recreated your own personal Flight of the Phoenix from bits of demised models? I just can't bear to throw them out, so I've just been stuffing them in a closet, thinking maybe, just maybe I'd get one flying again. The Me109 ARF is in horrible shape but would fly with a new engine mount on a new firewall. The Chipmonk needs some rebuilding on the wing and new covering (and a new 90-size engine since I pulled the one I had to use on my CI). As you can see there are a couple of almost undamaged Cub wings (for a Cub biplane?).

Partially, I don't throw them out because I always think that I might be able to use one bit of something as a building aid. For example, I stripped and covered a wing to practice my silk over Koverall technique and rib stitching. And you can see where I've been practicing hand-painting German crosses on the Cub wing. By the way, here's how the final wing came out thanks to lots and lots of practice on these discarded bits.

Abu, I have started a thread nearly identical to this in the past. I thought it would be SO funny to see who could build the oddest flying creation from multiple broken planes. Some total franken-plane ! hahahah Nobody ever stepped up, and I myself never found the remnants of the right kind of planes. It used to be you could find 40 size debris in the shack at the field all the time. I guess it all gets hauled off and thrown away now. We do also still have a few rebuilders on the simpler slab sided planes.

I have had my shares of trips into the corn field this year, but they have either been saveable or total write offs ! hahahah

Hmm...the Cub wing is roughly the right size for the Chipmonk...and I do have an unused Saito 82. Except from I no longer have a field for gas-powered flying.

here's a thought, Don.......BONFIRE!

Turn the Pup into a Sopwith Swallow and that 109 looks almost flyable.

The Me109 is almost certainly flyable with a new motor mount. Even the Chipmonk falls into the repairable category. But I just hate to spend building time on either...particularly now since I don't have a field to fly gas engine models from. Maybe Art's suggestion is the kindest.

Make an electric trainer

Onya TFF. Brilliant idea.

Hugh

And a system that flies the Me109 should also fly a 1/6 scale WWI model.

Be careful with that one, the answer is, it depends. The flight envelope of the ME 109 and a WWI plane are quite a bit different. The ME, with the retractable landing gear will limit the prop size. Since the WWI model will want to spin a larger prop, the requirements are somewhat at odds. Geared motors are no longer popular, so you will probably be using an outrunner type motor. To accomplish what you would like to do, you will have to use batteries of different voltages for each application. The ME will probably require a 5S (18.5 V nominal) battery while the WWI plane will probably use a 4S (14.8 V nominal) battery.

Personally, depending piloting skill level, I would pick an airplane that is easy to fly for a first conversion (ie. CUB or something of that sort) so that you can spend you time learning about electrics and getting a feel for it. Probably the first thing you will notice with electrics is that the lack of sound throws you off. It takes a while to learn to manage power based on thumb position while getting very little sound feed back. Something like the ME will be more critical of power settings (specially on landing) and make the transition more challenging. By the way, my first electric was a high wing plane followed by a sport/3d plane.

Good luck,

Teo

Teo, you make some interesting points there. First and foremost, I'm trying to avoid having to start all over with the RC hobby just because I need (not want) to switch to electric. I don't want to go through some sequence of "first electric" "second electric" etc. before getting to fly (and build) the models I want to build. I've been flying and building (scale) for 10 years now. I don't want to have to go back to square one.

So that's the only reason I was considering putting a fixed electric system on an old beat up ARF. I flew the wings off that old ME (and by the way, I've now locked the gear down and never raise them in flight). I bought this ARF simply because it was cheap and I already had an engine for it. So if I could stick $100-150 worth of electric gear that I would later pull and use on a WWI model, I'd do that. If not, I'll just pull the servos and torch it (as per Art's suggestion). : )

Hi,

When I wrote my reply, part of the answer was based on how transffarable (spelling?) the power system would be from one plane to another. In the case of the ME, in order to get it to fly properly, you will need a system that develops a little more power which is also able to spin a smaller diameter prop to generate that power. In essence, the motor will have to spin faster in this application. To accomplish this, you increase the voltage: if a 4S system was adequate for the WWI subject, chances are that you will need a 5S (or maybe even 6S depending on weight) battery for the ME. Once you are done with the ME and pull the system to use on a WWI subject, you will probably have to buy new batteries for the application. This is what I had in the back of my mind when I wrote the post.

In the case of a Cub or something similar, you could probably just pull the system and use it on a WWI subject without any additional changes. Although I mostly fly pattern (so that I can provide a stepping stone for others at whatever competition I show up), I do not see a Cub as a step back in terms of fun. This past year we have had a heavy influx of new members, as a result, we have close to 50 students in our roster. When ever I go to the field, along with the pattern plane, I bring a LT-25 trainer (SIG kit) just in case it is needed. It always get flown, whether I have students or not. When horsing around, my normal take off involves a 4 point roll, followed by a 45 degree climb to a 5/8 outside loop (from the top) to finish with an inverted pass over the take off point. I only do this on the LT-25 because it was built using components that I already had around (ie. cheap) and it flies slowly enough that I have time to make corrections at low altitude. It is a trainer, but it is also fun.

Teo

The only thing I build or fly anymore is WWI. It's the only thing I care to build or fly. If I couldn't build and fly WWI aircraft (or thereabouts) I'd probably leave RC flying. That may seem rather extreme, but I'm really in it for the aircraft not the flying. I've had a lot of non-WWI ARFs (because there aren't many WWI ARFs) and they taught me a lot about RC flying. And I've had a Cub ARF and it was great fun. But I always had the feeling that I was just wasting my time by not flying the models I really wanted to fly.

It's not that I'm some hot-shot pilot who's "too good" for more basic models. I'm not. But I do know what I like and am not willing to work my way "up" through several different electric systems. In fact, I don't intend to have more than one single electric model. When that one "dies" I'll want to pull the gear on that and stick in the next electric model.

Well, another option would be to convert one of the models you are currently flying to electric if you want something more immediate. If you want to try out the ME, why don't you post its info and I will run the numbers for you. I need an idea on wingspan, area and weight. Also knowing what engine it used to use would help.

Teo

Go ahead and get rid of all those planes. They are a distraction; I have the same kind of pile, and they are hard to get rid of. Im hoping to get rid of mine at a swap meet later in the winter. They are really an infestation. The biggest problem you have is to test with a real world correct working system, you need to, dare I say, convert one of the finished planes or your Albi. I think the SE5 is the one. There is room, it is strong, and the shape is good for batteries. Your planes, all dolled up, are probably 2 pounds heavier than what an electric builder is after and you need something that is "your airplane." It also gets you going and out of the downer mode and out to the field.

I think you're right.

I just couldn't.

That sounds like Myth #1 popping up again: "You HAVE to build an electric model lighter than you build a model for glow/gas." Unless, what people are really meaning with this is something like: "Because of the additional weight of batteries, it is necessary to build an model for electric power lighter so that the total weight will be the same as a model with gas/glow power." A model with a total weight of, say, 8lbs (including the whatever powers it) should be the same. I don't know much about the weight of batteries, but if it is significant it may be true that adding battery weight to my already heavy scale models could be a problem.

Without making any changes for electric, you will end up about 1/2 lb or so heavier than the glow powered version of it. A Saito .56 weighs about 15.5 oz, a E-Flite power 46 will come in at 10 oz. The mounting system for the electric motor is probably a little lighter, but we will assume it to be a wash. Since you no longer need a fuel tank nor throttle servo, you probably save another 4 oz; however, you have to add an ESC so in the end, you probably save just 2 oz. At this point, the electric system is about 6-7 oz lighter. Depending on size, the battery will weigh somewhere between 13-16 oz (4S, 3200 mah) so you end up about 8 oz heavier. Depending on the size of the model and assuming that it is biplane I suspect that it will not affect your wing loading by very much.

Now, without making changes to the structure, you could probably save a little weight by using mini servos if already using standard servos (ie Hitec 225 or similar: 50 oz-in torque). That could save another 4oz, but for a plane such as this, probably not worth it.

Finally, the radio system could be powered from the main battery through a built in BEC on the ESC or a separate BEC. That will save you another 2 oz or so.

Even though the plane will be a little heavier, the ability to spin a large prop will keep performance about the same, but it could also make it slightly better. This is completely doable.

Teo

PS. I am starting to think that we are going to have to pry the glow driver and starter off someone's cold hands...

You need to review the Myth 1. Electric planes CAN take advantage of the lighter weight because of the smoothness and they need the help, BUT you are after something else; it is not even a focal point. You need a system that will power XYZ the rest of the world does not matter. You are not out to improve plane performance so you dont really care. Pattern planes go through this and there is a lot of reading if you want to search for it. You build high drag, relatively heavy planes because of the scale details, and you are not going to stop. Actually I think your planes are light for what you are doing. Lighter planes fly better, but they can only be so light, and most electrics are stripped down shells. If you took one of the light planes and added your touch it would be 2 pounds heavier. You will need a bigger motor and bigger battery. In full size airplanes it is called derating. You will want takeoff power to be at about 75% power at full charge, you want the rest to be a reserve, as you want to use the other 25% as reserve capacity. As you fly it is like a slowly sagging glow engine. As you fly, power goes away so when full throttle only gives you what you had at 75% it is getting time to land. Slam to the stop takeoffs is not how it;s done.

http://www.hobby-lobby.com/axi_motors_277_ctg.htm

Isn't the right to own and operate fuel engines covered in the Constitution??? You're right that I'll never give up glow, but I will out of brutal necessity add one electric model. I've learned a lot from all the comments and suggestions both here and on the other thread. TFFs comment that "most electrics are stripped down shells" is one of the reasons they've never appealed to me. But now that I've seen some example of highly scale (though still smallish) electric WWI scale models, I certainly can't use that excuse.

I definitely think there's an electric BE2e in my future.

Hi,

Good luck with the BE2e and make sure to post some photos or questions along the way. I would not worry too much about weight, if it were a WWII heavy metal airplane I might, but not so much for a WWI plane. I have converted a few planes which were meant for glow only (B)ARFs which turned out to be great electric fliers.

Teo