My Second Quad – The Blade Nano QX. First Impressions

Two months or so after first picking up the ProtoX, I was in my local hobby shop. I was just perusing through the latest toys and thinking how I really liked the looks of the new Platinum series Super Cub from E-Flight… but decided to wait on that for a while. I already have plenty of unfinished projects in the shop. As I continued browsing I came to the section where all the quads were displayed. I started thinking of what I wished my ProtoX could do… Binding to a “real” radio, better stability, maybe just a bit bigger to make it more visible… and not too expensive.

After looking over the options I realized the Blade Nano QX might be a lot closer to what I really wanted… and for only $65 or so plus a couple spare batteries… This thing looks great… I should get one. I deserve one. I was reaching for my wallet when I remembered. I was just looking!! I tore myself away just in time and roared out of the parking lot with my money intact… Whew… that was close.

24 hours later I was walking out of the hobby store with my new Blade Nano QX… I was already thinking about how i could program my DX18 to make this thing smooth. Hey, I’m only human!!

Here are the most important parts arrayed on the table…

2014-11-18 20.30.22

 

To buy your own from Amazon click here –>BLADE Nano QX BNF Quadcopter

In addition to the additional props, extra canopy and grommets (shown above) there is a USB charger for the included 150mah 25C single cell LiPo.

So I’ve only got a few flights but here’s what I’m thinking so far.

First of all the Nano QX can fly in one of two modes, Stability or Agility.  Stability mode utilizes the built in SAFE (Sensor Arrested Flight Envelope) system to keep the 18g quad from getting to far off level to quickly.  The biggest noticeable effect of this mode is that when you release a directional control, the system seems to feed in opposite control in order to arrest whatever motion was happening.  Add this to the slightly heavier airframe (compared to my ProtoX) and this thing is much easier to keep in a smooth hover.

Switch into the Agility mode and “wow” does everything change.  No more automatically stabilizing the Nano when you release the controls.  If you push in some “aileron” and then release… the Nano just keeps on moving.  You now have to push in some opposite control to get things back to level.  It’s very easy to get into oscillations… trailing behind the flight and over-correcting.  It can quickly become a problem if you don’t switch back to Stability mode!  This is no fault of the Nano of course, just my inexperience with the little quad showing through.

Flight times seem to run about 5:30 to 6:00 minutes before she powers down and forces a landing.  The on board LED is used to let you know this is occurring as well as signaling the two modes, for binding, etc…  It is not particularly useful for orientation.  For that you will have to rely on the canopy coloring and shape along with the color of the 4 props.

I have been flying the Nano QX with the setup of my DX18 configured exactly per the manual for the first flights but I now have some ideas about additional programming I intend to add.  I’ll cover that in another posting soon.

Overall I am very happy with the QX so far.  It looks like the Stability mode is doing a very nice job and the overall flight characteristics in this mode are very encouraging.  Having the advantage of full capability radio (the Nano is a DSMX compatible craft) even doing just the very basic functionality allows for much smoother control of the QX.

I’m already seeing that the biggest disadvantage of the QX is the lack of “navigation” lighting.  This means that when moving quickly or when the airframe gets off at a distance, orientation becomes a challenge.  I’ll have to look into ways to address that eventually.  I’m also going to start with some additional programming to help tame the Agility mode.

Otherwise, my initial impressions are that this is a big step forward compared to the ProtoX.  I’m looking forward to getting in some more flying and learning a bit more from the Nano QX.

My Introduction to Quads… The ProtoX

Recently at a charity event I was looking for a way to contribute a few dollars to the “Toys for Tots” when I noticed a tiny little quad on the auction block.  I really was just looking to either contribute some money or drive someone else into giving a bit more to the charity but ended up owning a brand new Proto X.  Since that event, I’ve been doing a little flying with this little nano-sized quad and having some fun with it.

This is a big departure for me in some folks eyes because I am an unabashed… helicopter basher I guess is the phrase.  Much of it is in fun, I have every respect for a good pilot regardless of what he flies.  It’s just that I have very little interest in helicopters, especially when flown 3D style.  They seem to me the epitome of what I dislike about 3D flying of all types.  No grace or beauty… just smashing the sticks and overcoming gravity with pure power.  Sure, I know lots of folks love that kind of thing… I’m just not one of them.  15 minutes of watching “3D” flying or helicopters flying in a “non-scale” manner has me itching to do something more interesting.  Watching a glider “defying gravity” or any aircraft flying a well flown scale sequence is much more inviting and awe inspiring to me.  I know I’m in the minority, but that’s OK with me.

I still have little interest in helicopters in general but the new breed of quad and other multi-rotor platforms are fascinating.  With the development of stabilization systems and superior battery technology these things now have some unique capabilities.

The quad I picked up is the Proto X Nano-Sized, Ready-to-Fly.  The Proto comes with most of what you will need to fly.  A couple AAA batteries inserted into the also-Nano-sized transmitter and a quick charge at the nearest USB port and you are ready to go.

IMG_1779

 

You can buy your own Proto X at amazon by clicking here –> Estes 4606 Proto X Nano R/C Quadcopter

Above is most of what comes in the box… note that you get a spare set of props.  The wall wart USB charger is NOT part of the package.  I quickly added it to the box so I’d always be able to charge the on board battery if I could find an AC outlet.

Here is my experience with the little quad so far.

First, the good.  This little flier is tough.  Running it into furniture, ceiling fans (off), walls, etc… has resulted in almost no damage.  I have always tried to drop power whenever a collision is imminent, and I believe that helps.  Occasionally a blade will pop off… or two… but as long as you can figure out which motor they came off of (they are coded by letter, blade A to motor A and B to B and you will be fine) it is usually just a matter of press fitting them back in place and you are ready again.  In theory you want one color of blade in front and a different color in back but once they start spinning neither are highly visible.  There are 8 LEDs on the Proto (Blue in the front) and these serve to keep directional orientation much better than the colored props ever will as well as warning of low voltage (blinking with ~30 seconds left before power loss forces a landing).  These make a huge difference in keeping orientation… a real concern for such a small quad.  It also has plenty of power and seems to fly for a nice long 5 minutes on a charge.  I’ve never timed it but it seems like 15-30 minutes will have it recharged and ready to go again.  Here’s a shot of the LEDs doing what they do.

IMG_1775

The range of the radio seems to be more than sufficient… I haven’t been able to get far enough away to lose radio link.    The Proto is to small to fly more than about 50 feet away anyway!  I have read on-line that the battery in the Proto was not meant to be replaced but upon taking off the canopy, I found the battery simply taped in place with an easily removed connector and batteries order-able on line from several sources.  I presume earlier models did not have this options so Kudos to Estes/HobbiCo for getting it right!

IMG_1774

Above is what it looks like minus the canopy.  As you can see the battery is easily replaceable.

Another big hit is the price… at $40 (and even $30 in some places) the value at the price seems quite good.

Now for the bad.  The included controller for the Proto is more toy than RC hobby grade.  For my big hands it is difficult to find a comfortable position to hold the controller.  The trim buttons only exist for the right stick and are oddly placed.  Finally, the on off switch has “ON” to the left… OK, I realize that may not be universal but it seems like 90% of everything in the world is up or right = on.  Here is what it looks like.

IMG_1776

I understand there is a better controller available out there that will mate up with the Proto and also enable some additional functionality but that is not what comes with the Proto, and I don’t think I really want to double down on my investment.  I find the included controller very distracting/difficult to master.  The sticks are just very toy like/very short sticks and not comfortable to my feel.  Granted, I’m spoiled with my DX-8 and especially the DX-18.  I’d love to try flying this with a real RC radio but sadly just about every manufacturer these days is incompatible with every other.

Continuing on, here are my general impressions of the Proto.  I think the Proto is a fun little quad.  I don’t know if it’s possible to make such a small and light quad any more stable but I find it to be quite difficult to get the Proto to hover in place or really fly in a truly straight line.  It always wants to twist or drift one way or the other.  I can herd it in the direction I want it to go and maneuver around obstacles but you have to be constantly correcting to do it and forget getting it trimmed to hover “hands off” and hold position.  If that’s possible I haven’t figure it out yet.  Add to that the understandable tendency of a craft this small to get pushed around by literally any air movement and stability is not really in its ballpark.

In spite of that, I enjoy flying the Proto.  Hopefully, I can still learn some directional awareness the way you can learn control reversals for a fixed wing by flying on your simulator.  Fixed wing craft don’t do much flying tail first as a rotary craft can, so that is probably a useful skill to work on.  Otherwise the small controller and stability issues will probably limit my learning much I can apply to larger quads.  That’s not to say I won’t keep flying it for a while.  It’s still a lot of fun.  Just more toy than RC fun in my estimation.  For $30 it would be hard to find anything better.  This is the definition of a beginners quad.

Pick one up if you want some basic flying fun in the living room.  Just make sure you turn off the ceiling fan! 🙂

 

P-51 Redtail – Electric Retract mistake… no good deed goes unpunished!

A while back, Kelly brought his P40 over to complete final piece of the install for his electric retracts into his Top Flite Giant Scale P-40.  The tail wheel.  We had the main gear already installed in the wing and tested and had just the tail left to complete the job.  We were well into the job and ready for some testing when we realized that we needed to cycle the gear to finish up… but a problem presented itself.  Kelly had not thought to bring the wing for the P-40 and attached to that wing was the control unit!  There is no way to cycle this gear without a control unit, but luckily (not as lucky as I thought at the time) I have a very similar control unit in my Mustang so I just walked across the shop and pulled it out.  That is where the trouble began…  You see, for some reason over the course of the last 6 months, Robart has decided to switch the connector type from a standard servo type plug to a 2 wire… I’m not sure what it is so let’s just call it a “Robart connector”!  They also decided to change from using type 1 and type 2 to using type A and B… but more on that later.

OK, so this connector issue is “no hill for a climber”, right!?  First, cut out the plastic around the opening on my control board and plug in the P-40 tail wheel there, then create a female to female servo lead to hook the control box to the receiver… my lead is tied down in the Mustang… and wallah!!  That taken care of we can now cycle the tail gear.  Yahoo!  With a bit of custom fitting (Dremel tools are great, aren’t they?) the P-40 tail wheel is all good.  That all accomplished, just stick the control board back in the Mustang and reconnect it… careful of polarity… that would be expensive!!  All good and the Mustang can retire back to it’s corner for a few weeks….  All good… I thought.

So a few weeks pass and it’s time for the club picnic.  Great fun, good food, excellent weather… sounds like a good time to show off the Mustang for the members and especially the families that rarely make it out to the field any other time.  Low 110+ MPH, nice slow (for a Mustang) photo passes, big loops and stall turns… and then have the pilot salute the crowd after a perfect main wheels only landing… The perfect recipe for a nice day at the field.  At least that’s the plan…

Upon arriving at the field, we (it takes a village) got the Mustang assembled and did a quick cycle of the landing gear and, yep it all works but… wait a minute.  One of the mains goes up when the other goes down!??  That’s weird.  Power down and back up with the wing opened up… try unplugging and replugging the two main retracts to get them in sync… still no joy.  How strange…  As I’m standing there cycling them one more time (bordering on insanity now… repeating the same actions waiting for something different to happen) and get a whiff of something hot/stinky.  Thinking the engine that someone is running 20 feet down the flightline must be getting hot or maybe something got against the hot engine down there.  Back to my problem and now the tail gear has quit moving… just staying down.  When I decide to check that connection it suddenly becomes obvious… the tail gear is plugged into a main gear slot on the Robart controller!  That must be what’s wrong, the two are reversed.  Swap those two and now the main gear works great.  But wait, the tail gear still isn’t working…

OH CRAP!!!  Now the full impact of what I’ve done hits.  The tail retract is what Robart calls a type 2.  The difference is that a Type 2 takes less voltage than a type 1.  And in case you’re wondering I can attest that plugging a type 2 into a slot that is set for a type 1 will release the smoke that is part of the “smoke and magic” formula that makes these things work.  At least it will after several cycles…  I haven’t even flown yet and I suspect this trip to the field just cost me $50-100.  That burning smell I detected earlier was something getting hot alright… but it was a lot closer than I thought!

If there is a silver lining… that tail gear was fully down and not likely to go anywhere so since I’d already paid the price I went ahead and got some flights in.  The last one for the day was a pretty close approximation to the one I’d dreamed of, complete with a 115 MPH high speed pass and a sweet landing that elicited some envious comments from fellow warbird pilots.  “You know you make us look bad when you do that, right?”  and “Mine doesn’t do that!” were among the shouts from the spectator area.

Once home I sent some email to Robart asking about a replacement and they promptly replied with the appropriate part number and instruction on how to get a unit that would drop in and fit my control board.  When it arrived, one more little detour came up.  The new unit arrived and was marked with a “Type A” tag.  Huh?  I only have Type 1 or Type 2 options on my controller??  OK, so type 1 would be A and 2 is B, right?  Wrong!!  My old unit was a type 2 and Kelly’s tail wheel worked when set to type 2 on my controller… Plus it’s still a lower voltage unit (checked the instructions and confirmed, main gear is Type B and tail is Type A) so not only did the nomenclature change but it didn’t follow what you might think of as the logical choice either!

After reading everything over 2 or 3 times to confirm that things are as I think they are, got the new unit plugged in and tested and it seems to be working fine… no sign of smoke or heat.  Nice smooth cycles up and down.  So, the moral of the story is…. “Quit being nice to your buddies!”   Wait that can’t be right!?  Maybe, “Be a bit more careful when plugging and unplugging all those wires in your complicated and expensive airplanes!”  That one sounds better!  For sure this one applies: “No good deed goes unpunished.”

Putting the Telemaster on Floats

This weekend is a float fly so I have been in the shop lately swapping out the wheels on several of my airplanes for floats.  I’ve been flying off floats whenever the opportunity arrives for a number of years now and I thought I’d try to share both the attachment method I use on my Telemaster and some of the tips and pitfalls for float attachment and float flying that I’ve learned over that time.

Here are a few quick float sizing/attachment guidelines that I have found will greatly increase your chances for success.

  • Floats should be mounted in such a way that the “step” on the bottom of the floats is in line with the balance point of the airplane.
  • Floats should extend beyond the nose of the airplane.  This seems to help to minimize the chance of the airplane flipping during a “to steep” landing and during takeoff if the tail rises to quickly.
  • A water rudder is a necessity for most aircraft.  Without this feature, you are very much at the mercy of the winds and will have trouble making turns during taxi maneuvers on the water.

Here are the floats I use on my Telemaster 40.

IMG_1677[1]

As you can see, I use a second aluminum landing gear as a secondary support, and Ernst water rudder and a separate water rudder servo.

Below you can see the rear mounting holes (there are blind nuts inside the body) that the rear landing gear mounts to.  Right behind that is the battery hatch.

IMG_1678[1]

Below is the “on float” servo that drives the water rudder.  This servo has been specifically water proofed but is otherwise a standard servo.  While some espouse dual water rudders, I have seen very little need.

IMG_1680[1]

The attachment to the floats is shown here (both front and back look similar).  The slack between the two wheel collars allows for a bit of telescoping action during landings to absorb some shock when the floats hit the water a  bit harder than planned.  For instance when a sudden burst of gravity interferes with an otherwise perfect approach.

IMG_1681[1]

That about covers the most important plot points.  I run my water rudder on a separate channel and then just mix it with the rudder so I can easily center it and adjust the travel independent of the main rudder.

Hopefully this has given you some useful ideas about how to get your own airplane on floats and ready to fly.  It can be a bit challenging to get everything set up correctly  but it is worth the effort.

 

Glider Carry for the Telemaster 40 – Pt. 2

Just a quick update that the glider carry worked well… but not for George’s glider.  While the carriage worked great and the release system worked flawlessly for the Radian, what I hadn’t foreseen was the length of George’s glider would bring the glider’s rudder into contact with the Telemaster vertical stab.  So back to the drawing board…  I was not happy with the saddle on the bottom of the carriage not properly fitting the Telemaster wing anyway so when I can get back to it I think I’ll be extending the bottom of the unit with new side supports that will raise the whole unit by about 4 inches as well as being cut to fit the wing surface better.

When I get some new parts built and tested I will post again.  In the meantime I’d love to hear from anyone else who has done this.  Feel free to share your experiences.

Glider Carry for the Telemaster 40 – Pt. 1

Myself along with a couple of other flyers at my club have taken to doing a bit of glider flying of late.  A couple of us have Radians while our current president (George) has a true un-powered balsa and monocoat ship.  While the Radians have no trouble getting to altitude with their on-board electric motor, the traditional glider needs some external help.  We don’t have a winch at the field and a high start takes a lot of time and effort to rig and takes up the whole field for a period of time.  In short, we wanted a better way to get a glider to altitude.

We discussed doing a tow but that seemed to require to many modifications and complex release mechanisms… While it looked fun we decided that a “carry” to altitude might be a better solution…. and it so happens I had picked up just such a mechanism at a swap meet a couple years ago.  I pulled it out and got to work to get it in “ready to fly shape”.

Of course life is never that easy and I immediately found a couple issues.  First, the unit had developed some warp over time and it seemed a bit flimsy.  It also doesn’t fit the top shape of my Telemaster’s wing.  That last I’m hoping to hold off for another time.  For now, I hope a bit of foam will help to distribute the load until I can come up with a better solution… if all else gets worked out!

So first things first, I started out by dis-assembling the carriage and doing some sanding to expose the wood so I could bond on some reinforcing.  For this I chose some carbon fiber tape from Dave Brown models that I had picked up on a whim at a hobby shop I recently discovered while on a business trip to Cincinnati.  I had never used this product but the instructions were spot on, recommending tape to bind the ends, etc…  I think you’ll do well if you just follow the included directions.

Here are a few pics showing the process…

Here is the disassembled structure.  Note that one of the bolts that form the pivot twisted off during the dis-assembly process..

IMG_1644[1]

This is after sanding.  If you don’t get rid of the paint and open up the grain the epoxy won’t stick and the carbon fiber reinforcing will just peel off.

IMG_1646[1]

 

Here is the cutting and fitting process.  The tape is vital to holding the carbon fiber together during cutting.  Remove it just as you lay the CF onto the epoxy.  By cutting all lengths before mixing the epoxy I managed to do one whole side before the epoxy started getting gummy.

 

IMG_1649[1]

Here is one side with the CF  laid down and weighted down so it dries straight.  Maybe not as neat as I could be but I think it will serve the purpose.

IMG_1653[1]

 

After letting this dry overnight and reassembling I did some tests and things were not working well.  The glider would scoot back on the cradle and the rubber bands would slide up against the front of the carriage.  This caused release to be unreliable.  One side or the other would come off sooner with several seconds before release occurred after the servo released the rotating arms.  Sometimes it would be several more before the other side let go.  That could cause major issues.  I tried polishing up the leading edge of the wood and even waxing it but that proved to be insufficient.

Here is a picture of the hold down system… The bands won’t stay out in the indent area of the release arms.  The bands rub on the wood and release is iffy at best.

 

IMG_1659[1]

 

Realizing I needed to get the rubber bands to stay in those indents at the ends of the arms, I realized that the direction they were pulling had to be adjusted.  No amount of sliding the glider forward or careful routing of the bands would make that happen so I decided I needed something to redirect the bands around to reposition them on those release arms.

Here is my fix… A peg (really a bolt held in on both sides with nuts) to redirect the rubber band up and over so that it stays in the indent of the release arms.  Now the release is immediate every time.

 

IMG_1660[1]

With this modification I think I am ready to test the carriage with a glider aboard.  I’m guessing on how many rubber bands are needed to hold the carriage in place, how many to hold the glider in place and really about everything else as well.  Planning on a test run or to with the Radian perched atop the carriage tomorrow evening.  Look for another post with some pics soon with the results and reports on how it went.

If all goes well, George’s glider will be next on the list.  Wish me luck!

P51 Mustang Red Tail – Latest Updates

In the last 2 weeks I’ve had the Mustang up on 6 flights and put it back in “race ready” condition just in time for our annual Tim Mills Derby Days RC Airshow.  This is just a little wrap up of the updates I’ve made and issues I’ve had since building up a new wing and electrifying the Robart retracts.  I will come back and edit this post with a few added photos in the coming days.

Working more or less chronologically, I got the wing built up and the retracts installed along with installing the retractable tail gear in the fuselage.  All seemed to be working pretty well so I went out for the first flight.  It went well, with “Drag Racer 2” going through her paces just I remembered.  She flies heavier than anything else I fly but with no real handling problems or bad habits other than needing a lot of speed to handle well.  Fairly much what you’d expect from a big war bird.  Maybe the ailerons could be dialed up a bit but the rolls are probably pretty close to scale… maybe a second or a bit more to complete a roll??  I’ll have to check that and consider increasing throws on those.

This first flight, I kept the gear down and the landing was fairly uneventful with the exception of  a tendency to turn right as the roll out got slow.  Nothing that the rudder couldn’t correct.  The landing gear took the shock on landing  better than I expected.  A pleasant surprise.

Second flight a half hour later was a bit more exciting…  After the first couple laps I hit the retract switch and all three disappeared into the  bottom of the airplane as planned.  So far so good, except the plane wanted to climb rapidly.  At first I didn’t understand but soon the reality of removing drag and closing the majority of the large pockets in the bottom of the tail and wing set in.  The plane is just getting more lift and experiencing less drag… which equates to the tendency to climb.  That’s generally a good thing so why fight it.  Eventually, a couple flights later, I trimmed it for level flight with the gear up and just got used to pulling a little up when flying with the gear extended.

After a few high speed passes I decided it was time to land and went for the retract switch again.  A quick pass to check gear down and… uh-oh… only 1 main is down!  While having all sorts of awful thoughts about how a Mustang would land on no gear (22 lbs of airplane on the scoop… yikes!) or even worse with only one main gear I tried cycling the gear a couple times.  Eventually I had the two mains down and locked.  The tail gear also managed to jam part way down but I decided to live with that and brought it in smoothly again.  No damage and now it is obvious that the gear door is pivoting on the strut and getting caught on the edge of the wing inset.

Back in the shop to tighten and re-glue the doors and come up with a solution for the tail wheel jam issues. The problem seemed to be that the cables that steer the wheel go slack when retracted.  This allows the tail wheel to pivot around in flight and get caught against the side of the plane when the command comes to move.  After some consideration, I added some rubber bands to the assembly to hold the wheel straight when no servo linkage pressure is being applied.  This keeps the axle and wheel from contacting the insides of the fuse OR the landing gear doors when coming down.

Back at the field a few days later and it was time for flight 3 and 4.  These two flights went well and it was during these that the trim got adjusted to account for the wheels up “slick” condition of the airframe in normal cruising mode.  As I flew, I got more and more comfortable with the airplane and made some “photo” passes in near knife edge and about 20-50 foot altitudes as well as fast low passes, immelmans, loops, split S(s), aileron rolls… Pretty much anything you’d expect a Mustang could do.  Both landings were smooth with comments from a pilot who owns this same ARF (not modified and with the wire gear on) to the effect that I was making him look bad by coming in to land so smoothly.  I love to see a big bird do a nice landing so I spend extra time and effort to make mine look good when I can.

Also during these flights I noticed just how much slicker the plane is with the gear up.  I was expecting 2-3… maybe 5 mph increase in speed.  What I got was 10-12!  In a couple of cases the GPS on board said I had hit 113, almost 114 in a shallow dive toward the field.  Before anyone comments on the inaccuracy of GPS speed, I can tell you I have tested the GPS versus the Pitot tube type instrument and they are very consistently within 1-2 mph of each other.  Engine RPMs hit somewhere around 7500 at their highest which didn’t seem to harm the DA-50 at all.

Those flights went very well and the landings were nice with full flaps and just a click or two of power on landing.  Back in the shop I painted the mounting blocks to match the struts and added the guns to the leading edge.  Two .50 cal in each wing in this B/C model (unlike the 3 per wing in the D).  The guns I did a bit different this time.  I cut circles out of flat black and then circles out of those big enough for the gun barrels.  I then ironed these covering “donuts” onto the leading edge at the appropriate spots and then drilled in the donut hole so the gun barrels could be expoxied in place.  After all was complete, a little flat black paint to cover up the brass tubes from which they are fabricated and all is ready to go.  There seems to be quite a variance in gun installations in different Mustang models so these look good enough and much better than the factory glue on pieces.

About the only thing left for this bird is more flights and some added epoxy on a couple of cowl screw inserts that are walking out.  I’m actually getting past the knee knocker factor of flying this bird and starting to enjoy it for what it is.  Not my favorite or best flying aircraft, but very impressive in the sky with plenty of wow factor for the crowd.

 

P-51 Mustang Redtail finally in the air again!

Finally finished up getting the wing rebuilt and ran out of excuses to not fly the Redtail.  Perfect weather and the looming airshow at the field where I am expected to fly this bird were the final straws so the Mustang went to the field for the first flight with the new wing.

This time, the retracts were electrified instead of tied down in the extended position, the tail gear doors had been installed and the wing was short a few .50 caliber guns but otherwise just like the last time it flew.  The difference being that last time it flew I was coming off of about 10 successful flights, not the off-field landing that caused the need for a new wing in the first place.  Also that was toward the end of last flying season… it seems like a long time since I flew it last and I was having my doubts.  Not about the plane of course, but the pilot was another matter.

There were lots of questions bouncing around in my head.  Did I remember how to land this bird?  Which switch was the kill and which retracts and which one just made Tim salute??  Here are pictures from the two evening flights.  (All pictures courtesy of Steve Howard)

Tail up and just about to lift:

IMG_5290

First pass with wheels still down…

IMG_5294

A few passes later… checking to see if the gear retracted as planned.  Looks good and you can even see the green “ignition on” indicator light!

IMG_5302

Then, of course, a high speed pass was called for.  After all, it hadn’t ever been this aerodynamically clean before!

IMG_5307

And finally, you have to do a photo pass!  You can see the rudder working in this shot.

IMG_5318

In all, two very successful flights.  There is a laundry list of issues to address.  First the right gear is rotated a bit outboard, causing a right turn as the plane slows to a moderate speed after landing.  Also, on the second flight the right main gear door got caught so the right main would not immediately come down!  I considered belly landing (ouch… ouch… ouch…) but a few cycles freed it up and landing was fairly uneventful after that.  The tail gear got caught a couple times going up and down.  Going to have to find a way to self center that when the cables that steer it go slack during retraction…  Later, also realized that a couple of cowl screws need some attention.  The inserts seem to be pulling out.  Perhaps from vibration where the exhaust rubs the cowl.  Seemed like with the gear up the plane wanted to climb!?  Just from a cleaner airfoil  or what I’m not certain but may have to mix some down with the gear up position to smooth that out.  A crop of small issues like this always seems to occur after the first flight or two so back to the shop for this bird.  All in all, I’m calling it a win with the retracts performing a bit better on ground handling and shock absorption than I expected them to.

Once all that is cleaned up I can install the guns back in the wings and do some other cosmetic work on the tail gear door hinges (white is not a good color for those).  The landing gear door blocks on the mains are natural wood color at the moment also.  Those will get some paint as well.  I’d really like to get a half dozen more flights before the big show on the 27th.  If the weather cooperates this week I hope to be able to be show ready by then.

Parkzone T-28 – My 3rd

I picked up a new PZ T-28 to replace the one I retired a couple months back.  I started having motor issues and had at least one servo starting to chatter, plus the foam was showing a lot of wear.  Additionally it was the US Air Force color scheme which is beautiful up close but very hard to see under anything but perfect lighting conditions.  I like to fly this plane near dusk and sometimes far up and out at times and poor visibility is an unnecessary limiting factor so I had been wishing to get back to the Navy scheme since about 2 days after I bought the last one!

Since I was pulling a new ARF out of the box anyway I thought I’d post some comments.  First, it seems that PZ really knows how to pack an airplane.  The packaging kept the plane very secure and I found no dents or dings at all.  As you can see here, its very nicely packed.

2014-06-12 19.27.56

Second, the manual (which I didn’t need, since I’d done this twice before) is well written, apparently by a native US/English speaking person (at least the US/English portion, I can’t comment on the rest of the languages) which I find refreshing compared to some I’ve seen.  No offense intended to those who are native speakers of other languages but I would expect a product sold in a particular country should have a manual that is written clearly in the native tongue of that land.  Everything seemed to be present and accounted for so assembly was pretty quick.

Looking the airplane over there are some drawbacks.  The paint job suffered from a bit of over spray and the decals have quite a few wrinkles and bubbles.  While I still like the overall look of the airplane, it could look better with a bit more care in production.  Here is an example.

2014-06-12 20.40.28

That aside, I have now flown the new plane a dozen flights or so and just as I remember it is a hard to beat little airplane.  Somehow it seems to fly bigger than it is.  While not capable of unlimited vertical… no hovering for this bird… the plane has enough power to climb rapidly and quite a bit of aerobatics are within its flight envelope.  Even better, the plane flies super stable (without needing a stabilization system) and can handle a lot more wind than you would imagine for a 2 pound foamy.  I can fly around all day doing knife-edge or simply putt along making wide sweeping turns and making low passes and it will do either equally well.  It just flies great.  It also will fly with a wide variety of battery packs.  I’ve flown them with everything from 1500-2200 3S packs from 15C to 45C discharge rates (static testing showed about 14A, so 15C is sufficient) and any of them will work.  Lower capacity batteries which are lighter and high C rated packs improve performance but the lower end (cheaper) batteries work well and keep costs down so suit yourself!

In the past I had typically hand launched the T-28 as the small wheels are not always conducive to upright landings and smooth takeoffs.  I have been a proponent of getting rid of the wheels from the beginning as it also lightens the plane up a bit… always good in an airplane that doesn’t have unlimited vertical anyway.  This time, however, I decided to get back to some wheels takeoff and landings so decided to put them on.  They were a problem on our grass field.  Not intolerable but occasional flip overs and difficulty taking off with anything less than full throttle and full up elevator.  I like a nice easy takeoff and upright landings so I recently changed them out for some Dubro lightweight wheels that I’ve seen others use on the other similar size PZ aircraft.  Here is a comparison of the old (smaller) wheels and the newer, larger set. (Dubro 250MS)

2014-06-17 20.31.20

Here is the complete set installed.  The existing axle caps unscrew and so can be reused but I did need some wheel collars to add inside the wheels to keep them from rubbing the wires.  I also had to drill the wheels out to 7/64ths to fit the wire axles.

 

2014-06-17 20.35.04

I flew at the local field using these the other day and it really makes a difference.  Much easier to roll on the grass and landing went great.  The nose occasionally will dip as the landing gear bends back but not a big issue and I think extending the nose gear just bit will help with that as well.

One final construction note.  I have noticed in the past that the wing tends to rock just a bit when installed, even with the machine screw at the front nice and tight.  In order to keep the wing snug, I add some wing saddle tape to the body before I install it.  This tightens things up remarkably.

Since I had an extra Telemetry receiver lying around….  I had to install it, and an altitude module, and… well I’m still working on the rest!  Don’t know how long I’ll leave it in there but it’s fun to gather some data.

 

Xion Wing Lock – Pt. 2

Last weekend at the field during the IMAC contest I lost one of the cams and the washer on the port wing of my Slick.  No big deal really… I have clips on my anti rotation pins on each wing so I needed a click of aileron trim and all was fine.  After the flight when I went looking for the reason I spotted the wing gap and on investigation found that the cam and washer were gone and the stud had rotated out a bit.  I didn’t have my spare so that wing went back to the nylon bolt for the rest of the day.

So what happened?  While it is impossible to tell for sure, I believe the problem was rooted in not seating the wing down snug against the body.  So when I locked the cam down it pulled the wing in a bit but not enough to put pressure against the cam and therefore with some vibration the cam escaped.  Maybe the stud rotated enough to further loosen as well.  Possibly contributing to this is that I have not glued the washers down inside the body either… perhaps if I had the slack in the system would not have been enough to allow the cam to escape??

The only other issue I can see is that perhaps the stud managed to pull out of the blind nut embedded in the wing root.  I am really not fond of blind nuts in any case.  I find most of them to be ill fitting/loose.  When used in conjunction with a standard bolt there just seems to be a lot of play and I have seen a bolt manage to walk itself out a thread or two before without rotating at all because of vibration and slop.

I have continued to use the system through another 6 flights or so and so far have not had a sign of any movement.  I may add some plumbers tape to the studs to cut down on “rattle” between the studs and the blind nuts before my next trip to the field.  Otherwise I will keep with it and see how it goes.

(Don’t recommend these anymore… see part 3)