Ive ordered the smartfly,hopefully it will arrive soon to make things nice and smooth with my elevator.Thanks guys.

My apologies to Dugster. I overlooked his post. Oops[]

My smartfly is on the way,thanks guys,with the elevators fixed and the 3/4ounce of weight in the right wing should make this a great flyer,also some expo

what Silversufer said about putting one arm at the top of servo and the other at the bottom works fine and cost nothing.

I'm sorry but in this case that just doesn't work. The big problem is the choice of equipment he started out with and it's limited capabilities. Because of the placement of the servos in the fuselage sides being off center to the horns the geometry of each side is completely different and that will result in a different range of motion for each side with a given input, sorry but that's a fact. Now you can fiddle with it a bit and get the end points to come out the some, the travel through the arc will differ and that means at part throw the halves will be out of sync with each other. Unfortunately this is the worse situation because these planes spend most of their flight time in low rate, or using only a small part of the full travel which is where the mismatch will be.

Like I said earlier if you make a set of pointers and check this I think you'll be surprised. I spent a LOT of time trying different set-ups on quite a few models and found that the worst possible configuration was one were the geometry was different from on one side versus the other.

Bear in mind that on most planes that a trim adustment nade on the maiden flight tom get the plane flying straight might only be one or two clicks of up or down elevator. Typically that adjustmend is 1-2 degrees which is not much but it gets the plane flying striaght and that's a good thing. Now imagine how poorly a model flies when the elevator halves have a mismatch of 2-5 degrees which is very likely if steps are not taken to ensure that these tracking of the halves match each other as closely as possible.

If your going to shell out 1.5 to 2K for a model why not tkae the time to set it up right?

My point exactly!

A well and properly set up plane flys well and rewards the owner with pleasant and exciting flights for a long, long time. Just the opposite often becomes another pile of wreckage in a smoking hole. Worse, the owner is left wondering why his plane was just destroyed, who then will begin blaming the plane and not the actual culprit, himself. But it was cheaper the way is was set up when it went in, right? Or was it?

I have never understood why anyone would want to fly RC planes if money was an issue in the first place. I know that everyone has their limits and that's ok too but why spend $1500-2000 on a model and then dismiss spending another $40 to make it easier to set up and fly better?

The real problem is that in times past there was a clear separation between the guys flying large glow and the guys flying giant scale gasoline planes and in general those two types stayed within their comfort zones. Nowadays it seems that there are a lot of guys that have accepted the added expense to go to 50cc planes and yet they seem to want to hold the price down at the same time. I think what they forget is that they only get what they pay for and trying to save a few bucks once you hang a shaker on the nose is a recipe for failure.

I can remember a time when I thought it was a scary thing to realize I had $500 worth of model flying around at risk but accepted it. Amazingly enough my insanity has progressed through $1000 for 1/4 scale glows with poled digital servos and now $2000 for 50cc gas with coreless digitals and CF parts. Even I'm amazed at my own willingness to spend more and more on these toys and now I'm trying to decide if I should make the jump to 100cc or just go all the way to 150cc. That's a pretty big jump in price from $4K to $6K but the planes are so impressive and fly so well. Now once you start thinking about building and purtting at risk one of these you simply don't skimp on the parts you use in them. Unfortunately it seems that most guys don't develop that attitude till they have $4K or more invested, I think that attitude adjustment really should occur when they make the jump to gas, regardles of the scale.

LOL LOL..I amaze myself all too much!!

I look at the trailer full of planes and go..."Where did all the money for this come from!" Then I want to add to the collection at the first opportunity.[X(]

Very good! You are right in all respects. One other thing that gets forgotten all too often is; you must be able to walk away from a total loss both financially and emotionally! If you can't do that you are not ready for giant scale.

The servos are located in the same holes facing the same way,same servo arms,same length of rod,i really dont think there is any differance there that would cause a problem.As far as not putting enough money into the plane,the only thing i feel needs to be upgraded in this plane is the the two elevator servos,i have two new 645 hitech metal gear servos that are going to have to last for a couple of more weeks,i have other projects going on,i fly warbirds and have never really had the urge to fly this type of model,ive been flying gas for sometime now,im just finishing up a mick reeves 1/4 scale spitfire with a 110" wingspan,which i have almost 4k invested,i have also scratch built a zirolli stuka which flies great,which i did not cut any corners,ive just never had to deal with this servo problem before,and wanted to know the best way of going about this so i would not have to rig the plane to make it fly,i never planed on cutting corners on this plane to save money,id hate to lose all i have into this plane over something stupid,my smartfly should be here today,from what ive read it should work fine,and 8611 servos will be coming within the next couple of weeks.I'm not looking for a cheap way around this problem,just the correct way to do this,so i wont have deal with this again in the near future.I hope no one got the impression that im trying to be cheap.

The rods come back to the center of the servo so going top or bottom will be same geometry. I have the same travel through out on my WH and one less part to fail. Not just a money thing but also a safety thing. Putting each servo in different channel will be less current on a single channel. Gary

I am about to make the jump to gassers...a 28% WH Edge will probably be the first. Hitec digitals are on the equipment list and a Hitec servo programmer is available. It seems from this thread that no additional electronics, other than a "Y", will be needed or even disirable Right? Also, does the matchbox only work with JR servos??

I have also given up on the 2 channel elevator setup..I can get it close but its not as good as it can be.I just ordered a SF also for my elevators..I have their FO kill switch and its a nice piece of equipment..I expect the same for the equalizer..

The edge assembly is pretty simple,the only real trouble is aligning these elevator halves,good luck.

Mike my post was not directed at you so please don't think I was ragging on your choices. From what your saying it seems pretty clear your not a guy that cuts corners with his planes, a LOT of newbies fall prey to this affliction though so most of this discussion is aimed at them.

The matchbox can be used with any brand servo, just like the Smartfly equalizer.

Concerning the geometry being equal I can only say that my Edge(s) are both older production versions(2ns and 3rd production runs) and they have the servo mounting hole offset below in relation to the elevator control horn. There is no possible way that putting a servo arm up and another down that the geometry will be even remotely close. Unless WH has changed the design and relocated the servo mounting holes, so that they are directly in-line and centered with the horn, I can't see how the geometry could be equal with the arms in the opposing configuration.

Regarding the issue of adding another component that can fail..... Bear in mind that the components we are discussing are all high quality and proven reliable parts that are highly unlikely to fail. If adding too many components was an issue because they were failing all the time, nobody would risk $6K on a 40% plane in the first place simply because it.......has to many components that can fail.

The concern about running a pair of servos through a single channel is also much ado about nothing since the reciever is merely a buss that supplies power to the servos across 2 circuit board traces that have less current carrying capacity than the extension wire does. If your really concerned about this being an issue just put a short Y between your 2nd receiver pack and the servo to apply current directly to the servos.

You are running a 2nd reciever pack....aren't you?

Scott,

Just to give you a hard time, I don't run a dual battery on any of my planes under 30% But I don't skimp on the products. They will always be first class, with plenty of available milliamps.

Discusmike,

I don't think that anyone was singleing you out for going lighter than you could or should. I know that I wasn't. My point was primarily directed to the many, many others that are just walking in to this larger class of 28% planes (and gas engines) that are still thinking that they can get one of these in the air for just slightly more than what they have been flying. It just can't be safely done as you found out long ago with the warbirds you have been involved in. With the warbirds you are not only well involved financially, but heavily in time as well. My hat's off to all those that dedicate themselves to that effort of pride and patience.

For those that are just entering the 28% and up size of planes, the need to understand the increased loads on airframes, linkages, and radio components is extremely important. That understanding will often be the difference between a tremendously pleasing success and a heartbroken crash. They're will be differences in the speed and accuracy of many of the components, along with the increased cost of that higher performance. Gassers have a cheaper long term operational cost, but unfortunately do have a little higher start up cost.

Most of us here are both willing and want to share our collective experience in giant scale to help assure the success of others. Ask and we'll tyr to answer, but the answer may not always what you're hoping to hear. I'd prefer that the answers could always be easy, but sometimes it just doesn't work out that way.

Pat

Discusmike,

As Scott and Pat said, I wasn't singling you out in any way. Your rapid commitment to adding the Equalizer confirms that you want to do it right. My comments where for those wanting or thinking about getting into large gassers. I've seen it before at my club field and I've read many posts on RCU about guys trying to step up for the same cost as a medium size glow plane. Then they gripe about the poor performance and sometimes unfortunate loss of their plane.

Doug

Why do I always see this comming!

You know where most guys foul up is by using cheap switches and in this case a second pack is HIGHLY recommended. If your running a high quality switch the need to run a second pack is greatly diminished IMO.

Of course I wouldn't for one minute think that your running sub standard switches Pat! [8D]

[8D]

Scott,

Switches???!! I don't need no stinking switches!!!!!!! Just plug and unplug the battery Realistically just pull the darn pin!

BTW, have you tried your servos on a 2s unregulated li-poly yet?

Totally understandable guys,i really appreciate all the good advice,and years of experience,which has made things much easier.I'm glad to know in advance if something does or does not work,instead of finding out the hard way.I'm running MPI switches,and im debating on a third switch and battery,ive heard argument from both sides,im sure it would'nt hurt to have a little more safety,but it will ad some weight,so im still undecided,i have a extra switch and battery if i decide to go with it.

I considered going the direct route but that got me to thinking that I would have to keep pulling the hatch before and after every flight, as such that would most likely result in the hatch screws wearing out and causing them to back out at an inopportune moment. Of course we all know that this would result in the hatch blowing off, knocking off the vertical stab which would result in a severe yaw instability that might crash the plane.

I had a friend offer to lend me one of those 1.5 inch wide yellow cargo straps to wrap around the plane as a back up hatch retention method but my sense of style just wouldn't permit it. Now this did get me to thinking that it might be kind of cool to have all the experts planes wear black belts. Think about it, all trainers would have a white stap around the fuse and we would all know to give them a wide berth.... Fortunately I came to my senses and in the end it just turned out to be easier to put in a switch since all of the extra gear would have just created more failure points to worry about.

Lipos....now theres an idea.

Scott,

Belts!!?? Haven't you ever heard of duct tape? Shoot, if you use the whole roll per flight it's only about another pound. It's best if you wrap it complete around the fuselage, tho.

Is there much of a decrease in weight when using li-po?and do these batteries make flight any better?ive never tried li-po,but im always interested in expanding my horizons(with airplanes)if it really makes a differance.