Official Freewing 90mm F-16 Falcon Thread

[gooniac33]

Its funny you would say all this, I tried the FMS unit in my F-15 and F4, didn't see any improvements at all, flight times were the same as my FW 4068-1835kv, it must work good in other airframes, maybe where there is more air moving through the intakes or something like that, sold the unit and installed all 1835kv in my jets, one reason really, love the smooth woosh sound they make......

The don't do well in all planes. It also depends on your flying style. F-15 and F-4 will not benefit if you are looking for speed but will do better in flight times. I have done it myself and seen the result. The new inrunner set ups from FW are much better than previous... but the FMS are still much better....

[Hugh Wiedman]

Excellent weather today and got 20 flights in on 4 EDF's, including 5 on the F-16 Wild Weasel version . I have been flying it with the RT 5500 70C battery because I have the 1835 Kv upgraded inrunner and that motor draws almost 300 Watts more with a 70C versus the RT 6250 35 C. But today, I made all 5 flights on the 6250 35C. Got an extra 40 seconds of flight time, although it did not have quite the take-off thrust the 70C has, but needed only an extra 20-30 feet (plus I have flaperons and fly off of grass so it can be a long run for take-off, especially if the grass is wet). Once in the air, it flew the same or even a little better as the 6250 is actually 45 g lighter than the 5500. It didn't have quite the top end speed (but I'm no speed freak so who cares) and I noticed it wasn't quite as crisp on the Cuban 8's and Spit S's, but overall, I'll definitely continue flying it for a while on the 6250 (every extra second is nirvana).

And the sound of the 12 blade is sooooo much better than the 9 blade in my F-4 and F-18 Canadian. One of the turbine guys said it almost did sound like a turbine. That 9 blade really sounds like compared to a 12 blade! I'm finally feeling fairly confident in flying all the jets and doing a lot more acrobatic maneuvers (for me anyway) like Cuban 8's and Split S's. And I'm getting fairly consistent in nice slow 2 point landings high alpha. I even was able to do a wheely with the F-16 on a grass runway (first time ever), but no one else was there to see it and no pictures, so it must not have happened.

[Johnnyrabuse]

This is my second F16 90 my first was an older early version I put about 100 flights on it then really busted the retracts it flew ok I found the stock system .... A little slow and it flew heavy but I could do basic aerobatics

So of course I'm putting in the 8s F4 phantom system in it

My question is ....

I have 4000. 5000 and 6000 4 cell battery's the 6000 are a very tight fit but man it weighs a ton

The 5000s are a good fit but still I hate weight

I'm considering maidening with the 4000s

It's a tad heavy than the 5000 6 cell but the fan is heavier to
Any idea on flight time?

I'm going with 2 minutes flight 30 seconds to land

I intend to fly conservatively with perhaps one full throttle pass

Any suggestions ?

Thanks in advance

[Phantom]

This is my second F16 90 my first was an older early version I put about 100 flights on it then really busted the retracts it flew ok I found the stock system .... A little slow and it flew heavy but I could do basic aerobatics

So of course I'm putting in the 8s F4 phantom system in it

My question is ....

I have 4000. 5000 and 6000 4 cell battery's the 6000 are a very tight fit but man it weighs a ton

The 5000s are a good fit but still I hate weight

I'm considering maidening with the 4000s

It's a tad heavy than the 5000 6 cell but the fan is heavier to
Any idea on flight time?

I'm going with 2 minutes flight 30 seconds to land

I intend to fly conservatively with perhaps one full throttle pass

Any suggestions ?

Thanks in advance

If there F4 Phantom's 8s system is the same as the Yak-130's 8s system then I had the same system in mine for about 40 flights as you have in yours.

Go with the 4000mah's for your maiden, and set your timer to 2 minutes. The 8s system gives the power your looking for that the 6s stock system doesn't, however anytime your back off full throttle she starts flying like a brick. You've basically made an already heavy bird, even more so by adding the 8s setup and additional battery weight.

I finally got tired of the lack of flight time, and the dump truck like feeling anytime I backed off the throttle. So I swapped out her power system for yet a 3rd time and went with the 6s FMS power system. I'm happy with her now, she's got a better power to weight ratio than the 8s system and I'm at 4 minutes of flight time, landing at 30 to 40% battery with 6000 and 6200mah batteries.

I've been up to 4.5 and 5 minutes now using my 8000mah 6s, but with this bird, she flies better on the 6000 and 6200mah. Any more battery weight and you will get a little more flight time, but the weight is very apparent in the loss of vertical.

She rolled off the assembly line a heavy girl, and unfortunately there is almost no way to put her on diet.

Enjoy your maiden, but when that 2 minute timer goes off be on short final so you have juice to do one go around and not kill your battery. Any more than that and you'll probably be sacrificing your battery for the plane.

[Johnnyrabuse]

If there F4 Phantom's 8s system is the same as the Yak-130's 8s system then I had the same system in mine for about 40 flights as you have in yours.

Go with the 4000mah's for your maiden, and set your timer to 2 minutes. The 8s system gives the power your looking for that the 6s stock system doesn't, however anytime your back off full throttle she starts flying like a brick. You've basically made an already heavy bird, even more so by adding the 8s setup and additional battery weight.

I finally got tired of the lack of flight time, and the dump truck like feeling anytime I backed off the throttle. So I swapped out her power system for yet a 3rd time and went with the 6s FMS power system. I'm happy with her now, she's got a better power to weight ratio than the 8s system and I'm at 4 minutes of flight time, landing at 30 to 40% battery with 6000 and 6200mah batteries.

I've been up to 4.5 and 5 minutes now using my 8000mah 6s, but with this bird, she flies better on the 6000 and 6200mah. Any more battery weight and you will get a little more flight time, but the weight is very apparent in the loss of vertical.

She rolled off the assembly line a heavy girl, and unfortunately there is almost no way to put her on diet.

Enjoy your maiden, but when that 2 minute timer goes off be on short final so you have juice to do one go around and not kill your battery. Any more than that and you'll probably be sacrificing your battery for the plane.

Thanks I was figuring as much I'm taking the system out putting it in my F22 and then putting the FMS system in can you post the equipment you used thanks for your post

as soon as I picked this bird up I felt it was too heavy with 8s

[Phantom]

Thanks I was figuring as much I'm taking the system out putting it in my F22 and then putting the FMS system in can you post the equipment you used thanks for your post

as soon as I picked this bird up I felt it was too heavy with 8s

FMS 3546 1900KV 90MM 12 BLADED EDF 6s. It only pulls about 112 amps so I down graded the 8s 150amp ESC that came with the YAK-130 system, to 130amp ESC out of my FW Venom, just to save a few more ounces of weight.

[Hugh Wiedman]

FMS 3546 1900KV 90MM 12 BLADED EDF 6s. It only pulls about 112 amps so I down graded the 8s 150amp ESC that came with the YAK-130 system, to 130amp ESC out of my FW Venom, just to save a few more ounces of weight.

Hey Phantom, I'm not weighing in on the 8S vs 6S, but noticed that you said the FMS 12 blade was only pulling 112 amps. I tested out my FW 4068-1835 KV 12 blade inrunner in my F-16 and found that on a Roaring Top 5500 70C battery fully charged, it draws 117.3 amps and 2830 watts. On the Admiral 6000 50C battery it was down to 110.5 amps and 2458 watts, so it seems the battery made a big difference. The RT 6250 35C battery was in between these 2 at 114 amps and 2605 watts. My IR meter does show the RT 35C actual c rating is slightly above the Admiral 50C, so the results do make a little bit of sense. I'm now using the 6250 more often than the 5500 just to get a few more "seconds" in the air. As I've said before, there is not as big a difference in the outrunners (like my F-4 and F-18 stock fans) with a higher C battery as there seems to be in the inrunners, so I also go with the higher mah for more flight time. Oddly, the RT 6250 is 28g lighter than the Admiral 6000 and RT 5500 so that's another advantage.

[Aros]

I just bought two Admiral 6000 50Cs...I will maiden my HSD F-16 with those. Not as high wattage as the RT's but I hope they do the job. I'll be using them on my 90mm jets too of course.

[themudduck]

I've been using the RT 6250's in all my 6-cell jets. I strongly suspect that the 35C rating is conservative, because they work perfectly. My Admiral 5000's seems good but started puffing after a year's use (and possibly from being over-discharged) but I've had nothing put great performance from the RTs. They are lighter and have about 20% more capacity, to me that is a big advantage.

(I don't have an F16) (sorry)

[Phantom]

Hey Phantom, I'm not weighing in on the 8S vs 6S, but noticed that you said the FMS 12 blade was only pulling 112 amps. I tested out my FW 4068-1835 KV 12 blade inrunner in my F-16 and found that on a Roaring Top 5500 70C battery fully charged, it draws 117.3 amps and 2830 watts. On the Admiral 6000 50C battery it was down to 110.5 amps and 2458 watts, so it seems the battery made a big difference. The RT 6250 35C battery was in between these 2 at 114 amps and 2605 watts. My IR meter does show the RT 35C actual c rating is slightly above the Admiral 50C, so the results do make a little bit of sense. I'm now using the 6250 more often than the 5500 just to get a few more "seconds" in the air. As I've said before, there is not as big a difference in the outrunners (like my F-4 and F-18 stock fans) with a higher C battery as there seems to be in the inrunners, so I also go with the higher mah for more flight time. Oddly, the RT 6250 is 28g lighter than the Admiral 6000 and RT 5500 so that's another advantage.

I should clarify, I haven't actually tested the setup on a watt meter. The 112amp number comes from FMS's specs on there website. Based on their specs is why I went with the 130amp ESC. Now you've peaked my curiosity, so I'll do some static power runs on my Falcon/Viper to see what she's putting down. I know folks love the RT's, I don't have any, so I'll be using an assortment of HRB's, CHNL's and HobbyStar's. By the time I was turned on to the RT's existence, I had already amassed a healthy amount of 6s lipos that worked great, were light, and about a 3rd cheaper than RT's.

[Hugh Wiedman]

I certainly can't speak for all batteries, I have only been able to test the brands I have. What I can say is that using the progressive RC Internal Resistance meter, the actual C of the RT 5500 70 C battery is more like 38 C, the RT 6250 35 C is closer to 30 C and the Admiral 6000 50 C is more like 27 C. The other thing that I observed with a watt/amp meter was that generally inrunners benefit more from higher C batteries than outrunners (at least in EDF's). The inrunners in my F-16 and SU-30 draw a good 3-7 amps more and 250-350 more watts on the RT 70 C than the Admiral 50C, with the RT 35 C in the middle (to be expected since the actual C is higher than the Admirals, even though the stated C is lower). In comparison, the outrunners I have draw within 1-2 amps and 50-100 watts between the 70 C battery and the 35 C battery, so not as big a benefit.

This is by no means an exhaustive and scientifically accurate study. And my general conclusions may not hold water in all cases. I have tested some friends HRB and the new Spektrum batteries and they seem to be similar to the Roaring Tops, but of course, I've yet to find any battery that is at it's stated C rating. However, the lower the C rating, the closer to the actual it gets. And I've only tested this on 2 inrunners and 5 outrunners, all FW.

The other factor of course is weight. The RT 5500 weighs 825 g, the Admiral 6000 is 827 g and the RT 6250 is 798 g, so there is a decision to make regarding weight and power. I've been flying the 6250 in all my outrunners (less weight and similar power to all 3 with more flight time), and just started flying it in the F-16 because I want/need/gotta-have more flight time. I at least picked up an extra 40 seconds and noticed a slight drop in take-off power (vs the 5500 70 C), but once in the air, it didn't seem to matter. Have yet to try it on the SU-30 though, there is definitely a 10% drop in power and I fly off of grass and need every bit of juice I can get. But it is annoying after taking off and barely completing one circuit I get my timer saying 2 minutes remaining, heck I thought I just took off and I'm 1 minute from going into landing preparation mode!!!

[Johnnyrabuse]

Put my stock fan back in to maiden this left the 150 amp esc programmed flaps delta mix I’m bringing the 8 cell fan to field and some battery’s if I can land this thing in under 150 feet on light packs I’ll toss in the 8s and cross my fingers that I can land at 280 I actually might try 4000 six cell keep it light and fly slow just to shoot approaches

if that works out I’ll toss in a 5000 and then a 6000 then I’ll try the 8s ....

did the mix on a dx 9 I can turn my aero lines on and off tailerons are full time flaps are 50 and 100 percent with up elevator the elevator itself is set at the 7mm bottom line in the manual I have three rates on surfaces 100 80 and 70 but the elevators staying at 100 no expo ... cog is just a little back of the recommended in manual but for the maiden I’ll push it forward to the recommended

wish me luck

[Phantom]

Good luck!

[Phantom]

I certainly can't speak for all batteries, I have only been able to test the brands I have. What I can say is that using the progressive RC Internal Resistance meter, the actual C of the RT 5500 70 C battery is more like 38 C, the RT 6250 35 C is closer to 30 C and the Admiral 6000 50 C is more like 27 C. The other thing that I observed with a watt/amp meter was that generally inrunners benefit more from higher C batteries than outrunners (at least in EDF's). The inrunners in my F-16 and SU-30 draw a good 3-7 amps more and 250-350 more watts on the RT 70 C than the Admiral 50C, with the RT 35 C in the middle (to be expected since the actual C is higher than the Admirals, even though the stated C is lower). In comparison, the outrunners I have draw within 1-2 amps and 50-100 watts between the 70 C battery and the 35 C battery, so not as big a benefit.

This is by no means an exhaustive and scientifically accurate study. And my general conclusions may not hold water in all cases. I have tested some friends HRB and the new Spektrum batteries and they seem to be similar to the Roaring Tops, but of course, I've yet to find any battery that is at it's stated C rating. However, the lower the C rating, the closer to the actual it gets. And I've only tested this on 2 inrunners and 5 outrunners, all FW.

The other factor of course is weight. The RT 5500 weighs 825 g, the Admiral 6000 is 827 g and the RT 6250 is 798 g, so there is a decision to make regarding weight and power. I've been flying the 6250 in all my outrunners (less weight and similar power to all 3 with more flight time), and just started flying it in the F-16 because I want/need/gotta-have more flight time. I at least picked up an extra 40 seconds and noticed a slight drop in take-off power (vs the 5500 70 C), but once in the air, it didn't seem to matter. Have yet to try it on the SU-30 though, there is definitely a 10% drop in power and I fly off of grass and need every bit of juice I can get. But it is annoying after taking off and barely completing one circuit I get my timer saying 2 minutes remaining, heck I thought I just took off and I'm 1 minute from going into landing preparation mode!!!

I'll fire her up tonight and annotate the results.

[Phantom]

Finally got around to testing the different batteries with this FMS setup, but I wanted to share the condition of my main wheels, after 65 flights, about 40 of which were with the FW 8s setup. As you can see from the pictures, the inner wheel flange has cracked on both sides. Swapping them out for some new ones.

[Phantom]

So manufacturers specs for this FMS EDF setup is 25.20v X 112amps=2822watts.

HS=Hobbystar
TGY=Turnigy
TGY-NT=Turnigy-Nano Tech

The rest of the lipos brands should be self explanatory.

Ok from top to bottom these are the power runs,

HS 4200mah 40c 6s two lipos parallel =8400mah
>3141.7 W at 143.46A

HS 8000mah 100c 6s
>2880.4W at 121.35A

HRB 6000 56c 6s
>2802.2W at 120.88A

CNHL G+plus 5000 55c burst 110c 6s
>2761.7W at 121.72A

CNHL 2200 40C burst 80c 6s
>2734.2W at 119.59A

CNHL Black 5000 65c 6s
>2690.5W at 119.59A

HS 6200 50c 3s two lipos series
>2673.5 at 123.84A

HS 3500 60c 6s
>2636.3W at 118.22A

CNHL G+plus 6000 70c burst 140c 6s
>2615.8W at 116.26A

HS 3000 30c 6s two lipos parallel =6000mah
>2552.3W at 116.0A

TGY-NT 4000 25-50c 6s
>2536.4W at 113.52A

CNHL 2200 40c 6s two lipos parallel =4400mah
>2492.5W at 117.02A

TGY-NT 5000 35-70c 6s
>2482.2W at 117.64A

HS 4600 35c 6s
>2469.1W at 117.02

TGY 2650 20-30c 6s two lipos parallel =5300mah
>2459.9W at 117.51A

HS 6200 50c 6s
>2453.2 W at 116.82A

HS 5200 45c 3s two lipos series
>2427.5W at 113.33A

HS 4200 40c 6s
>2287.6W at 112.a4A

Interesting that identical lipos packs when wired up in parallel add over 800W of power. Like in the case of the HS 4200 40c 6s, verses just one of these lipos.

Also interesting to note that two 3s wired in a series produced 220W of additional power over the 6s equivalent. Such as in the case of the HS 6200 50c 3s in a series verses the HS 6200 50c 6s.

My thoughts are that two batteries whether wired up in a series or in parallel allow for a truer C rating to the claimed manufacturers C rating.

Below is a picture the lipos tested so that you can compare lipo sizes.

[DCORSAIR]

So manufacturers specs for this FMS EDF setup is 25.20v X 112amps=2822watts.

HS=Hobbystar
TGY=Turnigy
TGY-NT=Turnigy-Nano Tech

The rest of the lipos brands should be self explanatory.

Ok from top to bottom these are the power runs,

HS 4200mah 40c 6s two lipos parallel =8400mah
>3141.7 W at 143.46A

HS 8000mah 100c 6s
>2880.4W at 121.35A

HRB 6000 56c 6s
>2802.2W at 120.88A

CNHL G+plus 5000 55c burst 110c 6s
>2761.7W at 121.72A

CNHL 2200 40C burst 80c 6s
>2734.2W at 119.59A

CNHL Black 5000 65c 6s
>2690.5W at 119.59A

HS 6200 50c 3s two lipos series
>2673.5 at 123.84A

HS 3500 60c 6s
>2636.3W at 118.22A

CNHL G+plus 6000 70c burst 140c 6s
>2615.8W at 116.26A

HS 3000 30c 6s two lipos parallel =6000mah
>2552.3W at 116.0A

TGY-NT 4000 25-50c 6s
>2536.4W at 113.52A

CNHL 2200 40c 6s two lipos parallel =4400mah
>2492.5W at 117.02A

TGY-NT 5000 35-70c 6s
>2482.2W at 117.64A

HS 4600 35c 6s
>2469.1W at 117.02

TGY 2650 20-30c 6s two lipos parallel =5300mah
>2459.9W at 117.51A

HS 6200 50c 6s
>2453.2 W at 116.82A

HS 5200 45c 3s two lipos series
>2427.5W at 113.33A

HS 4200 40c 6s
>2287.6W at 112.a4A

Interesting that identical lipos packs when wired up in parallel add over 800W of power. Like in the case of the HS 4200 40c 6s, verses just one of these lipos.

Also interesting to note that two 3s wired in a series produced 220W of additional power over the 6s equivalent. Such as in the case of the HS 6200 50c 3s in a series verses the HS 6200 50c 6s.

My thoughts are that two batteries whether wired up in a series or in parallel allow for a truer C rating to the claimed manufacturers C rating.

Below is a picture the lipos tested so that you can compare lipo sizes.

Good job and thanks for posting, any chance you will do any testing on the Genesace/Tattu 5000 45c and 5000 60c lipos? They are all I use in my EDF jets and helis.

[Phantom]

Good job and thanks for posting, any chance you will do any testing on the Genesace/Tattu 5000 45c and 5000 60c lipos? They are all I use in my EDF jets and helis.

Unfortunately I have no batteries from either of those brands.

[Hugh Wiedman]

Phantom WOW, a lot of great data to analyze, thanks. The FMS fan is an out-runner, correct?

The 2 HS 4200 40 C must turn this thing into a Saturn Rocket! But maybe a bit much for the 130 Amp ESC you downgraded to, no? It also seems (unless I'm mistaken) that in some cases, the slightly higher C rated battery performs almost identical to one with a slightly lower C. I have definitely found something similar with my jets that have out-runners. The out-runner EDF's in my Stinger 90, the 2-F-4's and my F-18 show virtually the same amps/watts drawn on a Roaring Top 5500 70 C and a RT 6250 35 C battery, with the Admiral 6000 50 C (tested at an actual C of a couple points less than the RT 35 C) just slightly below the 2 RT's. The in-runners in my Avanti, F-16 and SU-30 showed a substantial increase (+7 amps & +250 watts) with the 70 C versus the 35 C or 50 C. I'm not sure that this is backed up by any actual "science" or if it's just a coincidence.

So now after this, what battery set up are you most inclined to go with that gives you the best balance of power/flight time/weight? I'm guessing the HRB 6000 56 C 6S or the 2-HS 6200 50 C 3S.

[Phantom]

Phantom WOW, a lot of great data to analyze, thanks. The FMS fan is an out-runner, correct?

The 2 HS 4200 40 C must turn this thing into a Saturn Rocket! But maybe a bit much for the 130 Amp ESC you downgraded to, no? It also seems (unless I'm mistaken) that in some cases, the slightly higher C rated battery performs almost identical to one with a slightly lower C. I have definitely found something similar with my jets that have out-runners. The out-runner EDF's in my Stinger 90, the 2-F-4's and my F-18 show virtually the same amps/watts drawn on a Roaring Top 5500 70 C and a RT 6250 35 C battery, with the Admiral 6000 50 C (tested at an actual C of a couple points less than the RT 35 C) just slightly below the 2 RT's. The in-runners in my Avanti, F-16 and SU-30 showed a substantial increase (+7 amps & +250 watts) with the 70 C versus the 35 C or 50 C. I'm not sure that this is backed up by any actual "science" or if it's just a coincidence.

So now after this, what battery set up are you most inclined to go with that gives you the best balance of power/flight time/weight? I'm guessing the HRB 6000 56 C 6S or the 2-HS 6200 50 C 3S.

Historically I've only used the HS 8000 100c 6s, the HRB 6000 50c, and the HS 6200 50c 6s in her since switching back to a 6s setup in her. I'm glad I did the testing as now I know about the additional power the HS 4200 40c 6s in parallel offers. All ESC's have a burst capability and an additional 13 amps of static power wouldn't tax the ESC too much if used in bursts. The system would only experience that with full throttle take off runs honestly because as soon as air starts getting rammed into the fan due to forward momentum, the efficiency of the system will increase and the reduced drag on the blades would demand less amp draw. So I think I'll keep the 130amp ESC in there and capitalize on the reduced weight over the 150amp ESC.

I've used the HS 4200 40c 6s in parallel setup in many of my jets such as my 80mm F-5, 80mm F-86, twin 80mm A-10 just to name a few because I loved the HS 8000 100c 6s lipos, however some of the planes like the F-5 can't fit the single 8000mah lipo. Additionally the 8000's are 159 bucks a piece where as two HS 4200's in parallel cost 30 bucks less, 50 bucks less if they are on sale.

Due to this I have 12 of them verses 4 of the 8000's. I've always been a fan of multiple batteries in a series and in parallel due to the decreased cost and the added mah capacity they provide. However this is the first time I've tested their ability to deliver power over a similar capacity single battery. Now I'm convinced, the proof is in the pudding.

I once loaded up my 90mm YAK-130 8s system with four 4000mah 40c 4s lipos wired first in parallel and then in series to give my 8000mah 8s worth of lipos on board. The interior of the YAK's battery compartment is so vast that I could wedge them into just below the wing and make CG no problem. It was an amazing 7 minute flight on 8s, I sacrificed some vertical, but she handled the extra weight no problem, I'll hook her up that way again, with pics so that you can see the loadout, and post the power run over in the Yak page because now I'm just curious.

The assorted lipos used during this power tests haven't all been flown with this F-16 yet. It was just an experiment using the majority of options for lipos I have, to see the power delivering difference. Having said that the HS 4200 40c 6s in parallel will be my go to lipos for this jet in the future.

And since I'm already setup I'll bench test the majority of my EDF's now and post on their respective blog pages for anyone who's curious.