Delta Star Rocket Plane

Sounds good Boris, that is a great design you have there, stick with it.

LiFE batteries are great, very good choice. They also hold a charge for a very long time (low self discharge).

I would look at your throw on roll axis and reduce if necessary or maybe add some exponential (30-50 percent) to tame the roll axis. In my experince pitch is usualy fine with tons of throw. But that high roll rate roll can be devastating and as I said it can lead you to believe the radio is not working, but remember of the radio stops working it goes to failsafe and wont tumble and go crazy when you are mixing the sticks.

I agree it doesn't look like twitchy radio commands.

In regards to failsafe, that only applies if the rx is powered up and looses link, brownout on the other hand will most likely just have inputs come and go as power fluctuates, or just stop at the last place the servos were when the power drooped.

I think your problem doesn't lie with the radio gear, but rather a combination of an overweight airplane and possibly an inexperienced pilot? The craft was a fast, high performance airplane to begin with and you managed to pile on an extra half a pound with all your "improvements". That, together with crappy flying conditions, probably combined to produce an almost unflyable airplane. I think what probably happened is you over controlled the aircraft and it entered a classic departure (or approach, in this case) stall scenario where one wing stalls slightly earlier than the other resulting in a spin into the ground. With an overweight airplane, this happens at a much higher airspeed than you would think. Personally, I would do whatever I could to reduce the flying weight rather than adding more nose weight. A lighter, lower impulse motor would probably be a good first step. And I would definiitely add a bunch of expo or just reduce the throws of your flight controls. And wait for a calm day! It's hard enough to tell how an airplane is flying on a calm day, let alone with gusty conditions like that. Best of luck with your future flights. John Carlson.:fly:

Forgot to subscribe, what a dummy!

It was in the mid-twenties F last night, as it was Saturday for the flights.

I took the opportunity to test battery performance in cold temperatures.

The battery is LiFe 6.4V 1200 mAh. The two Hitec HS-82MG servos are each rated to draw about 280 mA when activated and the Hitec Optima 6 2.4 Ghz receiver 190 mA.

There is a LOT of extra capacity in this battery. Activating servos continuously for an hour would use only 63% of rated battery capacity.

Test 1:
glider 65-70 F
start battery voltage 6.68 V (not re-charged after Saturday's flights)
activated servos continuously for 5 minutes
no performance problems
end battery voltage 6.64 V

Test 2:
glider about 25 F (outside for 2 hours - not re-charged)
start battery voltage 6.68 V
activated servos continuously for 5 minutes (in cold)
no performance problems
end battery voltage 6.58 V

This does not seem to support the theory that the battery did not perform adequately due to cold.

Remaining possible causes for the apparent loss of flight control at the end of the second flight Saturday:

I may have failed to fully secure the switch in the on position, there may have been an aerodynamic problem, or there my have been another electrical failure that I have not been able to replicate.

I designed this model a time ago. It is a great flying model and lands at a walking pace. I also have an electric version with an electric motor up front and rocket motor in the rear. I still need to cover the model and hope to do that some time this year.

You have made so many changes "improvements" to this model that any bad flight habbits it may have are amost likely been caused by these changes. You increased the weght and decreased the wing area, two big negatives.

For anyone else who decides to purchase a Delta Star, please build it per the instructions. You will be very pleased with it's performance both going up and gliding down.

John Boren

Thanks for your input, John, thought I was the lone ranger out here. John.

John Boren, thank you for designing this beautiful kit.

On a different note, is Estes planning to produce more D11-P or E9-P motors in the near future?

My usual sources have been out for some time.

All,

First many thanks to John for letting me sell his kit. The only difference between the original kit of John's and mine is that I wanted to be able to use a 32mm motor in addition to the 29mm and I also added a battery bay up front. I am sure John would have added these himself had time permitted.

I set the balance point up as "motor NOT installed" as for the motors spec'ed in the instructions, there was very little difference for this balance point between 29mm and 32mm motors. Main reason was that many people (myself) did not have a burnt out motor of the type I was planning to use already available. The model's true balance point is also set on the plans for those planning to use electric / other type power. I have since found that a slightly nose heavy balance is desirable for first flights and it is noted on the plans. It is NOT set to fly in high winds and says so in the instructions. Until it gets up to speed, it will be very twitchy, as with all deltas. I am impressed at any control someone would have in the winds shown in the video.

I designed the Gamma Star, but it essentially a little brother of the Delta in almost every way, just scaled down. These models are built to fly and even without sheeted wings, fiberglass, etc. are extremely tough (ask me how I know) and excellent fliers, but are NOT for the beginner pilot (intermediate at least).

That said, the builder had some pretty cool ideas I liked as I ponder an L1 version called the Alpha Star .

The Switchblade will be launch tested this weekend, weather permitting. It already glides very nice. It will be BT-60 based for lighter wing loading, but one of the hold ups I am having is a source/ replacement for the Estes PNC-60AH cone (Red Max). This is the third prototype and I am very happy with this one. Motors most likely are E-18 -F-24.

R&R Model Aircraft said:

The Switchblade will be launch tested this weekend, weather permitting. It already glides very nice. It will be BT-60 based for lighter wing loading, but one of the hold ups I am having is a source/ replacement for the Estes PNC-60AH cone (Red Max). This is the third prototype and I am very happy with this one. Motors most likely are E-18 -F-24.

Click to expand...

Awesome news. I would love to order one of these.

kj

I will probably end up going to the pointy one that is in that assortment, but mention to the individual the PNC 60AH is the preferred cone. That said, I will be testing it with both cones, but the shorter one will necessitate a heavier model since it is shorter and will require more weight for the balance point.

We are probably getting a bit off topic here, so I expect the moderator may move this to a new thread. The first flight a few weeks ago didn't go well due to my screw up. I was busy prepping 3 motors, an E18, F12 and F24. Guess who missed a ring? It went up about 30ft and started smoking. Needless to say, the motor decided to have "two" nozzles and cooked the body and she nosed in with the wing still folded.:sad:

The good side of this is that I now know what breaks in this situation and the best part is not much. I had to replace the servo gears, but everything else could be stripped off and put into a new BT-60 body tube (minus the motor tube).

I broke my rule of not having two prototypes to launch for testing. I now have the rebuilt one and second one is almost complete with the shorter nose cone to see how much heavier it is due to the short cone. Hope to fly this or next weekend, weather permitting.

If successful, a final prototype / beta kits will be made and sent to a couple builders for anything I have missed. I was hoping to have it ready (as a kit) for NSL, but I don't think I will make that window.

David

Semroc has a BNC 60AH. Probably heavier than the plastic part...

Thanks for the progress reports! Can't wait for this kit to come out...

The cone needs to be plastic to put the nose weight / battery in place ( space needed to put it as far forward as possible). A balsa version does not help in this regard (plus it is really $$).

The model will come with a very basic "slow" airfoil (this is a beginner's flying model after all ), but I am toying with the idea of a separate wing kit that has a high - lift under cambered airfoil - or at least one with better performance.

David

On a different note, is Estes planning to produce more D11-P or E9-P motors in the near future?

Click to expand...

Sorry, it took so long to reply to this quesiton. I haven't a clue if or when another batch of these engines might be made. I just design product. Since both of these motors are discontinued I believe the only way they would be produced again is if a "VERY" large order is placed for them.

John Boren

Did a couple build ups of epoxy to repair vertical wing tips. Last one with with popcicle sticks holding release plastic to form epoxy.

Then added a couple layers of 1.3oz FG to vertical fin tops, sanded and wiped with epoxy.

As long as wind is moderate, will fly again this Saturday at the 4/28/12 CMASS Amesbury, MA launch. I plan on adding a tiny amount of nose weight to shift CG forward.

Unfortunately, the launch tomorrow is predicted to be windy, so the glider will have to wait for a later date. Learned my lesson from last time...

Will be flying the Spinning Saucer of the Apocalypse, an original design 36" saucer with helicopter recovery for the first time:

https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?t=32970

CMASS had a launch in Sudbury, MA on 6/10/12.

Winds were low and weather was nice, so I prepped the Demon Star.

Loaded a G64 and taped 12 pennies under the nose to add 1.2oz nose weight.

The Demon Star lifted off fast and arced over backwards in a slight cross wind. I pulled up on the RC control, realized my mistake and pushed down, but too late.

It flew over the first row of trees, still upside down, and plowed into the second row of trees at high speed.

The two largest pieces of the plane were stuck in the trees about 30 feet up and can be seen on the far left and right in the second picture.

The airframe is a total loss, but the electronics seem to be salvageable.

RC control was still active for the larger piece of the plane after it was recovered!

"If you can't deal with it you should have built a train set"

On to new adventures...

delta22 said:

"If you can't deal with it you should have built a train set"

Click to expand...

I'm just wondering how many engines your train set would have.

billspad said:

I'm just wondering how many engines your train set would have.

Click to expand...

Well now that is an interesting question, trains have electrical controllers which should fire many igniters nicely, just not sure how to get the train to hit a tree at 100+mph.....:dark:

delta22 said:

Well now that is an interesting question, trains have electrical controllers which should fire many igniters nicely, just not sure how to get the train to hit a tree at 100+mph.....:dark:

Click to expand...

When I was a kid the power source for my launch controller was a train transformer. When you're not flying anything bigger than a C you don't have to be too far from an electrical outlet.

I grew up in New York City. In the early 1970s, we launched rockets in the park with fuse and a lighter.

When we were done, we packed up and went home to avoid having bigger kids from Harlem take our stuff from us again.

Lost two bikes, full bags of Halloween candy and pocket change that way. I don't miss NYC.