Bob Kopski, 25 West End Dr., Lansdale PA 19446
RADIO CONTROL ELECTRICS
Hobby-shop brass strip adds great strength to Rascal
cabin area. Note triangle-stock fillet on LG “spreader”
plate.
New, robust “spreader” on Sig Rascal adds durability to LG. Added
plywood strips midcabin allow brass-strip reinforcement of cabin
structure.
THIS COLUMN WILL follow up on the Sig Rascal story from the
October 2004 column, offer a true-life name-tag lesson, and share
some exciting new-product info.
The October column described how I helped local friend Paul get
started in E-RC with a Sig Rascal ARF. The events began in the
June-July 2004 time frame, and by now (November 2004), Paul has
accumulated considerable flying experience. The Rascal has proven
itself well in this early learning process.
As typically happens with many newbies, Paul’s Rascal has had it
share of knocks. These have included the usual encounters with
mother earth, trees, falls from trees, hangar rash, etc. Throughout it
all, the Rascal has survived by virtue of its design strengths combined
with ongoing maintenance and repair. It continues flying as I write
this. Following are some lessons learned from this experience.
Do you recall my earlier comments that I would have preferred a
rubber-banded-on wing instead of the Rascal’s bolt-on wing? Sure
enough, the latter brought consequence. Among all of the encounters
with not-so-movable objects, some of those that engaged a wingtip
did result in damage to the wing attachment.
On one occasion, an LE dowel former hole was ripped open. On
another, the somewhat feeble cabin structure was broken apart. These
outcomes were not surprising and would likely have been avoided
with rubber-banded-on wings. Repairs were needed, and two photos
show the approach used to repair and strengthen the cabin area.
Specifically, a K&S 0.016 x 1⁄4-inch brass strip was formed over
the top of the cabin structure and down each fuselage side. This brass
strip was positioned at the wing center-section LE but over the
fuselage cabin structure itself. Some careful bending and shaping
permitted a good fit.
Next, 1⁄2-inch-wide, 1⁄16 plywood pieces were glued in place inside
the fuselage sides, centered where the brass-strip verticals fell. These
plywood strips were epoxied to the existing light-plywood fuselage
structure.
Then, as shown, four #2 x 1⁄4-inch sheet-metal screws were
used to firmly attach the brass to the outside of the fuselage. The
screws had plenty of plywood to bite into, and the brass-strip band
has admirably held the fuselage cabin structure in tight
containment ever since.
The cost was pennies worth of material, but admittedly a serious
cost to the innate beauty of the Rascal’s appearance!
Another wear-and-tear point of this airplane (and many others) is
the landing gear (LG). Newbies who are learning to land can really
test the durability of any undercarriage. It turns out that the Rascal
LG is quite sturdily installed (by design) in the fuselage and has
never shown any signs of ripping out despite many hard encounters.
Of course the individual wire struts do bend backward and
outward and have to be straightened to permit true-tracking ROG
(rise-off-ground), but overall the LG has held up well. What did not
hold up well is the fuselage bottom structure where the LG wires
emerge. That structure, called the “spreader” in the manual, did break
loose.
The replacement plywood piece was made heavier and longer and
was attached to the fuselage more securely. The new 3⁄32-inch-thick
piece actually protrudes 1⁄4 inch past the sides of the fuselage where a
piece of 1⁄4 triangle stock nests between the extended spreader and the
exterior fuselage sides. This revised spreader has held up well—but
also with some impact on the Rascal’s otherwise clean appearance.
Another weak point proved to be the tail skid. The original skid
wire quickly fatigued on this Rascal and on others locally. The
replacement consists of a single two-leg 0.032-inch-wire piece
shaped as shown and clamped to each side of the rudder with 2-56
hardware. So far this skid has held up extremely well.
A local modeler installed a similarly attached variant that includes
a 1⁄2-inch Du-Bro micro tail wheel. An additional Sig Easy Hinge was
installed between the lower rear fuselage end and the lowest part of
the rudder for extra support. Since the original skid design seems to
be short-lived, I think this modification should be considered during
initial assembly.
Another area that needed repair was the motor mount. One rather
hard nose-in broke the existing, not-too-sturdy structure on each side,
necessitating significant rework. The splintered light-plywood pieces
were pressed back close to original shape and soaked with
cyanoacrylate to solidify the damaged goods.
Then two pieces of 3⁄16 x 5⁄16-inch pine stock were epoxied on
top of the original beams and against each fuselage side and
clamped until cured. This made a big difference in the sturdiness
of this structural particular, and it would be a worthy
modification during initial assembly.
Castle Creations’ PHX-Link connects ESC to PC and makes
child’s play of otherwise tedious programming process.
Home-brew programming aid used before the PHX-Link eliminated
all throttle-stick wiggle needed during ESC “tune-up.”
This much-improved tail skid on the Rascal replaces the original.
Adding a wheel is even better!
The October 2004 column described the use of two seven-cell
500AR Ni-Cds, and some readers have questioned that selection. I
did that on purpose, and time has shown it to be a good choice.
These packs fly Rascal roughly six to seven minutes and need
roughly 15-18 minutes to recharge. The “fly one, charge one”
sequence allows enough but not too much air time for a newbie, and
it permits some between-flight relaxation—a needed cooldown
period for the “shakes” to settle! At the same time, numerous flights
are still possible on a typical summer evening.
Although I’d make this beginning choice again, I appreciate that
longer-duration flights would be beneficial in the future. Now it’s
time to add one or two longer-flying KAN 1050 packs, making
three or four total batteries that fit in place the same way.
Why not Li-Poly? That would require a new charger and may
have associated balance problems. What about a better motor? I’m
thinking that one of the AXI Outrunners would make a great
upgrade! Time may tell.
I have been flying RC for 50 years, and I flew FF before that.
Through the years I have lost several airplanes, and one FF and one
RC model have been “out there” for more than 40 years. I recovered
most lost models within a few days. Losing an airplane is just part
of the aeromodeling experience. And although it’s been nearly two
decades since I had such an experience, I did have an “incident” a
few weeks ago.
The model involved was my WEEVOLT!: a REVOLT! scaled to
park size. It was late in the evening, with the sun low on the
horizon. I had the model too far out and too low, and it suddenly
disappeared from sight. It was under full control, but when I put it
in a turn, it blended with the background and I could not regain a
visual soon enough. Neither could others on the flightline.
Days passed, and some local friends searched, including several
searches from the full-scale air. I figured it was a goner. After
approximately 10 days I got a phone call; it had been found as a
result of good fortune—and having my name on it. But there was a
surprising kind of luck associated with the latter.
It has been my practice to attach my name, address, etc. under
the middle of the wing so that the fuselage would protectively
enclose the placement. Surely anyone who found a lost model
would likely take the wing off, if only for storage convenience,
right?
Wrong! WEEVOLT’s wing is attached with rubber bands and
just begs to be removed. But the local resident who found it
(approximately 0.7 mile away) did not know to remove the wing.
The “luck” part of the find had to do with the wing shifting
sideways a bit on the wing saddle during touchdown. The stillattached
but slid-over wing exposed the name tag! I have since
redone all of my models and placed an additional readily visible
name tag on an external surface.
I own eight Castle Creations brushless controllers ranging from the
Phoenix-10 to the Phoenix-60. I love these devices! They offer
many features and work great. They include many operational
options such as brake behavior, throttle response, motor cutoff
voltage, etc. All of these can be selected by the user; i.e.,
programmed.
Although I have always liked this product line, I have also
always disliked the programming process itself. It takes a great deal
of care and patience, and it’s easy to make a mistake—without
knowing it.
Classic programming is physically carried out with a tedious
series of throttle-stick moves that are laboriously described in
several pages of sequential instructions. In time I became frustrated
with all of the throttle-stick wiggle needed to select and set the
desired performance features, so I built a “programming box” (see
photo) to ease some aspects of the process.
There are three push buttons representing full-throttle (“yes”),
mid-throttle (“neut”), and low-throttle (“no”)-equivalent throttlestick
positions. The ESC’s receiver cable plugs into and powers the
device, at which time the ESC “thinks” it’s plugged into a receiver.
Upon connecting the motor battery, the equivalent of the fullthrottle
(“yes”) signal is automatically sent to the ESC—the starting
position for the programming process to follow.
The same programming process is now
performed, but without a radio. The three
typical throttle-programming positions are
represented by the three push buttons and
are quickly invoked with certainty. No
more stick wiggle.
This approach greatly eased the
programming process for me, even though
the same tedious sequential paper
instruction set is used. But that was then.
Now enter the new Castle Creations PHXLink—
a PC interface that reduces the
programming chore to just moments of
play!
The small PHX-Link is shown in a
photo next to a standard RC radio
connector. Both are shown with a
Phoenix-60 controller. The ESC receiver
lead is plugged into a mating cable from
the Link via that radio connector. Another
connector onboard the Link accepts a
USB cable, the other end of which is
plugged into a PC.
Downloadable software allows the PC
to run the Link and access all
programming options via a simple screen
display. Parameter-option selection and
setup is just a few “clicks” away. Any
(later model) Phoenix controller is now a
snap to set up—with no paper instructions
to follow and with complete confidence in
what has been done.
The PHX-Link is less than $25 and is
readily available in the aeromodeling
marketplace. It works with any Windows
98SE through XP operating system and
brings sheer delight to “tuning up” a
Phoenix.
Further, future software upgrades are
available from the www.castle
creations.com Web site; just download
them into your PC. As I write this, there is
an available Beta software version, which
allows automatic sensing and setting of
the cutoff voltage. This allows flightline
swapping of varied-cell-count packs
without reprogramming the cutoff voltage.
My PHX-Link works great, and I
strongly encourage you to consider this
product.
Arriving too late for detailed discussion
in this column is the new FMA Direct
Automatic Cell Detect, Low Voltage
Cutoff Device (part AVC1AIR): a tiny
onboard accessory that allows older motor
controllers without settable voltage-level
shutdown to be used safely with Li-Poly
(or any other) packs. It’s especially
important not to drain Li-Poly packs too
far, or they will be damaged. More about
this item next month.
So ends one more monthly column.
Please do remember that electric power
works great throughout the winter months
too. And please do include an SASE with
any correspondence for which you’d like a
reply; everyone so doing does get one! MA
Edition: Model Aviation - 2005/02
Page Numbers: 87,88,89
Edition: Model Aviation - 2005/02
Page Numbers: 87,88,89
Bob Kopski, 25 West End Dr., Lansdale PA 19446
RADIO CONTROL ELECTRICS
Hobby-shop brass strip adds great strength to Rascal
cabin area. Note triangle-stock fillet on LG “spreader”
plate.
New, robust “spreader” on Sig Rascal adds durability to LG. Added
plywood strips midcabin allow brass-strip reinforcement of cabin
structure.
THIS COLUMN WILL follow up on the Sig Rascal story from the
October 2004 column, offer a true-life name-tag lesson, and share
some exciting new-product info.
The October column described how I helped local friend Paul get
started in E-RC with a Sig Rascal ARF. The events began in the
June-July 2004 time frame, and by now (November 2004), Paul has
accumulated considerable flying experience. The Rascal has proven
itself well in this early learning process.
As typically happens with many newbies, Paul’s Rascal has had it
share of knocks. These have included the usual encounters with
mother earth, trees, falls from trees, hangar rash, etc. Throughout it
all, the Rascal has survived by virtue of its design strengths combined
with ongoing maintenance and repair. It continues flying as I write
this. Following are some lessons learned from this experience.
Do you recall my earlier comments that I would have preferred a
rubber-banded-on wing instead of the Rascal’s bolt-on wing? Sure
enough, the latter brought consequence. Among all of the encounters
with not-so-movable objects, some of those that engaged a wingtip
did result in damage to the wing attachment.
On one occasion, an LE dowel former hole was ripped open. On
another, the somewhat feeble cabin structure was broken apart. These
outcomes were not surprising and would likely have been avoided
with rubber-banded-on wings. Repairs were needed, and two photos
show the approach used to repair and strengthen the cabin area.
Specifically, a K&S 0.016 x 1⁄4-inch brass strip was formed over
the top of the cabin structure and down each fuselage side. This brass
strip was positioned at the wing center-section LE but over the
fuselage cabin structure itself. Some careful bending and shaping
permitted a good fit.
Next, 1⁄2-inch-wide, 1⁄16 plywood pieces were glued in place inside
the fuselage sides, centered where the brass-strip verticals fell. These
plywood strips were epoxied to the existing light-plywood fuselage
structure.
Then, as shown, four #2 x 1⁄4-inch sheet-metal screws were
used to firmly attach the brass to the outside of the fuselage. The
screws had plenty of plywood to bite into, and the brass-strip band
has admirably held the fuselage cabin structure in tight
containment ever since.
The cost was pennies worth of material, but admittedly a serious
cost to the innate beauty of the Rascal’s appearance!
Another wear-and-tear point of this airplane (and many others) is
the landing gear (LG). Newbies who are learning to land can really
test the durability of any undercarriage. It turns out that the Rascal
LG is quite sturdily installed (by design) in the fuselage and has
never shown any signs of ripping out despite many hard encounters.
Of course the individual wire struts do bend backward and
outward and have to be straightened to permit true-tracking ROG
(rise-off-ground), but overall the LG has held up well. What did not
hold up well is the fuselage bottom structure where the LG wires
emerge. That structure, called the “spreader” in the manual, did break
loose.
The replacement plywood piece was made heavier and longer and
was attached to the fuselage more securely. The new 3⁄32-inch-thick
piece actually protrudes 1⁄4 inch past the sides of the fuselage where a
piece of 1⁄4 triangle stock nests between the extended spreader and the
exterior fuselage sides. This revised spreader has held up well—but
also with some impact on the Rascal’s otherwise clean appearance.
Another weak point proved to be the tail skid. The original skid
wire quickly fatigued on this Rascal and on others locally. The
replacement consists of a single two-leg 0.032-inch-wire piece
shaped as shown and clamped to each side of the rudder with 2-56
hardware. So far this skid has held up extremely well.
A local modeler installed a similarly attached variant that includes
a 1⁄2-inch Du-Bro micro tail wheel. An additional Sig Easy Hinge was
installed between the lower rear fuselage end and the lowest part of
the rudder for extra support. Since the original skid design seems to
be short-lived, I think this modification should be considered during
initial assembly.
Another area that needed repair was the motor mount. One rather
hard nose-in broke the existing, not-too-sturdy structure on each side,
necessitating significant rework. The splintered light-plywood pieces
were pressed back close to original shape and soaked with
cyanoacrylate to solidify the damaged goods.
Then two pieces of 3⁄16 x 5⁄16-inch pine stock were epoxied on
top of the original beams and against each fuselage side and
clamped until cured. This made a big difference in the sturdiness
of this structural particular, and it would be a worthy
modification during initial assembly.
Castle Creations’ PHX-Link connects ESC to PC and makes
child’s play of otherwise tedious programming process.
Home-brew programming aid used before the PHX-Link eliminated
all throttle-stick wiggle needed during ESC “tune-up.”
This much-improved tail skid on the Rascal replaces the original.
Adding a wheel is even better!
The October 2004 column described the use of two seven-cell
500AR Ni-Cds, and some readers have questioned that selection. I
did that on purpose, and time has shown it to be a good choice.
These packs fly Rascal roughly six to seven minutes and need
roughly 15-18 minutes to recharge. The “fly one, charge one”
sequence allows enough but not too much air time for a newbie, and
it permits some between-flight relaxation—a needed cooldown
period for the “shakes” to settle! At the same time, numerous flights
are still possible on a typical summer evening.
Although I’d make this beginning choice again, I appreciate that
longer-duration flights would be beneficial in the future. Now it’s
time to add one or two longer-flying KAN 1050 packs, making
three or four total batteries that fit in place the same way.
Why not Li-Poly? That would require a new charger and may
have associated balance problems. What about a better motor? I’m
thinking that one of the AXI Outrunners would make a great
upgrade! Time may tell.
I have been flying RC for 50 years, and I flew FF before that.
Through the years I have lost several airplanes, and one FF and one
RC model have been “out there” for more than 40 years. I recovered
most lost models within a few days. Losing an airplane is just part
of the aeromodeling experience. And although it’s been nearly two
decades since I had such an experience, I did have an “incident” a
few weeks ago.
The model involved was my WEEVOLT!: a REVOLT! scaled to
park size. It was late in the evening, with the sun low on the
horizon. I had the model too far out and too low, and it suddenly
disappeared from sight. It was under full control, but when I put it
in a turn, it blended with the background and I could not regain a
visual soon enough. Neither could others on the flightline.
Days passed, and some local friends searched, including several
searches from the full-scale air. I figured it was a goner. After
approximately 10 days I got a phone call; it had been found as a
result of good fortune—and having my name on it. But there was a
surprising kind of luck associated with the latter.
It has been my practice to attach my name, address, etc. under
the middle of the wing so that the fuselage would protectively
enclose the placement. Surely anyone who found a lost model
would likely take the wing off, if only for storage convenience,
right?
Wrong! WEEVOLT’s wing is attached with rubber bands and
just begs to be removed. But the local resident who found it
(approximately 0.7 mile away) did not know to remove the wing.
The “luck” part of the find had to do with the wing shifting
sideways a bit on the wing saddle during touchdown. The stillattached
but slid-over wing exposed the name tag! I have since
redone all of my models and placed an additional readily visible
name tag on an external surface.
I own eight Castle Creations brushless controllers ranging from the
Phoenix-10 to the Phoenix-60. I love these devices! They offer
many features and work great. They include many operational
options such as brake behavior, throttle response, motor cutoff
voltage, etc. All of these can be selected by the user; i.e.,
programmed.
Although I have always liked this product line, I have also
always disliked the programming process itself. It takes a great deal
of care and patience, and it’s easy to make a mistake—without
knowing it.
Classic programming is physically carried out with a tedious
series of throttle-stick moves that are laboriously described in
several pages of sequential instructions. In time I became frustrated
with all of the throttle-stick wiggle needed to select and set the
desired performance features, so I built a “programming box” (see
photo) to ease some aspects of the process.
There are three push buttons representing full-throttle (“yes”),
mid-throttle (“neut”), and low-throttle (“no”)-equivalent throttlestick
positions. The ESC’s receiver cable plugs into and powers the
device, at which time the ESC “thinks” it’s plugged into a receiver.
Upon connecting the motor battery, the equivalent of the fullthrottle
(“yes”) signal is automatically sent to the ESC—the starting
position for the programming process to follow.
The same programming process is now
performed, but without a radio. The three
typical throttle-programming positions are
represented by the three push buttons and
are quickly invoked with certainty. No
more stick wiggle.
This approach greatly eased the
programming process for me, even though
the same tedious sequential paper
instruction set is used. But that was then.
Now enter the new Castle Creations PHXLink—
a PC interface that reduces the
programming chore to just moments of
play!
The small PHX-Link is shown in a
photo next to a standard RC radio
connector. Both are shown with a
Phoenix-60 controller. The ESC receiver
lead is plugged into a mating cable from
the Link via that radio connector. Another
connector onboard the Link accepts a
USB cable, the other end of which is
plugged into a PC.
Downloadable software allows the PC
to run the Link and access all
programming options via a simple screen
display. Parameter-option selection and
setup is just a few “clicks” away. Any
(later model) Phoenix controller is now a
snap to set up—with no paper instructions
to follow and with complete confidence in
what has been done.
The PHX-Link is less than $25 and is
readily available in the aeromodeling
marketplace. It works with any Windows
98SE through XP operating system and
brings sheer delight to “tuning up” a
Phoenix.
Further, future software upgrades are
available from the www.castle
creations.com Web site; just download
them into your PC. As I write this, there is
an available Beta software version, which
allows automatic sensing and setting of
the cutoff voltage. This allows flightline
swapping of varied-cell-count packs
without reprogramming the cutoff voltage.
My PHX-Link works great, and I
strongly encourage you to consider this
product.
Arriving too late for detailed discussion
in this column is the new FMA Direct
Automatic Cell Detect, Low Voltage
Cutoff Device (part AVC1AIR): a tiny
onboard accessory that allows older motor
controllers without settable voltage-level
shutdown to be used safely with Li-Poly
(or any other) packs. It’s especially
important not to drain Li-Poly packs too
far, or they will be damaged. More about
this item next month.
So ends one more monthly column.
Please do remember that electric power
works great throughout the winter months
too. And please do include an SASE with
any correspondence for which you’d like a
reply; everyone so doing does get one! MA
Edition: Model Aviation - 2005/02
Page Numbers: 87,88,89
Bob Kopski, 25 West End Dr., Lansdale PA 19446
RADIO CONTROL ELECTRICS
Hobby-shop brass strip adds great strength to Rascal
cabin area. Note triangle-stock fillet on LG “spreader”
plate.
New, robust “spreader” on Sig Rascal adds durability to LG. Added
plywood strips midcabin allow brass-strip reinforcement of cabin
structure.
THIS COLUMN WILL follow up on the Sig Rascal story from the
October 2004 column, offer a true-life name-tag lesson, and share
some exciting new-product info.
The October column described how I helped local friend Paul get
started in E-RC with a Sig Rascal ARF. The events began in the
June-July 2004 time frame, and by now (November 2004), Paul has
accumulated considerable flying experience. The Rascal has proven
itself well in this early learning process.
As typically happens with many newbies, Paul’s Rascal has had it
share of knocks. These have included the usual encounters with
mother earth, trees, falls from trees, hangar rash, etc. Throughout it
all, the Rascal has survived by virtue of its design strengths combined
with ongoing maintenance and repair. It continues flying as I write
this. Following are some lessons learned from this experience.
Do you recall my earlier comments that I would have preferred a
rubber-banded-on wing instead of the Rascal’s bolt-on wing? Sure
enough, the latter brought consequence. Among all of the encounters
with not-so-movable objects, some of those that engaged a wingtip
did result in damage to the wing attachment.
On one occasion, an LE dowel former hole was ripped open. On
another, the somewhat feeble cabin structure was broken apart. These
outcomes were not surprising and would likely have been avoided
with rubber-banded-on wings. Repairs were needed, and two photos
show the approach used to repair and strengthen the cabin area.
Specifically, a K&S 0.016 x 1⁄4-inch brass strip was formed over
the top of the cabin structure and down each fuselage side. This brass
strip was positioned at the wing center-section LE but over the
fuselage cabin structure itself. Some careful bending and shaping
permitted a good fit.
Next, 1⁄2-inch-wide, 1⁄16 plywood pieces were glued in place inside
the fuselage sides, centered where the brass-strip verticals fell. These
plywood strips were epoxied to the existing light-plywood fuselage
structure.
Then, as shown, four #2 x 1⁄4-inch sheet-metal screws were
used to firmly attach the brass to the outside of the fuselage. The
screws had plenty of plywood to bite into, and the brass-strip band
has admirably held the fuselage cabin structure in tight
containment ever since.
The cost was pennies worth of material, but admittedly a serious
cost to the innate beauty of the Rascal’s appearance!
Another wear-and-tear point of this airplane (and many others) is
the landing gear (LG). Newbies who are learning to land can really
test the durability of any undercarriage. It turns out that the Rascal
LG is quite sturdily installed (by design) in the fuselage and has
never shown any signs of ripping out despite many hard encounters.
Of course the individual wire struts do bend backward and
outward and have to be straightened to permit true-tracking ROG
(rise-off-ground), but overall the LG has held up well. What did not
hold up well is the fuselage bottom structure where the LG wires
emerge. That structure, called the “spreader” in the manual, did break
loose.
The replacement plywood piece was made heavier and longer and
was attached to the fuselage more securely. The new 3⁄32-inch-thick
piece actually protrudes 1⁄4 inch past the sides of the fuselage where a
piece of 1⁄4 triangle stock nests between the extended spreader and the
exterior fuselage sides. This revised spreader has held up well—but
also with some impact on the Rascal’s otherwise clean appearance.
Another weak point proved to be the tail skid. The original skid
wire quickly fatigued on this Rascal and on others locally. The
replacement consists of a single two-leg 0.032-inch-wire piece
shaped as shown and clamped to each side of the rudder with 2-56
hardware. So far this skid has held up extremely well.
A local modeler installed a similarly attached variant that includes
a 1⁄2-inch Du-Bro micro tail wheel. An additional Sig Easy Hinge was
installed between the lower rear fuselage end and the lowest part of
the rudder for extra support. Since the original skid design seems to
be short-lived, I think this modification should be considered during
initial assembly.
Another area that needed repair was the motor mount. One rather
hard nose-in broke the existing, not-too-sturdy structure on each side,
necessitating significant rework. The splintered light-plywood pieces
were pressed back close to original shape and soaked with
cyanoacrylate to solidify the damaged goods.
Then two pieces of 3⁄16 x 5⁄16-inch pine stock were epoxied on
top of the original beams and against each fuselage side and
clamped until cured. This made a big difference in the sturdiness
of this structural particular, and it would be a worthy
modification during initial assembly.
Castle Creations’ PHX-Link connects ESC to PC and makes
child’s play of otherwise tedious programming process.
Home-brew programming aid used before the PHX-Link eliminated
all throttle-stick wiggle needed during ESC “tune-up.”
This much-improved tail skid on the Rascal replaces the original.
Adding a wheel is even better!
The October 2004 column described the use of two seven-cell
500AR Ni-Cds, and some readers have questioned that selection. I
did that on purpose, and time has shown it to be a good choice.
These packs fly Rascal roughly six to seven minutes and need
roughly 15-18 minutes to recharge. The “fly one, charge one”
sequence allows enough but not too much air time for a newbie, and
it permits some between-flight relaxation—a needed cooldown
period for the “shakes” to settle! At the same time, numerous flights
are still possible on a typical summer evening.
Although I’d make this beginning choice again, I appreciate that
longer-duration flights would be beneficial in the future. Now it’s
time to add one or two longer-flying KAN 1050 packs, making
three or four total batteries that fit in place the same way.
Why not Li-Poly? That would require a new charger and may
have associated balance problems. What about a better motor? I’m
thinking that one of the AXI Outrunners would make a great
upgrade! Time may tell.
I have been flying RC for 50 years, and I flew FF before that.
Through the years I have lost several airplanes, and one FF and one
RC model have been “out there” for more than 40 years. I recovered
most lost models within a few days. Losing an airplane is just part
of the aeromodeling experience. And although it’s been nearly two
decades since I had such an experience, I did have an “incident” a
few weeks ago.
The model involved was my WEEVOLT!: a REVOLT! scaled to
park size. It was late in the evening, with the sun low on the
horizon. I had the model too far out and too low, and it suddenly
disappeared from sight. It was under full control, but when I put it
in a turn, it blended with the background and I could not regain a
visual soon enough. Neither could others on the flightline.
Days passed, and some local friends searched, including several
searches from the full-scale air. I figured it was a goner. After
approximately 10 days I got a phone call; it had been found as a
result of good fortune—and having my name on it. But there was a
surprising kind of luck associated with the latter.
It has been my practice to attach my name, address, etc. under
the middle of the wing so that the fuselage would protectively
enclose the placement. Surely anyone who found a lost model
would likely take the wing off, if only for storage convenience,
right?
Wrong! WEEVOLT’s wing is attached with rubber bands and
just begs to be removed. But the local resident who found it
(approximately 0.7 mile away) did not know to remove the wing.
The “luck” part of the find had to do with the wing shifting
sideways a bit on the wing saddle during touchdown. The stillattached
but slid-over wing exposed the name tag! I have since
redone all of my models and placed an additional readily visible
name tag on an external surface.
I own eight Castle Creations brushless controllers ranging from the
Phoenix-10 to the Phoenix-60. I love these devices! They offer
many features and work great. They include many operational
options such as brake behavior, throttle response, motor cutoff
voltage, etc. All of these can be selected by the user; i.e.,
programmed.
Although I have always liked this product line, I have also
always disliked the programming process itself. It takes a great deal
of care and patience, and it’s easy to make a mistake—without
knowing it.
Classic programming is physically carried out with a tedious
series of throttle-stick moves that are laboriously described in
several pages of sequential instructions. In time I became frustrated
with all of the throttle-stick wiggle needed to select and set the
desired performance features, so I built a “programming box” (see
photo) to ease some aspects of the process.
There are three push buttons representing full-throttle (“yes”),
mid-throttle (“neut”), and low-throttle (“no”)-equivalent throttlestick
positions. The ESC’s receiver cable plugs into and powers the
device, at which time the ESC “thinks” it’s plugged into a receiver.
Upon connecting the motor battery, the equivalent of the fullthrottle
(“yes”) signal is automatically sent to the ESC—the starting
position for the programming process to follow.
The same programming process is now
performed, but without a radio. The three
typical throttle-programming positions are
represented by the three push buttons and
are quickly invoked with certainty. No
more stick wiggle.
This approach greatly eased the
programming process for me, even though
the same tedious sequential paper
instruction set is used. But that was then.
Now enter the new Castle Creations PHXLink—
a PC interface that reduces the
programming chore to just moments of
play!
The small PHX-Link is shown in a
photo next to a standard RC radio
connector. Both are shown with a
Phoenix-60 controller. The ESC receiver
lead is plugged into a mating cable from
the Link via that radio connector. Another
connector onboard the Link accepts a
USB cable, the other end of which is
plugged into a PC.
Downloadable software allows the PC
to run the Link and access all
programming options via a simple screen
display. Parameter-option selection and
setup is just a few “clicks” away. Any
(later model) Phoenix controller is now a
snap to set up—with no paper instructions
to follow and with complete confidence in
what has been done.
The PHX-Link is less than $25 and is
readily available in the aeromodeling
marketplace. It works with any Windows
98SE through XP operating system and
brings sheer delight to “tuning up” a
Phoenix.
Further, future software upgrades are
available from the www.castle
creations.com Web site; just download
them into your PC. As I write this, there is
an available Beta software version, which
allows automatic sensing and setting of
the cutoff voltage. This allows flightline
swapping of varied-cell-count packs
without reprogramming the cutoff voltage.
My PHX-Link works great, and I
strongly encourage you to consider this
product.
Arriving too late for detailed discussion
in this column is the new FMA Direct
Automatic Cell Detect, Low Voltage
Cutoff Device (part AVC1AIR): a tiny
onboard accessory that allows older motor
controllers without settable voltage-level
shutdown to be used safely with Li-Poly
(or any other) packs. It’s especially
important not to drain Li-Poly packs too
far, or they will be damaged. More about
this item next month.
So ends one more monthly column.
Please do remember that electric power
works great throughout the winter months
too. And please do include an SASE with
any correspondence for which you’d like a
reply; everyone so doing does get one! MA