New FMS/Eflite Su-30 coming soon

[Hugh Wiedman]

It wasn't fun. I'm still wondering if I'm going to fly paint off....

[/QUOTE]

As I said before, the paint adhesion on this model is one of the worst I've seen. Freewing's process seems to me to be much better, but is the foam molding process so much different between the two? Even in repainting the raw foam nose cones, priming did not work as well (even after cleaning it profusely with alcohol several times) as with other models and even after coating with spar urethane several coats, light trim masking wanted to lift everything off.

I do feel that after 4 coats on the entire jet after finishing that it gave it a somewhat better "shell", so if you find the paint "flying off", you may want to add some clear coats. I'm sure you don't want to alter the matte finish that looks so realistic, but maybe if you try the matte or satin urethane finish, it won't change the look. BTW, forgot to say how much I like your canard wing modification. Your bird REALLY stands out from the crowd. Bravo!

[xviper]

As I said before, the paint adhesion on this model is one of the worst I've seen. Freewing's process seems to me to be much better, but is the foam molding process so much different between the two? Even in repainting the raw foam nose cones, priming did not work as well (even after cleaning it profusely with alcohol several times) as with other models and even after coating with spar urethane several coats, light trim masking wanted to lift everything off.

I do feel that after 4 coats on the entire jet after finishing that it gave it a somewhat better "shell", so if you find the paint "flying off", you may want to add some clear coats. I'm sure you don't want to alter the matte finish that looks so realistic, but maybe if you try the matte or satin urethane finish, it won't change the look. BTW, forgot to say how much I like your canard wing modification. Your bird REALLY stands out from the crowd. Bravo!

Did you get the AL-37? That paint adhesion on that one was . If you had just a little snot on your fingers, the paint would come off. If it smelled masking tape coming, the paint would just fall off on its own. I think it's got to do with the releasing agent they spray into the molds so that the foam parts can fall out easily. The more complex the part, the more agent is needed. Same goes for if the part is large in square area. If they don't fall out on their own, some human has to be there to coax them out. Such circumstances really should have a better prep stage before the paint goes on.

On both my SU and AL37, I painted on a single layer of MinWax but that didn't help much on areas that were already painted.

[PaulZ]

Hugh Wiedman I can confirm that the SU-30 flies stable and without oscillations with the following AS3X settings: R:80, P:80, Y:75 Priority:160 on all three axis. Yes, it does seem high for a jet but it works. I have this same gyro settings for flying around and landing. Note, I ended up setting up a slight flap/elevator mix as follows: Flaps up: 0%, 0%, Mid-flaps: -50%, -3%, Landing Flaps: -100%, -7%. I like my jets coming in flat during landing and the elevator correction helped keep level pitch. Hope this helps and good luck on the maiden! Try landing it without flaps first and then experiment to see how they impact landing speeds.

[dusmmdb]

It wasn't fun. I'm still wondering if I'm going to fly paint off....

As I said before, the paint adhesion on this model is one of the worst I've seen. Freewing's process seems to me to be much better, but is the foam molding process so much different between the two? Even in repainting the raw foam nose cones, priming did not work as well (even after cleaning it profusely with alcohol several times) as with other models and even after coating with spar urethane several coats, light trim masking wanted to lift everything off.

I do feel that after 4 coats on the entire jet after finishing that it gave it a somewhat better "shell", so if you find the paint "flying off", you may want to add some clear coats. I'm sure you don't want to alter the matte finish that looks so realistic, but maybe if you try the matte or satin urethane finish, it won't change the look. BTW, forgot to say how much I like your canard wing modification. Your bird REALLY stands out from the crowd. Bravo! [/QUOTE]

Thanks, I appreciate the compliment. I've got a few coats of matte on it already, but still im worried a bit!

Any adhesive material still pulls paint. I'll probably hit with some more matte. I would rather a tiny bit of extra weight over peeling. Don't think I've ever used urethane, what brand do you use?

Mike

[JLambCWU]

Live video sunrise first tracks from Saturday at the 2020 Presidents Day fun fly in GORGEOUS St. George, UT. The Remote Possibilities RC Club flying field here in Southern Utah is absolutely gorgeous. Got up early to show everyone this fantastic EDF tearing up the pinky skies.

[Hugh Wiedman]

Did you get the AL-37? That paint adhesion on that one was . If you had just a little snot on your fingers, the paint would come off. If it smelled masking tape coming, the paint would just fall off on its own. I think it's got to do with the releasing agent they spray into the molds so that the foam parts can fall out easily. The more complex the part, the more agent is needed. Same goes for if the part is large in square area. If they don't fall out on their own, some human has to be there to coax them out. Such circumstances really should have a better prep stage before the paint goes on.

On both my SU and AL37, I painted on a single layer of MinWax but that didn't help much on areas that were already painted.

No, I have yet to pull the trigger on the AL37, seems like a tremendous amount of work to repaint it with some of the outstanding jobs I seen on it's thread. They all have my utmost respect and admiration for the repaints I've seen. I'm still working on my Canadian Demo repaint of the F-18 so the AL37 will have to wait. My new motto of "more flying, less modifying" is already taking a serious beating! Found the same issue as you did on the layer of MinWax not really helping as much, but ended up with 4 coats (actual used Spar Urethane-same stuff) and that seemed to keep it down much better.

How's your SU-30 coming, decided yet on the receiver (still going with the Lemon)?

[Hugh Wiedman]

Hugh Wiedman I can confirm that the SU-30 flies stable and without oscillations with the following AS3X settings: R:80, P:80, Y:75 Priority:160 on all three axis. Yes, it does seem high for a jet but it works. I have this same gyro settings for flying around and landing. Note, I ended up setting up a slight flap/elevator mix as follows: Flaps up: 0%, 0%, Mid-flaps: -50%, -3%, Landing Flaps: -100%, -7%. I like my jets coming in flat during landing and the elevator correction helped keep level pitch. Hope this helps and good luck on the maiden! Try landing it without flaps first and then experiment to see how they impact landing speeds.

Thanks PaulZ. I did follow your advice on the AS3X settings with take-off and landing flaps at 70/80/85 and flaps up at 65/70/75 (what's a few points difference, still couldn't force myself to 80 on the roll out of habit on the fly around mode). On the flaps, I'm also similar at 0%/55%/80%. Since I fly off of grass, the flaperons were more important to me on take-off, and less so on landing. Just dialed in some up elevator on the take-off and landing flaps as per your recommendation-thanks. Earlier, it was posted that the flaperons did not affect attitude, so I original had it with no compensation. Still waiting for the winds to subside for the maiden.

I noticed you have your flaps going negative, mine go down positive. We both have the AR7350 so I'm wondering if I've done something wrong, yet again. In the receiver the left flaperon is set at normal, and the right flaperon is reversed. In the transmitter (and I absolutely know reversing should not be done there with the AS3X) for some reason I've set channel 2 (right flaperon) at normal and Aux1 (left flaperon) reversed. I must have been drinking when I did this, but all surfaces moved correctly that way and AS3X compensated correctly that way, but that still makes no sense.

[Hugh Wiedman]

As I said before, the paint adhesion on this model is one of the worst I've seen. Freewing's process seems to me to be much better, but is the foam molding process so much different between the two? Even in repainting the raw foam nose cones, priming did not work as well (even after cleaning it profusely with alcohol several times) as with other models and even after coating with spar urethane several coats, light trim masking wanted to lift everything off.

I do feel that after 4 coats on the entire jet after finishing that it gave it a somewhat better "shell", so if you find the paint "flying off", you may want to add some clear coats. I'm sure you don't want to alter the matte finish that looks so realistic, but maybe if you try the matte or satin urethane finish, it won't change the look. BTW, forgot to say how much I like your canard wing modification. Your bird REALLY stands out from the crowd. Bravo!

Thanks, I appreciate the compliment. I've got a few coats of matte on it already, but still im worried a bit!

Any adhesive material still pulls paint. I'll probably hit with some more matte. I would rather a tiny bit of extra weight over peeling. Don't think I've ever used urethane, what brand do you use?

Mike[/QUOTE]

I use the Varathane, exterior Spar Urethane. I'm sure it's very similar to the MinWax exterior most other use.

[OV10]

MotionRC does not sell the Su-30. The Su-27/30 is a FMS-Horizon Hobby deal. You cannot find it on MotionRC.com because they don't sell it. I suggest you look at your Su-30's box and tell us if it says Horizon Hobby or FMS. Proof you bought it from MotionRC is an invoice or shipping label.

That issue was settled 2 days ago with member Tow apologizing in post#291

[Hugh Wiedman]

Thanks PaulZ. I did follow your advice on the AS3X settings with take-off and landing flaps at 70/80/85 and flaps up at 65/70/75 (what's a few points difference, still couldn't force myself to 80 on the roll out of habit on the fly around mode). On the flaps, I'm also similar at 0%/55%/80%. Since I fly off of grass, the flaperons were more important to me on take-off, and less so on landing. Just dialed in some up elevator on the take-off and landing flaps as per your recommendation-thanks. Earlier, it was posted that the flaperons did not affect attitude, so I original had it with no compensation. Still waiting for the winds to subside for the maiden.

I noticed you have your flaps going negative, mine go down positive. We both have the AR7350 so I'm wondering if I've done something wrong, yet again. In the receiver the left flaperon is set at normal, and the right flaperon is reversed. In the transmitter (and I absolutely know reversing should not be done there with the AS3X) for some reason I've set channel 2 (right flaperon) at normal and Aux1 (left flaperon) reversed. I must have been drinking when I did this, but all surfaces moved correctly that way and AS3X compensated correctly that way, but that still makes no sense.

Sorry, just the opposite, left flaperon normal, right flaperon reversed in the receiver, but yes in transmitter right flaperon Channel 2 normal and but flap channel 6 also normal. It's Aux 2, which is now my speed brake, is reversed, which should be OK. Flight mode switch is Aux 1. The original 636 programmed receiver had both aileron's reversed (of course they were y-connected together on the plane and the left aileron channel 6 went to the speed brake-reversed).

[xviper]

No, I have yet to pull the trigger on the AL37, seems like a tremendous amount of work to repaint it with some of the outstanding jobs I seen on it's thread. They all have my utmost respect and admiration for the repaints I've seen. I'm still working on my Canadian Demo repaint of the F-18 so the AL37 will have to wait. My new motto of "more flying, less modifying" is already taking a serious beating! Found the same issue as you did on the layer of MinWax not really helping as much, but ended up with 4 coats (actual used Spar Urethane-same stuff) and that seemed to keep it down much better.

How's your SU-30 coming, decided yet on the receiver (still going with the Lemon)?

I'm really looking forward to flying the AL. If a person were to just get it and only do the decals, the factory paint isn't a problem. I painted a minimal amount but still required some masking - therein was the headache.
As for my SU, I'm going to order one of the Lemon PLUS's and put the stock 636 into the FlexJet. That is, unless spring comes before the RX does , in which case, I'll fly it as is for a couple of flights.

[Hugh Wiedman]

Hugh Wiedman I can confirm that the SU-30 flies stable and without oscillations with the following AS3X settings: R:80, P:80, Y:75 Priority:160 on all three axis. Yes, it does seem high for a jet but it works. I have this same gyro settings for flying around and landing. Note, I ended up setting up a slight flap/elevator mix as follows: Flaps up: 0%, 0%, Mid-flaps: -50%, -3%, Landing Flaps: -100%, -7%. I like my jets coming in flat during landing and the elevator correction helped keep level pitch. Hope this helps and good luck on the maiden! Try landing it without flaps first and then experiment to see how they impact landing speeds.

OK, so I must have had a small brain aneurism, checked out the movement of the AS3X on all surfaces and they are indeed correcting in the right direction. Did this by reprogramming in 100% heading holds on the different flight modes so as I moved the plane, the surfaces corrected in a direction and held there. I've always done this as a check to make sure the surfaces are moving in the correct direction because I'm never precisely sure with only rate gain as the surfaces only flutter. In programming 25 AS3X, I've only had one "mystery", and that was in a receiver I put in my Avanti. The transmitter had all servo's in normal position and only reversing in the receiver. Receiver orientation was programmed correctly (had the receiver on it's side), but for some reason, the elevator moved in the wrong direction! The only way to correct it was to flip the receiver orientation on the programming app 180 degrees-clearly not the correct orientation, but the one that worked. All I can surmise is that with this receiver, the gyro was upside down. I still shudder to think what would have happened if I didn't give it a final test before flying-most likely a lawn dart.

Now, back to the question of why, if we are both using the AR7350, programmed for flaperons, and directions in our receivers are normal and directions in the receiver are only reversed on channel 2 Right Flaperon (and on channel 3 the elevator), why are my flap positions opposite from yours. Flaps Up: 0%, Mid-Flaps: +55% , Landing Flaps: +85%.

[xviper]

Now, back to the question of why, if we are both using the AR7350, programmed for flaperons, and directions in our receivers are normal and directions in the receiver are only reversed on channel 2 Right Flaperon (and on channel 3 the elevator), why are my flap positions opposite from yours. Flaps Up: 0%, Mid-Flaps: +55% , Landing Flaps: +85%.

This is but only a guess. There are 2 places where servos can be reversed - one is in the RX and the other is in the TX. Perhaps you have them the opposite in one from what Paul has in his, requiring you to have to go the opposite in the TX.

[Hugh Wiedman]

This is but only a guess. There are 2 places where servos can be reversed - one is in the RX and the other is in the TX. Perhaps you have them the opposite in one from what Paul has in his, requiring you to have to go the opposite in the TX.

With the Spektrum AS3X receivers, all reversing must be done in the receiver, never in the transmitter (at least for channels 2-6). I have all servo directions in my transmitter at normal. If any axis channel is reversed in the transmitter, then the AS3X will correct in the opposite direction of what you want. In this case, since the receiver is set for flaperons, the right is reversed in the receiver, and the transmitter wing type is set for 1 aileron 1 flap wing type (which the receiver program tells you to set it for). Oddly enough, my F16 is also set for flaperons, with the exact same reversing in the AR636 receiver, the transmitter wing type same and normal directions on all in the transmitter directions. The flaps system is the same in this as with my SU-30. 0% Flaps up, +70% mid flaps and +90% landing flaps. That's why I didn't think the SU-30 set-up odd, since it's the same, but with PaulZ it's opposite flap system deflection. Very curious to me and my 3rd grade education.

[PaulZ]

Thanks PaulZ. I did follow your advice on the AS3X settings with take-off and landing flaps at 70/80/85 and flaps up at 65/70/75 (what's a few points difference, still couldn't force myself to 80 on the roll out of habit on the fly around mode). On the flaps, I'm also similar at 0%/55%/80%. Since I fly off of grass, the flaperons were more important to me on take-off, and less so on landing. Just dialed in some up elevator on the take-off and landing flaps as per your recommendation-thanks. Earlier, it was posted that the flaperons did not affect attitude, so I original had it with no compensation. Still waiting for the winds to subside for the maiden.

I noticed you have your flaps going negative, mine go down positive. We both have the AR7350 so I'm wondering if I've done something wrong, yet again. In the receiver the left flaperon is set at normal, and the right flaperon is reversed. In the transmitter (and I absolutely know reversing should not be done there with the AS3X) for some reason I've set channel 2 (right flaperon) at normal and Aux1 (left flaperon) reversed. I must have been drinking when I did this, but all surfaces moved correctly that way and AS3X compensated correctly that way, but that still makes no sense.

Hugh, my apologies, my actual flap channel is also going positive when flaps are deflecting down. What I gave you was the "flap system" screen readout from my tx. I have the flap channel reversed in the tx so that is why it is different then the actual channel signal. Sounds like you are all good to go!

[Hugh Wiedman]

Hugh, my apologies, my actual flap channel is also going positive when flaps are deflecting down. What I gave you was the "flap system" screen readout from my tx. I have the flap channel reversed in the tx so that is why it is different then the actual channel signal. Sounds like you are all good to go!

If it is reversed in the transmitter, I think that's a no-no. From my knowledge of AS3X, and I've programmed over 25 of them over the last 4 years (but please don't take this as gospel), the only reversing of servo's for any of the stabilized channels (2-6) should be done in the receiver, otherwise you will get opposite correction for the correct direction on any channel reversed in the transmitter.

You may want to bench test the corrections one more time, and I know you've flown it many times already, but I honestly think that it may be giving you a wrong AS3X correction on the right flaperon. That may not be quite fatal as the 2 ailerons would be cancelling each other out, but obviously in the elevator, it would be fatal.

As I said earlier, the best way to do this is program in 100% heading hold into the receiver on all 3 axis surfaces and then hook it up and move the plane in each direction to confirm they are correcting in the right direction. You should also include an AS3X monitor in your transmitter by going to the telemetry menu and in any empty slot, highlight it and scroll till you get to AS3X. Then when the transmitter is bound to the receiver, use the scroll wheel to go that screen and it will actually show you set gains and what the receiver is actually giving (sorry if you already have it, just wanted to mention it). I believe the receiver should have left flaperon normal and right flaperon reversed, and in the transmitter all at normal, except AUX2 which is your speed brake.

[Hugh Wiedman]

...

OK, finally received some 5500mah 70C Roaring Tops and first tested the "True" C with the new Progressive RC Lipo ESR Meter Mark II as well as my GT Power meter hooked up to the battery and ESC/EDF's. The results are sorely disappointing. First off, the manual states that the true C rating is conservative, that a Lipo testing consistently at 30C may be closer to 45C (a 33% lower true C test than actual, or conversely, the actual C is 50% higher than the test result). With that said, I tested over 100 of my batteries (unfortunately only 6 different brands) and the highest C I got (before getting the Roaring Tops) was 18C. This was on the Admiral 6000 50C, some on the Admiral 5000 50C & Admiral 40C. The Admirals tested on average 30%-40% actual C to the battery rating. E-flights and Venoms were closer to displayed C, 40%-50%.

Look, we all know they lie profusely to sell batteries. I knew Roaring Tops 70C had to be a bunch of , but the 5500mah 70C came in at 20C, still higher than the Admiral 6000 50C, but not by much. I'm guessing the actual C can't be much more than 30C based on the internal resistance tests of this meter. Roaring Top came in at a true C rating of 29% of stated!!!

But we all really know that proof is in the use of the Lipo in actual conditions. I also hooked up my trusty GT Power meter to all my jets to see how much Amps and Watts each were drawing. My SU-30 on the Admiral 6000 50C was at 116.5 Amps and 2862 Watts. On the Roaring Top 5500 70C it was down to 106.3 Amps and 2257 Watts. My F-16 with the upgraded 4068-1835kv inrunner was 110.2 Amps and 2446 Watts on the Admiral and 102.6Amps and 2315 Watts on the Roaring Top. To make matters worse, I could actually feel (and hear) more thrust coming off of both with the Admiral than with the Roaring Top. The Admiral is also about 50g heavier in weight.

I can't deny that JLamb's flights have plenty of power, and many others swear by the Roaring Tops. Aros uses them in his F-16 Artic Camo (with the same inrunner as mine) and Chris Wolff of RC Geek uses them exclusively in all his FW jets-but he uses the 6250 35C, and anyone else I know who uses them will only install Roaring Tops. I'm finally going to maiden the SU-30 on Thursday as the winds are finally predicted to be down to 15mph (they've been 25-30 or more for the last 3 weeks) so I'll get to test them out. I can just tell you that the Roaring Tops don't measure up (by actual test data) and you can easily feel the lower thrust even on the bench. It still has plenty of thrust, just not as much as with the Admirals (and I'm not pitching Admirals, I'm sure there are plenty of other great brands out there). I've been flying all my jets on the AD 6000 for the last 4 months, always felt they have plenty of power, but after hearing everyone say RT where best, I had to try them out. Well, I now have 8 new 5500 70C and they may go into permanent storage.

[xviper]

OK, finally received some 5500mah 70C Roaring Tops and first tested the "True" C with the new Progressive RC Lipo ESR Meter Mark II as well as my GT Power meter hooked up to the battery and ESC/EDF's. The results are sorely disappointing. First off, the manual states that the true C rating is conservative, that a Lipo testing consistently at 30C may be closer to 45C (a 33% lower true C test than actual, or conversely, the actual C is 50% higher than the test result). With that said, I tested over 100 of my batteries (unfortunately only 6 different brands) and the highest C I got (before getting the Roaring Tops) was 18C. This was on the Admiral 6000 50C, some on the Admiral 5000 50C & Admiral 40C. The Admirals tested on average 30%-40% actual C to the battery rating. E-flights and Venoms were closer to displayed C, 40%-50%.

Look, we all know they lie profusely to sell batteries. I knew Roaring Tops 70C had to be a bunch of , but the 5500mah 70C came in at 20C, still higher than the Admiral 6000 50C, but not by much. I'm guessing the actual C can't be much more than 30C based on the internal resistance tests of this meter. Roaring Top came in at a true C rating of 29% of stated!!!

But we all really know that proof is in the use of the Lipo in actual conditions. I also hooked up my trusty GT Power meter to all my jets to see how much Amps and Watts each were drawing. My SU-30 on the Admiral 6000 50C was at 116.5 Amps and 2862 Watts. On the Roaring Top 5500 70C it was down to 106.3 Amps and 2257 Watts. My F-16 with the upgraded 4068-1835kv inrunner was 110.2 Amps and 2446 Watts on the Admiral and 102.6Amps and 2315 Watts on the Roaring Top. To make matters worse, I could actually feel (and hear) more thrust coming off of both with the Admiral than with the Roaring Top. The Admiral is also about 50g heavier in weight.

I can't deny that JLamb's flights have plenty of power, and many others swear by the Roaring Tops. Aros uses them in his F-16 Artic Camo (with the same inrunner as mine) and Chris Wolff of RC Geek uses them exclusively in all his FW jets-but he uses the 6250 35C, and anyone else I know who uses them will only install Roaring Tops. I'm finally going to maiden the SU-30 on Thursday as the winds are finally predicted to be down to 15mph (they've been 25-30 or more for the last 3 weeks) so I'll get to test them out. I can just tell you that the Roaring Tops don't measure up (by actual test data) and you can easily feel the lower thrust even on the bench. It still has plenty of thrust, just not as much as with the Admirals (and I'm not pitching Admirals, I'm sure there are plenty of other great brands out there). I've been flying all my jets on the AD 6000 for the last 4 months, always felt they have plenty of power, but after hearing everyone say RT where best, I had to try them out. Well, I now have 8 new 5500 70C and they may go into permanent storage.

Now you know why I was so skeptical about "what's his name" (who has been on the ignore list since) and his so called "FACTS". Obviously just a shill for that shop. Anyone who pushes a product as hard as he did, have dubious motives.
Your measurements are what I call "FACTS". Thank you for doing that although I'm sorry that you had to fork out money for the batteries before you could do it. I was actually going to buy one just to see for myself but you did it for me. I've been known to buy whole airplanes because someone boasted vehemently about how great it was, just to prove what a "croc-o-shat" it was.

[T-CAT]

OK, finally received some 5500mah 70C Roaring Tops and first tested the "True" C with the new Progressive RC Lipo ESR Meter Mark II as well as my GT Power meter hooked up to the battery and ESC/EDF's. The results are sorely disappointing. First off, the manual states that the true C rating is conservative, that a Lipo testing consistently at 30C may be closer to 45C (a 33% lower true C test than actual, or conversely, the actual C is 50% higher than the test result). With that said, I tested over 100 of my batteries (unfortunately only 6 different brands) and the highest C I got (before getting the Roaring Tops) was 18C. This was on the Admiral 6000 50C, some on the Admiral 5000 50C & Admiral 40C. The Admirals tested on average 30%-40% actual C to the battery rating. E-flights and Venoms were closer to displayed C, 40%-50%.

Look, we all know they lie profusely to sell batteries. I knew Roaring Tops 70C had to be a bunch of , but the 5500mah 70C came in at 20C, still higher than the Admiral 6000 50C, but not by much. I'm guessing the actual C can't be much more than 30C based on the internal resistance tests of this meter. Roaring Top came in at a true C rating of 29% of stated!!!

But we all really know that proof is in the use of the Lipo in actual conditions. I also hooked up my trusty GT Power meter to all my jets to see how much Amps and Watts each were drawing. My SU-30 on the Admiral 6000 50C was at 116.5 Amps and 2862 Watts. On the Roaring Top 5500 70C it was down to 106.3 Amps and 2257 Watts. My F-16 with the upgraded 4068-1835kv inrunner was 110.2 Amps and 2446 Watts on the Admiral and 102.6Amps and 2315 Watts on the Roaring Top. To make matters worse, I could actually feel (and hear) more thrust coming off of both with the Admiral than with the Roaring Top. The Admiral is also about 50g heavier in weight.

I can't deny that JLamb's flights have plenty of power, and many others swear by the Roaring Tops. Aros uses them in his F-16 Artic Camo (with the same inrunner as mine) and Chris Wolff of RC Geek uses them exclusively in all his FW jets-but he uses the 6250 35C, and anyone else I know who uses them will only install Roaring Tops. I'm finally going to maiden the SU-30 on Thursday as the winds are finally predicted to be down to 15mph (they've been 25-30 or more for the last 3 weeks) so I'll get to test them out. I can just tell you that the Roaring Tops don't measure up (by actual test data) and you can easily feel the lower thrust even on the bench. It still has plenty of thrust, just not as much as with the Admirals (and I'm not pitching Admirals, I'm sure there are plenty of other great brands out there). I've been flying all my jets on the AD 6000 for the last 4 months, always felt they have plenty of power, but after hearing everyone say RT where best, I had to try them out. Well, I now have 8 new 5500 70C and they may go into permanent storage.

I have no issue with RoaringTop, and they seem to have a very loyal following, but I've found them to be overly expensive for the performance they provide. That's why we brought up that RCgroups battery testing thread as it at least provides some data to mix with opinions to help make the most informed decision on LiPo purchases (although you may have already known about that thread long ago).

I've done the same as you though, and sometimes buy various LiPo brands just to see for myself what they're all about. Thanks for doing some testing as well as that is always helpful information. If wanted, you may want to consider posting your data on the battery testing thread mentioned to add to the information they have. The good is that if the RT's perform well enough in the planes you put them in and you don't crave more performance, at least you have a good amount of LiPo's to use for more flights.

[Aussie1]

I just need some help with setting up flaperons. I am using a DX18 and 12 channel Spectrum RX, and when I have full flap set, about 50 degrees, I have very little aileron. I'm thinking that I will lose roll control and am wondering whether I need to mix tailerons? If I do, are the stock servos ok for the tailerons? Also, can you increase aileron travel with full flap? Thanks!