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

[xviper]

Hugh Wiedman I used to swear by Graphenes until I was put onto HRBs (thanks Hugh and others) and ChinaHobbyLine, both of which are just as good LiPo's and for much less money. I still have all my Graphene's and all of them still perform well.

[Joehockey]

I Appreciate the comments of the C ratings but I fly all my warbirds on 6s or 12s Graphenes with zero, nada, never dead weight.
On the Flightline Corsair, I use the 6cells 5000 graphene and removed all the dead weight that comes with the model at the factory. That plane flys so well, so dead on CG that its actually boring lol !
Every model below is 6s or 12 s Graphenes using the lipo during the bash/assembly or conversion from glow to epower with the goal of zero dead weight for CG. With care you can use the lipo to achieve CG and not add dead weight . Top Flight P40, CMP Zero, TF Bearcat, Corsair, Flight Line Corsair

[Hugh Wiedman]

Graphene and Graphene Panthers in 6s, 5000mah weigh much more than the RT 6250s - 858g and 920g respectively. They will work but it may be necessary to move the control board as far back as possible (up against the rear bulkhead) and perhaps a new battery strap installed if the heavier Graphenes are used. (Since that's what he has and doesn't wish to buy different brands of batteries.)

xviper I agree, I think you are right about moving the control board to the back bulkhead. I even had to do that with the 2 RT 6250's and move the straps back because of the extra weight of the modified cockpit. Graphenes are outstanding batteries and give a more consistent and higher discharge rate (C) than standard Lipo's, but the trade off is more weight and cost. IMO, after testing a lot of batteries on my various prop and EDF aircraft, they usually don't really need an extremely high C, with the exception of some of the EDF inrunners and therefore I feel the extra weight and cost is not warranted. Maybe for heli's (which I do not fly so this is a guess), the higher C would offer a bigger benefit. All of my prop and outrunner EDF's give almost the same initial thrust on a 35C battery as they do on a 70C battery. My EDF inrunners show about 5%-8%% more thrust from a 70C than the 35C, but that only is significant at take-off and if I can get off the grass with the 35C-50C battery, I'd rather have more flight time and less weight. I fly my Corsair and Spitfire on a standard Admiral 5000 mAh battery, weight around 720 g, and get 8 minutes or more and rarely use full throttle, not even on take-off. A 920 g graphene 5000 mAh battery in those, IMO would be like putting a Sumo wrestler in a box car racer. I think the same analogy will fit on the A-10, but there a lot of ways to skin the cat and whatever each pilot likes and feels comfortable with, that's the real answer.

[Joehockey]

Guys thanks for actually listening, all great advice. My packs come in at 858 grams vs the stated packs above at 795 grams per pack. That is a 126 grams of total gain vs your examples but with your advice I can move onboard system around to play with the weight.
As stated weight is not your friend in foamy and its not your friend in epower period. If you go to RCG ( Giant Electric Plane forums ) you will see my zero conversion. The model had a G62 gas engine + 3.5 lbs of dead weight. I was able to make the conversion with tons of reallocation and achieve CG with zero added weight.

My concern with the A10 is that many of the components will not be movable outside of the board and lipos. Usually I move servos when needed to change the CG as a final task.
Its sound like this model can handle the weight of the Graphenes, I just did not want another grass mower like the L39 .
Not one member at my club can get their L39 off a normal cut field !

[xviper]

Graphene and Graphene Panthers in 6s, 5000mah weigh much more than the RT 6250s - 858g and 920g respectively. They will work but it may be necessary to move the control board as far back as possible (up against the rear bulkhead) and perhaps a new battery strap installed if the heavier Graphenes are used. (Since that's what he has and doesn't wish to buy different brands of batteries.)

[ColtPilot]

I think I answered that question on the Motion website but just looked and don't see the question or the answer posted under the Q&A. Anyway, I'm sure that the stock A-10 can handle the weight with no problem as far as flying, but not sure of the weight of those Graphenes. This aircraft has an excellent power to weight ratio. I fly with 2 RT 35C 6250's (each weighing 795 g) all the way back, in fact removed the control board so I could get the aft battery all the way in to achieve a balance point of 92 mm as my 3D redesigned cockpit and pilot added extra weight of 150 g. My other point was that you don't really need the extra C that I think the Graphenes offer. If I'm not mistaken, the HobbyKing Graphenes weigh about 920 g each and are a 75C battery. If so, you're adding about 240 g of extra weight that is not really going to help the EDF performance (as a lower C battery will work just fine in these EDF's). I get over 5 minutes of aggressive flying on the 2 6250's and rarely am at full throttle, except take-off (on grass) and testing out vertical climb. 50% to 70% throttle gets you just about anything you want. And the most important point, IMO, is to balance it in the 92 mm range instead of the book point of 78 mm, which not only results, IMO, in better flying characteristics but is imperative in landing on the mains with the nose up. The only thing that will get you in trouble with this bird is landing with the front nose gear touching first which will give you the dreaded "bucking bronco". Landing with the balance point of 92 mm has resulted, for me anyway, in 100% of the landings being mains first and probably the easiest landing EDF I have. So I guess you could fly with the graphenes as long as you can achieve the right balance point, but I'd rather trade off that extra weight for a higher mAh battery and get more flight time. Hey, the HobbyStar 8000 mah batteries weight about 900 g each and theoretically would give you 50-60% more flight time, and I can't use these and balance where I need to, so doubt you will be able to with the graphenes. Unnecessary weight with these foamies is not your friend, but the extra weight of cockpit mods, pilots, paint, etc. is what I would call completely necessary extra weight.

I fly mine at 13lbs with no problem. 2x RT 6250 same as yours, sound system with twin transducer speakers and added lights using a 2 cell lipo and 3 cell for the sound system which I plan on changing to a balance plug to the RT lipo. Use the full 22.2 volts on the sound system. 4 years and one of the first off the boat.

[Hugh Wiedman]

Hi All, I asked this question in the Q&A however ( sorry ) I cant find the answer that was clearly given.
I am on the fence about any jet with a grass field, all attempts at our field fail.
My really question is can this model handle in size and weight the Hobby King 6s 5000 Graphenes ? This is all i use for my prop blade warbirds and I would like to stay with the same battery’s on all my models.
I am assuming if it can, the battery area is large enough to meet the CG via battery movement manipulation.
Thanks for the help

I think I answered that question on the Motion website but just looked and don't see the question or the answer posted under the Q&A. Anyway, I'm sure that the stock A-10 can handle the weight with no problem as far as flying, but not sure of the weight of those Graphenes. This aircraft has an excellent power to weight ratio. I fly with 2 RT 35C 6250's (each weighing 795 g) all the way back, in fact removed the control board so I could get the aft battery all the way in to achieve a balance point of 92 mm as my 3D redesigned cockpit and pilot added extra weight of 150 g. My other point was that you don't really need the extra C that I think the Graphenes offer. If I'm not mistaken, the HobbyKing Graphenes weigh about 920 g each and are a 75C battery. If so, you're adding about 240 g of extra weight that is not really going to help the EDF performance (as a lower C battery will work just fine in these EDF's). I get over 5 minutes of aggressive flying on the 2 6250's and rarely am at full throttle, except take-off (on grass) and testing out vertical climb. 50% to 70% throttle gets you just about anything you want. And the most important point, IMO, is to balance it in the 92 mm range instead of the book point of 78 mm, which not only results, IMO, in better flying characteristics but is imperative in landing on the mains with the nose up. The only thing that will get you in trouble with this bird is landing with the front nose gear touching first which will give you the dreaded "bucking bronco". Landing with the balance point of 92 mm has resulted, for me anyway, in 100% of the landings being mains first and probably the easiest landing EDF I have. So I guess you could fly with the graphenes as long as you can achieve the right balance point, but I'd rather trade off that extra weight for a higher mAh battery and get more flight time. Hey, the HobbyStar 8000 mah batteries weight about 900 g each and theoretically would give you 50-60% more flight time, and I can't use these and balance where I need to, so doubt you will be able to with the graphenes. Unnecessary weight with these foamies is not your friend, but the extra weight of cockpit mods, pilots, paint, etc. is what I would call completely necessary extra weight.

[ColtPilot]

Hi Guys,
I’m new to electrics and just purchased the A-10 and Shock Wave 3 system. Can someone show me their install. Not sure about speaker placement or if I have to cut the fuse then place screen over the top etc. thanks!

Call me 📞. 586-484-5239. You'll really like the Shock Wave 3. All I have are the still photos. However I can do a short video when I get home from work for the details.

[ColtPilot]

Hi All, I asked this question in the Q&A however ( sorry ) I cant find the answer that was clearly given.
I am on the fence about any jet with a grass field, all attempts at our field fail.
My really question is can this model handle in size and weight the Hobby King 6s 5000 Graphenes ? This is all i use for my prop blade warbirds and I would like to stay with the same battery’s on all my models.
I am assuming if it can, the battery area is large enough to meet the CG via battery movement manipulation.
Thanks for the help

The A-10 can handle a RT 6250 35c and excellent grass ops.

[PeteStevens]

Hi Guys,
I’m new to electrics and just purchased the A-10 and Shock Wave 3 system. Can someone show me their install. Not sure about speaker placement or if I have to cut the fuse then place screen over the top etc. thanks!

[Joehockey]

Hi All, I asked this question in the Q&A however ( sorry ) I cant find the answer that was clearly given.
I am on the fence about any jet with a grass field, all attempts at our field fail.
My really question is can this model handle in size and weight the Hobby King 6s 5000 Graphenes ? This is all i use for my prop blade warbirds and I would like to stay with the same battery’s on all my models.
I am assuming if it can, the battery area is large enough to meet the CG via battery movement manipulation.
Thanks for the help

[Look ma, no trim]

Hey guys! Not sure if anyone is interested, but i have found a sweet little cache of Spektrum AR9350 ASMX rx's Canada. Evasive lil buggars..where they say discontinued, they mean it. But persistence pays!!

if you're interested they can be found here, if interested https://amr-rc.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=ar9350

they wont last , good luck!

[Aros]

Yes, enamel is fine. Always start with light coats and build up from there. Never use lacquers on foam.

[Look ma, no trim]

Can you use spray paint on this foam??

Thx in advance

[themudduck]

Wow, I saw that in the instructions, but i thought it was too minimal to be right.. Lol, i put in 10 off rip.. Whoops

Your profile name makes this even funnier....

As Aros said, it can be different with each plane. With the A10 you need to set the elevators with some "up" for the normal flying setting - mainly because of the neutral stab and because this plane tends to be nose heavy. Have you noticed the many previous posts where people recommend moving the CG back? If you move the batteries back you won't need as much up trim, but you'll still probably need a little. Regarding flaps, with the A10 you'll find that it doesn't need much additional elevator trim with full flaps. I do find a little up elevator trim mixed in to be helpful with this plane to keep the nose up during landing. But the most important factor is the CG. If your plane is nose-heavy you will find it hard to raise the nose during landing, and you'll end up bouncing. (lots of posts regarding that)

[Look ma, no trim]

Yes you would add 2mm and 3mm down elevator trim to your flap mix. Some planes require up trim, others down trim.

Wow, I saw that in the instructions, but i thought it was too minimal to be right.. Lol, i put in 10 off rip.. Whoops

[Gringotuerto]

HOW DO YOU ALL FEEL ABOUT THE DEPENDABILITY OF THE MIXING BOARD?

I have used mixing board on many Motion RC planes, and never had an issue. I have had 3 y-cables fail, presumably breaking connection at the joint (fortunately, all three failed on the ground). That is not a large sample size, but we all form our "personal superstition" based on direct experiences, and mine is that the box from the plane maker is safer than a no-brand commodity y-cable. One thing not to like about the box is that it does introduce more pin connections. Also I found it interesting that MotionRC provides a Y-cable for the elevator with the Mig-29, and instructs how to bypass the box. And that Y cable has dual path all the way from the beginning (in other words, lower resistance than if the split were farther downstream). What I take from this is that there is some concern about resistance (on power/ground). PCB traces should be reliable, but they might have less cross sectional area than a cable, and typically pin connections have some resistance also (contact resistance...surfaces are always slightly oxidized, and metal oxides are typically insulating....two pieces of metal touching each other are not quite as good as one piece of metal).

[xviper]

So to update, I have everything in proper order, all is working. My only gripe is I have 1 aileron that is going dead at connection, with a little wiggle, I get it back live and it stays live..I'm diverting Ele & Ail directly to rx, so where the connection gets dodgy is at the wing..So I guess my question is, HOW DO YOU ALL FEEL ABOUT THE DEPENDABILITY OF THE MIXING BOARD?

Thanks again fellas for all the help

Before you get too far in your mindset as to trust or not trust, you should take the wing connector apart and see what's on the other side. You may find one or more of the plugs are not fully seated. But that's where your testing should begin. Use a servo tester to test each and every one of those plugs that go into the wing board. Then go to the other end and test the first connection you find there. In this case, the lead that plugs into the RX. This can rule out a faulty wing board or blue box or faulty wiring.

[Aros]

By "down elevator", you mean bring actual control surface down, to bring nose down, not down stick elevator that would bring the nose up..Confused as take off flaps should raise plane, wouldnt down elevator bring planes nose back down?

Yes you would add 2mm and 3mm down elevator trim to your flap mix. Some planes require up trim, others down trim.

[crxmanpat]

So I guess my question is, HOW DO YOU ALL FEEL ABOUT THE DEPENDABILITY OF THE MIXING BOARD?

Thanks again fellas for all the help

The mixing board has worked perfectly for me on 3 different A-10s over the years. No issues with it whatsoever.