Jump to content

Laser Engines development.


Jon H

Recommended Posts

I may be odd, and to each their own, but for me practicality is as important as scale accuracy. My scale(ish) models have their cylinders poking out because it makes them easier to install, access, cool, and operate. I want to fly, and not faff about too much.

 

My Vees are always inverted making tank position a challenge sometimes, and needle access from below can be tricky. One of my 360V's if it ever nosed over would crunch the carbs (never has though)

 

Therefore my vote is for an FT360, purely for practicality. Easy tank position, easy installation, easy cooling and easy needle access. But that's maybe because I'm just getting old ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Jon's point of reducing or eliminating the single range (personally would be gutted) as I think think there is a place for 70's and 80's engines for acrowots and VQ models for people wanting to enter IC flying. However this has come up in Richard's WB Replicas threads and the point is that as electric components are cheap compared with IC in the 70/80 size 4 stroke arena then people and manufacturers will focus on electric only designs and will be exacerbated if IC engines prices go up due to material/energy costs. No idea, but is there is another step change in battery technology through increase in capacity/reduction in cost then the change will be more pronounced. 

 

Perhaps the market for IC will drift towards larger and larger IC engines because of the convenient of electric in that area of the hobby. I can certainly see more clubs excluding IC due to noise issues (while they ignore electric pusher & EDF) and so the IC flyer may look to the larger models to make it more worthwhile. From my perspective I am prepared to travel longer distances to fly IC with better facilities/runway that suit models over the 70 four stroke size range. To the point that perhaps I would even consider the >300 size engine range to fit a suitable size model, just pack one and enjoy the splendor of a multi cylinder four stroke thundering around the sky.  

 

Do the inline engines suffer any more than a single when it comes to tank position (assuming the tank is in the right place to start with), ok it may need an additional clunk line, but to me it look a good solution for the pointy nose warbirds range? Ok cooling needs a bit of work, but Jon can advise + others have completed installs as reference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Electric installations are becoming more expensive, as has been said before HobbyKing gave us cheap components including some really good motors and esc. With them, in effect, leaving the UK, alternative supplies are somewhat more expensive (batteries!) so I think the cost gap that you mention is reducing and will continue to do so.

 

Regarding your question about tank positions, for the in-line twins there is no difference from singles mounted the same way and as you have noted twin clunks and correct baffles are a must but not too hard to achieve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

crikey...

 

TBM, yep you could make the model as a D9 version and use an inline but no matter what you do the hardwood mounting rails need to go. Composite mounts are far superior to beech or maple and any model calling for hardwood mounts needs a redesign to get shot of them when using a single cylinder engine. If you used our flat or v they are radially mounted and so the hardwood rails would need to go anyway, and the inline has its own mount as well. In the specific case of your 190 i would chop off everything ahead of the former F4, double thickness the firewall (3/8 thickness is good) at that point and work from there. If the engine is short, and i think it would be, you can laminate up ply disks to edge the engine forward for the perfect spinner gap. Once its all sorted glue the disks together/to the firewall and run long bolts through the engine mount, disks and firewall into captive nuts to pull the whole lot together. I am also not a fan of having a battery in the cowling. I know it gets the weight forward but having a mission critical power supply nestled next to a hot vibrating lump of metal seems like a bad idea to me. 

 

Radials. 

 

Yes, i would like to offer them in 50, 75 and 90cc sizes (300, 450 and 540cui if i remember rightly). The 90cc design is ready for production and has been for 8 or 9 years but there is no interest for some reason. Part of the hold up i think is due to a 90cc radial 'needing' to be petrol to achieve wide adoption and we arent really finished with that development yet. But i would like to build some as glow's and see how they sell and how the fuel consumption is on the LOG fuel. Certainly the 300 size is unlikely to present any problems in that regard. They would have to be single carb and testing would be needed to see if i needed to ensure even fuel charge distribution. I have some ideas, but need to test a plain version first so see if the added complexity is justified. 

 

As much as i appreciate the enthusiasm, they are sadly a pipe dream at the moment although i keep pestering. 

 

 

 

Thanks Jon. Will do as it sounds like the FT310 is the way to go.  Just modifying the FW and not have to worry about the fuel tank positioning sounds like a plan.

 

As for fuel distribution in radials, the Saito's have single carbs, were known for flooding out the bottom cylinders.  In my case on my 170R3, #2 and #3.  Saito came up with this W design (picture 1) to try and even it out and stop the flooding.  However, this modification caused the #1 cylinder to run leaner and hotter than #2 and #3.  The temperature difference between #1 was anywhere from 10 to 20 degrees cooler than #2 or #3.  Midrange transition was often sluggish and hard to tune.

 

A gentleman from the UK, a retired engine designer for Marlin Lindy Cars, Ray English designed a mod (picture #2) that fed all the cylinders evenly as well as keeping the cylinder temperatures within a few degrees of each other and eliminated the transition issues.  I had this mod done by Ray to my 170R3 and she runs like a champ, idles very well and transitions with no sluggishness at all. I am running my radial on nitro, too. Saito has been using Ray's modification in their radials. 

saito intake.JPG

 

RE Mod.JPG

 

 

Edit:  Looks like Morris Mini Motors carries this mod for the Saito Radials

https://www.morrisminimotors.com/saito-fa-170-r3-glow-3-cylinder-radial-4-stroke-engine-intake-manifold-modification-conversion-kit.html

 

Edited by thebluemax
added MMM link for mod
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jon

What size prop would you suggest for the laser 200 FT?

I had it mounted in a corsair but was waiting on parts so I mounted it in an xtrawot and used a 18x8 g sonic. It went like a rat up a drain pipe! So I was thinking maybe something bigger 20x8 maybe?

 

Ron have you flown the Wotswot xl yet how did it go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I have Mike, several times and am taking it out again tomorrow when I go to the South Norfolk flying site.

 

I’m running mine with an APC 18x8W prop and this combo gives the WWXL Pitts like performance, not quite unlimited vertical but enough!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gsonic props run very fast and i am not a massive fan of them. An 18x8 from another brand would probably do just fine. 

 

Aim for 7000-8000rpm on the ground in most cases. Any prop running in that range will be fine

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Saito thing sounds bonkers. Release engine. Known fault develops. Release fix. Fix doesn't work. Continue selling with non-functioning fix. Aftermarket plenum chamber solution for 15 or 20% or engine cost required to sort it. Really, Saito?

  

On 13/05/2022 at 13:03, Ron Gray said:

HobbyKing gave us cheap components

 

HK gaves us VAT free shopping. In effect. And they had a large throughput on their lipo stocks. Pile em high...

 

  

On 13/05/2022 at 09:33, Don Fry said:

So I drop Just Engines £365 for an OS 72, expensive on fuel, and bit fragile. Nice engine.

Or pay £300 for a Laser 70, £325 for an 80 if a bit more grunt needed. Cheaper on fuel, robust. Nice engines. 

 

Bump the OS prices a bit Don?

 

£310 for the 62V, £372 for a 95V, £378 for a 56a, £438 for the 72a.

 

Don't know why they're asking for so much more for the alphas, but there it is.

 

That said. In the interest of balance, I've not found the alphas to be very thirsty, nor am I running special fuel. Actually quite the opposite, 5% blend of the fuel that shall not be named, going through about 6 maybe 8oz per flight on the 81.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea the saito radial intake mods were...interesting. What i cant understand is why they didnt see it in their own testing, especially when it was so obvious in the 450r3 glow engine that the 84cc petrol was based on. 

 

On prices its bad news as we are going to have to put ours up and its going to hit the smaller engines more than the bigger ones. The reason is simply the cost of material and this was made plainly clear a few days ago when we ordered up material to manufacture crankshafts. Its been some time since we did cranks and at that time the material was about £3500 per ton. Now? over £6000 per ton. Its a similar story with aluminium and we are going to need to run cylinders soon as well. 

 

The upshot is there is not going to be much price difference between the 70, 80 and 100 once we do all the maths but they should still be very competitive on price vs OS. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon, you're in an impossible position facing cost rises that are beyond your control - any reasonable person will see and understand that. I guess what you do have going for you are the absurd prices being asked for OS engines. Over £550 for a 120FS - in my book they're simply not worth it.

Good Luck.

Edited by Cuban8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm amazed your prices have been what they currently are for so long Jon. Increases to overheads and costs are always bourn out by the customer, one way or other. You have to be financially viable.

 

C8 regarding OS pricing I think we've been spoilt in recent years. Saito pricing is close to OS (£350 for a FA100, vs £372 for OS 95). ASP et al had us used to lower cost engines, albeit with a different quality level. Laser have been avoiding distributors markups for some time and if I'm honest, I think Jon has been cutting his own throat to a certain extent, which has allowed Jon to produce a high quality engines for very, very good prices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am less concerned about this price hike than i am by the cost of the models themselves. I was horrified to find out the other day that a black horse super air, probably one of the most basic of low wing sport models and formerly sold by me at a model shop for as little as £65 on special offer, is now a nearly £300 proposition just for the kit! I know it was probably 12 or more years ago i was selling them at 65 quid, but 300 now?? ouch. 

 

I also noticed that other ARTF's from black horse in my beloved WWII 80 inch category are up to near 2 grand for a wooden model covered in sticky back plastic. Sure they include retracts now, but included retracts have historically been of dubious utility so i cant be sure the value is there. For less money you can buy a toprc full composite model with a bespoke retract set from electron and have a much higher quality model overall. Yes you have to ship it in from europe, but still.

 

If things continue like this, the price of the engine will not matter as there will not be an affordable model to put them in. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kit costs are definitely a thing. I think the hobby simply made hay on the back of low labour costs and low shipping costs, for a few years. There's no way that £65 will ever happen again on a wood+covering 40 class sport model. It's a shame, but, there it is. Since that 2010 point in time, inflation is around 150%. I don't know what 'normal' price was - £100? If nothing had changed it'd be £150 today. Then we've had the B word and Covid with its resultant worldwide logistic supply chain expenses and lately balsa disappearing up the wind turbine. Shipping a large box containing a fragile airframe is neither cheap nor easy right now, as I understand things.

 

£270 ARTF for super air at SMC, BTW - not quite as bad as £300 for kit only.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea the RRP for the super air is 300 and most are selling for 260-280 from what i could find. Still, £270 vs £300 is a distinction barely worth making in the context of how much it is vs how much it was and its the better part of 300 quid however you slice it. 

 

I do absolutely agree that we all got used to things being dirt cheap and that a super air is worth more than £65. Is it worth £250-300? Maybe not? Its hard to say as there is the cost of the timber raw timber, the cost of processing the timber, transport, laser cutting, labour to assemble...the list goes on and on. 

 

On costs here i can give a little example in that the lump of material needed to make a crankshaft for our engines is about £10-12 at the moment. That is just the straight material cost without machining, hardening, grinding (3 ops), and general finishing/cleaning operations along the way. Also the cost of the carbide material needed to plate the liners is around £9-12 as well. That is just the bare carbide material and does not include the price of doing the electroplating. Add to that the aluminium billet, 3 machining ops and 2 manual finishing ops and the cost just keeps rising. 

 

Anyway, given all the price rises on ARTF i am certainly glad i have a number of kits in stock and i think for sure that something like a DB Spitfire kit offers far greater value than the £1100 black horse equivalent. £635 gets you the kit and a decent set of retracts and i am sure you could finish the airframe of the model for far less than the £465 you have saved vs the BH ARTF and you would end up with a higher quality model as well. However, this assumes a level of building skill and/or available time which may not everyone may have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would expect (at this point in time, assuming stock was there) to spend £150 or £200 on materials (balsa/ply, hardware, film covering, i.e. everything except motive power and radio) to make an airframe of the size of the Super Air. So is £270 for a pre-rolled ARTF good value? I'd say it is pretty fair, all things told. Whether or not people will buy them at that price is a different question.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point Nigel, compaired with scratch building, a £300 (ish) RTF doesn’t sound that expensive, especially if you are time poor. It is really a question of how many people will have to give up their hobbies due to their finances being stretched, because of the cost of living crisis? Aeromodelling is not the only hobby that may contract as consequence of price hikes. On a more positive note a Laser engine is a great investment that should last many years, far longer than a not so cheap ARF model.

Perhaps also there will be a revival in a domestic kit market utilising foam extensively and minimal balsa? Unfortunately there may not be enough  people who possess the skills to put a kit together. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Nigel R said:

I would expect (at this point in time, assuming stock was there) to spend £150 or £200 on materials (balsa/ply, hardware, film covering, i.e. everything except motive power and radio) to make an airframe of the size of the Super Air. So is £270 for a pre-rolled ARTF good value? I'd say it is pretty fair, all things told. Whether or not people will buy them at that price is a different question.

I found that rather hard to believe Nigel until I started to add up the costs involved in building a model.

 

I am about to start building a DB Sport & Scale Skyrider as a surprise gift for my partner. For the time being, I live in France and she lives in Somerset so I can keep it secret easily. The Skyrider is about the same size as a Super Air and the short-kit costs £65 plus postage. I have just ordered some film from Steve Webb Models because she's always teasing me about wanting a model finished in purple and pink! The film has cost me £37, so that's £102 right off the bat. Of course, experienced builders like myself have built up stocks of materials which we don't take into account when building a new model. It will be interesting to see how much the project costs. I'll keep an account.

 

Others don't have the time, skill or interest to build a model but £270 for a basic, somewhat flimsy sports model is too much for me.

 

Now back to Laser Engines developments!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon, has anyone bought an inline twin for a Slec/precedent Stampe yet? Talking anout the price of models these days the Stampe represents fantastic value for money, especially for a large model. The only big extra expensive when I built mine was the Solartex and Laser engine.


It would be interesting to know what the percentage cost is of the engine/electric setup is for a range of typical models. Is there a pattern relates to size or type of model! Obviously where retracts are involved the percentage drops a lot as they are pretty expensive, especially on the larger warbirds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Jon - Laser Engines said:

I am less concerned about this price hike than i am by the cost of the models themselves. I was horrified to find out the other day that a black horse super air, probably one of the most basic of low wing sport models and formerly sold by me at a model shop for as little as £65 on special offer, is now a nearly £300 proposition just for the kit! I know it was probably 12 or more years ago i was selling them at 65 quid, but 300 now?? ouch. 

 

I also noticed that other ARTF's from black horse in my beloved WWII 80 inch category are up to near 2 grand for a wooden model covered in sticky back plastic. Sure they include retracts now, but included retracts have historically been of dubious utility so i cant be sure the value is there. For less money you can buy a toprc full composite model with a bespoke retract set from electron and have a much higher quality model overall. Yes you have to ship it in from europe, but still.

 

If things continue like this, the price of the engine will not matter as there will not be an affordable model to put them in. 

 

I remember when we began to get the first batches of cheap, Far Eastern ARTF models some thirty + years ago and it's fair to say that the novelty of them drove sales to unimagined heights. Pile it high and sell it cheap to satisfy a very active market that just kept on growing at the time. What goes around, tends to come around, and for a multitude of reasons, the attractiveness of buying ARTF's has taken a hit, both because of buyer fatigue with the same old, same old stuff and compounded by very large price increases and lack of availability. I doubt if the market will recover to anything like it was.

Foamies, love or hate them, seem to me to be bucking the trend and although not as cheap as they were, are mostly at a good price point for small to medium sized types. Good for electric sales but not for IC, I suppose....... I did see foamy EDF jet converted to take a tiny turbine, so nothing's off the menu given the will.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DD - I suppose if you add up building a super air equivalent it might be price competitive, but i still think you would end up with a superior model if you built it. 

Cuban - I have always tended to build my scale models for the simple reason that the ones i build tend to look better and i want to pick my paint job. I dont want my model to look the same as everyone else's so i tend to build them from scratch or, in the case of my YT kit, repaint them. 

 

It really is a shame YT have gone as i think that their range would be well placed in the current market. I also think that they might have had good sales by selling the models as kits including the composite fuselage, wing ribs/laser cut parts and the plans. The boxes would have been smaller and easier to ship, costs would be cheaper as a result, and i think they would sit well in the market. Alas, it was not to be. 

 

Getting back onto the OP 

 

Nick - No not yet. I think some are being lined up for tiger moths but so far no stampe's. That said very few engines are out in the wild at the moment and i really need to build some more. I know that 2 of the upcoming batch are headed for 1/4 scale Fokker DVII's and that should be a lovely combo as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 I'd love a laser radial of a size to power a 1/4 stearman or Waco

2 Please keep the singles going Great size for a simpler sport model 

3 re Glow/Petrol I'm impressed by the reliability of the Lasers.  I like my Saito petrols but they do have some reliability issues.

Had 2 5-6min flights yesterday with the 200i in my H9 Vans. It didnt miss a beat and probably used less than 300ml fuel (paid $15AUD for 2litres so not too costly)

Also a couple of flights with myLaser 80 powered Antic as the conditions were so nice for a slow float  around the sky.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Small update

 

New exhausts for the FT series with an offset to make it easier to get to the slow run needles. Also a straight through type. Both of these can fit any of the engines with our small head (70 80 100 etc). 

 

20220616_115758.thumb.jpg.764ac2288f8b6bdd126ab17782cf7e4b.jpg

 

FT-310 crankcase production should start within 2 weeks and... (you might want to sit down) The final parts i need to finish a batch of petrol engines are also very close. 

 

I am working on trying to convince the boss the FT-360 would be nice and also a 360i. I will also keep dreaming of a radial but alas, it is only a dream...unless one of you guys with a lathe/mill fancy a project. 

 

Oh and prices are going to have to go up. Sorry. But material costs are insane ? 

Edited by Jon - Laser Engines
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...