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

[drettger]

Oh really? I was unaware it was in the manual. Everybody I talked to at our local field learned this in the air. Wow, we are all so dumb. Of course this won't stop me from telling the next guy who does this "Didn't you even read the manual, you idiot!?"

Look at Page 10 of the manual. It looks like it was an afterthought after setting up dual rates. I have to say, the instructions for this were really pretty good.

[MikeT]

It's actually a little up. See pic in post #10104

LOL, Thanks....... I posted in the wrong forum. My bad. I was looking for OV-10 settings. Getting old sucks.....

Mike

[Twowingtj]

LOL, Thanks....... I posted in the wrong forum. My bad. I was looking for OV-10 settings. Getting old sucks.....

Mike

After I saw your post on the OV-10 forum, I had a feeling that was the case. Happens to the best of us lol. All those "10" planes look alike.

[Hugh Wiedman]

But, but, but...the A-10 is supposed to "whine".

Oh, Got it, the light finally went on (it's usually mostly blacked out though). So then I take it twin 12 blades each with an afterburner would be wrong on so many levels, but sounds like something I'd do. As I like to say, "For me, if it's Scale, then it's too Pale".

[The43rdHammer]

Hey Alpha since the A-10 is out of stock, I think it's time to upgrade the "whining" 80mm 9 blade outrunners with a 12 blade inrunner. You've been great in upgrading other jets, like the F-18 BA/Avanti/etc., so since the A-10 been around for a while, it deserves an upgrade. Aros has finally convinced me to join the "Arctic" club and I thought the A-10 would be ideal for that, especially since my CO gave me the . I'm a little worried about her giving another RC requisition the go ahead, either she's not feeling well or she must have something nefarious up her sleeve (I'll probably find out one day after she returns from another shopping trip), but gotta strike while the irons hot. And I know that she's not getting a new broom (she says that when she needs a new one, don't you dare ask her if it's because of her last crash landing-her joke, not mine, but I like it).

I'm really thinking of buying it and upgrading the fans myself to the inrunners, but that's going to add an extra $215 to the purchase , so instead of us having to pay for it, why doesn't Freewing/Motion bear the cost for all of us loyal Freewing/Flight Line/Motion customers . Makes Sense, doesn't it?

Motion RC has no need to do this as they sell the fans and motors already. I bought the version without motors and ESCs and put the inrunners in myself .... simple n’est ce pas?

[themudduck]

deleted

[Hugh Wiedman]

Motion RC has no need to do this as they sell the fans and motors already. I bought the version without motors and ESCs and put the inrunners in myself .... simple n’est ce pas?

The43rdHammer Yes, simple to buy the ARF and put in the inrunners, but my post was mostly "tongue in cheek" and slightly sarcastic, didn't mean it to be all that serious, just a bad joke I guess. I've done that on 3 ARF's already (F-4, F-16 and F-18) so I definitely "get it'".

However, with the A-10, the economics are just a bit different than others. The PNP version costs $599 and the ARF $479, a difference of $120. The dual ESC's cost $120, so why buy the ARF (unless you don't want to use the Freewing ESC's) even if you want to swap out the fans? Buying the PNP gets you the same with the ESC, but you end up with the 2 outrunner EDF's for free (compared to the ARF) that you can use as paper weights or sell at a swap meet? If you do use the ESC's, the total cost after buying the replacement inrunners is the same with the PNP and the ARF, except with the PNP you have 2 80mm outrunners to do whatever you want with. The extra cost under each scenario is either $216 if you go with the 12 blade or $152 for the 9 blade.

Now if Motion would split the difference in the extra cost relating to the fans (notice that the ARF gives essentially full credit for the ESC and zero credit for the 2 EDF's), like say the ARF would cost $400, that would make more economic sense to get the ARF, which if you go with the 9 blade would now cost you $672 all in versus $751 (or with the 12 blade $736 vs $815). Now my head really is spinning!

[xviper]

Hugh Wiedman It seems I have more paper weights than paper these days.

Your math would never work for the bean counters. You know what they say ............................... "The sum of the parts ..................................."

[The43rdHammer]

I agree with everything you say, it does work out more expensive for something that’s already quite pricey, but having been crazy enough to have done it myself, the end result is very satisfying

[Hugh Wiedman]

I agree with everything you say, it does work out more expensive for something that’s already quite pricey, but having been crazy enough to have done it myself, the end result is very satisfying

Oh I'm sure I'll do the same, so I'll join your crazy club, or you can join mine. With that said, did you go with the 9 or 12 blade inrunner (if I remember from an earlier post of yours I think you said the 12 blade). I like the sound of the 12 blade better, but seeing as I know precious little between the performance of a 12 vs a 9, you must feel that a 12 is better for some reason, right? I'm more interested in flight time and in take-off power (like 0-60 mph with a V8) than speed, is one better than the other for either?

[Warthog]

Phantom still looking for those HobbyStar 8000's to give them a try in my F-16 after you posted about them in that thread, but will have to wait a while till they come back in stock, if ever. I'm sure they'd increase the fun time in the A-10 as well and can't wait to try them in my SU-30 to boot!.

Regarding your "dead cell", I just had 2 E-Flight do the exact same thing (almost never use them anymore for that exact reason). Starts out OK, but at about 80% capacity, either 1 or 2 cells start dropping dramatically, resulting in a serious drop in power. After landing, if you wait about 15 seconds, the cells come back up and it seems OK for a short time, then drops again. All cells re-charge OK and come up, but those "hidden" bad cells are just waiting for another opportunity to strike. Put them on my IR meter and found that the internal resistance of the bad cells was almost double that of the good ones. Those batteries are now "swimming with the sharks". E-Flight batteries have been hands down the worst I have (in the last year 5 of them have done this-and most of the rest are at least puffed). One day soon, I'm going to dump all my E-Flights. Not a single problem with the Admirals, Roaring Tops or HRB's. But if you still have 11 good cells left, I suppose missing 1 ain't "life or death".

BTW, the RT 6250 is perfect for the F-4 outrunner as well as the outrunners in the A-10. Not as good in the inrunners though cause those fans definitely like higher C batteries. Just ordered some HRB 6000 50C and can't wait to test them on the inrunners. So far I've found the Admiral 6000 50C (weight 827g) has a lower actual C than the RT 6250 35C (weight 798g) but the HRB 6000 50C (weight 809g) has an actual C higher (according to IR meter and Power meter) than both, so looks like a good candidate for the A-10 outrunners (assuming I have to wait till hell freezes over for the HobbyStar 8000's)

Here you go: https://www.rcjuice.com/hobbystar-80...o-battery.html

[sam51401]

Anyone have the new SMC batteries yet? Im looking at the new flight packs they are introducing very shortly and looking at size of 6s and comparing to the Hobbystar, the current offering and the new graphene looks similar and little less in cost to RCJuice cost of $180 per bat and when i need two, cost does factor in when i use three sets of RT 6250's.

[Hugh Wiedman]

Here you go: https://www.rcjuice.com/hobbystar-80...o-battery.html

Thanks Warthog I appreciate the heads up. Actually, I've been watching that site and another for a couple of weeks and noticed last night they were available. I also noticed that within a few hours of it coming available, 36 had already been sold. Fortunately, 4 of those were to me! I've been after these for a while since Phantom had recommended them to me for the F-16 since I was just a little bummed about the 3-3:30 flight time using a Roaring Top 5500 mah 70 C battery even with the upgraded 12 blade inrunner. I also want to try it in my SU-30 (barely over 3 minutes with 2-70mm inrunners if you're doing anything other than boring flat ovals around the field and landing) so wanted to try them in that as well. Interested to see if these would also work in the A-10 as I'm sure the extra 200g for both batteries may not necessarily destroy the flying ability of this thing.

[Hugh Wiedman]

Anyone have the new SMC batteries yet? Im looking at the new flight packs they are introducing very shortly and looking at size of 6s and comparing to the Hobbystar, the current offering and the new graphene looks similar and little less in cost to RCJuice cost of $180 per bat and when i need two, cost does factor in when i use three sets of RT 6250's.

Amen brother, also just picked up another 6 of the RT 6250's as well. They've been out of stock for a bit but came in a couple days ago. $92 per battery for the RT vs $180 for the HB definitely factors into the equation ($360 per flight-I should be getting a ride in the real thing for that). I'm starting to fly the 6250 in almost all of my EDF's, except the F-16 and SU-30 (both inrunners) which really put out a bigger punch (7-9%) with the RT 70 C vs the RT 35C. I would not have bought the Hobbystar 8000's for any of the outrunners because of the cost, but since I bought 4 for the inrunners, I can always drop it into the A-10 or other outrunners "since they happened to be in the neighborhood".

[The43rdHammer]

Hugh Wiedman I suddenly thought ‘why on earth did I put 12-blade inrunners in my A-10, Hugh is right, 9-blades would be much better’ ... well... turns out my common sense is better than my memory and I did indeed put 9-blade fans in. I also bought 12-blade fans and inrunners x2 for both of my L-39 so my entire fleet is now running on them which confused me (easily done). 🤣

[xviper]

With regards to these 8000mah, 6s, 100C batteries. I'm a bit bewildered as to why they weigh only about 30g more than some of my 5000mah, 6s, 70c "graphene" type batteries and dimensionally speaking (volume) to be 16% less than the "smaller" battery. I would have thought that something rated like that would weigh another 300 to 400 grams.

[C17loadmaster]

Fits like a glove, just put one in at a time to get past the narrow lip at the top and install a longer battery strap.

I bought those exact batteries but got a set 4s and a set of 2s so that I could use them on 8s planes like the F-22. I’ve never even tried them yet because I worried about the weight 🤷🏻♂️

I need to use them or sell them haha. Side note- RCJuice (the distributor of those lipos) is actually right down the road from me. I bought a FW B-17 from the owner, John. He’s a good dude

[Hugh Wiedman]

With regards to these 8000mah, 6s, 100C batteries. I'm a bit bewildered as to why they weigh only about 30g more than some of my 5000mah, 6s, 70c "graphene" type batteries and dimensionally speaking (volume) to be 16% less than the "smaller" battery. I would have thought that something rated like that would weigh another 300 to 400 grams.

Excellent question xviper, I thought the exact same thing. I've been told (so not sure this is actually true) that a graphene battery of similar size to a "regular" lipo is heavier and may be closer to Actual C to what is listed (along with lower, more consistent IR). The HS 8000 we are talking about is not their graphene battery and (per specs) weighs 920g and is 68mmx43x135. It's supposed to be a 100C . I'll check all of that when mine arrive and post the IR meter C testing and weight, so we'll see. The RT 5500 70 C weighs 825g, so even with a regular lipo, the HS 8000 is only 100g heavier than a 5500. Still doesn't make any sense to me but not much does these days after watching the news! And Phantom has a lot of experience with these, over 70 cycles on them and he uses them in his F-16 and A-10. He just posted in the F-16 thread (in a response to me about these batteries) that he just flew his A-10 with 2 HS 8000's and after 6 minutes of aggressive flying, he came in with 40% battery. Yhee Hah, saddle me up boys!

[Phantom]

Excellent question xviper, I thought the exact same thing. I've been told (so not sure this is actually true) that a graphene battery of similar size to a "regular" lipo is heavier and may be closer to Actual C to what is listed (along with lower, more consistent IR). The HS 8000 we are talking about is not their graphene battery and (per specs) weighs 920g and is 68mmx43x135. It's supposed to be a 100C . I'll check all of that when mine arrive and post the IR meter C testing and weight, so we'll see. The RT 5500 70 C weighs 825g, so even with a regular lipo, the HS 8000 is only 100g heavier than a 5500. Still doesn't make any sense to me but not much does these days after watching the news! And Phantom has a lot of experience with these, over 70 cycles on them and he uses them in his F-16 and A-10. He just posted in the F-16 thread (in a response to me about these batteries) that he just flew his A-10 with 2 HS 8000's and after 6 minutes of aggressive flying, he came in with 40% battery. Yhee Hah, saddle me up boys!

Hugh,

I'm definitely interested in your IR numbers on these lipos, the most skepticism about these batts seem to come from there size and weight in regards to their C rating. Although I tend to agree with this skepticism based on my static power runs on my F-16. The two HS 4200mah 6s 40C lipos in parallel out performed the HS 8000mah 6s 100C lipo, by close to 500 additional watts if memory serves...

Having pointed this out the HS 8000mah 6s 100C is no slouch, it came in second over all to providing the most power against an extensive list of lipos, minus the newly popular RT's. I assume it was out performed due to the parallel set up having an additional 400mah and although each 40C lipo would be able to deliver 80C combined rate, the manufacturer claim of 80C burst would allow for a combination of a 160C possible output, atleast for a short period of time.

I'm sure I'd be happy with some of these other lipos that are waking up our EDF's, but I'm more happy with the HS price point, and availability with the exception of the 8000mah 6s 100C.

[xviper]

I know this thread is about the A-10, which most poster have, but all this battery talk is somewhat related, so I'm going to bring into this thread something that Hugh and I have talked about by PM. I think we all want performance from our batteries in terms of "punch" but flight time is also of importance although for me, flight time is secondary.
These HobbyStars seem to be impressive and the fact that the 8000 is small enough to fit our planes while still giving decent flight times, is even more appealing. However, one still have to give due consideration to "value". In this mix, we've been talking about HobbyStar and Roaring Top, high C rated LiPos. So as to compare oranges with oranges, one should restrict to similar MAH size. Since HS and RT don't have 8000s, let's just stick with around 5000, 70C. Both of these are in the $110.00 range. (The 8000 is around $160.00). Hugh and I have been PMing about the ChinaHobbyLine LiPos and these come in at $80.00 for a 5000 and $99.00 for a 6000. Please keep in mind that I'm not peddling these things and I'm not going to tell you that so-n-so is going to "hook you up", just that I've tried some of late and they seem to be very good value (money for what you get) and what you get seems to perform just as good as my old standby "semi-premium" Gens Ace (at 50C). I'm still waiting for Hugh to take the bait and try a couple and come back to us with his review numbers. Although I'm reluctant to pay for the 8000mah HS, I may give the 6000mah CHL a go when I need more batteries.