Jack Devine

My Feedback: (6)

Mark: You have a very good point with the RC car senerio as many aftermarket manufacturers build special and better parts for most of the R/C cars and trucks out there. The chassis upgrade market is huge and I don't see any of the car companies doing anything to stop that.

It's a sad state of affairs when we have to look over your shoulder to see if someone wants to sue you for trying to make the hobby better. I made a comment earlier about aftermarket performance car parts that are available and none of the manufacturers have sued any of those companies. Maby we should just check with Iron Bay and see if they have an objection to someone in the aftermarket making a prop blade that is better than the original. Iron bay is not endorsing it and it sure doesn't effect the ability of Iron Bay to step up and design one of their own. The prop blades are 20 year old technology and I know they could be improved and my inquiries with Iron Bay met with the same answer three times. "We have no plans at this time to design a new blade". Hell the Mustang was supposed to be out six months ago and it still hasn't been rereleased and I believe it was their most popular kit.

This is just an opinion and we all have those.

Jack Devine

SCALECRAFT

My Feedback: (13)

Dear Sirs

What would the be a fair price for such an item?

Steve

Mustang51

My Feedback: (25)

Kram1234, and everyone else. I spoke to Iron Bay way back when they first took Byron over. I asked them about the blades. Their response was as I stated in my above post.
As for touring cars????? I know nothing about that.
As for carburetors??? As I understand it, no one owns a patent on how fuel and air get mixed (no flame Jack)My guess would be, no two manufacturers parts are interchangeable , they are completely different. Here... you're talking about interchanging a "PATENTED" part with the exact same DESIGN, but just a change in materials.
If what Scalecraft says is true, then someone should proceed with this.

If someone were to REDESIGN the hub, Blades. and spinner, then there would be no problem, would there?(git it?)

-Mustang51

cknaack

My Feedback: (1)

Hey guys, hold on here. As I understand it (and I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV) patents also have a time limit. This I know for sure. If Jack is correct on the statement of the blades being around for 20 years, then I think it is worht a quick look into this issue. I would also think that the design could be improved upon by at least 10 percent excluding the materials. Just a thought.

Merlin65

Here's the reply from Bolly in Aust.
--
Merlin

"Thanks for the email. Feel free to post any of the below on the site.

In a nutshell, the Byron prop blade is in my opinion a very poor product, it is too thick and too flexible. We could make a better unit easily, but the development costs are difficult to justify although we have full CNC capability - it doesn't come cheap. We will not copy the Byron unit as it is unethical - unless we have written permission to do so. If that can be obtained we would make a thinner and stiffer blade to fit - with vastly improved performance and at a reasonable price."

SCALECRAFT

My Feedback: (13)

Hi

Seeing pictures of the Byron P-51 Blades, I can see that designing one with the scale "cuff" on it would not be a copy but an after market upgrade. After all aprox 20-30% back from the tip is the most effective part of the blade, if not the only effective part.

You just need one blade modified.



Also in my years of producing composite fuses and spinners and wings,ect, (as a hobby) no one has complained. Ever.

Why, my guess is because there is no accountable business lost in a small limited demand, highly specilized application. kept in a small group of people

Or just ask Byron what the probability is they would persue someone who developed one. Maybe they would even buy the ability to produce it.

I'm working on a 109G6 prop mold now.

Good luck guys

steve

speedaholic

My Feedback: (4)

i have e-mailed the guy and no replyies. i think that he is not too interested in making the props, either that or he is just to busy. but on another note i just flew my byron for the first time this weekend and it was awsome. saturday the mag wire broke and i belly landed in a field and tore off the inner gear doors. they wouldnt go up. the valve isnt working properly all the gear goes up but the the air just keeps leeking out and the doors stay open, sometimes it works but usually at home. anyways on sunday i had two flights and went smooth. landing was great flaps down alittle power and practicly landed herself.

kram1234

Sorry to hear that! Quick question, are you using the original valve assembly that came with the kit? If so, I'm guessing that there is no "gear down" line but rather it uses the springs with gravity to extend the gear, yes?

Best of luck!

Mark

maddog-RCU

My Feedback: (23)

The byron gear needs air for both down and up. There is no spring on it for locking the gear down.

Mustang51

My Feedback: (25)

Correction... The Byron gear are air up, and air down.
The Byron gear incorporates a spring return in the case of air loss. This would extend the main gear to the down and locked position.

-Mustang51

kram1234

thanks, I guess I have to look at the valve assembly again to be sure I understand the way it should be set up. Fortunately, I haven't gotten that far yet.

Thanks!

maddog-RCU

My Feedback: (23)

Mustang 51,

I don't see how that can work, at least not with the Byron gear set-up I have. Once the gear is activated and goes into the up position it continues ever so slightly into an off set on the mount the gear is on. This slight offset locks the gear up, the reverse is also true for landing.

So if my system looses air while in the up and locked position I can't see how they can come unlocked with out the air pressure required to drive it out of the locked position.

The simple truth of the matter is my mustang is sitting on a bench now with the gear up and locked with no air in the system whatever, and that gear will not come down unless I was to physically unlock it from the up position; or fill the airtank and cycle the gear.

kram51

My Feedback: (3)

This one I can answer. The instructions I have came with an addendum, which said to add a small piece of ply in the up-lock slot and to also file down the corner so that the spring can more easily release the gear should the air pressure drop. If I can I will scan it in as "a picture is worth . . . .well, you know"

Mark

kram51

My Feedback: (3)

Attached is the addendum I mentioned that shows how to alter the gear to have the spring bring it down should the pressure fall.
I'm looking at my air system schematic and I just don't see how to use the original valve and have air down as well!



Mark

kram51

My Feedback: (3)

Where'd it go?!?!?! I'll try again . . . .

Mustang51

My Feedback: (25)

What can I tell you. That was the standard setup that Byron had. It was on ALL 4 of the Mustangs I had. They may have changed it along with the two piece wing. I have in my possession, the Byron schematics for it. I also have the parts listings page that shows it.

There is a spring that connects to that piece that goes into the "off-set" you are talking about. Upon air loss, the spring pulls that lock out, the gear down, and then locks it on the bottom end.

-Mustang51

kram51

My Feedback: (3)

http://www.msnusers.com/MarksRCPlanesnStuff

Okay, it wouldn't work so I posted it in the pictures section of the site noted above. Check it out . . . .

Mark

maddog-RCU

My Feedback: (23)

kram51,

Well from looking at your schematic I can see how it can work. All that I can tell you is that was never included with my 2-piece wing mustang. Maybe there is a good reason why that don't include that anymore with the newer models (2-piece wings).

I could guess and say as the air pressure was to go down and if the spring tension was strong enough it could actually cause the gear to drop; or maybe even come out during a loop with the added g-force added to it.

kram1234

I have the original one piece wing so maybe they changed it later on with the two piece wing.

Oh well!!!

k_sonn

My Feedback: (32)

I just purchased a NIB one piece wing Byron P-51. Unfornately, it came with the construction manual for the plug in wing. Does anyone have an extra one piece wing construction manual or would be willing to make a copy of their manual?

kram1234

I happen to have the manual right here with me. I can copy it and fax it to you if you'd like. I don't have access to a scanner here. If that works let me know. My email is [email protected].


Mark

kram1234

I have a copy already made. Give me an address and I'll mail it out today.

Mark

You can send it to the above email address.

k_sonn

My Feedback: (32)

Hi Mark:

Thanks for copying the manual. I emailed you my mailing address.

speedaholic

My Feedback: (4)

the byron i have the guy i got it from took the spring out of the gear, i think so that they dont come out on loops and rolls not sure but i think that is why. also are you using the ultra persicion valve that cycles the doors too. if so you can get a air line diagram from them and the will fax it right over to ya.. anyone have a set of inner main gear doors they dont need anymore? It flew good last weekend so i think i may put doors back on it. has anyone talk or emailed APC to see if they can make some blades. does anyone have the email for them.???

kram1234

I had a very nice conversation with the guy at Iron Bay about, among other things, the blades for the Mustang, and all the scale blades they produce. He had a few very interesting observations. I'm paraphrasing what was said so you can quote me but not him.
A) He's aware of the growing interest in having stiffer blades made.
B)There are a number of problems that can develop by using stiffer blades.
1) The stiffer blades can translate undue stresses, ie nose over or prop strike, that won't leave visible signs of damage. What can happen is the hub itself has to take the stress and could possibly crack. This then could lead to losing a blade 1) in flight, which sucks. Or 2) throwing a blade in the pits, which REALLY sucks. You can imagine the inertia of one of these blades if it were to part company with the plane during an engine run-up.
I think that the bottom line is the chances of a drive system failure increase to a level that Iron Bay does not want to accept (liability). That being said, he did point out that they are aware that the system has it's weakness in the flexibility of the blades but that in turn limits the damage that can be done elsewhere. I can see his point. After all, most, if not all, are building this thing for the scale "realism" effect of the 4-bladed prop. I can agree and personally attest to the fact that a real Mustang could not pull straight up into a loop even with all the power it has.
BOTTOM line, if this is the only set back to what is admittely the best looking scale drive system out there, then I'll live with it!!!

All the Best!!

Mark