High Strangeness DCORSAIR....Glad she is still safe and sound. I feel I misspoke when I said 25-30% power at full throttle...It wasn't that bad...Maybe closer to 40-50% power. I will check it with my wattmeter for sure. The battery has seen a few dozen cycles and been in two crashes total so I will definitely try with my other one and compare the results.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Official Freewing F/A-18C Hornet 90mm EDF Thread
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by fredmdbud View Postre: lack of power - have you experimented with changing the ESC toming?My YouTube RC videos:
https://www.youtube.com/@toddbreda
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Aros View Post
Do you mean timing? No I haven't nor I shouldn't because they come from the factory pre-calibrated for timing. I have many of the new gen jets from FW and haven't had this issue.
ESC's are solid-state including the memory, and if they haven't been powered up for a while they can lose their settings, among other reasons. I see the same thing with receivers in planes I haven't flown in a while and need to re-bind them.
Like the oft-given advice about ARF's and PNP's, assume nothing, check everything ...
Comment
-
True, due diligence and all of that but this is a brand new model I just put together days ago. Should I really check the timing of the ESC? I have never once had to do that before. I don't mean to sound argumentative, more of an honest question.My YouTube RC videos:
https://www.youtube.com/@toddbreda
- Likes 1
Comment
-
DCORSAIR, I used to fly a Yellow Aircraft F-18 back in the DF days. When we put in lots of flap, it did some strange things. It looks like they may be blanking the Elevators. Mine was set with Tailerons only and I had to take out some flap and just live with it. I plan on picking one of these up to relive my youth. :-)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Aros View PostTrue, due diligence and all of that but this is a brand new model I just put together days ago. Should I really check the timing of the ESC? I have never once had to do that before. I don't mean to sound argumentative, more of an honest question.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Aros View PostTrue, due diligence and all of that but this is a brand new model I just put together days ago. Should I really check the timing of the ESC? I have never once had to do that before. I don't mean to sound argumentative, more of an honest question.
Have you tried accessing the fan and turning the motor back and forth and listen for any loose bits inside? All the connections and wiring are solid? Not coming apart? Insulation not cut and touching something?
Comment
-
Taileron/Stabilators have almost zero load as they are pivoted at the MAC (well, very close to it). They have less load than a normal tailplane/elevator setup. Huge throws or not.
They are also less effective and need large throws - compared to tailplane/elevator setups. You might look at them and think "they are huge!"... but they are not as effective as their size would make you think.
The 'near zero load' means the servo loads are not 'huge' or anything....under normal forwards flight uses.
If the airflows become 'different' than typical forwards flight THEN their large surfaces will become huge loads on the servos. When the MAC is not the normal state/position - like for eg if the aircraft was flying backwards the MAC is a totally different position then - and then the pivot not being at the new different MAC means it is not zero loads anymore. You are unlikely to fly backwards.... lol... unless doing a tail slide(!!).... but even other 'just not straight and linear' situations can move the loads to be higher. It is just a matter of what situations (airflows) you get the aircraft into, whether loads will ever be overly high or not. (even a Flat Spin is of no notable load issue).
So for the majority of cases encountered, the stock servos do not have a difficult job at all.
In full scale aircraft that don't use FBW they use various methods of ADDING load to Taileron/Stabilator so that the pilot actually has some resistance to 'feel' by - otherwise it would be 'zero' load and no feel. And these aircraft never do 'not normal flying motions', eg they fly forwards always, so the only criteria that matters is the normal expected MAC and force resultants (near zero).
All these Freewing FFS aircraft have poor tolerances on the pivot systems..... but 'luckily' a FFS being quite an ineffective device (versus what it looks like it would achieve) means the freeplay they have does not cause a lot of 'error' anyway.
Whilst I do not like the freeplay.... in any aircraft at all and thus I remove it.... it is not a huge issue if you do not.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alpha View PostI hear you all, I do. We're all entitled to our opinions as to the value of any consumer product and what we individually feel is "worth" the money we're paying. That's all well and good discourse. I've heard feedback across out entire product price spectrum from $5 wheels to $500 airplanes as to what the customer expects for the price they paid. Some love it, some hate it, and they make their purchase decisions accordingly. As a fellow consumer, I do the same. That's all useful, valuable feedback, and I know I and all of us at Motion RC depend on that kind of feedback so let's all keep it coming.
But as regards the stereotype that factory workers make "a dollar an hour", I have to pause and raise my hand, as someone who works alongside these people in China every day, and civilly ask that we all retire the outdated stereotype of "a dollar an hour". Not just because it's false (try multiplying that by 6x-10x on average for the Shenzhen industrial region in 2019), but because it perpetuates the notion that this is simple, unskilled work, done without years of workforce training, dozens of integrated suppliers, specialized engineers, and millions of dollars of equipment. I'd encourage readers to check out my "How A Foam Aircraft is Made" article in this month's Model Aviation magazine for more information in this context, so as not to derail this F-18 Discussion thread entirely. I've visited over 140 factories and suppliers in China over the years, including almost every RC supplier we can think of, in addition to other tech industries such as Foxconn, DJI, Huawei, Bose, consumer laptops, various camera manufacturers, even a vacuum cleaner factory (random). No one is making a dollar an hour.
Yes, issues with RC PNPs will happen occasionally, and unfortunately No, money can't guarantee perfect consumer products for every single unit (just ask Samsung, Apple, DJI, Tesla, VW, Sony, GE, etc). But those companies, like ours, continue to diligently seek solutions with the resources available to preempt problems, improve consistency, and enhance user experience and the customer's assessment of the "value" of the product in question. There's no difference between those multi-billion dollar giants and the hobby industry supply chains, except a matter of scale.
I'm game for any criticism based on facts or feedback based on experience, so I'd ask that we please keep the focus on those in this thread. And, if at all possible, if we can return the conversation in this thread more specifically to the Freewing 90mm F-18. We can all explore the value proposition of general PNP hobby goods in a separate thread if someone wanted to create one. I'd actually welcome that discussion in good spirit.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alpha View PostI hear you all, I do. We're all entitled to our opinions as to the value of any consumer product and what we individually feel is "worth" the money we're paying. That's all well and good discourse. I've heard feedback across out entire product price spectrum from $5 wheels to $500 airplanes as to what the customer expects for the price they paid. Some love it, some hate it, and they make their purchase decisions accordingly. As a fellow consumer, I do the same. That's all useful, valuable feedback, and I know I and all of us at Motion RC depend on that kind of feedback so let's all keep it coming.
But as regards the stereotype that factory workers make "a dollar an hour", I have to pause and raise my hand, as someone who works alongside these people in China every day, and civilly ask that we all retire the outdated stereotype of "a dollar an hour". Not just because it's false (try multiplying that by 6x-10x on average for the Shenzhen industrial region in 2019), but because it perpetuates the notion that this is simple, unskilled work, done without years of workforce training, dozens of integrated suppliers, specialized engineers, and millions of dollars of equipment. I'd encourage readers to check out my "How A Foam Aircraft is Made" article in this month's Model Aviation magazine for more information in this context, so as not to derail this F-18 Discussion thread entirely. I've visited over 140 factories and suppliers in China over the years, including almost every RC supplier we can think of, in addition to other tech industries such as Foxconn, DJI, Huawei, Bose, consumer laptops, various camera manufacturers, even a vacuum cleaner factory (random). No one is making a dollar an hour.
Yes, issues with RC PNPs will happen occasionally, and unfortunately No, money can't guarantee perfect consumer products for every single unit (just ask Samsung, Apple, DJI, Tesla, VW, Sony, GE, etc). But those companies, like ours, continue to diligently seek solutions with the resources available to preempt problems, improve consistency, and enhance user experience and the customer's assessment of the "value" of the product in question. There's no difference between those multi-billion dollar giants and the hobby industry supply chains, except a matter of scale.
I'm game for any criticism based on facts or feedback based on experience, so I'd ask that we please keep the focus on those in this thread. And, if at all possible, if we can return the conversation in this thread more specifically to the Freewing 90mm F-18. We can all explore the value proposition of general PNP hobby goods in a separate thread if someone wanted to create one. I'd actually welcome that discussion in good spirit.
When you add a magic box to the mix, the, "FACT IS" you are essentially doubling the electrical points for possible failure. This isn't even counting the additional added electrical points of failure within the magic box it's self. Add to that a ganged multi circuit wing connector, this adds more potential points of failure. These Facts are undeniably true. It isn't just FW, FL. It's everyone's product that come with a higher potential of possible failure who employs these devices.
This is why I never use these magic boxes in any of my personal airplanes, even if it comes with them. This was the specific point of my posting. I don't even use servo extensions, except when I extend the servo wire by soldering and shrink wrapping my self when needed, which is almost always when I get a plane with a magic box. This is also a, "FACT".
I know why they add these sorts of things, it's primary reason is to make things simpler for the end user. I get it. I just have to learn to keep my mouth close in regards to opinions. My purpose for bringing this up? To try to add something to some of my forum friends to help them keep their prize models in the air, not to bash some person down in Asia that is trying to simply make a living.
W
Comment
-
But, but, but ............................ they're "MAGIC". :Silly: I don't remember who coined the word "magic" for these things. There's nothing "magic" about them. The purpose was and is well intended, logical design and a bit ingenious, just their execution (read "manufacture") is sometimes "off". If they were really magical, they probably would work all the time.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by xviper View PostBut, but, but ............................ they're "MAGIC". :Silly: I don't remember who coined the word "magic" for these things. There's nothing "magic" about them. The purpose was and is well intended, logical design and a bit ingenious, just their execution (read "manufacture") is sometimes "off". If they were really magical, they probably would work all the time.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by xviper View PostBut, but, but ............................ they're "MAGIC". :Silly: I don't remember who coined the word "magic" for these things. There's nothing "magic" about them. The purpose was and is well intended, logical design and a bit ingenious, just their execution (read "manufacture") is sometimes "off". If they were really magical, they probably would work all the time.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
For the record, I have ditched the flap to aileron and taileron mixing after the maiden flight was a bit screwy. Trims from one mode to the other created some touchy situations. I landed it without flaps and returned it to stock configuration. Flew it about 5 more times after that and it was fine. Mine has plenty of power and flies great!
Comment
-
Originally posted by slamdance64 View PostDCORSAIR, I used to fly a Yellow Aircraft F-18 back in the DF days. When we put in lots of flap, it did some strange things. It looks like they may be blanking the Elevators. Mine was set with Tailerons only and I had to take out some flap and just live with it. I plan on picking one of these up to relive my youth. :-)
I plan on flying this F-18 until I get it right, I had it flying nicely and landings are a thing of beauty, I want to see what others think when using full span flaps because mine just does some weird things, it isn't rock solid like my Phantom was or F-22, will report back when I get more flights on it.:Cool:
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by HellHathNoFury View Post
You mean Tragic :PI really like the idea but out of all the Freewing planes I have sooner or later issues arise .. Call me unlucky but it is what it is.. I have no issues with reYing the connections.. I gotta find use of the 2 big bags of different lengths Y connections hoarded over the Years LOL
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment