Jump to content

Graham Davies 3

Members
  • Posts

    756
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Everything posted by Graham Davies 3

  1. HI DD, I have a full subscription to e-calc, so did a few 'what-ifs' for you. Using the Protroniks motor, you'll need a pretty big prop. A 14x8 will give you a thrust to weight ratio of around 0.9, which will fly it nicely, and a flight time of around 5 minutes on the 2200 packs. A 16x8 will give you a thrust/ weight ratio of 1.1, or 'plenty'! That will reduce your flight times to 4 minutes. That equates to 468W of electrical power. Bigger packs will help, and will also help the CofG too. Let me know what you plan using and what props you have and I'll run the simulations for you. Graham
  2. Update: Mike at HobbyRC advised that whilst the R88 is OK, it is not built to the same standards as FrSky receivers and is sensitive to antenna positioning. With that in mind, I returned to the field this evening to try again. I also went through the fine tune procedure again. Initial range checks very nearly sent me home as I couldn't get to 30 paces before RF was lost. However, on checking the antenna one of them was very close to the feed from the main batteries. I missed this because they are only in this position when the battery is fitted, I checked without... Once I moved one antenna, range check went up to >80 paces, and I got no RF warnings during flight. 3 flights without any issue at all. So it seems Mike is spot on; the antenna positioning is far more critical than it was, but once correct, all seems well. Graham
  3. 911, Ron is right. Try to get into the habit of coming in with power on and control the speed with elevator. The elevator will slow the model very effectively and you can then safely fly across you until you are comfortable with the position and decrease power. The model will loose height in a nice controlled way. You'll have a lot more control this way as you always have good airflow over the tail. This will help you no end if the wind gets up, or swings when you're on finals. You will also be able to steepen the approach and avoid that fence! As suggested earlier, you can practice this as a slow flypast, and see what happens when you decrease the throttle. And similarly, when you increase it. This will prevent you from panicking and make going around again a totally un-traumatic event. Graham
  4. That got it Ron! I have an older version of OpenTX companion, so can at least make sense of the logs. Thanks for your help Ron, you're a saint!
  5. Correct Ron. As far as I can tell, it's installed. If I then click or double click the icon, nowt happens, and there are no security messages
  6. Thanks Ron, Your help is much appreciated. Unfortunately, although all appears correct, the companions simply don't open. I have reached the limit of update on my mac, so if this is a version issue, it will end here. I'm not buying a new mac to get the companion to work! Graham
  7. Thanks Matty, Got that far, but the app also does nothing. I don't know if it's a mac version thing, but I followed the steps on the openTX university until I got to the bit where it says 'congratulations! You have downloaded openTX companion. You can be proud of yourself'. All well and good, but it doesn't do anything. Nada. Zip. Zilch... Got two pretty but rather ornamental icons...
  8. Hi John, TX antenna was pointing sideways. I can't rule out low receiver pack voltages, but I agree that it's unlikely. Trying to access logs at the minute, but struggling to get the companion to work. The joys of owning a mac; you can download it, extract it and get the icon in the apps folder, but nothing happens when you click it. Without the companion, the logs are unavailable, and so no help.
  9. Hello Ron, I have just started to dive into logging as I had an issue yesterday. Here we get into the area of acute IT frustration... I can't get the Edge TX companion to work on my 2013 Mac. As with many things Mac, you don't get much help. I can download the loader, and the app exists, but won't run. Nothing really happens when you click on it. I thought I might try the OpenTX companion, but I'm stuffed if I can see where to download it. The download page has a million links, but none that seem to be 'OpenTX companion'... Any ideas? I can really see how people find this an unnecessary pain... Graham
  10. One of our members spends a good percentage of each flight 'landing' at 10ft. They are essentially doing touch and goes without touching, but as a conscious activity. It's a great way to understand model placement, speed, height and throttle management without continually ripping out the undercarriage. It will also take the fence out of the equation. It may help you build up your confidence and some repeatability before committing the fragile bit to the hard and unforgiving bit! Graham
  11. Thanks Pete, Some useful nuggets here. I did suspect antenna orientation, but it looked fine. I have one antenna pointing directly downwards, and another along the fuselage. To be sure, I repositioned this one so it was inside a clear acetate window in case servo leads were creating a shield. Didn't make any noticeable difference. To be honest, if the system is so sensitive to this or the TX antenna position, it sounds a bit too marginal for my liking! I need to explore the failsafe thing and replay what happened in my head. I'm starting to doubt that this is what happened. The reason for my doubt is I would have expected to hear an 'RF lost' report and 'Telemetry re-stablished' (or somesuch) announcement, and I don't recall that I did. So something else may have happened. I may have logs, in which case I should be able to diagnose more accurately. I'll keep thinking... Graham
  12. Morning all, I had my first flights with my new TX16Smk2 yesterday. An issue came to light.... Iam paired with Radiomaster R88 receivers, and the installation is identical to the Futaba clone receivers in both the models I flew yesterday, so antenna placement is known to be at least OK. The R88s are set up in the TX16 as Frsky D8. I have fine tuned them, as per the instructions, but they needed minimal offset (-4, to those that know!). I range tested both models. Here is the first (small) issue; what is the actual range test criteria? All I can find on tinternet advises >30 paces. I had a controllable connection to 60 paces, but got RF low warnings from 35. However, this only occurred when I was facing directly away from the model. If I turned at all, the RF restored. The RF critical setting is as factory; 42 dB. So this appeared OK, if not as solid as I would hope. Bear in mind I've come from a background where no such information is provided (a FF9), so don't know whether this is good, bad or indifferent. So, in the sky, first model gave many RF low warnings. I flew very close, but still they came, and then an RF critical. So I landed. Went through the range test protocol again, and it seemed a bit better. The only thing that had changed is both TX and RX had been power cycled. Second model, exactly the same thing. Second flight on the first model seemed OK with fewer warnings, and just as I was thinking it was a warning threshold issue, it briefly went into failsafe. This was actually at quite close range, and relatively low so distance does not seem to be a factor. On this, I landed (safely), and called it a day. Have I missed something during set up? Or is something broken? Much as I love the radio, it's first task is to provide a solid control link. Fundamentals first, I need to get to the bottom of this. I don't have any compatible receivers other than R88s to try, so diagnosis is limited to those at the moment. Not sure I enabled logging (that seemed a step too far for me at the moment!), but will look and see. What should I check gents? Thank you Graham
  13. Put a few ounces of lead in the tail; that will certainly stop it being boring... It may also stop it being a model!
  14. From your profile picture, you'll appreciate this Paul. As a motorcyclist, the consequences of accidents can be very high. I have always taken the view that you can't fight a court case from a wooden box. As such, whilst riding my bike I am constantly looking for my killer, and mitigating the risks. In other words, if something COULD happen, then do something to prevent it being any more than very unlikely. Why would I put my life in someone else's hands? to put this into this situation, If you model means that much to you, put it where the accident can't happen. Don't rely on someone else's vigilance. The rights and wrongs won't change the facts that a model airplane is no match for a car. It won't resolve this issue, but a few words in the club rules or handbook to clarify the responsibilities may help others in the future. Graham
  15. In legal terms, the short answer is no: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/spectrum/radio-spectrum-and-the-law/licence-exempt-radio-use/licence-exempt-devices/Radio-controlled-models I don't know if the ELRS system uses frequency hopping, and that may provide a higher ceiling. The responsibility for this lies with the manufacturer and importer; to a lesser extent to the user. From my company's point of view, we took a black and white view. It either complies with the ofcom advice, or we won't sell it. However, we all conceded that this is not clear, and many other sellers take a different view. As John says, actual spec may well differ. Don't forget that radiated power (e.i.r.p) is also dependant on the antenna, so whilst 100mW may well be the specification of the output stage, the radiated power you will have seen when testing may be considerably different. Clear as mud! Graham
  16. Hi Frank, Last year I spent a LOAD of time ensuring that a range of mini drones my company sells were fully compliant. At that point in time 250mW would not have been permitted within our frequency allocation. However, I haven't looked at the frequency the ELRS version uses. One thing though, the directive states that the equipment cannot transmit on frequencies not permitted, and at power levels above those permitted. This means you can't rely on a user to dial it down. It is permitted to dial the output down within firmware though. I may have a quick look later and see what the ELRS frequency range is and check the directive. One thing; I got my new TX16mk2 this week and there is an option to select your country. This concerns me a bit as it implies that the hardware can therefore operate to US levels. The UK spectrum is a lot more restrictive. If this is the case, the compliance to the EU/ UK directives may possibly be a little 'fast and loose'! I will have a check later though Graham
  17. Purely my personal experience... Those models that do everything a bit worse than other similar models without bringing anything new to the party. I had a 46" span biplane I heavily modified from a plan. I loved the build, but the flight performance was 'ok', and it didn't tick my 'biplane cuteness' box in the air. It got less and less flight action until I deemed it too big to warrant the space it took! For me now though, I have far more personal connection with models where I have had a significant input in their conception. I'm on the start of my 'own design' journey, and I definitely have a stronger connection to these models. Oddly though, I'm also more critical of them so feel less attached and move them on if I feel their space would be better filled with another project. The ones I have less attachment for are the 'mass market kit builds'. I have enjoyed building from kits, but nowadays these hold less appeal. I have a 30 year old acrowot in the loft that seems like a good idea every year or so, but usually ends up back in the loft. No idea why, but I suspect it's because it is a similar size to my warbirds, and they just spark my desire a little more. I guess the WOTs in general are my 'meh' models. And through no fault of their own... Similarly with models acquired ready built*. As with many others, a bargain is always tempting, but somehow they are never fully 'mine' and are too 'someone else's' to bond with and too 'not mine' to take aerial liberties with, which would always ultimately resolve the issue of whether they stay or go, one way or another! *There's a big exception to this. Peter Miller has kindly put a couple of his models my way, and these are very much ingrained in my fleet. Graham
  18. Totally agree Jon. We're our own worse enemy sometimes, and I'm placing myself firmly in that category. We seek false economies, and it can be very costly. Sadly, it took me a while to learn that lesson...
  19. Totally agree GG. I set up my regianne yesterday and somehow managed to copy a basic 4channel model over the top of it and wipe the lot out! It took me about 5 minutes to restore it, so it's hardly a difficult operating system. But it is indeed immensely powerful. I now have slowly operating flaps. Can't do that with the old FF9! I particularly like the checklist. Previously I had to remember which rates I preferred with which models. I know I could set them all to preferred rates in low, but it's unnecessary faff. The checklist lets me decide on the starting switch positions, and the transmitter will remind me if anything is in the wrong place. Marvellous...
  20. I think both these positions are valid, and are options because we have the luxury of choice. Jon, I can totally understand your position. If it ain't broke, etc. But also you've had years of reinforcing experiences to firm up your confidence. I too came from a Futaba (challenger, then FF7 and finally FF9 with the futaba 2.4GHz module) route and remember viewing Hitec with the same suspicion back in the 80s. However, things change. The Futaba transmitter was fine, it was the receivers that caused me bigger issues, and some were self inflicted and therefore should not influence anyone else's position. Basically, I had to stop trying to save money because it was costing me a fortune! Second hand Receivers. Not a wise idea. In fairness, I am not sure any of the problems I've had were definitely the receiver's fault Unbranded receivers. One that you can't set the failsafe on (or at least not that I can tell), and one that has random jitters on one channel... Cheap ESCs. The ESCs are OK, the BECs are not... I'm quite sure this has resulted in several incidents. So I've created for myself a chain of uncertainty, and that erodes your confidence. I had two choices, buy a load of new, DECENT flight packs, or start again. Given the cost of genuine Futaba FASST receivers, I decided to start again. Whilst we don't NEED the extra features in more modern gear, and for some they will certainly be an unwelcome distraction, progress does provide options. After all, we don't NEED electric windows in our cars (never mind all the other trinkets), but do you really want to wind your own windows? For me though the biggest issue was trying to find out if any of the new gear would suit me. My club is tiny and therefore there are limited chances to see the gear in action, my local model shop has no real choice and there is a limited trade attendance at the few shows I can get to! I therefore had to jump off the high board and find out if I floated... Thanks to the helpful advice from everyone on here, so far so good, and with the lessons learned above I can feel confidence returning. Graham
  21. That was easy Matty! Thank you. Ron, the logging may be a useful thing. Where do I enable, and more importantly, view it? Graham
×
×
  • Create New...