Shaun Evans

Hi,

I just cracked open the box on this new "Mako" kit. I'll be building it for the 11-s Dynamax system from XPS. This will be the sixth one of these I've built, but I'm definitely open to ideas and experiences... especially if they help me save some weight! The big fan/motor combo is not the lightest in the industry, but the drop-in fit, great performance of the fan and cool turbine sound won the day. I'll be starting this build next Monday so if any of you are building one, or thinking about starting one, feel free to chime in with your thoughts and photos.

The first pic is the fuse with the paper wrapping pulled off. There is a shot of the fuselage viewed from the rear showing the carbon reinforcement inside. There's a shot of the infamous inlet and the view from the front of it to the fan.

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

Shaun you have to many builds going on
11 cell should be good for this plane. I would stay at 5000 mah packs and not any bigger. Mine before the operating canopy , missiles and dropping fuel tank was 15lbs. Now with everything I am at 15.5 pounds and she still flys great. What ever you do keep it under 16lbs. Where are you going to install the batteries? I moved my fan back on mine and installed them all on top of the inlet behind the cockpit.

jmalone1982

My Feedback: (1)

Subscribed and excited.

SCALECRAFT

My Feedback: (13)

Hi

I have the early poly version. I see in the intake to the fan there is no landing gear clearance humps. Have those been redone/removed? One of the reasons I put the dynemax in the BVM. Also the LE flaps helped to use the BVM.

On my BVM I did a test run on my dynemax/scopion 12s 5300 installed. As I throttled up, my intake liner detached from the front urethane lip. May have never been glued in.



Really loud. No damage.

Shaun Evans

Hi,

No, the inlet still has the bumps for the gear and such. It's also still got those sharp corners for the area where the top of the intake meets the bottom of the nose section. Yikes on the inlet detachment! Yeah, these fans ain't no joke. In the Yellow kit, you are advised to reinforce the top of the inlet with heavy cloth and resin to keep it from collapsing. On my last EDF build, you could see the inlet contorting slightly (even with the reinforcement) with the E-Turbax on 10s. Scary at first!

Shaun Evans

Yep, I got a lot of projects going on! On my last one, I had the batteries behind the cockpit and on top of the inlet as well. I still ended up needing to add tail ballast. Did you? That's one sweet-looking Falcon, btw. How did you operate your canopy?

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

I used two servos for the canopy. One opens and closes. The other is a micro servo that pushes a pin to lock it. I used the servo slowing feature in my radio and it works great.

I moved my fan back a few inches during the build so I could have all my batteries on top of the inlet. I am running 3 4cell packs. So 12 cell total. But my inlet is much smaller then the stock one so I have more room inside my plane. I wish yellow would make a smaller inlet for this plane for 110mm fans so it would all be a stock drop in system. But electric has so much power now it does not matter what system you use they all work great.

I also installed my receiver in the tail under the thrust tube. So I have short servo runs to all my main flight control servos. The receiver battery goes in the main hatch along with the small lipo for the nav lights.

Shaun Evans

Hey,

Well, maybe you can upload some more video (that doesn't look like it was shot from space)? Yours is one of the best looking of these around, and I sure wouldn't mind having more video for my site!

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

I will try and get some good video at florida jets next week but its hard because its so busy out thier.

jmalone1982

My Feedback: (1)

so Shaun, I am getting ready to be a Yellow aircraft dealer and already talked with Charles. I have been trying to get into your site and my pc wont let me in nor will my Blackberry. Whats the deal?

I have a few customers wanting the good ole Mako and also an F15 arf. I really dig the F15, Nobody, I mean Nobody has a better, more complete arf in the world. Is there a problem with The site?<br type="_moz" />

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

His site works fine for me...........

Shaun Evans

Hi,

Yeah, I just checked it, too. Hmmm..... Well, anyway, I do agree about the F-15! Congrats on the dealerhood, too.

SCALECRAFT

My Feedback: (13)

Yes I would agree that it is a bit scary. Especially when holding the model back and throttling up. 100% rev ups on the ground will be short on this power system till in flight. My wren turbine is less scary for me.

My (BVM) intake duct failed at the bottom. I guess I'll glass the top of the intake as well with some light kevlar. Along with the the rest of the areas that are flat and elongated a bit.

I noticed that my 90mm K&A F-100 has far stronger intake ducts and still needed additional support. Once I reinforce these ducts, its ready for a test flight. Then if in one piece, paint.

Steve

Shaun Evans

Hi,

Yep. This one will get the inlet reinforced enough to not worry about it. The fan is very powerful, even on my 6-cell runups that I did for self-entertainment. I'm looking forward to getting this build started. Now, I'm off to finish weathering the F-18 and then trying that clear-coat!

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

Shaun dont forget to do the CG 3/4 of an inch foward. If you dont the plane will extremely hard to land.........

This CG is only for an electric F16. Since electric has no fuel tanks our CG does not change and if we use the published CG from yellow you will crash it or damage it.

SCALECRAFT

My Feedback: (13)

With all due respect, but....

Please explain why the proper CG location would be different from a model that has fuel takes tanks that are nearly empty upon landing, and lighter from take off weight. +.The tanks are empty when one CG's the model and returns to that CG location ( + or - ) if one knows his models fuel consumption.

The batteries don't get lighter as they are consumed. Is this why??

I may be wrong, but if you set your edf system up on the same CG, will it not land safely. A bit heavier perhaps, but that"s why I know the weight of every model I fly. To determine how to land it.

Generally speaking, forward CG has always been more forgiving for me, but a very little off the proper CG for good all around handling at slow speeds.

It may be me, I apologize in advance.

Steve

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

Steve I totally know where you are coming from I was the same way but after the craziest landings ever I had to figure out why. For one the heavier a plane is more CG sensitive then a light plane. So with the batteries you are landing like its full of fuel. Now on the glow and turbine planes the fuel went above the inlet in front of the CG. So by the time you burn the fuel out the plane has lost enough weight to not be so CG sensitive. Also you would always land with some fuel in the tank and that fuel was in front of the CG since yellow does the CG with the tanks empty.

Here is a video with the CG where I say to put it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNHDq...layer_embedded

I had some video of my landings before with the CG that yellow wants but they are deleted now. All I can say is it was almost impossible to land. The tail would pitch around all over the place by just touchy any elevator at all.

If it was nose heavy it would not land like that. Scalecraft I know you are building a BVM F16 also and if I rememebr right Ralf had one and he had to change the CG from where BVM says to put it also. I will try and ask about the BVM F16 at flroida jets I am sure Bob will have the electric one thier.

Shaun Evans

Hi,

Interesting stuff! I'll be building this for a customer, and unless he requests a trim-flight, I won't be flying it. I have, though, logged hundreds of flights on this airframe, including glow DF and the first turbine flight on the new kit. I've flown them on everything from a P-60 to a P-120. As a point of fact, I've only had one flight on this airframe as an EDF, and it ended in a badly-negotiated dead-stick, so I can't say how the landing would have been under power [] . That plane was balanced 1/4" forward of the recommended CG which is my default CG for this airplane. It did not seem pitch-sensitive at all but, like I said, that short flight didn't leave a lot of time for data-gathering....

SCALECRAFT

My Feedback: (13)

gun

Thanks for your explanation. Respectfully however, I do not agree that CG affects heavy models more than light models. What weight would affect is each models stall speed.

A light weight model properly CGed will fail to land if it is stalled, whereas a heavy properly CGed model will land safely with enough airspeed.

A given is that my CG locations are based on dry tanks. Only variables on CG for certain models is landing gear retracted or extended or balanced inverted.


My thinking is this on EDFs: If you have a proven correct CG location for an airframe, when setting up your model, you locate all your hardware to balance on the given proven CG.

"If" the model is heavier in its ready to fly condition, that pilot would know not to bring it in too slow. Also, in turbine models were much fuel is needed (aprox 2.5lbs for 50oz), the fuel should be located as close to CG as possible. Also the amount of fuel may not come into play since its gone.

I do see your point and it has been my practice for years. That is to have nose heavy model oppose to a tail heavy one.

Also note that on my 1991 production BVM, throttling up my dynemax/scopion630kv with 12s 5400Ma 30-60c to around 40%, while holding the model from moving forward has caused duct collapse again. I don't recommend holding the plane back past 25% throttle. Off to fix ducting or fabricate a new composite one. Loud to...

I have the BVM CG location, but they had sent out an amendment to the original location. I will await your friends location and figure it out. I do have a leading edge flat to consider as well in this configuration.


Shaun, sorry about the "off subject".

Steve















Steve

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

Steve all I can go by is what I went through. I can tell you right now 100% fact you will be lucky to land this plane consistantly with the factory CG. You can even call Charles at yellow he said they asume you will land with fuel in the tanks thats why the CG yellow gives is correct for fuel planes because the tanks are in the nose and that will move the CG on all the fuel planes. For electric the published CG is to far aft period.

Shaun when you fly the plane at the published CG you will not notice it being tail heavy until you get the heavy main gear out and slow down. Then its going to be a fun ride.
I have flown this plane nose heavy and tail heavy. At 3/4 inch forward from yellows spot is perfect on this plane.

Shaun Evans

Gun,

Do you think there could have been any other factors involved? For example, I had a customer who I helped with one and somehow he managed to put the gear door cylinders in different spots (with different geometries resulting) and the doors did not open symmetrically. For that reason, the plan had a big yaw when the gear were down.

I'm just thinking out loud because what you're saying doesn't jibe with my own experiences with the bird (which are pretty substantial and thorough). Don't get me wrong...obviously, I value your experiences with this setup.

gunradd

My Feedback: (9)

Shaun to get it flying right I changed nothing but the CG. Now it flys like a baby and high alpha with it is great and predictable before not so much.....

Shaun the difference is with the fuel planes the CG is always forward of where you set it because you CG it with the tanks empty. If you totally drain the fuel tanks then I am pretty sure you would be tail heavy. I have played with the CG on this plane for no less then 15 flights to get it right. With the CG where yellow says and no fuel tanks to move the CG forward then you will need to actually carry a little down elevator to keep the plane from dropping the tail and crashing on landing.



Shaun I hope you get to fly one electric and you will see what I mean. You have a video on your site of a yellow F16 electric, he also had to move his CG up some to get good landings. If you get to fly this thing then I hope you can get yellow to have a part in the manual to have a different CG for electric planes because it would make people a ton happier when they still have their plane in one peice.

tulz161

Hey Shaun...when I try to go to your site now i get a "this might harm your computer." Not sure if you're aware or not.

Shaun Evans

Hi,

Yeah, thanks. I'm working on it. There was some fake member that was a phishing bot, but it's gone. Now it takes time for the crap to fall off. Sucks.

Shaun Evans

Hi,

There's a little progress on the build. The wing spars are solid carbon rod which are captured in aluminum and plastic clamps. The spars are glued into balsa filler blocks which are carved to shape to fit inside the pre-cut slots in the wings. With the DF inlet, you have to have that inside the fuse before you can glue in the formers. The inlet was reinforced with some heavy cloth to prevent collapse under all the negative pressure from the fan.

The nose gear mount is made up from a few pre-cut ply pieces. There's a recess routed for the door cylinder mount, but you have to carve out a little stock for the steering arm tiller to clear. The scale nose gear is pretty nice looking. There are lots of nice looking scale F-16 gear out now, but this one was the first....