You must Sign-in or Register to post messages in the Hobby Squawk community
Registration is FREE and only takes a few moments

Register now

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Official FlightLine OV-10 Bronco Discussion Thread

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Mikkelb View Post

    Theres a plastic modellers trick I use for painting the canopies or screens and that is using a liquid paint mask. Flat tip and fine tip brushes to apply can make it fairly easy and you're not spending ages cutting up small strips of tape and going cross eyed. Once you're done you just peel it off.
    Better yet cover the whole thing with 2 or 3 thick coats than using a new sharp #11 blade cut the frame out. Works great. Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2241.JPG
Views:	1122
Size:	98.4 KB
ID:	249049Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2242.JPG
Views:	1091
Size:	79.7 KB
ID:	249050

    Mike
    \"When Inverted Down Is Up And Up Is Expensive\"

    Comment


    • Originally posted by MikeT View Post

      Better yet cover the whole thing with 2 or 3 thick coats than using a new sharp #11 blade cut the frame out. Works great. Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2241.JPG
Views:	1122
Size:	98.4 KB
ID:	249049Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2242.JPG
Views:	1091
Size:	79.7 KB
ID:	249050

      Mike
      Of course, more than one way to skin a cat :) Looks great Mike!

      Comment


      • MikeT, hold my beer! I have used the liquid mask, and never thought about just painting it on "all over" and then cutting out the windows. What a great idea!

        Several posts back the guys were talking about amperage draw, how the 30amp ESCs on this plane are fairly small, etc. Something that I'd like to contribute is that I have found that multi-engine planes don't draw as much amperage as you might expect, while in the air. In a multi-engine setup, each motor isn't working as hard (basically they are sharing the load). When you increase the load (with a heavier plane for example, or if one motor shuts down) then the motors will draw more current. Its an interesting thing - even with a single engine plane, you can put a given motor with a given prop on one plane and draw a certain number of amps, and put the same prop and motor on a heavier plane, and draw a lot more amps.

        Try flying your plane with added weight (like a pound of candy in the bomb bay for example) - you'll be able to see that the motors are working harder and drawing more amps because the motors get hotter than usual and your battery won't last as long. Or conversely, try flying your plane using a much smaller battery (same number of cells) and you'll see that you can fly a lot longer than you think (the motors don't need to work as hard to fly a light airplane)

        I have often found that with twin-engine planes the two motors aren't working as hard and aren't drawing as many amps as you might think- they are sharing the load. Its possible on the Bronco that the 30-amp ESCs are more than adequate. It would be very interesting to prove this using on-board telemetry measuring the amp draw.
        Marc flies FW & FL: AL37, MiG-29, T45,F4, A4, A10, F104 70 and 90, P38, Dauntless SBD, Corsair, B17, B24, B26 & P61, Lipp.P19, ME262, Komets, Vampire, SeaVixen, FMS Tigercat, FOX Glider & Radian XL.

        Rabid Models foamies, including my 8' B17 & 9' B36... and my Mud Ducks! www.rabidmodels.com

        Comment


        • Glad I could contribute something of value. "Work smarter not harder."

          Mike
          \"When Inverted Down Is Up And Up Is Expensive\"

          Comment


          • themudduck Your observations about current draw increases when using the same power system from a lighter to heavier platform is true.
            Yes it is an interesting thing as you say but it is more, actually it is science.
            This is the reason that formulas for power factors require weight as one of the many data points of consideration.
            The best power calculator avail that I'm aware of for ePower modeling is eCalc.
            Along with the weight data point it also uses wing area, elevation and air temperature as primary general factors that affect power coefficients.
            I concur with your comment that the as is stock power configuration is adequate. It may not be however when any number of the power factor coefficients get modified.
            I've expressed for many a moon on multiple forums about the care that anyone needs to consider when modifying any component of an ePower power system.
            Making general assumptions like increasing my prop diameter by a 1/2" should be alright is where the possibility of letting the smoke out occurs.
            Again, I can't emphasize strongly enough that if you are going to be in the practice of modding power systems to have the basic tool of a power meter at your disposal.
            Regards,
            Warbird Charlie
            HSD Skyraider; FlightLine: OV-10, Sea Fury; FMS 1400: P-40B, P-51, F4U, F6F, T-28, P-40E, 1700 F4U & F7F, FOX glider; Freewing: A-6, P-51; VQ: P-39; Dynam: ME-262, FW-190, Waco; ASM A-26; ESM F7F-3; LX PBJ-1 EFL CZ T-28, C-150

            Comment


            • Originally posted by OV10 View Post
              themudduck Your observations about current draw increases when using the same power system from a lighter to heavier platform is true.
              Yes it is an interesting thing as you say but it is more, actually it is science.
              This is the reason that formulas for power factors require weight as one of the many data points of consideration.
              The best power calculator avail that I'm aware of for ePower modeling is eCalc.
              Along with the weight data point it also uses wing area, elevation and air temperature as primary general factors that affect power coefficients.
              I concur with your comment that the as is stock power configuration is adequate. It may not be however when any number of the power factor coefficients get modified.
              I've expressed for many a moon on multiple forums about the care that anyone needs to consider when modifying any component of an ePower power system.
              Making general assumptions like increasing my prop diameter by a 1/2" should be alright is where the possibility of letting the smoke out occurs.
              Again, I can't emphasize strongly enough that if you are going to be in the practice of modding power systems to have the basic tool of a power meter at your disposal.
              Regards,
              Charlie, you are so correct with everything you've said. In all honesty, I personally own 3 planes (all twins) using the same motors and props. In fact, those planes have motors and ESCs that are very similar to this Bronco - nearly the same kv and size of motors but with 3-blade props that are 1/2" bigger diameter and about 1" less pitch. The 3 planes are: HobbyKing BushMule, HobbyKing Albatross, VQ Model Twin Otter. The Twin Otter is significantly heavier than the other two (while the BushMule and Albatross are both lighter than the OV-10). When I put the drivetrain into the Twin Otter, I immediately burned up an ESC on the bench (well, taxiing on the ground). Moving up to 60A ESCs, I still burned up an ESC. Then, moving up to 80A ESCs, the ESCs and motors got a little hotter than I'd like but they did work OK. I then Dremeled cooling exhaust slits at the rear of the nacelles (just behind the ESCs) and the plane has performed flawlessly for many flights since. Unlike yourself, I learned all this by "trial and error" (NOT the best way and not the cheapest way).

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Alpha View Post

                Hello there, Rudderman98 ! It's a fair question that deserves a straight answer:

                Candidly, the economics of offering two colorways for the same aircraft, especially at launch, doesn't work out for most planes. In fact, to date it never has. It's not as simple as just the painting step alone. To have a second color, we need to have two separate production lines, two separate paint lines, two separate sub-component lines (over fifty colored sub-components to paint/transport/track separately), two SKUs for every part (dozens), and then have to stock two planes' worth of spare parts in that color which requires inventory resources.

                For any of that to pencil out, we need quantity, and, quite frankly, Base Color models have never come close to even beginning to pencil out. I have to chuckle to myself at how many times I have pushed for Base Color models despite it never working out every previous time. Inescapable, the fact remains that at any given day we are mass-producing 10+ model types from jets to warbirds of many sizes in the hundreds, so changing that vast and complex system to sell a few more Grays unfortunately isn't tenable.

                By comparison, the "much easier" route is for a modeler to spray paint a layer of primer gray to cover up the green in one coat, then proceed with light gray or white. I use AmmoByMig "One Shot" primer or a cheaper equivalent. Rustoleum 2X works as well. Spray painting a new base coat takes minutes for a modeler to do, and helps me keep the factory focused on more efficient expenditure of our limited time and resources.

                I hope this answers your question!

                Thanks,
                Alpha
                Hi Alpha,

                Yes thank you for your info on the workings of what it takes to produce a model in different colors.

                I do know how to paint. I'm a decorative painter at Boeing painting Boeing jets. I am also a custom car and motorcycle and garden gnome painter.

                Yes garden gnome. Long story lol!

                The question was put forth to save a little time and money on the customer's side but as you have stated it is quite the hurdle to switch colors at the factor for our models.

                Looking forward to my OV-10!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Mikkelb View Post

                  Theres a plastic modellers trick I use for painting the canopies or screens and that is using a liquid paint mask. Flat tip and fine tip brushes to apply can make it fairly easy and you're not spending ages cutting up small strips of tape and going cross eyed. Once you're done you just peel it off.
                  Yup!

                  Works (as Tony the tiger would say) Grrrrreat!

                  Comment


                  • Rudderman98 You paint Boeing jets AND garden gnomes?! I never thought I'd say this, but I'm actually more intrigued by the gnomes than the planes, please share!

                    It is always such a joy to learn more about what we're all doing with our time outside of RC.
                    Live Q&A every Tuesday and Friday at 9pm EST on my Twitch Livestream

                    Live chat with me and other RC Nuts on my Discord

                    Camp my Instagram @Alpha.Makes

                    Comment


                    • We always hear first about ways you will customize a new RC aircraft offering. Livery's, wheels, props, more power, 3D printed everything, but how are you planning on enjoying FLYING your new model? Is anyone planning on exploiting the OV-10's versatile flight characteristics?

                      With the vast majority of RC flight fields shut down currently I am very excited that the OV-10 Bronco seems to be at home on short unprepared surfaces. I am very lucky to have a perfect lake front Bush field (yellow outline in pics) to utilize and my OV-10 will be maidened right here at home. Am I nervous? Excitedly! I've flown Timbers, my Havok Racer, and a Flightline FW-190 1100mm off this dirt so the OV-10 should be cake! With the 7min+ flight times I am looking forward to some over water operations. How low can I go? Heck, my OV-10 might even find itself with a bomb drop on the belly too.


                      Click image for larger version

Name:	Field2.JPG
Views:	738
Size:	142.5 KB
ID:	249193Click image for larger version

Name:	Field1.JPG
Views:	757
Size:	133.9 KB
ID:	249194
                      Attached Files

                      Comment


                      • RCGuy83 Your comment about being "very excited that the OV-10 Bronco seems to be at home on short unprepared surfaces" is why I can't wait for when
                        the rest of the RC world gets their hands on this and affirms what I have been espousing for years of this bird.
                        A twin for all skill level pilots that will survive whatever it is reasonably smacked with and look cool as doing it.
                        Warbird Charlie
                        HSD Skyraider; FlightLine: OV-10, Sea Fury; FMS 1400: P-40B, P-51, F4U, F6F, T-28, P-40E, 1700 F4U & F7F, FOX glider; Freewing: A-6, P-51; VQ: P-39; Dynam: ME-262, FW-190, Waco; ASM A-26; ESM F7F-3; LX PBJ-1 EFL CZ T-28, C-150

                        Comment


                        • I am very excited about the plane! I lived on Camp LeJuene in 74-76 and these guy were flying around lower than the water towers all the time,they sometimes buzzed the playground Lower than the pine trees!

                          Comment


                          • In response to RC Guy 83,I have an AMA field I fly at ,But theres also an "under the radar group of parkflyers near me.This girl is a little bigger than I would normally fly there but if she handles as well as I hope she will,Il be splitting the oaks,Cutting the daisies Baby!!

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cobbster View Post
                              I am very excited about the plane! I lived on Camp LeJuene in 74-76 and these guy were flying around lower than the water towers all the time,they sometimes buzzed the playground Lower than the pine trees!
                              Im with ya as i lived in Oceanside CA, aka Camp Pendelton and actually started RC at the main airfield where VMO-2 is. Hence why i love the UU 76' scheme. Maneuver time always gave a me great airshow as the house was high enough i could see all the way to the mountains north range. That was 70's to 78' and i was middle school.

                              Comment


                              • And while we are waiting for the boat to arrive and R shut-in do read: Da Nang Diary by Col. Tom Yarborough. Great read about FAC's flying the OV-10 in combat. Both Amazon & Barnes & Noble have it

                                Comment


                                • It's a beautiful bird and I'd love one. I'm reading that there is some questioning about the somewhat understated electronics on this plane that maybe things perhaps could have been uprated a bit. Esc size; prop size; motors. No one is a fan of doing mods really. But it is what it is and I'm sure it's all been done before. You just don't want the "dilithium crystals" to melt when Captain Kirk calls for "Full Warp speed Scotty!...."

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by AirHead View Post
                                    It's a beautiful bird and I'd love one. I'm reading that there is some questioning about the somewhat understated electronics on this plane that maybe things perhaps could have been uprated a bit. Esc size; prop size; motors. No one is a fan of doing mods really. But it is what it is and I'm sure it's all been done before. You just don't want the "dilithium crystals" to melt when Captain Kirk calls for "Full Warp speed Scotty!...."
                                    If I understand your post correctly, I think this plane, if kept stock, will perform fine under all situations as is witnessed by other models with similar drivetrains. It's only if an owner decides to change something, that it might be necessary to check things out carefully to determine if any other "upgrades" need to be done.

                                    Comment


                                    • Alpha, I'm fixing to pull the trigger on this one but I normally ship to work but were under "stay at home" right now. if late Jun is a good guess as far as a ship date I'm pretty sure we'll be back at work. Any thoughts?
                                      I hate shipping to the house with all the porch pirates running wild.

                                      Mike
                                      \"When Inverted Down Is Up And Up Is Expensive\"

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by MikeT View Post
                                        Alpha, I'm fixing to pull the trigger on this one but I normally ship to work but were under "stay at home" right now. if late Jun is a good guess as far as a ship date I'm pretty sure we'll be back at work. Any thoughts?
                                        I hate shipping to the house with all the porch pirates running wild.

                                        Mike
                                        Since you're at home anyway, have it delivered there and instruct the delivery guy to ring your doorbell when he leaves it. At least for me, UPS, FedEX and postal all do that when they deliver a large box or parcel. I'll likely come UPS as that's what Motion usually uses and you can go to the UPS site, put in your tracking number and leave instructions for delivery.

                                        Comment


                                        • Pretty sure we'll be back at the shop in late June than I won't be home. Big boxes are just to tempting for the "bad guys" . The only reason I asked is the last few releases have come a lot quicker than expected.

                                          Mike.
                                          \"When Inverted Down Is Up And Up Is Expensive\"

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X