Discussion:
Li Poly batteries, fantastic
(too old to reply)
Wan
2004-02-12 05:34:24 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

In only a few months since I've been introduced to Li Poly batteries,
the developments in Lithium Polymer batteries grew in leaps and
bounds. Please witness the following specs and prices;

2 series, 8.5amp (nominal) li-poly 850mah 7.4 volt pack $29.28

3 series, 11amp (nominal) li-poly 1100mah 11.1 volt pack $53.52

2S3P, 33amp (nominal) li-poly 3300mah 7.4 volt pack $116.64

2600-4S4P, 104amp (nominal) li-poly 10400mah 14.8 volt pack $465.92

10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60

These people make packs on order and have a huge list. I have only a
partial list here. Perhaps some of you already knew about this, but I
could paste their web site from which this info was derived if it's
not unethical to advertise, but not for me?

Wan
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-12 11:54:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wan
Hi,
In only a few months since I've been introduced to Li Poly batteries,
the developments in Lithium Polymer batteries grew in leaps and
bounds. Please witness the following specs and prices;
2 series, 8.5amp (nominal) li-poly 850mah 7.4 volt pack $29.28
3 series, 11amp (nominal) li-poly 1100mah 11.1 volt pack $53.52
2S3P, 33amp (nominal) li-poly 3300mah 7.4 volt pack $116.64
2600-4S4P, 104amp (nominal) li-poly 10400mah 14.8 volt pack $465.92
10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
These people make packs on order and have a huge list. I have only a
partial list here. Perhaps some of you already knew about this, but I
could paste their web site from which this info was derived if it's
not unethical to advertise, but not for me?
Wan
try www.cheapbatterypacks.com
Wan
2004-02-12 21:52:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Wan
Hi,
In only a few months since I've been introduced to Li Poly batteries,
the developments in Lithium Polymer batteries grew in leaps and
bounds. Please witness the following specs and prices;
2 series, 8.5amp (nominal) li-poly 850mah 7.4 volt pack $29.28
3 series, 11amp (nominal) li-poly 1100mah 11.1 volt pack $53.52
2S3P, 33amp (nominal) li-poly 3300mah 7.4 volt pack $116.64
2600-4S4P, 104amp (nominal) li-poly 10400mah 14.8 volt pack $465.92
10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
These people make packs on order and have a huge list. I have only a
partial list here. Perhaps some of you already knew about this, but I
could paste their web site from which this info was derived if it's
not unethical to advertise, but not for me?
Wan
try www.cheapbatterypacks.com
I checked into your web site and I believe the batteries there are
basically of the smaller types, right? See if this is not more
comprehensive?

http://www.tanicpacks.com/BatteryListing.htm
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-13 10:33:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wan
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Wan
Hi,
In only a few months since I've been introduced to Li Poly batteries,
the developments in Lithium Polymer batteries grew in leaps and
bounds. Please witness the following specs and prices;
2 series, 8.5amp (nominal) li-poly 850mah 7.4 volt pack $29.28
3 series, 11amp (nominal) li-poly 1100mah 11.1 volt pack $53.52
2S3P, 33amp (nominal) li-poly 3300mah 7.4 volt pack $116.64
2600-4S4P, 104amp (nominal) li-poly 10400mah 14.8 volt pack $465.92
10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
These people make packs on order and have a huge list. I have only a
partial list here. Perhaps some of you already knew about this, but I
could paste their web site from which this info was derived if it's
not unethical to advertise, but not for me?
Wan
try www.cheapbatterypacks.com
I checked into your web site
Not mine I assure you.

and I believe the batteries there are
Post by Wan
basically of the smaller types, right? See if this is not more
comprehensive?
http://www.tanicpacks.com/BatteryListing.htm
Tanics are also very good cells and have had a lot of positive feedback
on teh E-zone.

Some say they are indeed the same cells as the Irates.

I don't think you will be disappointed with either.
Wan
2004-02-13 20:06:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Wan
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Wan
Hi,
In only a few months since I've been introduced to Li Poly batteries,
the developments in Lithium Polymer batteries grew in leaps and
bounds. Please witness the following specs and prices;
2 series, 8.5amp (nominal) li-poly 850mah 7.4 volt pack $29.28
3 series, 11amp (nominal) li-poly 1100mah 11.1 volt pack $53.52
2S3P, 33amp (nominal) li-poly 3300mah 7.4 volt pack $116.64
2600-4S4P, 104amp (nominal) li-poly 10400mah 14.8 volt pack $465.92
10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
These people make packs on order and have a huge list. I have only a
partial list here. Perhaps some of you already knew about this, but I
could paste their web site from which this info was derived if it's
not unethical to advertise, but not for me?
Wan
try www.cheapbatterypacks.com
I checked into your web site
Not mine I assure you.
and I believe the batteries there are
Post by Wan
basically of the smaller types, right? See if this is not more
comprehensive?
http://www.tanicpacks.com/BatteryListing.htm
Tanics are also very good cells and have had a lot of positive feedback
on teh E-zone.
Some say they are indeed the same cells as the Irates.
I don't think you will be disappointed with either.
I should have said the website you presented. Thanks. Perhaps you may
have done some testing on these batteries?

It's just that I am awed by the rapid progress made in the field of
batteries. Who knows what else technology may bring forth?

Wan
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-13 21:49:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wan
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Wan
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Wan
Hi,
In only a few months since I've been introduced to Li Poly batteries,
the developments in Lithium Polymer batteries grew in leaps and
bounds. Please witness the following specs and prices;
2 series, 8.5amp (nominal) li-poly 850mah 7.4 volt pack $29.28
3 series, 11amp (nominal) li-poly 1100mah 11.1 volt pack $53.52
2S3P, 33amp (nominal) li-poly 3300mah 7.4 volt pack $116.64
2600-4S4P, 104amp (nominal) li-poly 10400mah 14.8 volt pack $465.92
10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
These people make packs on order and have a huge list. I have only a
partial list here. Perhaps some of you already knew about this, but I
could paste their web site from which this info was derived if it's
not unethical to advertise, but not for me?
Wan
try www.cheapbatterypacks.com
I checked into your web site
Not mine I assure you.
and I believe the batteries there are
Post by Wan
basically of the smaller types, right? See if this is not more
comprehensive?
http://www.tanicpacks.com/BatteryListing.htm
Tanics are also very good cells and have had a lot of positive feedback
on teh E-zone.
Some say they are indeed the same cells as the Irates.
I don't think you will be disappointed with either.
I should have said the website you presented. Thanks. Perhaps you may
have done some testing on these batteries?
It's just that I am awed by the rapid progress made in the field of
batteries. Who knows what else technology may bring forth?
The cells are good enough: More work needs to be done to make them less
l=iable to explode under abuse, and to make theme cheaper.
Post by Wan
Wan
Doug McLaren
2004-02-13 23:46:09 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@posting.google.com>,
Wan <***@toast.net> wrote:

| 10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60

And in case somebody wasn't paying attention, this is exactly why we
don't see many large electrics yet.

This battery pack puts out up to 2900 watts, or 3.8 HP.

This would be comparable to an OS FX 1.6 engine, which puts out up to
3.7 HP. And costs $270.

This battery pack will put out that much power for 6 minutes *at best*
(since it's a 10C discharge rate.)

And this is just the battery pack -- there's no ESC, no motor (with
this much money going inot just one battery pack, it's silly not to
get the best brushless motor you can find. And of course, it won't be
100% efficient, reducing the actual power you get.) You're looking at
many hundreds of dollars more for that.

And of course, you usually want at least two battery packs ... the
costs add up very fast. Some say that it all evens out in the end,
that you're essentially buying all your fuel up front. There's some
truth to that, but it still seems that large electrics still cost a
lot more, both up front and over all.

The `sweet spot' for electrics is still the Speed 400 and smaller
sizes. Once you get larger, the price goes WAY up. If you double the
power, you basically double the price. (Compare this to glow, where
if you double the power, you add maybe 20% to the cost.)

That said, I bought some Li-poly packs for my smaller electrics, a XE2
with an Astroflight 020, and an Electrifly with a geared Speed 400.
Both got two cell packs, the first was a Tanic 2200 pack, and the
second a 1700 mAh pack of some sort. They're quite nice, though I
wish I had a three cell pack in the XE2 -- it has less power now, but
a lot more duration.

Someday (hopefully soon!) these batteries will come way down in price.
That will be a very good thing!
--
Doug McLaren, ***@frenzy.com
Don't spend two dollars to dry clean a shirt. Donate it to the
Salvation Army instead. They'll clean it and put it on a hanger. Next
morning buy it back for seventy-five cents. --William Coronel
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-14 00:55:06 UTC
Permalink
I am also waiting for the cost to come down. The fuel arguement is only
valid when thinking long term. I don't know anyone who paid for all the gas
their car would use at the time they bought the car.

Another thing to consider is the charger for such battery beasts!
Post by Doug McLaren
| 10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
And in case somebody wasn't paying attention, this is exactly why we
don't see many large electrics yet.
This battery pack puts out up to 2900 watts, or 3.8 HP.
This would be comparable to an OS FX 1.6 engine, which puts out up to
3.7 HP. And costs $270.
This battery pack will put out that much power for 6 minutes *at best*
(since it's a 10C discharge rate.)
And this is just the battery pack -- there's no ESC, no motor (with
this much money going inot just one battery pack, it's silly not to
get the best brushless motor you can find. And of course, it won't be
100% efficient, reducing the actual power you get.) You're looking at
many hundreds of dollars more for that.
And of course, you usually want at least two battery packs ... the
costs add up very fast. Some say that it all evens out in the end,
that you're essentially buying all your fuel up front. There's some
truth to that, but it still seems that large electrics still cost a
lot more, both up front and over all.
The `sweet spot' for electrics is still the Speed 400 and smaller
sizes. Once you get larger, the price goes WAY up. If you double the
power, you basically double the price. (Compare this to glow, where
if you double the power, you add maybe 20% to the cost.)
That said, I bought some Li-poly packs for my smaller electrics, a XE2
with an Astroflight 020, and an Electrifly with a geared Speed 400.
Both got two cell packs, the first was a Tanic 2200 pack, and the
second a 1700 mAh pack of some sort. They're quite nice, though I
wish I had a three cell pack in the XE2 -- it has less power now, but
a lot more duration.
Someday (hopefully soon!) these batteries will come way down in price.
That will be a very good thing!
--
Don't spend two dollars to dry clean a shirt. Donate it to the
Salvation Army instead. They'll clean it and put it on a hanger. Next
morning buy it back for seventy-five cents. --William Coronel
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-14 03:05:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
I am also waiting for the cost to come down. The fuel arguement is only
valid when thinking long term. I don't know anyone who paid for all the gas
their car would use at the time they bought the car.
Heck, not many people pay for the car upfront!

Lease those lithiums. Theres a new business oopportinity for you Paul!
Post by Paul McIntosh
Another thing to consider is the charger for such battery beasts!
Not particularly hard to engineer. 8A at 40V or so.
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-14 19:54:08 UTC
Permalink
The point is, you still have to pay for all the power up front with
electrics. That is what's keeping them in the minority so far. How many
people would even start glow if they had to pay for 100 gallons of fuel
every time they thought about a new plane?
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
I am also waiting for the cost to come down. The fuel arguement is only
valid when thinking long term. I don't know anyone who paid for all the gas
their car would use at the time they bought the car.
Heck, not many people pay for the car upfront!
Lease those lithiums. Theres a new business oopportinity for you Paul!
Post by Paul McIntosh
Another thing to consider is the charger for such battery beasts!
Not particularly hard to engineer. 8A at 40V or so.
Wan
2004-02-14 23:54:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
The point is, you still have to pay for all the power up front with
electrics. That is what's keeping them in the minority so far. How many
people would even start glow if they had to pay for 100 gallons of fuel
every time they thought about a new plane?
Paul, you know that the same battery pack may be used in different
planes, don't you? Then you would not have to think about paying for
100 gallons of fuel each time you want a new plane.

I know you have a lot more experience with model planes than I, but I
still believe electrics are do-able now cost wise. Witness the
hundreds of electric flyers whose .40 to .60 sized planes that are
performing as well and flying even longer than some gas powered planes
now.

With my limited experience on Li Poly, I'm hoping somebody would be
able to illustrate my point.

Wan
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
I am also waiting for the cost to come down. The fuel arguement is only
valid when thinking long term. I don't know anyone who paid for all the
gas
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
their car would use at the time they bought the car.
Heck, not many people pay for the car upfront!
Lease those lithiums. Theres a new business oopportinity for you Paul!
Post by Paul McIntosh
Another thing to consider is the charger for such battery beasts!
Not particularly hard to engineer. 8A at 40V or so.
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-15 00:16:24 UTC
Permalink
Wan,

I completely believe that electrics will continue to grow in popularity, but
not become dominant until something is done about the entry fee. You can
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under $250.
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc. To get equivalent
performance with electrics still costs much more. Some of the examples here
talk about near $1000 just for one battery which has the potential for
performance in the 1.5 glow power range. Add in the cost of motor, speed
controller and charger! And yo have ONE flight. Want two? Wait while your
battery charges or spend another $1000 for a second battery.

Electrics are getting there, but are still hampered by cost in anything over
the speed 400 range.
Post by Wan
Post by Paul McIntosh
The point is, you still have to pay for all the power up front with
electrics. That is what's keeping them in the minority so far. How many
people would even start glow if they had to pay for 100 gallons of fuel
every time they thought about a new plane?
Paul, you know that the same battery pack may be used in different
planes, don't you? Then you would not have to think about paying for
100 gallons of fuel each time you want a new plane.
I know you have a lot more experience with model planes than I, but I
still believe electrics are do-able now cost wise. Witness the
hundreds of electric flyers whose .40 to .60 sized planes that are
performing as well and flying even longer than some gas powered planes
now.
With my limited experience on Li Poly, I'm hoping somebody would be
able to illustrate my point.
Wan
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
I am also waiting for the cost to come down. The fuel arguement is only
valid when thinking long term. I don't know anyone who paid for all the
gas
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
their car would use at the time they bought the car.
Heck, not many people pay for the car upfront!
Lease those lithiums. Theres a new business oopportinity for you Paul!
Post by Paul McIntosh
Another thing to consider is the charger for such battery beasts!
Not particularly hard to engineer. 8A at 40V or so.
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-15 00:42:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
Wan,
I completely believe that electrics will continue to grow in popularity, but
not become dominant until something is done about the entry fee. You can
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under $250.
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc.
You cam get a ready to go firebird for under $100. Its perfectly
possible to get an sub 250 dollar leccy plane, it just isn't '40' sized.

THAT is what 'entry level' leccy flyers start with.

They can always get greased up later on...:-)
MikeF
2004-02-15 11:31:21 UTC
Permalink
Again, I couldnt be happier with my electric Slowstick.
Mind you, we are talking about ENTRY level here, although two or more expert pilots with
slowsticks and a few 6 foot combat streamers could have hours of fun (i sure do) - im
getting away from the point.
Screw the firebirds, they really do look like wal-mart toys. Not that the SS looks
beautiful, but at least it is Hobby Grade stuff.

Logically, one would 'enter' the hobby with an inexpensive electric foamie (such as i did)
Move on to a bigger/faster/sportier electric OR a .40 trainer plane, depending on outside
factors like your proximity to a club, LHS stock, luck with the electrics, etc.
From there, you can either go with an even bigger electric, or a sportier glow plane -
this is where the cost of electric really starts getting silly.

Ive learned so much about handling a plane in a few short months with the SS - i couldnt
imagine trying to learn the 'old-fashioned' way with a balsa/glow trainer from the start.
I did, however, just apply to the AMA, and im looking for a local club. Hopefully, i can
hook up with somebody there who can help me learn to fly this old Eaglet that was donated
to me. It should be easy to get used to, but i dont wanna take a chance with crashing a
balsa/glow plane first time out.
Mike
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Wan,
I completely believe that electrics will continue to grow in popularity, but
not become dominant until something is done about the entry fee. You can
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under $250.
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc.
You cam get a ready to go firebird for under $100. Its perfectly
possible to get an sub 250 dollar leccy plane, it just isn't '40' sized.
THAT is what 'entry level' leccy flyers start with.
They can always get greased up later on...:-)
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-15 11:58:17 UTC
Permalink
You are comparing apples to oranges AGAIN.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Wan,
I completely believe that electrics will continue to grow in popularity, but
not become dominant until something is done about the entry fee. You can
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under $250.
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc.
You cam get a ready to go firebird for under $100. Its perfectly
possible to get an sub 250 dollar leccy plane, it just isn't '40' sized.
THAT is what 'entry level' leccy flyers start with.
They can always get greased up later on...:-)
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-16 00:23:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
You are comparing apples to oranges AGAIN.
No, I was pointing out that you were, AGAIN.
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Wan,
I completely believe that electrics will continue to grow in popularity,
but
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
not become dominant until something is done about the entry fee. You
can
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under
$250.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc.
You cam get a ready to go firebird for under $100. Its perfectly
possible to get an sub 250 dollar leccy plane, it just isn't '40' sized.
THAT is what 'entry level' leccy flyers start with.
They can always get greased up later on...:-)
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-16 12:27:28 UTC
Permalink
Maybe you can't handle anything above a Firebird so you think it is the same
as a .50 powered plane.

That is the only reason I can see for calling them the same thing. You only
want to compare price because that is the issue. You can't get equivalent
performance in anyting over speed 400 without the price going way over that
of glow. And, you have to consider ALL of the costs, not just the plane and
batteries,
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
You are comparing apples to oranges AGAIN.
No, I was pointing out that you were, AGAIN.
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Wan,
I completely believe that electrics will continue to grow in popularity,
but
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
not become dominant until something is done about the entry fee. You
can
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under
$250.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc.
You cam get a ready to go firebird for under $100. Its perfectly
possible to get an sub 250 dollar leccy plane, it just isn't '40' sized.
THAT is what 'entry level' leccy flyers start with.
They can always get greased up later on...:-)
Jim Lilly
2004-02-15 01:52:34 UTC
Permalink
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
You can
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under $250.
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc. To get equivalent
performance with electrics still costs much more.
Not very accurate. Most entry level EP's are as you say, except some like
the Aerobird Challenger.

You can get a HobbyZone Aerobird Challenger for around $150.00 which
includes EVERYTHING needed to get started & is far more durable & forgiving
than most glow trainers. I fly mine when some glow's think it's too windy &
fail to show up at the field. The ABC even comes with 2 flight modes, so
beginners & advanced pilots can have fun with them. Put in the optional 7
cell/900 mAh battery pack ($30.00 avg) & it screams!
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-15 11:59:07 UTC
Permalink
Like TNP, you are comparing apples to oranges. The entry fee I was talking
about is not entry LEVEL.
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
You can
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under $250.
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc. To get equivalent
performance with electrics still costs much more.
Not very accurate. Most entry level EP's are as you say, except some like
the Aerobird Challenger.
You can get a HobbyZone Aerobird Challenger for around $150.00 which
includes EVERYTHING needed to get started & is far more durable & forgiving
than most glow trainers. I fly mine when some glow's think it's too windy &
fail to show up at the field. The ABC even comes with 2 flight modes, so
beginners & advanced pilots can have fun with them. Put in the optional 7
cell/900 mAh battery pack ($30.00 avg) & it screams!
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Jim Lilly
2004-02-15 14:54:27 UTC
Permalink
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
Like TNP, you are comparing apples to oranges. The entry fee I was talking
about is not entry LEVEL.
That's the whole point here, entry level costs of glow vs electric.

This time you're off base, as my comparison *IS* entry level. No two ways
about it. My example comes complete & includes everything needed to get
airborne. A simple head to head comparison of what it takes to start in EP.
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-16 00:13:16 UTC
Permalink
I was NOT TALKING ENTRY LEVEL AND NEITHER WAS ANYONE BUT YOU TWO.

When I say entry fee, I mean the cost to get a specific level of airplane to
the flying field, in flight ready condition. You guys read something into
it that I did not type.
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
Like TNP, you are comparing apples to oranges. The entry fee I was talking
about is not entry LEVEL.
That's the whole point here, entry level costs of glow vs electric.
This time you're off base, as my comparison *IS* entry level. No two ways
about it. My example comes complete & includes everything needed to get
airborne. A simple head to head comparison of what it takes to start in EP.
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Jim Lilly
2004-02-16 02:54:29 UTC
Permalink
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
When I say entry fee, I mean the cost to get a specific level of airplane to
the flying field, in flight ready condition.
Exactly what I countered you with in my reply about the ABC, exactly the same
thing.

You seem to have selective memory in remembering only what supplements your
position. You stated;
Post by Paul McIntosh
You can
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under $250.
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc. To get equivalent
performance with electrics still costs much more.
To which my statement about the ABC was a direct & clear counter claim
supporting EP, AND at a cheaper cost as well.
Post by Paul McIntosh
You guys read something into
it that I did not type.
Not true, as shown above in your very own words.
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-16 00:30:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
Like TNP, you are comparing apples to oranges. The entry fee I was talking
about is not entry LEVEL.
That's the whole point here, entry level costs of glow vs electric.
This time you're off base, as my comparison *IS* entry level. No two ways
about it. My example comes complete & includes everything needed to get
airborne. A simple head to head comparison of what it takes to start in EP.
Ah, but for Paul, the only thing that counts is an EP that will turn
EXACTLY the same prop as his 40 engines at EXACTLY the same RPM, and
cost less.

Never mind that that is probably the most stupid and wasteful way to
operate an E-plane, that is all he understands and you can't teach old
dogs new tricks. :-)
Post by Jim Lilly
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Jim Lilly
2004-02-16 03:24:28 UTC
Permalink
TNP,

It's more an issue of the 'old guard' (some die hard glow, but not all
)seeing EP as encroaching on their turf. There's some valid arguments
against EP, as cost comparisons above a certain level show. Also, many
early EP planes were just plain junk. Not so now.

With 10, 20, 30, 40 or more years as glow only fliers, EP's recent rise
up to, and now leveling off with glow performance, isn't something some
will openly embrace.

I like both my glow's & EP. I just don't have a number of years on glow
only, so I'm not inclined to be anti either way. I will not however,
let erroneous claims such as Paul tries making, to go unchallenged.

One old timer in our club has flown for around 30+ years. He can fly
his glow's inverted about 3-4' off the deck, as good as anyone does
with theirs right side up. His flying & building abilities are
astounding! He's only this Winter, decided to build his very first EP
plane, somewhat due to what my EP - ABC and other EP planes are now
capable of.

There's room for both. We just don't need misinformation.
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-16 10:28:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Lilly
There's room for both. We just don't need misinformation.
I agree whole heartedly.

If its a question of a novice gettng some kit and going flying, there is
not much cost difference between E-fight and a basic glo trainer. The
e-plane will be smaller, that's all.

In a poll on the e-zone recently, that vast majority of E-flyers were
self taught. They got spomehing and bunged it in the air, it bounced,
they bunged it again, and eventually wobbled their way to some sort of
piloting skill.

Much as I did. Unless you have access to a friendly club, its a lot
easier to learn that way. The thought of bunging the average 40 trainer
in the air and bouncing it scares the pants off me. They really do NEED
qualified instruction.

After that tho, its all a matter of taste.

The big delusion is that flying model aircraft is all about what our
average glo pilot thinks it is all about.

It isn't. Thats just where it has ended up. In my youth it was all about
stick and tissue models and rubber bands, or chasing diesel powered old
timers across acres of countryside. The fun was in the building and the
challenge of actually getting it in the air.

E-flight is a whole new ball game with different rules. Enjoy it for
what it is, don't try and pretend its just a different sort of .40
engine to stick in the same model and get identical behaviour.
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-16 12:19:58 UTC
Permalink
Bullshit. Read my posts.
Post by Jim Lilly
TNP,
It's more an issue of the 'old guard' (some die hard glow, but not all
)seeing EP as encroaching on their turf. There's some valid arguments
against EP, as cost comparisons above a certain level show. Also, many
early EP planes were just plain junk. Not so now.
With 10, 20, 30, 40 or more years as glow only fliers, EP's recent rise
up to, and now leveling off with glow performance, isn't something some
will openly embrace.
I like both my glow's & EP. I just don't have a number of years on glow
only, so I'm not inclined to be anti either way. I will not however,
let erroneous claims such as Paul tries making, to go unchallenged.
One old timer in our club has flown for around 30+ years. He can fly
his glow's inverted about 3-4' off the deck, as good as anyone does
with theirs right side up. His flying & building abilities are
astounding! He's only this Winter, decided to build his very first EP
plane, somewhat due to what my EP - ABC and other EP planes are now
capable of.
There's room for both. We just don't need misinformation.
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Jim Lilly
2004-02-16 23:57:09 UTC
Permalink
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
Bullshit. Read my posts.
Regarding the blatant misinformation you're spewing about EP, yep, THAT
is bullshit. Your shade tree/arm chair misinformational approach to EP,
shows you truly are out of your element with them.

You DO know a lot about R/C aircraft overall & glow's in particular,
but regarding accurate knowledge about EP your way out in left field.
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-17 07:44:54 UTC
Permalink
So, you are saying that the equivalent to a .50 glow powered plane in
electrics does NOT cost significant;y more for the same performance? PROVE
IT rather than spewing. Everyone else here has given their prices for their
equipment and none of them have shown it to be the case.
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
Bullshit. Read my posts.
Regarding the blatant misinformation you're spewing about EP, yep, THAT
is bullshit. Your shade tree/arm chair misinformational approach to EP,
shows you truly are out of your element with them.
You DO know a lot about R/C aircraft overall & glow's in particular,
but regarding accurate knowledge about EP your way out in left field.
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Jim Lilly
2004-02-17 11:50:31 UTC
Permalink
Paul,

I already made my statements on it. YOU just can't accept the facts.

Message-ID: <***@comcast.net>

-and-

Message-ID: <***@comcast.net>
Based by your very own 'entry fee' (aka; entry level) criteria.
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
mike tully
2004-02-17 13:45:36 UTC
Permalink
Some use this forum to ask questions and learn.
Some are here to impart their wisdom and help others.
Some just want to spread the joy that the hobby brings them.
Then there are those who's lives must be so miserable that they come here to
pick fights.
Don't take the bait!
It is fun to sit on the sidelines and watch though..
Jim Lilly
2004-02-17 18:25:07 UTC
Permalink
Mike,
Post by mike tully
Don't take the bait!
It is fun to sit on the sidelines and watch though..
Very true!

A wise person once said; "Never have a battle of wits with an un-armed
opponent." IOW; for me, Paul just isn't up to the challenge any more.
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Bob
2004-02-17 18:51:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Lilly
Mike,
Post by mike tully
Don't take the bait!
It is fun to sit on the sidelines and watch though..
Very true!
A wise person once said; "Never have a battle of wits with an un-armed
opponent." IOW; for me, Paul just isn't up to the challenge any more.
An even wiser person said .....

Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and always win
with experience....
Post by Jim Lilly
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-17 21:10:00 UTC
Permalink
Because you CAN'T win. You , like TNP, have to shift the rules to suit your
statements. C'mon, show the post where I said that entry LEVEL EP planes
cost more than what you said. Don't add your own bias to it, just show the
post.
Post by Jim Lilly
Mike,
Post by mike tully
Don't take the bait!
It is fun to sit on the sidelines and watch though..
Very true!
A wise person once said; "Never have a battle of wits with an un-armed
opponent." IOW; for me, Paul just isn't up to the challenge any more.
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-18 01:47:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
Because you CAN'T win. You , like TNP, have to shift the rules to suit your
statements. C'mon, show the post where I said that entry LEVEL EP planes
cost more than what you said. Don't add your own bias to it, just show the
post.
Tell you what Paul, I'll sell you an entry to my house for a million
bucks, but I know cos its you, I'll have to charge you another hundred
for the ladder you will need to come in by the upstairs window.
Bob
2004-02-18 03:59:17 UTC
Permalink
Hell, will you guys go rent a cheap motel room and get this over with!
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Because you CAN'T win. You , like TNP, have to shift the rules to suit your
statements. C'mon, show the post where I said that entry LEVEL EP planes
cost more than what you said. Don't add your own bias to it, just show the
post.
Tell you what Paul, I'll sell you an entry to my house for a million
bucks, but I know cos its you, I'll have to charge you another hundred
for the ladder you will need to come in by the upstairs window.
Wan
2004-02-18 23:23:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by mike tully
Some use this forum to ask questions and learn.
That's what I'm trying to do, let the experienced e-flyers discuss the
merits of electric flight, and learn from them.
Post by mike tully
Some are here to impart their wisdom and help others.
Lots of people on this Usenet do a very good job of helping others
like me to understand the perplexing questions of batteries.
Post by mike tully
Some just want to spread the joy that the hobby brings them.
I have read the enjoyable times of most flyers with their hobby here,
and there wre seldom any mean words.
Post by mike tully
Then there are those who's lives must be so miserable that they come here to pick fights.
It's too bad not all of us just simply accept what a good hobby we
have and enjoy.
Post by mike tully
Don't take the bait!
It's hard for some people to keep from getting mired in heated
arguments.
Post by mike tully
It is fun to sit on the sidelines and watch though..
You have summed up what this site is about, and poetically.

Thank you! Mike,
Wan
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-17 16:49:50 UTC
Permalink
Jim,

LEARN TO READ! I said entry fee NOT entry level. YOU read entry level into
it.
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
I already made my statements on it. YOU just can't accept the facts.
-and-
Based by your very own 'entry fee' (aka; entry level) criteria.
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-18 01:45:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
Jim,
LEARN TO READ! I said entry fee NOT entry level. YOU read entry level into
it.
Strange. Just about avery entry fee I have ever paid takes me stright to
teh entry level.

It must be something to do with the whole pricess of entering things.

Or my dady wasn't rich enough to buy me entry into the boardroom or
something.
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
I already made my statements on it. YOU just can't accept the facts.
-and-
Based by your very own 'entry fee' (aka; entry level) criteria.
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-18 07:03:34 UTC
Permalink
Like I said, you added you own bias to the conversation. Apples to oranges.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Jim,
LEARN TO READ! I said entry fee NOT entry level. YOU read entry level into
it.
Strange. Just about avery entry fee I have ever paid takes me stright to
teh entry level.
It must be something to do with the whole pricess of entering things.
Or my dady wasn't rich enough to buy me entry into the boardroom or
something.
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
I already made my statements on it. YOU just can't accept the facts.
-and-
Based by your very own 'entry fee' (aka; entry level) criteria.
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-16 12:19:37 UTC
Permalink
You can really be a dickhead sometimes. You only want to compare toys to
larger planes to make your point.

Compare like performance instead of justifying price.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
Like TNP, you are comparing apples to oranges. The entry fee I was talking
about is not entry LEVEL.
That's the whole point here, entry level costs of glow vs electric.
This time you're off base, as my comparison *IS* entry level. No two ways
about it. My example comes complete & includes everything needed to get
airborne. A simple head to head comparison of what it takes to start in EP.
Ah, but for Paul, the only thing that counts is an EP that will turn
EXACTLY the same prop as his 40 engines at EXACTLY the same RPM, and
cost less.
Never mind that that is probably the most stupid and wasteful way to
operate an E-plane, that is all he understands and you can't teach old
dogs new tricks. :-)
Post by Jim Lilly
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-16 00:27:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
Like TNP, you are comparing apples to oranges. The entry fee I was talking
about is not entry LEVEL.
I see Paul, so basically following your logic, I have to spend 30bn
dollars on developing some huge piston engines to get what any turbojet
can do?

Or every time I build a new model I have to buy a new transmitter for it?


No, better than that, I have to buty a new truck to take it to the field
in.

Because I didn't have the sense to buy the right truck teh first time
around, or the second, or the third?
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
You can
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under
$250.
Post by Jim Lilly
Post by Paul McIntosh
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc. To get equivalent
performance with electrics still costs much more.
Not very accurate. Most entry level EP's are as you say, except some like
the Aerobird Challenger.
You can get a HobbyZone Aerobird Challenger for around $150.00 which
includes EVERYTHING needed to get started & is far more durable &
forgiving
Post by Jim Lilly
than most glow trainers. I fly mine when some glow's think it's too windy
&
Post by Jim Lilly
fail to show up at the field. The ABC even comes with 2 flight modes, so
beginners & advanced pilots can have fun with them. Put in the optional 7
cell/900 mAh battery pack ($30.00 avg) & it screams!
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-16 12:17:13 UTC
Permalink
Where the hell do you get that analogy from?
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Like TNP, you are comparing apples to oranges. The entry fee I was talking
about is not entry LEVEL.
I see Paul, so basically following your logic, I have to spend 30bn
dollars on developing some huge piston engines to get what any turbojet
can do?
Or every time I build a new model I have to buy a new transmitter for it?
No, better than that, I have to buty a new truck to take it to the field
in.
Because I didn't have the sense to buy the right truck teh first time
around, or the second, or the third?
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
You can
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under
$250.
Post by Jim Lilly
Post by Paul McIntosh
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc. To get equivalent
performance with electrics still costs much more.
Not very accurate. Most entry level EP's are as you say, except some like
the Aerobird Challenger.
You can get a HobbyZone Aerobird Challenger for around $150.00 which
includes EVERYTHING needed to get started & is far more durable &
forgiving
Post by Jim Lilly
than most glow trainers. I fly mine when some glow's think it's too windy
&
Post by Jim Lilly
fail to show up at the field. The ABC even comes with 2 flight modes, so
beginners & advanced pilots can have fun with them. Put in the optional 7
cell/900 mAh battery pack ($30.00 avg) & it screams!
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-16 13:26:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
Where the hell do you get that analogy from?
From oir critcsim of the point I made that one does not buy a new pack
of cells for every aeroplane, in the same way you don't buy a new
transmitter, or a new vehicle to carry it in.
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Like TNP, you are comparing apples to oranges. The entry fee I was
talking
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
about is not entry LEVEL.
I see Paul, so basically following your logic, I have to spend 30bn
dollars on developing some huge piston engines to get what any turbojet
can do?
Or every time I build a new model I have to buy a new transmitter for it?
No, better than that, I have to buty a new truck to take it to the field
in.
Because I didn't have the sense to buy the right truck teh first time
around, or the second, or the third?
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
You can
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under
$250.
Post by Jim Lilly
Post by Paul McIntosh
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc. To get equivalent
performance with electrics still costs much more.
Not very accurate. Most entry level EP's are as you say, except some
like
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by Jim Lilly
the Aerobird Challenger.
You can get a HobbyZone Aerobird Challenger for around $150.00 which
includes EVERYTHING needed to get started & is far more durable &
forgiving
Post by Jim Lilly
than most glow trainers. I fly mine when some glow's think it's too
windy
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
&
Post by Jim Lilly
fail to show up at the field. The ABC even comes with 2 flight modes, so
beginners & advanced pilots can have fun with them. Put in the optional
7
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by Jim Lilly
cell/900 mAh battery pack ($30.00 avg) & it screams!
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Doug McLaren
2004-02-16 14:35:22 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@b.c>, The Natural Philosopher <***@b.c> wrote:

| From oir critcsim of the point I made that one does not buy a new pack
| of cells for every aeroplane

I do indeed buy new packs for most new electric planes I get.

Why? Because most of the time, if I get a new electric plane, it's
rather different than the ones I've already got, so requires a
different battery pack in many cases. I may already have a small slow
flier, and so my next plane would be a E3D plane, and the next might
be a 0.20 sized aerobatic plane. All would have different power
requirements, so would require different battery packs. At least two
for each class of plane.

| in the same way you don't buy a new transmitter, or a new vehicle to
| carry it in.

That analogy is flawed.

My 9c radio has models set up for slow park fliers, 60 sized glow
planes, powered gliders, non powered gliders aerobatic electic planes,
etc. I don't have any giant scale stuff, but it could handle it if I
did.

My vehicle can handle all of these planes as well.

But I don't have any battery packs that can.
--
Doug McLaren, ***@frenzy.com
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him.
-Galileo Galilei
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-16 15:56:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug McLaren
| From oir critcsim of the point I made that one does not buy a new pack
| of cells for every aeroplane
I do indeed buy new packs for most new electric planes I get.
Why? Because most of the time, if I get a new electric plane, it's
rather different than the ones I've already got, so requires a
different battery pack in many cases. I may already have a small slow
flier, and so my next plane would be a E3D plane, and the next might
be a 0.20 sized aerobatic plane. All would have different power
requirements, so would require different battery packs. At least two
for each class of plane.
Well more fool you. I have basically one IPS class pack (15W), one 400
class pack (100W), one 480 class pack (200W) , and will be getting a 600
class pack soon (350W).

Any planes I build will be built around those pack sizes.

So far the most I have spend on a single pack is $66. I estimate the 600
class pack will be around $100.

If you are sane and build blocks of the same cells that can be assembled
into different pack configurations, you can even assemble a 600 class
pack from e.g. three 400 class ones.
Post by Doug McLaren
| in the same way you don't buy a new transmitter, or a new vehicle to
| carry it in.
That analogy is flawed.
My 9c radio has models set up for slow park fliers, 60 sized glow
planes, powered gliders, non powered gliders aerobatic electic planes,
etc. I don't have any giant scale stuff, but it could handle it if I
did.
My vehicle can handle all of these planes as well.
But I don't have any battery packs that can.
Time to draw up a chart and make up some that will then.
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-16 17:52:22 UTC
Permalink
See, no matter what you do, TNP is always smarter and better than you.

Hey, TNP, what do you do if you want to build a plane that DOESN"T match
your current batteries? Settle for something else? Sounds like it.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Doug McLaren
| From oir critcsim of the point I made that one does not buy a new pack
| of cells for every aeroplane
I do indeed buy new packs for most new electric planes I get.
Why? Because most of the time, if I get a new electric plane, it's
rather different than the ones I've already got, so requires a
different battery pack in many cases. I may already have a small slow
flier, and so my next plane would be a E3D plane, and the next might
be a 0.20 sized aerobatic plane. All would have different power
requirements, so would require different battery packs. At least two
for each class of plane.
Well more fool you. I have basically one IPS class pack (15W), one 400
class pack (100W), one 480 class pack (200W) , and will be getting a 600
class pack soon (350W).
Any planes I build will be built around those pack sizes.
So far the most I have spend on a single pack is $66. I estimate the 600
class pack will be around $100.
If you are sane and build blocks of the same cells that can be assembled
into different pack configurations, you can even assemble a 600 class
pack from e.g. three 400 class ones.
Post by Doug McLaren
| in the same way you don't buy a new transmitter, or a new vehicle to
| carry it in.
That analogy is flawed.
My 9c radio has models set up for slow park fliers, 60 sized glow
planes, powered gliders, non powered gliders aerobatic electic planes,
etc. I don't have any giant scale stuff, but it could handle it if I
did.
My vehicle can handle all of these planes as well.
But I don't have any battery packs that can.
Time to draw up a chart and make up some that will then.
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-17 09:04:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
See, no matter what you do, TNP is always smarter and better than you.
True. ;-)
Post by Paul McIntosh
Hey, TNP, what do you do if you want to build a plane that DOESN"T match
your current batteries? Settle for something else? Sounds like it.
Yes. Unless I am SO in love with it that it justifies the expense of
investing ina new pack.

I mean what do YOU do if you only have a 6 channel transmitter, and you
want to build a model that needs more ?
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Doug McLaren
| From oir critcsim of the point I made that one does not buy a new pack
| of cells for every aeroplane
I do indeed buy new packs for most new electric planes I get.
Why? Because most of the time, if I get a new electric plane, it's
rather different than the ones I've already got, so requires a
different battery pack in many cases. I may already have a small slow
flier, and so my next plane would be a E3D plane, and the next might
be a 0.20 sized aerobatic plane. All would have different power
requirements, so would require different battery packs. At least two
for each class of plane.
Well more fool you. I have basically one IPS class pack (15W), one 400
class pack (100W), one 480 class pack (200W) , and will be getting a 600
class pack soon (350W).
Any planes I build will be built around those pack sizes.
So far the most I have spend on a single pack is $66. I estimate the 600
class pack will be around $100.
If you are sane and build blocks of the same cells that can be assembled
into different pack configurations, you can even assemble a 600 class
pack from e.g. three 400 class ones.
Post by Doug McLaren
| in the same way you don't buy a new transmitter, or a new vehicle to
| carry it in.
That analogy is flawed.
My 9c radio has models set up for slow park fliers, 60 sized glow
planes, powered gliders, non powered gliders aerobatic electic planes,
etc. I don't have any giant scale stuff, but it could handle it if I
did.
My vehicle can handle all of these planes as well.
But I don't have any battery packs that can.
Time to draw up a chart and make up some that will then.
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-17 16:48:04 UTC
Permalink
Your battery comparison is more like having a 6 channel radio and having to
buy another one.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
See, no matter what you do, TNP is always smarter and better than you.
True. ;-)
Post by Paul McIntosh
Hey, TNP, what do you do if you want to build a plane that DOESN"T match
your current batteries? Settle for something else? Sounds like it.
Yes. Unless I am SO in love with it that it justifies the expense of
investing ina new pack.
I mean what do YOU do if you only have a 6 channel transmitter, and you
want to build a model that needs more ?
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Doug McLaren
| From oir critcsim of the point I made that one does not buy a new pack
| of cells for every aeroplane
I do indeed buy new packs for most new electric planes I get.
Why? Because most of the time, if I get a new electric plane, it's
rather different than the ones I've already got, so requires a
different battery pack in many cases. I may already have a small slow
flier, and so my next plane would be a E3D plane, and the next might
be a 0.20 sized aerobatic plane. All would have different power
requirements, so would require different battery packs. At least two
for each class of plane.
Well more fool you. I have basically one IPS class pack (15W), one 400
class pack (100W), one 480 class pack (200W) , and will be getting a 600
class pack soon (350W).
Any planes I build will be built around those pack sizes.
So far the most I have spend on a single pack is $66. I estimate the 600
class pack will be around $100.
If you are sane and build blocks of the same cells that can be assembled
into different pack configurations, you can even assemble a 600 class
pack from e.g. three 400 class ones.
Post by Doug McLaren
| in the same way you don't buy a new transmitter, or a new vehicle to
| carry it in.
That analogy is flawed.
My 9c radio has models set up for slow park fliers, 60 sized glow
planes, powered gliders, non powered gliders aerobatic electic planes,
etc. I don't have any giant scale stuff, but it could handle it if I
did.
My vehicle can handle all of these planes as well.
But I don't have any battery packs that can.
Time to draw up a chart and make up some that will then.
Fubar of The HillPeople
2004-02-16 19:30:24 UTC
Permalink
Bingo.
You left out what a PITA it is to bring several of the EP planes that take
diff packs out for a day of flying. Generally took me most of the prior day
spent charging up two packs each for my 400X, Razor, and Yard Bee, each of
which takes a different style or at least layout of pack. Throw in my
Twinstar and I am hosed.
This assumes one charger. Eventually I got a second charger. Still spent
more time at the field re-charging packs than flying. Quite a lot of time
waiting for that little red light to start blinking!
I fly both, but prefer my glow planes for those reasons.
Something else NOBODY takes in to account for the cost of EP:
How much of your electricity bill goes to charging up all those packs? That
aint free!
You can bring a 12v tractor battery or equivalent to the field but that
sucker has to be charged someplace too.
Probably not comparable to the cost of glow fuel, but still a factor that
should be considered as far as the total cost.
I know that all those glowing LEDs in the garage are costing me something...
--
Dan
KE6ERB
AMA605992
I've heard the screams of the vegetables...
http://fubar1.freeservers.com
Post by Doug McLaren
| From oir critcsim of the point I made that one does not buy a new pack
| of cells for every aeroplane
I do indeed buy new packs for most new electric planes I get.
Why? Because most of the time, if I get a new electric plane, it's
rather different than the ones I've already got, so requires a
different battery pack in many cases. I may already have a small slow
flier, and so my next plane would be a E3D plane, and the next might
be a 0.20 sized aerobatic plane. All would have different power
requirements, so would require different battery packs. At least two
for each class of plane.
| in the same way you don't buy a new transmitter, or a new vehicle to
| carry it in.
That analogy is flawed.
My 9c radio has models set up for slow park fliers, 60 sized glow
planes, powered gliders, non powered gliders aerobatic electic planes,
etc. I don't have any giant scale stuff, but it could handle it if I
did.
My vehicle can handle all of these planes as well.
But I don't have any battery packs that can.
--
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him.
-Galileo Galilei
Doug McLaren
2004-02-16 20:31:32 UTC
Permalink
In article <kT8Yb.9436$***@twister.socal.rr.com>,
Fubar of The HillPeople <***@SPAMsocal.rr.com> wrote:

| You left out what a PITA it is to bring several of the EP planes that take
| diff packs out for a day of flying. Generally took me most of the prior day
| spent charging up two packs each for my 400X, Razor, and Yard Bee, each of
| which takes a different style or at least layout of pack. Throw in my
| Twinstar and I am hosed.

Hmm, I never had that much trouble with it. I do have two chargers
though, so that helps.

| This assumes one charger. Eventually I got a second charger. Still spent
| more time at the field re-charging packs than flying.

One reason why I do more slope flying than anything else now. I spend
all my time flying. I usually land because I'm tired of flying after
an hour or so -- not because I'm out of power.

| Something else NOBODY takes in to account for the cost of EP:
| How much of your electricity bill goes to charging up all those packs? That
| aint free!

It's damn cheap. One kilowatt hour costs around $0.10 (it's nowhere
near this simple, but that's pretty close.) So if you've got a plane
with a 500 watt motor (a pretty good sized electric -- yours are more
in the 50-150 watt range except for the Twinstar, for which I have no
idea), that's two hours of full throttle flying for $0.10. Of course,
your batteries and charger aren't 100% efficient, but even with 50%
efficiency it doesn't cost much.

If you're charging from your car, you'll pay for this via reduced fuel
efficiency, but it still won't be much.

| You can bring a 12v tractor battery or equivalent to the field but that
| sucker has to be charged someplace too.
| Probably not comparable to the cost of glow fuel, but still a factor that
| should be considered as far as the total cost.

Not even close.

| I know that all those glowing LEDs in the garage are costing me
| something...

A large number of wal-warts certainly adds up. And they use power
even if your plane isn't plugged into it ...

I don't use those wal-wart chargers much anymore. I just use my fast
chargers as needed.
--
Doug McLaren, ***@frenzy.com
Captain Ahab just has to have his whale, didn't he?
Fubar of The HillPeople
2004-02-16 22:47:45 UTC
Permalink
Well, I knew I was oversimplifying the fuel vs charging cost but the rabid
EP guys act like batteries are recharged by divine intervention or
something.
I only had one charger at the time so with 3 diff battery types X2 there is
quite a lot of time spent with that charger.
My 12v chargers (I now have added a Triton) are run off of my Astron power
supply which would be powering the charger and a cooling fan.
Granted that probably doesnt add up to much but it does (especially here in
So Cal where Bush's energy buddys screwed us) to something.
I agree that sloping is about as close to free as you can get, other than
charging the tx and rx. Another prob here in So Cal is the pyros setting the
cool slope sites on fire, at least those near me.
Looking good wind wise for tomorrow tho so I hope to hit the slope myself!
Gotta maiden my new Mini-Blade.
Wan
2004-02-17 06:57:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
Well, I knew I was oversimplifying the fuel vs charging cost but the rabid
EP guys act like batteries are recharged by divine intervention or
something.
No offense, Fubar, I wasn't about to be posting again, but I looked up
"rabid" and it means "EXTREMELY ZEALOUS, FANATICAL", among other
milder definitions . Isn't it a bit of extremism on your part? Should
we describe the Glow powered guys that way? I think we should be
tolerant toward each other's interests.

I am not favoring one or the other. Each type of flying has it's
place in model aviation. I used to fly a lot, mostly glow power. Now I
am a convert e-flight. But be it slope gliding, racing, or any other
kind of flying, don't you think they add richness to our hobby?

I submit this with due respect of your experience,
Wan
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
I only had one charger at the time so with 3 diff battery types X2 there is
quite a lot of time spent with that charger.
My 12v chargers (I now have added a Triton) are run off of my Astron power
supply which would be powering the charger and a cooling fan.
Granted that probably doesnt add up to much but it does (especially here in
So Cal where Bush's energy buddys screwed us) to something.
I agree that sloping is about as close to free as you can get, other than
charging the tx and rx. Another prob here in So Cal is the pyros setting the
cool slope sites on fire, at least those near me.
Looking good wind wise for tomorrow tho so I hope to hit the slope myself!
Gotta maiden my new Mini-Blade.
Fubar of The HillPeople
2004-02-17 19:34:40 UTC
Permalink
You misunderstood me or I didnt make it clear. I wasnt implying all EP guys
were rabid. Didnt mean to anyway. I was referring to that section of the EP
guys that ARE rabid. Same as that segment of the Glow camp that is also
rabid.There are extremists on both sides of any discussion.
I simply meant that group that claims that once you buy a motor and battery,
its nothing but free gravy from then on not like those evil slimers that
gulp gallons upon gallons of fuel to the point that you end up in the poor
house.
Dats all. :-)
Post by Wan
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
Well, I knew I was oversimplifying the fuel vs charging cost but the rabid
EP guys act like batteries are recharged by divine intervention or
something.
No offense, Fubar, I wasn't about to be posting again, but I looked up
"rabid" and it means "EXTREMELY ZEALOUS, FANATICAL", among other
milder definitions . Isn't it a bit of extremism on your part? Should
we describe the Glow powered guys that way? I think we should be
tolerant toward each other's interests.
I am not favoring one or the other. Each type of flying has it's
place in model aviation. I used to fly a lot, mostly glow power. Now I
am a convert e-flight. But be it slope gliding, racing, or any other
kind of flying, don't you think they add richness to our hobby?
I submit this with due respect of your experience,
Wan
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-18 01:46:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
You misunderstood me or I didnt make it clear. I wasnt implying all EP guys
were rabid. Didnt mean to anyway. I was referring to that section of the EP
guys that ARE rabid. Same as that segment of the Glow camp that is also
rabid.There are extremists on both sides of any discussion.
I simply meant that group that claims that once you buy a motor and battery,
its nothing but free gravy from then on not like those evil slimers that
gulp gallons upon gallons of fuel to the point that you end up in the poor
house.
No one has said that here.
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-16 22:46:24 UTC
Permalink
Be caregul! TNP is going to tell you how stupid you are for not making sure
all your planes use the same batteries!
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
Bingo.
You left out what a PITA it is to bring several of the EP planes that take
diff packs out for a day of flying. Generally took me most of the prior day
spent charging up two packs each for my 400X, Razor, and Yard Bee, each of
which takes a different style or at least layout of pack. Throw in my
Twinstar and I am hosed.
This assumes one charger. Eventually I got a second charger. Still spent
more time at the field re-charging packs than flying. Quite a lot of time
waiting for that little red light to start blinking!
I fly both, but prefer my glow planes for those reasons.
How much of your electricity bill goes to charging up all those packs? That
aint free!
You can bring a 12v tractor battery or equivalent to the field but that
sucker has to be charged someplace too.
Probably not comparable to the cost of glow fuel, but still a factor that
should be considered as far as the total cost.
I know that all those glowing LEDs in the garage are costing me something...
--
Dan
KE6ERB
AMA605992
I've heard the screams of the vegetables...
http://fubar1.freeservers.com
Post by Doug McLaren
| From oir critcsim of the point I made that one does not buy a new pack
| of cells for every aeroplane
I do indeed buy new packs for most new electric planes I get.
Why? Because most of the time, if I get a new electric plane, it's
rather different than the ones I've already got, so requires a
different battery pack in many cases. I may already have a small slow
flier, and so my next plane would be a E3D plane, and the next might
be a 0.20 sized aerobatic plane. All would have different power
requirements, so would require different battery packs. At least two
for each class of plane.
| in the same way you don't buy a new transmitter, or a new vehicle to
| carry it in.
That analogy is flawed.
My 9c radio has models set up for slow park fliers, 60 sized glow
planes, powered gliders, non powered gliders aerobatic electic planes,
etc. I don't have any giant scale stuff, but it could handle it if I
did.
My vehicle can handle all of these planes as well.
But I don't have any battery packs that can.
--
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from
him.
Post by Doug McLaren
-Galileo Galilei
Fubar of The HillPeople
2004-02-16 23:49:40 UTC
Permalink
Aw, man, I plonked that dude months ago.
Besides, going by that logic, I would have to decide on one engine for all
my glow planes and 86 the rest. Which one would I then keep?
My Ultra Stick 60 (91FS)? My Uproar 40 (cept it has a .32SX on it, not a
.40)? My .15 powered Hyper Bee? My Kaos (cept has a .51 and not a .40)?
Guess I need to stop building my Super Sports 20. Forget about even STARTING
my Super Sports 40 twin engine conversion.
Oh wait! I CAN keep those! They all use the same type of BATTERY!
Yay!
--
Dan
KE6ERB
AMA605992
I've heard the screams of the vegetables...
http://fubar1.freeservers.com
Post by Paul McIntosh
Be caregul! TNP is going to tell you how stupid you are for not making sure
all your planes use the same batteries!
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
Bingo.
You left out what a PITA it is to bring several of the EP planes that take
diff packs out for a day of flying. Generally took me most of the prior
day
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
spent charging up two packs each for my 400X, Razor, and Yard Bee, each of
which takes a different style or at least layout of pack. Throw in my
Twinstar and I am hosed.
This assumes one charger. Eventually I got a second charger. Still spent
more time at the field re-charging packs than flying. Quite a lot of time
waiting for that little red light to start blinking!
I fly both, but prefer my glow planes for those reasons.
How much of your electricity bill goes to charging up all those packs?
That
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
aint free!
You can bring a 12v tractor battery or equivalent to the field but that
sucker has to be charged someplace too.
Probably not comparable to the cost of glow fuel, but still a factor that
should be considered as far as the total cost.
I know that all those glowing LEDs in the garage are costing me
something...
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
--
Dan
KE6ERB
AMA605992
I've heard the screams of the vegetables...
http://fubar1.freeservers.com
Post by Doug McLaren
| From oir critcsim of the point I made that one does not buy a new pack
| of cells for every aeroplane
I do indeed buy new packs for most new electric planes I get.
Why? Because most of the time, if I get a new electric plane, it's
rather different than the ones I've already got, so requires a
different battery pack in many cases. I may already have a small slow
flier, and so my next plane would be a E3D plane, and the next might
be a 0.20 sized aerobatic plane. All would have different power
requirements, so would require different battery packs. At least two
for each class of plane.
| in the same way you don't buy a new transmitter, or a new vehicle to
| carry it in.
That analogy is flawed.
My 9c radio has models set up for slow park fliers, 60 sized glow
planes, powered gliders, non powered gliders aerobatic electic planes,
etc. I don't have any giant scale stuff, but it could handle it if I
did.
My vehicle can handle all of these planes as well.
But I don't have any battery packs that can.
--
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from
him.
Post by Doug McLaren
-Galileo Galilei
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-17 09:08:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
Bingo.
You left out what a PITA it is to bring several of the EP planes that take
diff packs out for a day of flying. Generally took me most of the prior day
spent charging up two packs each for my 400X, Razor, and Yard Bee, each of
which takes a different style or at least layout of pack. Throw in my
Twinstar and I am hosed.
You should build your own planes. That way YOU dictate the internal layout.
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
This assumes one charger. Eventually I got a second charger. Still spent
more time at the field re-charging packs than flying. Quite a lot of time
waiting for that little red light to start blinking!
Thats the trouble with running NiMh. You have to field charge to get the
performancem it takes an hour and they STILL don't fly that lomng.
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
I fly both, but prefer my glow planes for those reasons.
How much of your electricity bill goes to charging up all those packs? That
aint free!
Well, if you arefield chargimng, it comes free wih teh gas you spent
driving to the field.

Dunno about te US, but electricity here is about 10c a KW/h - thats
enough to fly a 40 sized plane for an hour. Hardly bank breaking.
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
You can bring a 12v tractor battery or equivalent to the field but that
sucker has to be charged someplace too.
Probably not comparable to the cost of glow fuel, but still a factor that
should be considered as far as the total cost.
I know that all those glowing LEDs in the garage are costing me something...
Less than the computer ou are typing on...
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-17 16:48:48 UTC
Permalink
See, you should settle for planes OTHERS want, not what YOU want!
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
Bingo.
You left out what a PITA it is to bring several of the EP planes that take
diff packs out for a day of flying. Generally took me most of the prior day
spent charging up two packs each for my 400X, Razor, and Yard Bee, each of
which takes a different style or at least layout of pack. Throw in my
Twinstar and I am hosed.
You should build your own planes. That way YOU dictate the internal layout.
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
This assumes one charger. Eventually I got a second charger. Still spent
more time at the field re-charging packs than flying. Quite a lot of time
waiting for that little red light to start blinking!
Thats the trouble with running NiMh. You have to field charge to get the
performancem it takes an hour and they STILL don't fly that lomng.
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
I fly both, but prefer my glow planes for those reasons.
How much of your electricity bill goes to charging up all those packs? That
aint free!
Well, if you arefield chargimng, it comes free wih teh gas you spent
driving to the field.
Dunno about te US, but electricity here is about 10c a KW/h - thats
enough to fly a 40 sized plane for an hour. Hardly bank breaking.
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
You can bring a 12v tractor battery or equivalent to the field but that
sucker has to be charged someplace too.
Probably not comparable to the cost of glow fuel, but still a factor that
should be considered as far as the total cost.
I know that all those glowing LEDs in the garage are costing me something...
Less than the computer ou are typing on...
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-18 01:43:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
See, you should settle for planes OTHERS want, not what YOU want!
How very un-american of you Paul.
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
Bingo.
You left out what a PITA it is to bring several of the EP planes that
take
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
diff packs out for a day of flying. Generally took me most of the prior
day
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
spent charging up two packs each for my 400X, Razor, and Yard Bee, each
of
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
which takes a different style or at least layout of pack. Throw in my
Twinstar and I am hosed.
You should build your own planes. That way YOU dictate the internal
layout.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
This assumes one charger. Eventually I got a second charger. Still spent
more time at the field re-charging packs than flying. Quite a lot of
time
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
waiting for that little red light to start blinking!
Thats the trouble with running NiMh. You have to field charge to get the
performancem it takes an hour and they STILL don't fly that lomng.
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
I fly both, but prefer my glow planes for those reasons.
How much of your electricity bill goes to charging up all those packs?
That
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
aint free!
Well, if you arefield chargimng, it comes free wih teh gas you spent
driving to the field.
Dunno about te US, but electricity here is about 10c a KW/h - thats
enough to fly a 40 sized plane for an hour. Hardly bank breaking.
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
You can bring a 12v tractor battery or equivalent to the field but that
sucker has to be charged someplace too.
Probably not comparable to the cost of glow fuel, but still a factor
that
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Fubar of The HillPeople
should be considered as far as the total cost.
I know that all those glowing LEDs in the garage are costing me
something...
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Less than the computer ou are typing on...
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-16 15:50:24 UTC
Permalink
Where does that ever enter into the equation? Are you saying only buy one
pack and transfer it between all your planes? Do you take the motor off
each plane and switch it to another each time you want to fly it? Hell, you
only get one flight as it is, now you want to limit that to one plane as
well?

Go back to my original post and read the post I was responding to.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Where the hell do you get that analogy from?
From oir critcsim of the point I made that one does not buy a new pack
of cells for every aeroplane, in the same way you don't buy a new
transmitter, or a new vehicle to carry it in.
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Like TNP, you are comparing apples to oranges. The entry fee I was
talking
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
about is not entry LEVEL.
I see Paul, so basically following your logic, I have to spend 30bn
dollars on developing some huge piston engines to get what any turbojet
can do?
Or every time I build a new model I have to buy a new transmitter for it?
No, better than that, I have to buty a new truck to take it to the field
in.
Because I didn't have the sense to buy the right truck teh first time
around, or the second, or the third?
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by Jim Lilly
Paul,
Post by Paul McIntosh
You can
get a VERY nice .50 size glow powered model, ready to fly, for under
$250.
Post by Jim Lilly
Post by Paul McIntosh
That includes plane, radio, engine and fuel, etc. To get equivalent
performance with electrics still costs much more.
Not very accurate. Most entry level EP's are as you say, except some
like
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by Jim Lilly
the Aerobird Challenger.
You can get a HobbyZone Aerobird Challenger for around $150.00 which
includes EVERYTHING needed to get started & is far more durable &
forgiving
Post by Jim Lilly
than most glow trainers. I fly mine when some glow's think it's too
windy
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
&
Post by Jim Lilly
fail to show up at the field. The ABC even comes with 2 flight modes, so
beginners & advanced pilots can have fun with them. Put in the optional
7
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by Jim Lilly
cell/900 mAh battery pack ($30.00 avg) & it screams!
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-15 00:39:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
The point is, you still have to pay for all the power up front with
electrics. That is what's keeping them in the minority so far. How many
people would even start glow if they had to pay for 100 gallons of fuel
every time they thought about a new plane?
We all had to fork out for radio transmitter, and charger tho?
you don't start out in electrics on 40 sized models either. You strat
out with a 50 dollar LIPO and a 3o dollar charger at the worst...

Some people sepnd $1000 on transmitters. So wahts the odds with a pair
of $500 packs?
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
I am also waiting for the cost to come down. The fuel arguement is only
valid when thinking long term. I don't know anyone who paid for all the
gas
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
their car would use at the time they bought the car.
Heck, not many people pay for the car upfront!
Lease those lithiums. Theres a new business oopportinity for you Paul!
Post by Paul McIntosh
Another thing to consider is the charger for such battery beasts!
Not particularly hard to engineer. 8A at 40V or so.
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-15 11:57:39 UTC
Permalink
You are comparing apples to oranges.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
The point is, you still have to pay for all the power up front with
electrics. That is what's keeping them in the minority so far. How many
people would even start glow if they had to pay for 100 gallons of fuel
every time they thought about a new plane?
We all had to fork out for radio transmitter, and charger tho?
you don't start out in electrics on 40 sized models either. You strat
out with a 50 dollar LIPO and a 3o dollar charger at the worst...
Some people sepnd $1000 on transmitters. So wahts the odds with a pair
of $500 packs?
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
I am also waiting for the cost to come down. The fuel arguement is only
valid when thinking long term. I don't know anyone who paid for all the
gas
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
their car would use at the time they bought the car.
Heck, not many people pay for the car upfront!
Lease those lithiums. Theres a new business oopportinity for you Paul!
Post by Paul McIntosh
Another thing to consider is the charger for such battery beasts!
Not particularly hard to engineer. 8A at 40V or so.
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-16 00:23:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
You are comparing apples to oranges.
No, I was pointimng out that you were actually.
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
The point is, you still have to pay for all the power up front with
electrics. That is what's keeping them in the minority so far. How
many
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
people would even start glow if they had to pay for 100 gallons of fuel
every time they thought about a new plane?
We all had to fork out for radio transmitter, and charger tho?
you don't start out in electrics on 40 sized models either. You strat
out with a 50 dollar LIPO and a 3o dollar charger at the worst...
Some people sepnd $1000 on transmitters. So wahts the odds with a pair
of $500 packs?
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
I am also waiting for the cost to come down. The fuel arguement is
only
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
valid when thinking long term. I don't know anyone who paid for all
the
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
gas
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
their car would use at the time they bought the car.
Heck, not many people pay for the car upfront!
Lease those lithiums. Theres a new business oopportinity for you Paul!
Post by Paul McIntosh
Another thing to consider is the charger for such battery beasts!
Not particularly hard to engineer. 8A at 40V or so.
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-16 12:16:14 UTC
Permalink
I was responding to a post regarding $1000 LiPos. Where does that fall into
$50 toys?
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
You are comparing apples to oranges.
No, I was pointimng out that you were actually.
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
The point is, you still have to pay for all the power up front with
electrics. That is what's keeping them in the minority so far. How
many
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
people would even start glow if they had to pay for 100 gallons of fuel
every time they thought about a new plane?
We all had to fork out for radio transmitter, and charger tho?
you don't start out in electrics on 40 sized models either. You strat
out with a 50 dollar LIPO and a 3o dollar charger at the worst...
Some people sepnd $1000 on transmitters. So wahts the odds with a pair
of $500 packs?
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
I am also waiting for the cost to come down. The fuel arguement is
only
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
valid when thinking long term. I don't know anyone who paid for all
the
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
gas
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
their car would use at the time they bought the car.
Heck, not many people pay for the car upfront!
Lease those lithiums. Theres a new business oopportinity for you Paul!
Post by Paul McIntosh
Another thing to consider is the charger for such battery beasts!
Not particularly hard to engineer. 8A at 40V or so.
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-14 03:03:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug McLaren
| 10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
And in case somebody wasn't paying attention, this is exactly why we
don't see many large electrics yet.
This battery pack puts out up to 2900 watts, or 3.8 HP.
This would be comparable to an OS FX 1.6 engine, which puts out up to
3.7 HP. And costs $270.
However the FX puts it out at a not too useful RPM. To be fair that pack
and a motor is probably nearer a 50cc motor.
Post by Doug McLaren
This battery pack will put out that much power for 6 minutes *at best*
(since it's a 10C discharge rate.)
And this is just the battery pack -- there's no ESC, no motor (with
this much money going inot just one battery pack, it's silly not to
get the best brushless motor you can find. And of course, it won't be
100% efficient, reducing the actual power you get.) You're looking at
many hundreds of dollars more for that.
No, but it will be approaching 90% overall. How efficient is your glo prop?
Post by Doug McLaren
And of course, you usually want at least two battery packs ... the
costs add up very fast. Some say that it all evens out in the end,
that you're essentially buying all your fuel up front. There's some
truth to that, but it still seems that large electrics still cost a
lot more, both up front and over all.
Its true. Get into the big sizes and the cost does rocket.

But you are not being totally fair here.

There are more variables than you account for.
Post by Doug McLaren
The `sweet spot' for electrics is still the Speed 400 and smaller
sizes. Once you get larger, the price goes WAY up. If you double the
power, you basically double the price. (Compare this to glow, where
if you double the power, you add maybe 20% to the cost.)
Actually I'd slightl;y take issue, and say that the sweet spot is
100-500W, whicgh is speed 400 up to roughly 40 sized glo equivalents. In
teh smaller planes, the radio gear has to be light, and that gest
expensive, but planes around the 15-25 glo equivalent are not too
expensive to electrify and not too small to need specialised gear.

And you don't need a brushless motor to enjoy kithoum - the excess power
and duration means rather les efficient (and much cheaper) motors still
deliver good performance.
Post by Doug McLaren
That said, I bought some Li-poly packs for my smaller electrics, a XE2
with an Astroflight 020, and an Electrifly with a geared Speed 400.
Both got two cell packs, the first was a Tanic 2200 pack, and the
second a 1700 mAh pack of some sort. They're quite nice, though I
wish I had a three cell pack in the XE2 -- it has less power now, but
a lot more duration.
Someday (hopefully soon!) these batteries will come way down in price.
That will be a very good thing!
I think it will be sooner rather than later. Ther are a lot of
applications becomeing more sensible using lithium technology. I think
there will be a huge incrase in use of these cells everywhere. Even
current small cars would benefit from knocking a few ounds of teh wight
by replacing the lead acid cell. If the price was right...
Doug McLaren
2004-02-14 08:39:17 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@b.c>, The Natural Philosopher <***@b.c> wrote:

| Doug McLaren wrote:
|
| > In article <***@posting.google.com>,
| > Wan <***@toast.net> wrote:
| >
| > | 10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
| >
| > And in case somebody wasn't paying attention, this is exactly why we
| > don't see many large electrics yet.
| >
| > This battery pack puts out up to 2900 watts, or 3.8 HP.
| >
| > This would be comparable to an OS FX 1.6 engine, which puts out up to
| > 3.7 HP. And costs $270.
|
| However the FX puts it out at a not too useful RPM. To be fair that pack
| and a motor

A high quality, and expensive motor. For example, an Aveox 1415/1.5
with a 3.7:1 gear ratio and a 14x10 prop can use 2500 watts (36 volts
or so, 70 amps), giving a useful output of about 1700 watts, and costs
about $250 for the motor and $300 for an appropriate ESC. (Are the
ESCs really this expensive for larger motors?)

(Maybe my choice of motor is very poor -- I've never actually really
investigated putting together an electric plane this large before. At
least not once I realized the small fortune I'd spend on batteries
alone.)

| is probably nearer a 50cc motor.

Actually, that HP rating is at 9000 RPM. That's not that unreasonable
-- certainly, it's not some screaming 0.049 engine. I doubt you'd
need to go to 50 cc (3 ci) for similar performance.

It depends on what you want. If you want speed, you want high RPMs
and a small prop. If you want to do 3D, you want low RPMs and a big
prop. Electics make the latter easier to do.

| > This battery pack will put out that much power for 6 minutes *at best*
| > (since it's a 10C discharge rate.)

Don't disregard this. If you're using this much power, it won't be a
very long flight.

| > And this is just the battery pack -- there's no ESC, no motor (with
| > this much money going inot just one battery pack, it's silly not to
| > get the best brushless motor you can find. And of course, it won't be
| > 100% efficient, reducing the actual power you get.) You're looking at
| > many hundreds of dollars more for that.
|
| No, but it will be approaching 90% overall.

Probably not even too close to 90%, even for a brushless. And even
less if you're running at the maximum output of the batteries. Run it
through Motocalc ... it's very upsetting. 70% seems more realistic,
and that's for a good motor.

| How efficient is your glo prop?

As for props, at some level, props are props. Gearing your motor down
can give you more prop efficiency for slow flying, but you're still
losing energy at the prop, glow or electric.

| > And of course, you usually want at least two battery packs ... the
| > costs add up very fast. Some say that it all evens out in the end,
| > that you're essentially buying all your fuel up front. There's some
| > truth to that, but it still seems that large electrics still cost a
| > lot more, both up front and over all.
|
| Its true. Get into the big sizes and the cost does rocket.
|
| But you are not being totally fair here.
|
| There are more variables than you account for.

Like? I guess you do need to add a throttle servo to the glow setup
-- $10 or so.

I don't think it's really reasonable to add the cost of chargers and
starters and such to the prices when making comparisons.

| > The `sweet spot' for electrics is still the Speed 400 and smaller
| > sizes. Once you get larger, the price goes WAY up. If you double the
| > power, you basically double the price. (Compare this to glow, where
| > if you double the power, you add maybe 20% to the cost.)
|
| Actually I'd slightl;y take issue, and say that the sweet spot is
| 100-500W, whicgh is speed 400 up to roughly 40 sized glo
| equivalents.

A 0.40 sized glow engine can do a lot more than 500 watts. The OS FX
0.40 is rated at 1.36 hp -- 1033 watts. Yes, it's at a higher rpm
than most need, but still, you're going to have a hard time getting
similar performance out of an electric system that peaks out at 500
watts. Especially when the power system weights more than the glow
power system. And I believe that power rating doesn't take into
account the energy lost in the motor (and gearbox, if there is one) --
but the BHP rating of a glow/gas engine does. (Of course, IC engines
are only like 25% efficient at best, but that's another matter
entirely.)

| In teh smaller planes, the radio gear has to be light, and that gest
| expensive, but planes around the 15-25 glo equivalent are not too
| expensive to electrify and not too small to need specialised gear.

No, it's not too bad, but you'll still end up spending hundreds of
dollars on batteries. It would take many many flights to run even
$100 worth of fuel through a 0.25 glow engine plane.

I've never found my (e-power) batteries to last (the internal
resistances just seem to go up too much after that) more than a year
or two, and I spend far more on batteries now than glow fuel. Of
course, I also fly the electrics more than my glow planes ...

| And you don't need a brushless motor to enjoy kithoum - the excess
| power and duration means rather les efficient (and much cheaper)
| motors still deliver good performance.

When you're spending $900 per battery pack, it just makes good sense
to spend a few hundred on the best motor you can get. Getting a
better motor will save you money on the battery pack, because you can
use a smaller (and cheaper) battery pack and get the same performance.
For a $20 8 cell NiCd pack it's not a big deal. But for a $900 battery
pack ...

(For larger motors, doubling the power rating doesn't seem to double
the cost. A brushless motor setup with 0.40 performance doesn't cost
that much more than one with 0.09 performance.)

| If the price was right...

That's my beef. If I could get Li-poly cells for like 20% of the
current cost, I'd go all electric tomorrow.
--
Doug McLaren, ***@frenzy.com
May you die in bed at 95, shot by a jealous spouse.
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-14 12:30:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug McLaren
|
| >
| > | 10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
| >
| > And in case somebody wasn't paying attention, this is exactly why we
| > don't see many large electrics yet.
| >
| > This battery pack puts out up to 2900 watts, or 3.8 HP.
| >
| > This would be comparable to an OS FX 1.6 engine, which puts out up to
| > 3.7 HP. And costs $270.
|
| However the FX puts it out at a not too useful RPM. To be fair that pack
| and a motor
A high quality, and expensive motor. For example, an Aveox 1415/1.5
with a 3.7:1 gear ratio and a 14x10 prop can use 2500 watts (36 volts
or so, 70 amps), giving a useful output of about 1700 watts, and costs
about $250 for the motor and $300 for an appropriate ESC. (Are the
ESCs really this expensive for larger motors?)
Yes. To date its been a narrow market with low volume sales. There is no
real reason they should be tho - the majority of the electronics is teh
same for a 10A ESC as a 100A one, you just need a lot more power FETS
stuck on teh back, and some way to drive them harder maybe added.
Post by Doug McLaren
(Maybe my choice of motor is very poor -- I've never actually really
investigated putting together an electric plane this large before. At
least not once I realized the small fortune I'd spend on batteries
alone.)
| is probably nearer a 50cc motor.
Actually, that HP rating is at 9000 RPM. That's not that unreasonable
-- certainly, it's not some screaming 0.049 engine. I doubt you'd
need to go to 50 cc (3 ci) for similar performance.
It depends on what you want. If you want speed, you want high RPMs
and a small prop. If you want to do 3D, you want low RPMs and a big
prop. Electics make the latter easier to do.
Agreed. All out speed you will generally find a tuned pipe IC screamer
is still the best. But for 3D work teh electric is more controllable and
far more efficient overall as a a power train.
Post by Doug McLaren
| > This battery pack will put out that much power for 6 minutes *at best*
| > (since it's a 10C discharge rate.)
Don't disregard this. If you're using this much power, it won't be a
very long flight.
| > And this is just the battery pack -- there's no ESC, no motor (with
| > this much money going inot just one battery pack, it's silly not to
| > get the best brushless motor you can find. And of course, it won't be
| > 100% efficient, reducing the actual power you get.) You're looking at
| > many hundreds of dollars more for that.
|
| No, but it will be approaching 90% overall.
Probably not even too close to 90%, even for a brushless. And even
less if you're running at the maximum output of the batteries. Run it
through Motocalc ... it's very upsetting. 70% seems more realistic,
and that's for a good motor.
Mmm. The point is that that sort of power train is mostly used at or
near max eficiency current, only peaking to full power for short bursts.

You use full power really only when going for max rate of climb (keep
that up and the model is out of sight soon) or absolute max speed. The
rest of the time its throttled back a lot.

So flight times are often surprisingly longer. Even EDF models with
lower weeight lithium packs suddenly don't need full power all the time.

Once you come down a few notches from flat out efficiency is better,
current its lower and suddenlt flight times ae much longer.
Post by Doug McLaren
| How efficient is your glo prop?
As for props, at some level, props are props. Gearing your motor down
can give you more prop efficiency for slow flying, but you're still
losing energy at the prop, glow or electric.
That is a misleading statement. An ungeared motor putting teh prop tips
close to mach 1, and being strong enough at the root to cope with the
centrifugal and torque pulse loads imposed by an IC motor, and heavy
enough to act as a flywheel, is nowhere near as efficient as a thin
bladed larger one geared down to the correct RPM for your model.

This is teh MAJOR reason why people are surprised at how little E-power
they need to fly a given glo airframe.

Only in the case of >75mph models does teh glo engine start to match teh
overall prop efficiency of the geared electric.
Post by Doug McLaren
| > And of course, you usually want at least two battery packs ... the
| > costs add up very fast. Some say that it all evens out in the end,
| > that you're essentially buying all your fuel up front. There's some
| > truth to that, but it still seems that large electrics still cost a
| > lot more, both up front and over all.
|
| Its true. Get into the big sizes and the cost does rocket.
|
| But you are not being totally fair here.
|
| There are more variables than you account for.
Like? I guess you do need to add a throttle servo to the glow setup
-- $10 or so.
I don't think it's really reasonable to add the cost of chargers and
starters and such to the prices when making comparisons.
Well, what kind of kit do you need to take to the field for a glo motor.

- spare gloplug
- glo starter battery
- electric starter.
- fuel pump
- bag of baby wipes

The field battery of course is commoon for both sorts.

Additional model cost include

- throttle servo
- hefty engine mount
- maybe custom muffler for the plane
- fuel tank and plumbing
- fuel proofer and generally strong firewall construction.

And of course, fuel. Not irrelevant in a big model by any means.
Post by Doug McLaren
| > The `sweet spot' for electrics is still the Speed 400 and smaller
| > sizes. Once you get larger, the price goes WAY up. If you double the
| > power, you basically double the price. (Compare this to glow, where
| > if you double the power, you add maybe 20% to the cost.)
|
| Actually I'd slightl;y take issue, and say that the sweet spot is
| 100-500W, whicgh is speed 400 up to roughly 40 sized glo
| equivalents.
A 0.40 sized glow engine can do a lot more than 500 watts. The OS FX
0.40 is rated at 1.36 hp -- 1033 watts. Yes, it's at a higher rpm
than most need, but still, you're going to have a hard time getting
similar performance out of an electric system that peaks out at 500
watts.
Well I disagree. For reasons stated above. Execpt when you DO need that
extra RPM.
Post by Doug McLaren
Especially when the power system weights more than the glow
power system.
Its actually fairly close. Especially with a custom designed E-plane
with all the beefed up structure to take engine vibraion removed, along
with the fuel, tank, heavy prop and engine mount, muffler and servo.
Post by Doug McLaren
And I believe that power rating doesn't take into
account the energy lost in the motor (and gearbox, if there is one) --
but the BHP rating of a glow/gas engine does. (Of course, IC engines
are only like 25% efficient at best, but that's another matter
entirely.)
As I said, the gains on the prop outweigh the efficiency losses in the
box, or people wouldn't be using them.


I am not trying to maintain teh E-planes are xcheaper at higher powers,
bu they are not as expensive, or heavy, when costed out over a season or
two, as you are making out.

They also have some advantages in terms of reliability and ease of
starting and very predictable throttle response that make them ideal for
aerobats and multi-engined models.

That is where the cost is worth bearing. Bigger aerobats, and
multi-engined models.

Also in the sub .25 type of sport model, where the costs are comparable.

Only a big single engined sport or speed plane - 40 and up - is it
really a bit enthisiastic to go electric.
Post by Doug McLaren
| In teh smaller planes, the radio gear has to be light, and that gest
| expensive, but planes around the 15-25 glo equivalent are not too
| expensive to electrify and not too small to need specialised gear.
No, it's not too bad, but you'll still end up spending hundreds of
dollars on batteries. It would take many many flights to run even
$100 worth of fuel through a 0.25 glow engine plane.
Well, I have spent $70 on a pack that will do 200W, about equivalent to
.19 power wise by my estimation. Certainly .15 power. I can. and will,
split that amongst several different models. I cannot reasonably unbolt
an engine and swap it amongst two or three models in the same day.

But I can only fly one plane at a time, and two such packs as that will
allow me almost continuous back to back flying with short breaks in
between on an unlimited number of models.

Because the pack is light, and powerful, for general purpose sport
models I can spend very little on the motors - cheap inefficient ones do
just fine for average flying. Sure I have a 200W brushless setup that
cost in excess of $100, but hat is not what I have to fly all the time,
Thats reserved for planes that need to go straight up!
Post by Doug McLaren
I've never found my (e-power) batteries to last (the internal
resistances just seem to go up too much after that) more than a year
or two, and I spend far more on batteries now than glow fuel. Of
course, I also fly the electrics more than my glow planes ...
Again, there is a positive feedback mechanism. With Nicads, to fly at
all, we needed to thrash the packs and motors just to fly at all. I've
got some 2 year old packs that haven't been thrashed too much, that are
still fine.

All the signs are that the lithiums will be up there after two years as
well.

The key thing is to rememebr they are going to die of old age anyway
whether you use them or not, and simply use them to the full, by
splitting them amongst several models. You do NOT need to buy one pack
per model. I've got one 100W pack and one 200W pack. That, plus a
charger, is $200. Those will power ALL my planes built and on the board
- about 7 in all. So that works out at $30 per plane or less.

In the speed 400 sized cans, which are good enough for scale and modest
planes cost is less than $50 per motor/ESC/box combo, and the 200W 480
class motors are not much more. Even the 480 class brushless is only
$120 or so. So typically each model is costing me between $80 and $150
for the power train capital cost.

Contrast that with an IC engine, servo, tank, mount etc. etc. and add
fuel costs and its not very different.

In general with two fully charged packs charged at home before flying, I
can expect 40 minutes of continuous flight of the packs inclding general
stuff like getting them packed up and checked out prior to flinging in
the air, and the landing approach etc etc at low power. Then a 20 minute
hiatus to recharge the packs, followed by 20 minutes flight/forty
minutes wait AT THE VERY WORST WITH A FLAT PACK which they seldomn are.
Its more like 15 minutes flight 10 minutes wait in practice. The
amount of time glo planes seem to spend being started and fiddled with
makes it very little worse. If you have three packs and two chargers its
pretty much constinuous flying no breaks. Or indeed three packs and one
charger will allow you to take 45 minutes of continuous power to the
field ready to go.

More than most glo pilots except the chopper boys seem to actually spend
in the air anyway.

Apples and oranges. Unless you MUST have a 40 powered or bigger plane,
electrivc is cheap, and convenient. Why have a 40 powerd plane? Because
that is the 'sweet spot' for IC. That's where its at its cheapest
really. Slightly smaller is the sweet spot costwise for electrics.

Once you have enough packs, you don't need to buy more for new models.
Just unplug them, charge, and use on the next plane...onbce you have
enough packs, you don't even need to field charger them...pre-charge
them all, and fly them till they run out and go home. If you want
different power levels, parallel or series up packs (fully charged of
course to make sure discharge times are matched) and you can save on
buying another pack.


People on a tight budget have even been known to swap receivers, motors
and ESC's between planes at the field. Unplug a few connections and
unscrew two or three bolts, and away you go...

Of course all this requires a change in the way of doing things and
thinking. If you 'think glo' and do the sums you will never go electric.
You have to 'think flight times and planes' and work out an overall
budget for the type of flying you do...but in many cases, if you DO do
this, you will find its not half so bad as the critics make out. How
many planes do you take to the field anyway?
Post by Doug McLaren
| And you don't need a brushless motor to enjoy kithoum - the excess
| power and duration means rather les efficient (and much cheaper)
| motors still deliver good performance.
When you're spending $900 per battery pack, it just makes good sense
to spend a few hundred on the best motor you can get. Getting a
better motor will save you money on the battery pack, because you can
use a smaller (and cheaper) battery pack and get the same performance.
For a $20 8 cell NiCd pack it's not a big deal. But for a $900 battery
pack ...
I don't see that at all. I run a $70 pack and a $18 gearbox on a $7
motor. All in $50 plane. Split amongst several models its not a silly
thing to do.

Look at the cost breakdown of a speed 400 plane.
Kit cost $50
Glue, paint, covering, odd bits - $15
Motor $7
Gearbox $15
Prop $5
Receiver $50
4 x feather servos $80

Thats $222 already ...

Now add ESC, at maybe $25, and we have a $250 plane without the battery.

Since as I said the battery is costing (because its shared between three
models at least only about $11 per plane), its a $262 plane at this point.

Now if I drop the $25 ESC and add in a brushless+ESC at maybe $100 I am
adding $75 to the plane cost. A 30% hike in cost.

Besides which, that model is a scale jobby, and will potter around doing
mild aerobatics for the best part of 40 minutes on the one charge.

I simply don't need to spend $75 to extend that to one hour.

Ive done the calculations over and over, and the way that makes sense is
to buy lithium batteries, and share them between models. Motors I
cosndeier more disposable, and cheaper than, servos. ONLY if I want the
last ounce of performance will I bother forking out for a brushless.

I mean, not every plane you have runs a tuned pipe high performance
motor, does it?

Stop thinking 'one plane, two packs' and start thinking 'oow packs,
infinite planes' or whatever, and suddenly the cost benefit equations
stand on their heads.
Post by Doug McLaren
(For larger motors, doubling the power rating doesn't seem to double
the cost. A brushless motor setup with 0.40 performance doesn't cost
that much more than one with 0.09 performance.)
| If the price was right...
That's my beef. If I could get Li-poly cells for like 20% of the
current cost, I'd go all electric tomorrow.
Jim Lilly
2004-02-14 14:54:30 UTC
Permalink
The,
Post by The Natural Philosopher
In the speed 400 sized cans, which are good enough for scale and modest
planes cost is less than $50 per motor/ESC/box combo
Speaking of speed 400 motors, I've got one of those new Great Planes
Douglas DC-3 Speed 400 EP Twin ARF ($159.99) on back order. It uses a
Speed Control: Electronic with (BEC) battery eliminator circuitry and dual
motor harness, and recommended battery pack is 9.6V 8 cell 1800mAh (AA
cells).

With Li-Po's at 3.7/7.4/11.1 volt, what Li-Po combination would you
suggest for it?
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXFYW5
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
PCPhill
2004-02-14 18:35:34 UTC
Permalink
Not knowing how many amps the dual sp400 will draw, I'd use a 3S3P Kokam
1500mah pack(actually three of the 3S1P packs) That would be good to about
36A and almost triple the flight time. Just don't run it at full throttle
for long or the motors could fry. Then again, depending on the sp400s they
might be fine with higher voltage.


PCPhill

Don't ask how much I spent on batteries this morning. Really, don't
ask......



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Lilly" <***@comcast.net>
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc.air
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: Li Poly batteries, fantastic
Post by Jim Lilly
The,
Post by The Natural Philosopher
In the speed 400 sized cans, which are good enough for scale and modest
planes cost is less than $50 per motor/ESC/box combo
Speaking of speed 400 motors, I've got one of those new Great Planes
Douglas DC-3 Speed 400 EP Twin ARF ($159.99) on back order. It uses a
Speed Control: Electronic with (BEC) battery eliminator circuitry and dual
motor harness, and recommended battery pack is 9.6V 8 cell 1800mAh (AA
cells).
With Li-Po's at 3.7/7.4/11.1 volt, what Li-Po combination would you
suggest for it?
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXFYW5
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The,
Post by The Natural Philosopher
In the speed 400 sized cans, which are good enough for scale and modest
planes cost is less than $50 per motor/ESC/box combo
Speaking of speed 400 motors, I've got one of those new Great Planes
Douglas DC-3 Speed 400 EP Twin ARF ($159.99) on back order. It uses a
Speed Control: Electronic with (BEC) battery eliminator circuitry and dual
motor harness, and recommended battery pack is 9.6V 8 cell 1800mAh (AA
cells).
With Li-Po's at 3.7/7.4/11.1 volt, what Li-Po combination would you
suggest for it?
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXFYW5
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-15 00:37:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by PCPhill
Not knowing how many amps the dual sp400 will draw, I'd use a 3S3P Kokam
1500mah pack(actually three of the 3S1P packs) That would be good to about
36A and almost triple the flight time. Just don't run it at full throttle
for long or the motors could fry. Then again, depending on the sp400s they
might be fine with higher voltage.
Unless they are race motors, they won't draw more than 10A apiece.
Trouble is you can't gear EDF down, so they may get a little hot and
bothered on 3sLIPO.

The safe option is 2s2p, which will probably run at 15A or so. My choice
would be Irate 1100 or thereabouts, but 3s2p of larger cells may be
quite lively.

Its a hard call. Its no aerobat, and may well run fine on the lighter
2s2p packs.
Post by PCPhill
PCPhill
Don't ask how much I spent on batteries this morning. Really, don't
ask......
----- Original Message -----
Newsgroups: rec.models.rc.air
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: Li Poly batteries, fantastic
Post by Jim Lilly
The,
Post by The Natural Philosopher
In the speed 400 sized cans, which are good enough for scale and modest
planes cost is less than $50 per motor/ESC/box combo
Speaking of speed 400 motors, I've got one of those new Great Planes
Douglas DC-3 Speed 400 EP Twin ARF ($159.99) on back order. It uses a
Speed Control: Electronic with (BEC) battery eliminator circuitry and dual
motor harness, and recommended battery pack is 9.6V 8 cell 1800mAh (AA
cells).
With Li-Po's at 3.7/7.4/11.1 volt, what Li-Po combination would you
suggest for it?
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXFYW5
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The,
Post by The Natural Philosopher
In the speed 400 sized cans, which are good enough for scale and modest
planes cost is less than $50 per motor/ESC/box combo
Speaking of speed 400 motors, I've got one of those new Great Planes
Douglas DC-3 Speed 400 EP Twin ARF ($159.99) on back order. It uses a
Speed Control: Electronic with (BEC) battery eliminator circuitry and dual
motor harness, and recommended battery pack is 9.6V 8 cell 1800mAh (AA
cells).
With Li-Po's at 3.7/7.4/11.1 volt, what Li-Po combination would you
suggest for it?
http://www2.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXFYW5
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
PCPhill
2004-02-15 00:46:00 UTC
Permalink
Unless I'm confusing my acronyms, They're not EDF, DC3's were prop
planes...
I don't know if the lower voltage would be adequate for flight speed.

PCPhill
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Unless they are race motors, they won't draw more than 10A apiece.
Trouble is you can't gear EDF down, so they may get a little hot and
bothered on 3sLIPO.
The safe option is 2s2p, which will probably run at 15A or so. My choice
would be Irate 1100 or thereabouts, but 3s2p of larger cells may be
quite lively.
Its a hard call. Its no aerobat, and may well run fine on the lighter
2s2p packs.
Jim Lilly
2004-02-15 01:52:35 UTC
Permalink
PCPhill,
Post by PCPhill
I don't know if the lower voltage would be adequate for flight speed.
I doubt it myself.
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Jim Lilly
2004-02-15 01:52:34 UTC
Permalink
TNP,
Unless they are race motors...........
Trouble is you can't gear EDF down
The DC-3 never had EDF/Electric Ducted Fan engines & this Electrifly
doesn't either. Not race 400's either.
The safe option is 2s2p
As my original post stated, that DC-3 twin 400 requires 9.6volt, so a
2s2p @ 7.4volt probably wouldn't get it airborne.
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-15 10:42:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Lilly
TNP,
Unless they are race motors...........
Trouble is you can't gear EDF down
The DC-3 never had EDF/Electric Ducted Fan engines & this Electrifly
doesn't either. Not race 400's either.
The safe option is 2s2p
As my original post stated, that DC-3 twin 400 requires 9.6volt, so a
Lighter weight, so it might.

If its geared props, go 3s2p and drop the prop diameter an inch roughly

If its DD use same props, 3s2p and get 7.2v motors.
Post by Jim Lilly
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Jim Lilly
2004-02-15 03:24:29 UTC
Permalink
PCPhill,
Post by PCPhill
Not knowing how many amps the dual sp400 will draw
I've got an Astro Flight Super Whatt-Meter coming soon, and will be
able to determine the DC-3's needs exactly. Still, I need some sort of
battery pack as it comes with none. Might throw something NiMh for temp
use to determine it's true needs.
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-15 10:56:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Lilly
PCPhill,
Post by PCPhill
Not knowing how many amps the dual sp400 will draw
I've got an Astro Flight Super Whatt-Meter coming soon, and will be
able to determine the DC-3's needs exactly. Still, I need some sort of
battery pack as it comes with none. Might throw something NiMh for temp
use to determine it's true needs.
That's good.
A mixture of theory and Whatmeter tests show that the 6v speed 400
actually produces less power as the current goes up above 10A. So don't
prop or more than that. the 7.2v motor is happier at only 8A.

If you have gears, you can get more out of a 6v 400 at 7-8A and 3s LIPO
than 10A at 8 cell levels, because at the lower current is more
eficient, and the extra volts gets the power input back.

Props that are 'in the zone' on a 6v 400 on 3s LIPO are:

2.33:1 - use 7x5
3:1 - use 8x6
3.5:1 use 9x6
4:1 use 10x7

APC 'E' props tested.

These will all produce decent thrust with adequate pitch speed -
suitable for a model weighing up to about 40 oz (twin motors). For a
small reduction in power and much better efficiency and cooler motors,
throttle back, or use the next size smaller prop.

Pack weight for 3s2p LIPO about 5oz, as compared with 9.6oz of 8x1700
NIMH cells.
Post by Jim Lilly
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Jim Lilly
2004-02-15 11:54:31 UTC
Permalink
The,
Post by The Natural Philosopher
If you have gears
Doesn't come that way, just DD. But if I ever went to a geared setup,
it would need to be planetary as the twin 400's are mounted to the
wing's LE & enclosed in cowling. That, or go brushless.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
6v 400
7.2v motor
Any easy way to determine which these 400's are?
Post by The Natural Philosopher
2.33:1 - use 7x5
3:1 - use 8x6
3.5:1 use 9x6
4:1 use 10x7
Did you use Moto-Calc to get those figures?
Post by The Natural Philosopher
suitable for a model weighing up to about 40 oz (twin motors).
It's around 3 pounds!

SPECS: Wingspan: 59.4" (1510mm)
Wing Area: 393 sq in (25.3sq dm)
Weight: 3lb (1360 kg)
Wing Loading 17.6 oz/sq ft (53.7g/sq dm)
Length: 37" (940mm)
Airfoil: fully symmetrical, low wing
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-16 00:22:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Lilly
The,
Post by The Natural Philosopher
If you have gears
Doesn't come that way, just DD. But if I ever went to a geared setup,
it would need to be planetary as the twin 400's are mounted to the
wing's LE & enclosed in cowling. That, or go brushless.
DD, for 3s LIPO use teh 7.2v motor.
Post by Jim Lilly
Post by The Natural Philosopher
6v 400
7.2v motor
Any easy way to determine which these 400's are?
If not marked, probably 6v motors.
Post by Jim Lilly
Post by The Natural Philosopher
2.33:1 - use 7x5
3:1 - use 8x6
3.5:1 use 9x6
4:1 use 10x7
Did you use Moto-Calc to get those figures?
Partly, and partly cross checking with a selection of props and
gearboxes. Heck, the weather has been **** and I had little better to
do...:-)
Post by Jim Lilly
Post by The Natural Philosopher
suitable for a model weighing up to about 40 oz (twin motors).
It's around 3 pounds!
SPECS: Wingspan: 59.4" (1510mm)
Wing Area: 393 sq in (25.3sq dm)
Weight: 3lb (1360 kg)
Wing Loading 17.6 oz/sq ft (53.7g/sq dm)
Length: 37" (940mm)
Airfoil: fully symmetrical, low wing
I seriously doubt it will fly successfully on two DD 400's then.. Well
it WILL, but its a fairly high wing loading and not a great reserve of
power.

Don't eliminate gearboxes - the MPjet inner driven ones are very compact.

Also, you can upgrade to 'long can' 400's - and provided the batteries
can take the 30A or so the setup will draw, get about 50% more power.

So, stick to stock motors an 1700 NiMh cells.
get 7.2v motors and 3s2p LIPO
gear existng motors and go 3s2p LIPO

Depending on what suits best.
Post by Jim Lilly
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Jim Lilly
2004-02-16 03:24:29 UTC
Permalink
TNP,
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Heck, the weather has been **** and I had little better to
do...:-)
LOL, well understood.
Several of us all-season fliers braved the elements Saturday & flew anyway.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
I seriously doubt it will fly successfully on two DD 400's then.. Well
it WILL,
Their video shows it doing fine.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Don't eliminate gearboxes - the MPjet inner driven ones are very compact.
I'm beginning to think brushless will be the best choice in the long run.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
So, stick to stock motors an 1700 NiMh cells.
I'm going to start out with some 2000Mah NiMh's I've got & see where I need
to upgrade after that. Provided I keep it in one piece.<g>
Post by The Natural Philosopher
gear existng motors and go 3s2p LIPO
Probably where I'll end up.
Thanks for the great input!
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Wan
2004-02-15 14:14:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Lilly
PCPhill,
Post by PCPhill
Not knowing how many amps the dual sp400 will draw
I've got an Astro Flight Super Whatt-Meter coming soon, and will be
able to determine the DC-3's needs exactly. Still, I need some sort of
battery pack as it comes with none. Might throw something NiMh for temp
use to determine it's true needs.
--
Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Reading what you gentlemen have said, I believe my point about the
cost of electric flight is do-able now has been validified. I have two
E3Ds. Cost of the first kit From Gary Wright was $100 + the cost of
covering, glue, etc. about $50. The second is a copy and materials
cost about the same as the kit. Now the AXI brushless, $97, ESP $107
and Li Poly 3S2P cost $100. So the first plane ready to fly costs
about $450.

This is a plane capable of verticals and 3D as the name implies. With
Li Poly batteries, the flight times will be about 20 minutes,
depending on throttle. Longer if the plane just loafs around. The
second plane costing about the same will need only the same battery so
it would cost about $350 RTF.

I cut down the weight of my field box for glow from about 40 lbs, to
about 2 lbs for electric. I just shut off my electric and go home. I
do understand some flyers love to tinker with the gooey, oily mess but
there's no beating turning on and turning off convenience of
electrics. Remember for electric, the charger + power supply for the
batteries cost about $200 or less. Is this not a one time cost?

And how much for starter and battery, fuel pump, glow igniter, extra
glow plugs, etc. cost for glow planes?

Would someone do a cost analysis on a gas powered plane RTF for
comparison?

Sorry for being long winded, just enthused.

Wan
Jim Lilly
2004-02-15 15:11:24 UTC
Permalink
Wan,
Post by Wan
Would someone do a cost analysis on a gas powered plane RTF for
comparison?
Sure will!

LXCXF442 Tower Hobbies Tower Trainer 40 RTF 42 72630 $269.99
{Complete RTF w/.46 eng, radio, and batteries}

TH3755 Great Planes Standard ProGlo Starter w/Meter & Charger $19.99

TY5871 Great Planes Filling Station Can Fitting Set $4.69

LXK129 Great Planes Silicone Fuel Tubing Standard 3' $2.19

LXMA93 Hobbico Hand Crank Fuel Pump $12.99

LXK134 Great Planes Ultra Precision Fuel Filter $2.99

WS3710 Tower Hobbies Tower Power Starter 12V Deluxe $17.99


{Following 2 items ONLY included as they lowered the overall cost}

DS80011 Tower Hobbies #1 Tower SS Club Pack-C $14.99

PC7125 $25 Promotional Discount $25.00-

*FREE shipping*

Purchased locally; 1 gal 10% glow fuel=$14.00

TOTAL=$334.82 w/discounts
{Add avg of 30% at LHS}

*NOT* included; 12v. Gel cell battery, power panel, spare props, etc
{Windex, paper towels, and such needed for glows}.

--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Doug McLaren
2004-02-15 15:37:29 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@posting.google.com>,
Wan <***@toast.net> wrote:

| Reading what you gentlemen have said, I believe my point about the
| cost of electric flight is do-able now has been validified.

I don't think that anybody here was arguing otherwise.

| I have two E3Ds. Cost of the first kit From Gary Wright was $100 +
| the cost of covering, glue, etc. about $50. The second is a copy and
| materials cost about the same as the kit. Now the AXI brushless,
| $97, ESP $107 and Li Poly 3S2P cost $100. So the first plane ready
| to fly costs about $450.

Doesn't it have a radio and servos?

I don't know what plane you've got, but I imagine it's a smaller
plane. This is definately the range where electrics are reasonably
priced.

Try to get a 0.60 sized or larger plane with similar performance and
see how much it costs -- it'll be quite a bit more.

| I cut down the weight of my field box for glow from about 40 lbs, to
| about 2 lbs for electric. I just shut off my electric and go home.

I don't think anybody here needs to be sold on the advantages of
electrics.

| Remember for electric, the charger + power supply for the
| batteries cost about $200 or less. Is this not a one time cost?

At least until you find that you need to charge two batteries at once :)

And you can do this much cheaper. GP Triton, $130. 110v -> 12v power
supply, use an old AT computer power supply. Cost, free to $20.
(For car use, you don't need any power supply.)

| And how much for starter and battery, fuel pump, glow igniter, extra
| glow plugs, etc. cost for glow planes?

Well, much of that stuff is optional, especially for a smaller plane.
And except for the glow plugs, it's a one time cost just like the
charger. At least until it wears out ...

For a small glow plane, a fuel bulb, glow ignitor and wood dowel (for
starting) will get you going for about $20.

| Would someone do a cost analysis on a gas powered plane RTF for
| comparison?

Well, I don't know what your plane is, I'm guessing it's 1/2A sized.
So a good engine could be had for $50 or so, and you'll need a
throttle servo, about $20 for a mini. $10 for a fuel tank. That, and
some fuel replaces your entire $300 power chain. (Though there may be
some additional cost as you'll need to make the plane fuel proof.)

This thread wasn't originally about entry level. It was about the
extreme cost (compared to glow) of larger electric planes. The entry
level glow plane is about 0.40 sized, and the entry level electric is
usually 1/2A (0.05 or so) sized. Cost is the primary reason that
these sizes are entry level -- anything larger will cost more, but
going smaller won't be much (or any) cheaper.
--
Doug McLaren, ***@frenzy.com
Lisa: Well, look at the wonders of the computer age now.
Homer: Wonders, Lisa, or blunders?
Lisa: I think that was implied by what I said.
PCPhill
2004-02-15 21:22:58 UTC
Permalink
I agree the initial investment is high. I just spent a small fortune on
Kokam 1500 batteries, 8 each 3s and 2s. The primary purpose is for a 1/4
scale with a 10S4P pack. But with the PCBs (series and parallel) they
manufacture it will now be a simple matter for me to power anything from a
speed 280 up to about a 90 glow equivalent. I haven't flown my glow models
for a while now and I'm really considering selling all the engines. If
anyone is interested I have a used, good running Saito 1.82 twin 4 Stroke
headed to eBay soon.( Gotta pay for the batteries somehow) Make a reasonable
offer.....

PCPhill
Wan
2004-02-17 02:26:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by PCPhill
I agree the initial investment is high. I just spent a small fortune on
Kokam 1500 batteries, 8 each 3s and 2s. The primary purpose is for a 1/4
scale with a 10S4P pack. But with the PCBs (series and parallel) they
manufacture it will now be a simple matter for me to power anything from a
speed 280 up to about a 90 glow equivalent. I haven't flown my glow models
for a while now and I'm really considering selling all the engines. If
anyone is interested I have a used, good running Saito 1.82 twin 4 Stroke
headed to eBay soon.( Gotta pay for the batteries somehow) Make a reasonable
offer.....
PCPhill
Well, PCPhill, I don't want to buy your engines because I'm thinking
eBay also. I still have 5 glow engines left. I may want to keep them
for sentimental reasons.

Though the original thought in this thread was about the comparative
costs of batteries. What you said about e-flight is what I meant all
along. You could fly the big ones like the other modelers have been
doing with glow.

As I said I'm relatively new to electric, flying them for 2 years. Li
Poly? I first heard about them last summer. I don't think there's much
else I could add that hasn't been said by more qualified people.
Except that I hope the battery prices will come down soon. But isn't
this what we want?

Good luck with your 1/4 scale electric.

Wan
Wan
2004-02-15 23:31:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug McLaren
| Reading what you gentlemen have said, I believe my point about the
| cost of electric flight is do-able now has been validified.
I don't think that anybody here was arguing otherwise.
| I have two E3Ds. Cost of the first kit From Gary Wright was $100 +
| the cost of covering, glue, etc. about $50. The second is a copy and
| materials cost about the same as the kit. Now the AXI brushless,
| $97, ESP $107 and Li Poly 3S2P cost $100. So the first plane ready
| to fly costs about $450.
Doesn't it have a radio and servos?
Yes but so do glow powered planes.
Post by Doug McLaren
I don't know what plane you've got, but I imagine it's a smaller
plane. This is definately the range where electrics are reasonably
priced.
Well, Doug, my plane has a 48" wing span and weighs about 56 oz before
Li Poly reduced it to about 42 oz. I do have an advantage of lower
weight over the heavier glow planes, if you could call it that.
Post by Doug McLaren
Try to get a 0.60 sized or larger plane with similar performance and
see how much it costs -- it'll be quite a bit more.
I have a friend who just finished a plane with a motor comparable in
power to a .90 four stroke. Yes, his system did cost lots more and I
can't account for it. Oh, yes his battery did cost about $345. And he
does have a charger that could charge multiple battery packs.

But how much does a .90 four stroke cost?
Post by Doug McLaren
| I cut down the weight of my field box for glow from about 40 lbs, to
| about 2 lbs for electric. I just shut off my electric and go home.
I don't think anybody here needs to be sold on the advantages of
electrics.
| Remember for electric, the charger + power supply for the
| batteries cost about $200 or less. Is this not a one time cost?
At least until you find that you need to charge two batteries at once :)
For me, you're right on that. I have to charge one battery at a time.
But it's good for the whole afternoon after that charge. If only I
have a charger like my friend's.....
Post by Doug McLaren
And you can do this much cheaper. GP Triton, $130. 110v -> 12v power
supply, use an old AT computer power supply. Cost, free to $20.
(For car use, you don't need any power supply.)
Now you tell me. I think I paid too much for the power supply for my
Triton..
Post by Doug McLaren
| And how much for starter and battery, fuel pump, glow igniter, extra
| glow plugs, etc. cost for glow planes?
Well, much of that stuff is optional, especially for a smaller plane.
And except for the glow plugs, it's a one time cost just like the
charger. At least until it wears out ...
Agreed
Post by Doug McLaren
For a small glow plane, a fuel bulb, glow ignitor and wood dowel (for
starting) will get you going for about $20.
| Would someone do a cost analysis on a gas powered plane RTF for
| comparison?
Well, I don't know what your plane is, I'm guessing it's 1/2A sized.
So a good engine could be had for $50 or so, and you'll need a
throttle servo, about $20 for a mini. $10 for a fuel tank. That, and
some fuel replaces your entire $300 power chain. (Though there may be
some additional cost as you'll need to make the plane fuel proof.)
To do what my plane could, you'd need a .32 to .45 powered glow plane.
Case in point, another flyer with a .40 OS could not keep up with it
in a chase. Trouble at the time I had only about 7 miniutes flight
time, but Li Poly changed that.

My power train, motor, ESC, battery as presented befere, cost about
$300. But, no fuel proofing, no tank, no need to buy fuel. But a good
.32 engine such as the Webra costs about $109 rather than th $50 or
so. But you do have me on the replacement cost.
Post by Doug McLaren
This thread wasn't originally about entry level. It was about the
extreme cost (compared to glow) of larger electric planes. The entry
level glow plane is about 0.40 sized, and the entry level electric is
usually 1/2A (0.05 or so) sized. Cost is the primary reason that
these sizes are entry level -- anything larger will cost more, but
going smaller won't be much (or any) cheaper.
Yes it was about the cost extremes from the smaller batteries to the
nearly $900 batteries. But I know someone who made his own indoor
plane of blue foam and flew it, total cost about $72. Now that's
cheap. At the other extreme for electrics, the sky's the limit.

I believe we're all waiting for prices of batteries to come down. Now
I've heard there will be Li Poly batteries that will yield 20 C. I
wonder if that will drive the "old" battery prices down?

Where do you get all your quotes?
"Discussion is good for the soul", Wan
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-20 23:04:03 UTC
Permalink
FINALLY someone who understands what I was saying. Thank you!
Post by Doug McLaren
| Reading what you gentlemen have said, I believe my point about the
| cost of electric flight is do-able now has been validified.
I don't think that anybody here was arguing otherwise.
| I have two E3Ds. Cost of the first kit From Gary Wright was $100 +
| the cost of covering, glue, etc. about $50. The second is a copy and
| materials cost about the same as the kit. Now the AXI brushless,
| $97, ESP $107 and Li Poly 3S2P cost $100. So the first plane ready
| to fly costs about $450.
Doesn't it have a radio and servos?
I don't know what plane you've got, but I imagine it's a smaller
plane. This is definately the range where electrics are reasonably
priced.
Try to get a 0.60 sized or larger plane with similar performance and
see how much it costs -- it'll be quite a bit more.
| I cut down the weight of my field box for glow from about 40 lbs, to
| about 2 lbs for electric. I just shut off my electric and go home.
I don't think anybody here needs to be sold on the advantages of
electrics.
| Remember for electric, the charger + power supply for the
| batteries cost about $200 or less. Is this not a one time cost?
At least until you find that you need to charge two batteries at once :)
And you can do this much cheaper. GP Triton, $130. 110v -> 12v power
supply, use an old AT computer power supply. Cost, free to $20.
(For car use, you don't need any power supply.)
| And how much for starter and battery, fuel pump, glow igniter, extra
| glow plugs, etc. cost for glow planes?
Well, much of that stuff is optional, especially for a smaller plane.
And except for the glow plugs, it's a one time cost just like the
charger. At least until it wears out ...
For a small glow plane, a fuel bulb, glow ignitor and wood dowel (for
starting) will get you going for about $20.
| Would someone do a cost analysis on a gas powered plane RTF for
| comparison?
Well, I don't know what your plane is, I'm guessing it's 1/2A sized.
So a good engine could be had for $50 or so, and you'll need a
throttle servo, about $20 for a mini. $10 for a fuel tank. That, and
some fuel replaces your entire $300 power chain. (Though there may be
some additional cost as you'll need to make the plane fuel proof.)
This thread wasn't originally about entry level. It was about the
extreme cost (compared to glow) of larger electric planes. The entry
level glow plane is about 0.40 sized, and the entry level electric is
usually 1/2A (0.05 or so) sized. Cost is the primary reason that
these sizes are entry level -- anything larger will cost more, but
going smaller won't be much (or any) cheaper.
--
Lisa: Well, look at the wonders of the computer age now.
Homer: Wonders, Lisa, or blunders?
Lisa: I think that was implied by what I said.
Wan
2004-02-14 13:44:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Doug McLaren
| 10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
And in case somebody wasn't paying attention, this is exactly why we
don't see many large electrics yet.
This battery pack puts out up to 2900 watts, or 3.8 HP.
This would be comparable to an OS FX 1.6 engine, which puts out up to
3.7 HP. And costs $270.
However the FX puts it out at a not too useful RPM. To be fair that pack
and a motor is probably nearer a 50cc motor.
Post by Doug McLaren
This battery pack will put out that much power for 6 minutes *at best*
(since it's a 10C discharge rate.)
And this is just the battery pack -- there's no ESC, no motor (with
this much money going inot just one battery pack, it's silly not to
get the best brushless motor you can find. And of course, it won't be
100% efficient, reducing the actual power you get.) You're looking at
many hundreds of dollars more for that.
No, but it will be approaching 90% overall. How efficient is your glo prop?
Post by Doug McLaren
And of course, you usually want at least two battery packs ... the
costs add up very fast. Some say that it all evens out in the end,
that you're essentially buying all your fuel up front. There's some
truth to that, but it still seems that large electrics still cost a
lot more, both up front and over all.
Its true. Get into the big sizes and the cost does rocket.
But you are not being totally fair here.
There are more variables than you account for.
Post by Doug McLaren
The `sweet spot' for electrics is still the Speed 400 and smaller
sizes. Once you get larger, the price goes WAY up. If you double the
power, you basically double the price. (Compare this to glow, where
if you double the power, you add maybe 20% to the cost.)
Actually I'd slightl;y take issue, and say that the sweet spot is
100-500W, whicgh is speed 400 up to roughly 40 sized glo equivalents. In
teh smaller planes, the radio gear has to be light, and that gest
expensive, but planes around the 15-25 glo equivalent are not too
expensive to electrify and not too small to need specialised gear.
And you don't need a brushless motor to enjoy kithoum - the excess power
and duration means rather les efficient (and much cheaper) motors still
deliver good performance.
Post by Doug McLaren
That said, I bought some Li-poly packs for my smaller electrics, a XE2
with an Astroflight 020, and an Electrifly with a geared Speed 400.
Both got two cell packs, the first was a Tanic 2200 pack, and the
second a 1700 mAh pack of some sort. They're quite nice, though I
wish I had a three cell pack in the XE2 -- it has less power now, but
a lot more duration.
Someday (hopefully soon!) these batteries will come way down in price.
That will be a very good thing!
I think it will be sooner rather than later. Ther are a lot of
applications becomeing more sensible using lithium technology. I think
there will be a huge incrase in use of these cells everywhere. Even
current small cars would benefit from knocking a few ounds of teh wight
by replacing the lead acid cell. If the price was right...
You both present points of view that are valid. WHEN the prices come
down, not IF, we would all benefit. The costs of Li Poly batteries for
larger aircraft seemed high indeed, But as the demand for them becomes
high, then mass production will make for lower prices.

Take the example of digital cameras. I bought a Nikon Coolpix 5000 for
about $1,000. In less than 6 months an improved version was selling
for around $700 (The Nikon Coolpix 5700, you may check it out). Most
things electronic or otherwise kind of work that way price wise.

This is my humble opinion.

Wan
gary
2004-02-19 02:40:26 UTC
Permalink
From what I've been reading on E-Zone, 3 cell packs can easily get out of
balance then cells need to be charged individually to get them equalized.
Then there is real fire danger, charging takes an hour or more and you need
a special charger. Three cells can fry a GWS 300C motor, two cells may not
be high enough voltage for brushless motors. It gets expensive and
complicated building and maintaining high amperage packs for large motors.
For now, Li Polys are great for parkflyers and indoor models if handled
properly.

Gary
Post by Wan
Hi,
In only a few months since I've been introduced to Li Poly batteries,
the developments in Lithium Polymer batteries grew in leaps and
bounds. Please witness the following specs and prices;
2 series, 8.5amp (nominal) li-poly 850mah 7.4 volt pack $29.28
3 series, 11amp (nominal) li-poly 1100mah 11.1 volt pack $53.52
2S3P, 33amp (nominal) li-poly 3300mah 7.4 volt pack $116.64
2600-4S4P, 104amp (nominal) li-poly 10400mah 14.8 volt pack $465.92
10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
These people make packs on order and have a huge list. I have only a
partial list here. Perhaps some of you already knew about this, but I
could paste their web site from which this info was derived if it's
not unethical to advertise, but not for me?
Wan
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-19 03:43:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by gary
From what I've been reading on E-Zone, 3 cell packs can easily get out of
balance then cells need to be charged individually to get them equalized.
That is only true if you really cane them. Otherwsie they stay pretty
well balanced. If you must thrash big packs, check out suzannes pack
balancer on the ezone. Its too heavy fort micro sized packs, but no
great penalty for the big ones.
Post by gary
Then there is real fire danger,
Its real, but its not common. More people lose fingers to glo props than
get hurt, and so far the aorts that has happened is asomeone losing a
car when they tossd a damaged pack in teh back,. COLKD have been a Nicad
juts as easily.

Ive seen cars burn out from shorts in their OWN electrics.

A danger to be taken seriously, but no worse than any other. If you must
charge the packs where youi can't see them,. make sure they are in
something fireprrof. I wouldn't store glo fuel by an open fire in a
plastic can either :-)
Post by gary
charging takes an hour or more and you need
a special charger.
Wll charging NiMh takes an hour or more and you need a special charger.
And you only get at best 5-10 minutes. Lipos might be esily 10 -20
minutes flight. I don't mind waiting an hour to recharge after three 7
minute flights.

nd LIPOS don;t need to be peaked up beforre flying. You can charge a
bunch at home, during the week, and fly em flat at the weekend. By the
time ou have flattend the last one the firts will be ready to fly again
anyway...
Post by gary
Three cells can fry a GWS 300C motor
Only if you don't pull the prop size down to get the currentin safe limist
Post by gary
, two cells may not
be high enough voltage for brushless motors.
That is all about propping and gearing the motors right for the packs. I
am getting BETTER efficiency AND power by carefully adjusting gearing on
cheap motors, by going up in voltage.
Post by gary
It gets expensive and
complicated building and maintaining high amperage packs for large motors.
That I agree with. The big packs are exopenseive, need a bit mopre
safety discipline, and a bit of looking after. Well if you havd forked
out a few hundred dollars for a big 4 stroke, you would take accare of
it too.
Post by gary
For now, Li Polys are great for parkflyers and indoor models if handled
properly.
No, they are great for up to about 1/2 bhp (roughly .15-.25 equivalent).
Beyond that it gets to >$100 for the packs, and they start to need
special treatment if for no other reason than they are too expesnive to
break!
Post by gary
Gary
Post by Wan
Hi,
In only a few months since I've been introduced to Li Poly batteries,
the developments in Lithium Polymer batteries grew in leaps and
bounds. Please witness the following specs and prices;
2 series, 8.5amp (nominal) li-poly 850mah 7.4 volt pack $29.28
3 series, 11amp (nominal) li-poly 1100mah 11.1 volt pack $53.52
2S3P, 33amp (nominal) li-poly 3300mah 7.4 volt pack $116.64
2600-4S4P, 104amp (nominal) li-poly 10400mah 14.8 volt pack $465.92
10S3P, 78amp (nominal) li-poly 7800mah 37 volt pack $873.60
These people make packs on order and have a huge list. I have only a
partial list here. Perhaps some of you already knew about this, but I
could paste their web site from which this info was derived if it's
not unethical to advertise, but not for me?
Wan
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-19 06:56:39 UTC
Permalink
Gee, I was caned mercilessly for even suggesting the same thing!
No, they are great for up to about 1/2 bhp (roughly .15-.25 equivalent).
Beyond that it gets to >$100 for the packs, and they start to need
special treatment if for no other reason than they are too expesnive to
break!
The Natural Philosopher
2004-02-19 10:12:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
Gee, I was caned mercilessly for even suggesting the same thing!
No, you were caned for saying that the entry fee was too high, somehow
assuming that the only way to enter E-flight was at the 61 model size level.

And also fo refusing to understand that packs and models are not

indissolubly connected, any more than you have to buy a new can

of fuel fo each aeroplane you own.



Anyay, you are a yank, and as such corporal and capital punishment is
something your legal system exonerates :-)
Post by Paul McIntosh
No, they are great for up to about 1/2 bhp (roughly .15-.25 equivalent).
Beyond that it gets to >$100 for the packs, and they start to need
special treatment if for no other reason than they are too expesnive to
break!
Jim Lilly
2004-02-19 11:12:40 UTC
Permalink
TNP,
Post by The Natural Philosopher
are a yank
Watch it there 'pond hopper'.<g>
--

Jim L.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 4.5, & WinXP Pro w/SP1
Paul McIntosh
2004-02-19 19:20:58 UTC
Permalink
Now there you go ASSUMING again. No matter how many time I say it, you just
don;t get it.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Gee, I was caned mercilessly for even suggesting the same thing!
No, you were caned for saying that the entry fee was too high, somehow
assuming that the only way to enter E-flight was at the 61 model size level.
And also fo refusing to understand that packs and models are not
indissolubly connected, any more than you have to buy a new can
of fuel fo each aeroplane you own.
Anyay, you are a yank, and as such corporal and capital punishment is
something your legal system exonerates :-)
Post by Paul McIntosh
No, they are great for up to about 1/2 bhp (roughly .15-.25 equivalent).
Beyond that it gets to >$100 for the packs, and they start to need
special treatment if for no other reason than they are too expesnive to
break!
Wan
2004-02-22 14:06:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul McIntosh
Now there you go ASSUMING again. No matter how many time I say it, you just
don;t get it.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
Post by Paul McIntosh
Gee, I was caned mercilessly for even suggesting the same thing!
No, you were caned for saying that the entry fee was too high, somehow
assuming that the only way to enter E-flight was at the 61 model size
level.
Post by The Natural Philosopher
And also fo refusing to understand that packs and models are not
indissolubly connected, any more than you have to buy a new can
of fuel fo each aeroplane you own.
Anyay, you are a yank, and as such corporal and capital punishment is
something your legal system exonerates :-)
Post by Paul McIntosh
No, they are great for up to about 1/2 bhp (roughly .15-.25 equivalent).
Beyond that it gets to >$100 for the packs, and they start to need
special treatment if for no other reason than they are too expesnive
tobreak!
Gary, I'd say my power train; Battery pack about $100, AXI brushless
motor $97, ESC $107, comes to about $294. When I add the charger and
power supply which may cost about $135 or less depending, bringing the
total to about $430 or less for power. I have the equivalent power
closer to that of a .30 to .40 and about the performance. Not the .15
to .25 of which you speak.

This does not include the cost of a plane which depends on which type.
Still, considering that I won't be needing the paraphernalia of gas
powered, don't you think that about $430 is not too expensive?

As for the batteries, they need care and have their hazards, but no
more than the hazards of gas power which can also cause fires and
explosions though rare. Any other opinions?

Wan
Loading...