Crazy that a motor that does 68A continuous would be paired with a 60A ESC. Luckily I have 2 spare 80A's from an ill fated F-14
-
-
[QUOTE=KevinMar;n317192]Crazy that a motor that does 68A continuous would be paired with a 60A ESC. Luckily I have 2 spare 80A's from an ill fated F-14[/QUOTE
Good swap in any event, better safe than sorry.Comment
-
Before I ordered the new version SU35 I called Motion and spoke with Tim asking the direct question "did this version come with 60 or 100amp esc's" he said 100amp.Comment
-
Well, someone has definitely messed up along the way... They should have upgraded the ESCs too IMO.Comment
-
That's pretty consistent with the RCG testing of that pack which they rate as a true 30C.
I maxed out a 150a current sensor running the FMS pros on high timing. Although measured 4.4kg thrust doing so. Never actually flew it in that configuration.
Low timng was 138A. Testing was on a pack that performs slightly better than an HRB.
Twin 70mm is no joke when it comes to power consumption!Comment
-
Have some fun! :)
Comment
-
And have some more:
Comment
-
Best inspiration for the #FlankerGang!
Comment
-
That may prove tricky, as the front end is the one that typically suffers most from a crash.Comment
-
Some more powerful fullscale inspiration :)
Comment
-
I re-maidened and flew six flights with my upgraded Su35 today and it performed as well as I had hoped!
New modifications except most of the things Airguardian has in his video:
Elevator servos from Turnigy, much better resolution.
New EDFs FMS PRO 12b with 80A ESC
Separate BEC 10A.
New Main landing gear from Freewing F15.
New nose gear from Freewing Avanti.
Flew from a grass field that really could need some mowing but it leaped to the air very quickly with the VT on. The new EDFs gives it very good performance and they are actually quiet. So all in all I'm very happy, but a little disappointed because I don't know how there will be a more fun to fly aircraft to get?
Comment
-
In short... there isn't!
Congrats on re-maiden!Comment
-
I hope the following video serves an educational purpose:
These were some flights I made earlier this year, and due to bad runway conditions and not having flown the Su-35 for a while I messed up and got myself straight into a textbook case of PIO (Pilot induced oscillations). In this case, triggered by requiring full throws to take-off at too low speed (forced by bad runway conditions), followed by delay in neutralizing the input, then overcorrecting, and then overcorrecting the overcorrection, and so on, and so forth.
Thankfully I was able to eventually pull out of it and keep the plane in one piece but at any point I could just as likely have smashed it down to pieces.
The point I want to make here is that my plane is (was) NOT tail-heavy. It is balanced with CG pretty aft, which makes it extra agile-twitchy, but it still has positive longitudinal static stability, that is, the plane is stable. If I take my hands off the transmitter when the jet is cruising, it is going to keep cruising pretty much level.
Many would have an episode like this, assume their CG is too far aft and resort to move it forward in an attempt at curing the problem.
My footage clearly demonstrates that a well balanced airplane is still perfectly capable of entering a PIO condition.
Furthermore, there are documented cases where building too much 'stability' into an airplane (for example a manned cessna or an airliner) is even more likely to have pilots inadvertently get into these dangerous scenarios that are usually hard to get out, and more often than not, end with a crash.
Other than the huge scare, you can see that the rest of the flight proceeded uneventfully, and I was pulling the usual aerobatic shenanigans. I didn't even have to retrim afterwards.
So that's that. Have it as a word of caution.
My take on it is: try not to blame everything on tail-heaviness right out of the box, without more thoroughly investigating the issue and making tests to clearly identify if the plane is actually tail heavy or not by conducting the appropriate flight tests that conclude that. ;)Comment
-
Two particularly screechy kittens it seems.Comment
-
More kittens dying in agony for your collective delight!
Comment
-
Excuse the tortured kittens...
Comment
-
I'm learning my Su35 more and more. With the FMS-fans I was able to get it to hover for a while, but I was so surprised and not a good enough pilot to sustain it, but the performance is definitely there. I have 3D-printed a brace for the nose-gear, and for the time being, the gear-doors are removed after some damage earlier. I would really like to get my hands on an ARF version and get the upgrades into a fresh airframe, but some other projects have precedence. The sound with the FMS fans is very nice, totally worth it in every way. If the fans show up on a good deal when Black Friday comes I would recommend anyone that want great performance (or stop hurting kittens) to get them!
Will try to get someone to film it, but can't promise anything.Comment
Comment