By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more

Member postings for Tom Satinet

Here is a list of all the postings Tom Satinet has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.

Thread: Greetings
21/09/2011 09:09:55
C93 is just the weight of the cloth (93g/sqm).
 
 
 
In terms of typhoon vs vector 3, I would get a typhoon if I were doing a lot of my flying at somewhere like Burton Dassett.
 
The V3 does seem to fly very well though.
20/09/2011 19:09:28
I would get the typhoon. I think it will meet your requirements and won't be too hard to get hold of. Pretty easy to build as well.
 
 
 

20/09/2011 09:09:31
Alex XL
Blade 1.9
 
 
I would put the bigger 2.5m stuff in another price bracket (e.g Tomcat, alex XXL, skorpion needle 100, big bird etc) . Although the mach 2 is 2.4.

Edited By Tom Satinet on 20/09/2011 09:12:00

19/09/2011 15:46:42
yeah it's probably old ground but I can't remember the previous threads...
 
I did have ballast but I shared it with another model which I since sold including the ballast, so now I need to make some more or buy the ballast kit. To be honest I felt it was a model that didn't want to be over ballasted, but I haven't flown it in enough conditions to get a real feel for it. But as I say it does what I want of it.
 
Not sure what CG I am on - pulled a fair bit of lead out of the nose - I would guess in the low 90s somewhere. Yeah it is pretty agile - the roll rate is good even for the size.
19/09/2011 15:15:41
What CG are you on now btw Peter?
 
Last time I had a session with it I was playing with the CG but it was extremely lumpy bumpy, so it was hard to really get a feel for it.
19/09/2011 15:14:15
I was up the great orme a few weeks ago, I just didn't have any ballast with me!
19/09/2011 13:15:22
I'm happy with my typhoon. I think for a smaller slopes it's a really good model. A nice compromise between agility and "soarability". I'm sure it's good in big air too, but most of my slope flying is done on a small bump.
18/09/2011 22:19:00
it's a good model
18/09/2011 21:14:43
just get one
Thread: Second glider the next step?
16/09/2011 14:05:49
Posted by Graham Chadwick on 16/09/2011 13:42:22:

Landing needs a different technique too in low wind I tend to float past and round again, in higher wind tend to land short.

 
 
You and everyone else Graham! You have exactly described the challenges of landing in the two extremes.
 
I would say go for a 4 servo wing (flaps.) it is a lot easier to land. Although you can actually end up short even more if you get over enthusiastic.
 
Although as others have said the moulded stuff usually has a lot more penetration so you can make it from a lot farther back.
 

16/09/2011 13:13:05
Graham,
I think the other guys are right.
In terms of moulded models, as they are essentially built by the factory there isn't really a factor in terms of the way the model has been built by the builder (the airframe anyway), unlike a wooden kit. The only real factor in that regard is how well the radio gear has been installed - usually they are pretty tight and often tricky installs.  I guess you can get some badly made in the factory, but it's more rare than a badly made kit certainly.

It's usually fairly easy to spot damaged on a mouldy, because if they don't have any they are usually pretty much "perfect" - like a new car but more so I guess.
 
That being said there is nothing wrong with repairing mouldies - I reckon most of them will have a bit of damage at some point in their lives.  We don't just chuck them out if they get a ding. Look for areas that have been repainted - even the best jobs will over paint the seams.
 
a ballast tube is pretty essential i would suggest.
I wouldn't particularly get fixated on a luna - sounds like you can fly already - moulded models are usually very easy to fly - more so the bigger they get really.
 
place to look:
forms - rcmf, barcs, flyquiet, here
mailing lists - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/F3F/
& bmfa classifieds of course

Edited By Tom Satinet on 16/09/2011 13:14:40

Edited By Tom Satinet on 16/09/2011 13:16:12

Thread: just a litlle bit lost!
15/09/2011 22:04:19
Miguel,
 
I have had a multiplex evo - to be honest the programming on the aurora sounds more powerful.
 
T
15/09/2011 09:05:55
the hitec aurora 9 is fine for f3f models btw.
 
As John says the receiver itself should draw hardly any current.
IIRC it is something like 30 to 50 mah for a typical receiver.
 
by the way you could use a lipo with a regulator to power the model - i don't see a problem with that. Personally I have always stuck to nickel (or LiFe recently). What you don't want, IMHO, is two batteries.
 

14/09/2011 21:48:05
Miguel
 
As I said I in my f3f models I just use a 4 cell Nimh to power both the servos and the receiver.







 
No need to use 2 batteries or all that complicated stuff.
 
If your 2500 can't power all 6 servos there is something wrong with it.
 
T

Edited By Tom Satinet on 14/09/2011 21:53:38

14/09/2011 10:18:16
Miguel,
 
I would say that a 4 cell nickel battery is the most common type you will find used on a glider like a Pike Brio (in the UK anyway).
 
On all my 3m models that I've owned (e.g tragi, ascot, extreme, freestyler etc) I have used either AA Nimh or 2/3a Nimh - depending on what will fit in each model. I have flown the model in both slope/f3f and some of them in f3b(winch) with no problems.
 
It just sounds like your battery is faulty or there is a potential fault in the wiring somehow(?).
 
A 4.8v nickel battery does not require a regulator as stated above (neither does a 5 cell/6v one).
 
Capacity is not the same as being able to deliver high current. e.g a 2500nimh "AA" only has a max discharge of about 7amps. Where as a 1500 "2/3a" battery might have a max discharge of 15amps. While the 1500 might not last as long it would actually work better if there was a heavy current draw. That being said I have never had problems with AA batteries either.
 
The other alternative is LiFePo4 batteries, which may or may not need a regulator - that's a whole other thread!
 
I think that either your 2500 nickel is faulty or the Lipo is masking a fault in the wiring (or servos etc) with it's superior abiliity to delivery current (although maybe not as the regulator would blow out (possibly?)). That seems the logic to my mind anyway.
 
hth
Tom

Thread: 15mph wind on a good slope
09/09/2011 12:55:27
was it cold?
Thread: Sloping Off
13/08/2011 20:58:49
Posted by Conwy Soarer on 12/08/2011 23:02:22:
Posted by Tom Satinet on 12/08/2011 16:08:54:

 
Full epp models like the bee, wildthing, m60 etc etc, require strengthening spars. TBH there is a reason that nearly all the rest of the foam slope models are all epp - that's because it's better!
 
If you built an epp model with no spars it would be like a dead fish!
 
Tom

Sorry Tom you are only partly correct the Xit which is a windrider Bee in an Irvine box doesn't have a solid spar of any sort and its full epp, the spar is replaced by tape, it works fine. The all EPP zagi also didn't have a spar just had tape.

Jon
I thought the bee had carbon ribbon spars.
 
As for the instructions on sas models - they are okay but I think there are points where basically everyone ignores them in particular the "ban" on ballast which is basically nonsense! 
 
on the fusion I had I could not work out the spar stopped so far short of the wing tips unless it was purely to save money by supplying it in 1m lengths. 

Edited By Tom Satinet on 13/08/2011 21:00:15

Edited By Tom Satinet on 13/08/2011 21:01:54

12/08/2011 16:09:46
Posted by Steve Hargreaves on 12/08/2011 12:11:17:
I'm a complete & utter slope/EPP/CW tape virgin so I'm probably wrong but wouldn't the wing be stronger if the two halves were joined first & then the wing taped as a complete unit...
yes, and I thought that was what the instructions said.
The middle of the wing is obviously the part under the most stress.
12/08/2011 16:08:54
Posted by Ian Jones on 12/08/2011 12:41:59:
Good idea I think it might be stronger Steve.
 
However the chevron type of wing, well the JP-Si anyway, does not have a spar and the rigidity comes from the tape. The WT & Fusion both have spars making them more like the conventional two wing halves that are assembled and then joined. On reflection though it would be quite easy to do it as you suggest.
 
I will be applying the coloured tape before joining the wing to the fuselage so I may now modify the way I do it so that it stiffens it up a bit more.
 
Ian,
 
sorry to disagree, but the reason the JP si has structural strength is that the rear part of the model is not EPP, it is a more rigid, but less deformable foam (EPO?). That's why you have to glue the EPP bit on the front to give it some degree of survivability, although in reality the model doesn't have the toughness of a full EPP model like the Wildthing or Bee. I guess it is easy to build and cheap though.
 
Full epp models like the bee, wildthing, m60 etc etc, require strengthening spars. TBH there is a reason that nearly all the rest of the foam slope models are all epp - that's because it's better!
 
If you built an epp model with no spars it would be like a dead fish!
 
Tom

27/07/2011 11:37:03
something to watch out for with the model is that the pocket for the RX tends to cave in with repeated nose strikes.
Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
Sussex Model Centre
Slec
electricwingman 2017
CML
Advertise With Us
Sarik
Latest "For Sale" Ads
NEW POLL - has the pandemic altered your event safety perceptions?
Q: Has the covid pandemic deterred you from attending shows and events in 2021?

 No, I'll be attending just as many as I usually do
 No, but I'll choose my event with greater care
 Yes, I'll attend fewer events going forward
 Yes, I wont attend any where previously I have

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E!