Official Freewing Twin 80mm/90mm A-10 Thunderbolt II Thread

[T-CAT]

I know some have used carbon tubes (round and square) to strengthen the nose area in the empty channels, especially if you are using heavy batteries and extensive mods. However, I needed something soon, and didn't want to wait to order some carbon. The local hobby shop only had aluminum tubing left. I purchased some 6mm diameter aluminum tubing. Carbon is likely much stronger, but with two of these (one on each side channel), I would imagine it's plenty strong. If I bent these flying, something else is massively wrong, ha-ha. The inner diameter is thick enough. I can still bend them a bit, but requires quite a bit of pressure and it's likely much more than would be applied during flight.

With that said, has anyone done testing with RF differences between using carbon tubes versus aluminum tubing? It makes me curious if I'm making things worse with receiver signal by using aluminum versus carbon. I would have to look up the difference in potential inference though, as I've never researched this.

[Aros]

Assuming your flap throws are from the manual and your mix is dialed in the air, what percentage is your elevator mix at for both settings? I am using Spektrum if that matters...Thanks in advance!

[Lon]

Thanks Lon, can you give me a measurement? It's difficult to tell positions from that angle. Brad

Front battery is 1cm past nose gear opening. End of Rear battery is in line with edge of wood where screw driver is pointing.

[ULTIMATETWO]

I know some have used carbon tubes (round and square) to strengthen the nose area in the empty channels, especially if you are using heavy batteries and extensive mods. However, I needed something soon, and didn't want to wait to order some carbon. The local hobby shop only had aluminum tubing left. I purchased some 6mm diameter aluminum tubing. Carbon is likely much stronger, but with two of these (one on each side channel), I would imagine it's plenty strong. If I bent these flying, something else is massively wrong, ha-ha. The inner diameter is thick enough. I can still bend them a bit, but requires quite a bit of pressure and it's likely much more than would be applied during flight.

With that said, has anyone done testing with RF differences between using carbon tubes versus aluminum tubing? It makes me curious if I'm making things worse with receiver signal by using aluminum versus carbon. I would have to look up the difference in potential inference though, as I've never researched this.

Plan to to the carbon rods reinforcements on mine too...I bet you that you should not have anyproblem with these carbon reinforcements if you keep your receiver and mainly antenas out of these rods at least over 3 cm., I´m currently flying and during years 3D airplanes; ( Precision Aerobatics models, Extreme Flight and similars ).. and they like to do a very extensive use of carbon rods and carbon fiber reinforcements thin sheets ironed to the wood itself on their well built and designed airframes and never, never have any issue by radio interference...
Start mine swapping EC5 connectors and adding the whistles too...
Regards.
Manolo.

[Pete Lane]

Whistle while you work...

Plane

[downwindleg]

Thanks to Lon and DrDeath for battery placement input, I really appreciate it. Don't have a good balancer so this will work. Brad

[Aros]

.

[Lon]

Thanks to Lon and DrDeath for battery placement input, I really appreciate it. Don't have a good balancer so this will work. Brad

It will work for sure...you will be in the ball park for CG. Make some personal adjustments if desired after a few flights. Make sure and "Fly her in" with power when landing. You will be all smiles flying her!

[dahawk]

End of which battery?

[Mike_Then]

I know some have used carbon tubes (round and square) to strengthen the nose area in the empty channels, especially if you are using heavy batteries and extensive mods. However, I needed something soon, and didn't want to wait to order some carbon. The local hobby shop only had aluminum tubing left. I purchased some 6mm diameter aluminum tubing. Carbon is likely much stronger, but with two of these (one on each side channel), I would imagine it's plenty strong. If I bent these flying, something else is massively wrong, ha-ha. The inner diameter is thick enough. I can still bend them a bit, but requires quite a bit of pressure and it's likely much more than would be applied during flight.

With that said, has anyone done testing with RF differences between using carbon tubes versus aluminum tubing? It makes me curious if I'm making things worse with receiver signal by using aluminum versus carbon. I would have to look up the difference in potential inference though, as I've never researched this.

Are the CC rods/tubes necessary if you're running a stock setup of 5000/5500 mAh batteries? I mean I'm sure MRC tested this plane extensively and determined they weren't needed? Not saying they won't be helpful, just wondering if they're really necessary?

[T-CAT]

Great question, as it can't hurt, but whether it's necessary we're not sure. I'd like to see if the Motion crew and other testers around the globe have tested the front fuse with the addition of the carbon reinforcement in the channels versus without. The plane has a lot of carbon toward the rear, but nothing visible in the front half of the fuse (maybe it's embedded). With two 910g batteries, I'm being a bit cautious, so I want to play it safe by adding the carbon (or aluminum since I have it).

[afjetmech]

Are the CC rods/tubes necessary if you're running a stock setup of 5000/5500 mAh batteries? I mean I'm sure MRC tested this plane extensively and determined they weren't needed? Not saying they won't be helpful, just wondering if they're really necessary?

Mike, if you saw how hard mine hit on the nose after my botched landing, I think you'd know they aren't needed. I ripped the nose piece off and tore the nose gear out of the mount. The rest of the fuselage laughed it off. People are over complicating this plane.

[crxmanpat]

Yeah, mine hit pretty hard too, and all I have is a few tiny creases in the foam near the nose retract. Hardly noticeable. I'd say it's pretty stout.

[Aros]

Maiden Success!

The school was virtually empty other than some of the janitor's vehicles but they were off the main "runway". A fairly pesky crosswind but nothing I didn't think she couldn't handle. This was my only shot before my trip to meet downwindleg and enjoy his beautiful island this weekend so it was now or next Tuesday. I put my Mobius on the port wingtip assuming it wouldn't create much if any issue with lateral stability. The takeoff was fairly uneventful but the nose gear did seem to fish tail on me at WOT...I may want to dial down the rudder throw on low rates.

She lifted off and immediately I knew I had to give quite a bit of right trim. How much was that due to the port-mounted cam? I won't know for sure until the next flight when the camera is center mounted. I got her fairly trimmed but with the winds it was impossible to dial her in completely. I was surprised how floaty and agile she felt. I expected her to feel a bit more "brick-ish" in the air. Not at all. I flew on low rates and even though I dialed down my ailerons A LOT (from recommended) I still need to dial down another 10% or so. A little too responsive on the roll axis for me. Yaw trim may need to be adjusted a touch too I think but it's too hard to tell with a cross wind component. As you can see in the video below, there wasn't much to the maiden. I generally "Grandma" my birds on the maiden until I learn the language they want to speak. Once I do then it's balls to the wall, lol.

I basically had the gear down for half the flight trying some slow-ish approaches with flaps to get a feel for the landing sequence in my limited runway. Boy does she eat up space! I didn't realize how much until watching the video! I had no choice but to slow her down pretty good with full flaps on the approach. She really does want to float! Once she was in ground effect I had to really battle to get her down as she was eating up my limited runway in a snap. Finally got her down and no bounce! Well so I thought! Once I watched the video there was a small bounce as if to mock me.

Son of a... LOL

You can see how I had to turn hard right as I ran out of runway (and praying my depth perception was on its game or it was going to hit the light pole or curb).

Summary: While I still have some dialing in to do, and I think she was ever so slightly on the aft side of the CG, this is one hell of a foam A-10. Hard to add what hasn't already been said about her. Fantastic scale looks and size and performance. Fans sounded nice and balanced. Can't wait to paint her up and get her decals on and spend the Summer and Fall rocking this beast!

[sam51401]

OK, Call me crazy but it is done AND flew!! Today at the Jet Jam I cut the tape on my FW A10 box, unpacked and built the plane on the bench AT THE MEET! Took my time and didnt rush and flew it around mid afternoon. I really need to pratice and get my finesse back on the landings. I had a bouncer on the first approach and went around then got it in on the second pass.
Now if you end up with a not so perfect landing and it bounces on the nose fairly hard, several things to double check.
1 Check the connector pin, it has a sharp relief cut for the set screws and could break there, had one on another break today!
2 Mine didnt break BUT, when back in the pits, the fore and aft play had increased greatly, like double or more than initial preflight play.
Found that the metal plate that is placed over the retract unit flanges was bent a little. I removed the unit and found further that I had cracked the flanges of the retract right next to the pivot pin across from side to side. Ordered the last remaining nose unit in stock, just the retract. The complete unit is still in stock for 39.99.
So when you have that not so perfect landing, check for increased fore and aft play in the nose gear and if found to be noticeably more than the preflight check, check the unit housing for cracking and the metal plate for deformation indicating a fairly hard impact of ther nose strut.
Other than my imperfect landing finesse, the plane flew great and was exceptional. Mine was like the fourth to be first flown this week at the Jam and i would say at least 7+ FW A10's at the meet. Now the AvantiS is runinng a close similar count also for first flights and just great flying all around.
Expecting pilot Ryan and Mike to be present tomorrow at the Jet Jam so looking forward seeing the guys again.

[Shirty]

Awesome fellas. Grats.

[Fast Eddie]

Congrats on the maiden Aros:Cool: Have a fun and safe weekend.

Standing by patiently for pre-order #2

[Alpha]

Hey T-Cat, to answer your question, aside from the reinforcements in the final version we've shipped, we never installed carbon rods except for a handful of comparative test flights, even up to the brutish twin 90mm twin 8s 5500 setup we tested on the heavy end. I still elected to leave some of the channels in the foam in anticipation of people wanting to further reinforce it if they're on especially rough runways or are running heavy setups. But for the record, I wouldn't say our setups require anything other than what arrives in the PNP box. 6s 4000/5000/5800/7000, and 8s 4000/5000/5500.

I hope that gives a good reference point for readers. Add some if and only if you really want to. I wouldn't add too much, though. Crumple zones are part of the design.

Sam51401, kudos for unboxing, building, and flying at the field in one shot! It's a testament to the plane's simplicity but moreso to your dedication. Welcome to the A-10 Addicts!

'Next shipments aren't far away, friends! You'll be joining the Hawg party soon.

[Fast Eddie]

'Next shipments aren't far away, friends! You'll be joining the Hawg party soon.
[/QUOTE]

Thank you Alpha for the shipment update

[T-CAT]

Excellent, thanks Alpha :Cool:. I appreciate the quick feedback.