Quantcast

Newbie R/C rocket glider questions

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

blakcat137

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
hello all!
I want to start in the r/c rocket glider world and have been looking around a bit.

How is the Edmonds' ArcieII glider and the electronics with it?

What kind of controller is best for starters? single or double stick? how many channels?

How many servos do I need for a glider?

I was looking at the "Hitec Neon SS 3-Channel FM" controller and its included "HS-55 sub micro" servos, 5-channel receiver, switch harness, and AAA battery box for the receiver. Has anyone had any experience with this brand and the set, and do I even need all this?

Thanks very much, everyone!
 

kjohnson

mox nix
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
4
The Arcie II is a good single channel model. Its control is by ailerons and you basically only get to turn the model- no pitch control. I got mine a while back iand the basic kit that went with it included a Hitec radio set with 2 servos and the single stick controller. That was basic but servicable gear andyou can always use it on your next project, so it's something that you won't be tossing out for a while. Single stick vs double stick for a smal 1 or 2 surface plane is a matter of choice. I think it's a little easier to learn on single stick.

The single stick radios give you 3 channels (elevator, rudder/aileron depending on how you set things up, and throttle which you probbaly won't be using. ;)

You typical need a servo for each surface you want to control. So if you want elevator and rudder control, you'd need 2 servos. Basic setups usually only need 2 and then it's up from there as you change the complexity of your models- add a flap you get 1 more servo. Ailerons add 1 or two servos. My Blaster DLG glider uses 4- elevator, rudder and one in each wing for the flaperons.


The Neon set is perfect for the Arcie II and will work well for other projects later on. I had the version from Hitec that the Neon replaced and flew several RC boost gliders and other small electric RC places with it. It has servo reversing and a built in V-tail mixing.


kj
 

chanstevens

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
1,111
Reaction score
1
I bought the Arcie II about 6 months after it came out, very reluctant to get into R/C because of the cost/complexity but needed something to enter an NAR contest in our area. I was very impressed with the package deal of kit and electronics, which in my case eliminated one big barrier to entry--researching the gear to figure out what works with what (though I now at least see several TX/RX/servo set packages with most online R/C retailers).

I had the thing built and ready to fly in under an hour, thanks to the pre-airfoiled balsa wing. First flight the next morning was perfect--about 2:00 on a D12 (caught small thermal) and I'd had zero previous R/C experience. Landed 10 feet from me. I was totally addicted. I've since built one for 2-channel (added a tiny elevator) though no big improvement, and also converted one to RG by going with a fixed sliding pod so I could enter it in a D-RG contest.

This is not a high performance bird, and will never thermal away on you (though could blow away if winds exceed 6-7 mph), but is a great entry model and very easy to learn.

As for the gear, I'm cheap and have tried to leverage it by using it on other models. Mixed results. The receiver, if you get a newer one (i.e. made in last 18 months) has decent, not great range (E9 boosts put it right at the edge). The servos are OK, but a tad heavy by today's standards. More importantly, the 72mhz FM gear uses matched crystals in TX and RX, and I've had a lot of trouble getting extra crystals for mine as I add new receivers to the fleet. I probably just have a weird channel number, as other channels seem to often be in stock but mine's out (and I can't find TX crystals, period). Just about everything's moving to 2.4ghz these days, so the Hi-Tec gear is headed towards obsolescence. The main advantage of 2.4ghz is range and lack of conflict/no need to worry about frequency pins and channel stomping.
 

kjohnson

mox nix
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
4
The main advantage of 2.4ghz is range and lack of conflict/no need to worry about frequency pins and channel stomping.
Ehhh- one caveat to Chan's statement is you have to be careful which 2.4ghz receiver you choose as far as range is concerned. Until recently the smaller stuff has been limited range, parkflyer type gear.

I still fly 72mhz in my higher performance RCRG, and that's mainly becasue the pods are all carbon fiber and the small 2.4ghz rx antennas don't like that much.
 

blakcat137

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Thanks so much! All that is so helpful.
Can you recommend any other brands of electronics (controllers, receivers, etc.) besides Hitec?
 

kjohnson

mox nix
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
4
It comes down to what you want and what you are willing to spend. :) I've been flying with a Futaba transmitter for a while, and recently picked up a nice JR system. The Spektrum DX6i is a decent 2.4ghz radio that I think had a good feel to it. It might be overkill if all you want to do is simple RC stuff, but it will definitely let you grow in the hobby.. I know one guy who has the DX6i and has at least 3 RC RG's programmed into it which is nice.

For 72mhz stuff I like the Berg 4ch receivers. They are small and readily available and have some nice failsafe features (you can set them to a desired set of control deflections if you ever lose signal or your battery cuts out). I've flown everything from EDFs to RCRG on them and have been happy.


kj
 

dave carver

Nam Myoho Renge Kyo
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
4,965
Reaction score
4
My only advice: Find a used RC plane in your local shopper or Craigslist. Learn to fly with it. Something with the wing on top of the plane like a Piper Cub or the like. I bought a Goldberg Falcon 54 with a OS FX .40 in, a little underpowered but a great learner. Find the local RC aero club and learn to fly.

It's a lot cheaper than smashing your rockets over and over learning to fly:cyclops:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jx3DtXyEqrE
 

GuyNoir

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
1,365
Reaction score
66
Location
Woodstock, IL
I did a lot of practice on the FMS simulator first. It's a free download, and for about $30 or so on eBay you can get a fake transmitter that plugs into the PC and have at it with all kinds of planes.

Then I got this:

http://www.readytoflyfun.com/skgtsotr.html

which is a tough durable beast, but beast. As long as you don't expect to do any thermal soaring with it, it'll do fine to teach you right from left and up from down.
 

zog139

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
427
Reaction score
14
Hey Bunny this might be OT , but what ever happened to the "Guppy" project ?
 

GuyNoir

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
1,365
Reaction score
66
Location
Woodstock, IL
Hey Bunny this might be OT , but what ever happened to the "Guppy" project ?
Dead for now. I decided not to go through the effort after only getting about 5 indications of interest, not all of those solid. Then Polcat Aero claimed to be making another run of kits. That was back around March or so, and the latest was an early June posting in rcgroups.com that the first run of 10 kits was, quote "nearly done".

If I build one, I'll probably cut the parts by hand.

For those wondering about this airplane, I've attached a three - view. It's a 1.5 M. electric sailplane that looks really CUTE!!!

Guppy MKII Layout.jpg
 

TheAviator

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
829
Reaction score
16
Personally, I would suggest getting a Parkzone Ember RTF to learn flying. It's a great little airplane, and the whole package only costs about $110. It will not fly outside unless the winds are calm or 1-2MPH tops (i.e. dawn & dusk) but takes very little space (it will fly in a small gym) and won't destroy itself if it crashes.

If you're more serious about doing RCRG's, then a radio with dual rates is a must. This is because you need low rates on boost to prevent overcontrol (if doing a Rocket Glider, Boost Gliders don't have that problem.) The Ember also comes as a Bind-and-Fly (everything without the transmitter) if you want to get a separate radio system.
 

JoeG

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2009
Messages
764
Reaction score
37
There are about a thousand different ways to go. To get real flying experience I would suggest something similar to that which Bunny has suggested. My customers have had a lot of success in learning to fly with the Hobby Zone brand of airplanes. The Phantom comes ready to fly for $84.95. This includes everything including batteries and charger.

http://www.horizonhobby.com/Products/Default.aspx?ProdID=HBZ4700

This is a little larger than the models you will likely be flying but will give you great experience in learning left and right and not to over control. It seems we all should know our left from our right but when the glider is coming toward you things are backwards. Just something you have to learn. Moving the stick the wrong way on final approach can turn a great flight into a rebuild. The bad news is that the receiver/servos is a dedicated system. These are on a single board and would be very difficult to move to another aircraft.

Flight simulators are great too. They vary in cost from free downloads to around $200. You get what you pay for.

A good all around radio system comes from Spectrum. They have a five channel (function) radio without all the computer bells and whistles for $99.95. This is transmitter and receiver only on 2.4Ghz so you don't have to worry about frequency control. The antenna are short so are easy to conceal even in a small glider and the receiver is a full range sport model. No servos or battery is included but I find you need to pick the right servos for the job anyway.
 

Clipper

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2009
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
If you need to learn to fly first, find something slow, and has all or most parts avaible. Next, go to a slow stable epp wing. lean that well, then put a fastter setup on it and get confortable with that. now remove the big battery and motor and attach your rocket motor. Funnnn!!!
 

MaxQ

Tripoli 2747
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
4,409
Reaction score
56
Location
Central Viginia - USA
My only advice: Find a used RC plane in your local shopper or Craigslist. Learn to fly with it. Something with the wing on top of the plane like a Piper Cub or the like. I bought a Goldberg Falcon 54 with a OS FX .40 in, a little underpowered but a great learner. Find the local RC aero club and learn to fly.

It's a lot cheaper than smashing your rockets over and over learning to fly:cyclops:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jx3DtXyEqrE
Me too....my first RC plane was a Falcon 56 with an OS 40...good memories!

Yeah, a high wing trainer.....like a "Piper Cub" but careful....NOT a Piper Cub..

The traditional trainers are indeed high wing and most have some ample dihedral...to the extent that they can be flown with aileron and no rudder to turn...

The Piper Cub does require use of rudder in its turns to offset the adverse yaw of its large ailerons....the instructors at the fields I flew at discouraged it;s use as a beginner's trainer...., however, it is often mentioned as a good "scale trainer"....

BTW: I and many others did a LOT of beginner training with RC sailplanes and a simple bungee (hi-start) ...less expensive - set it up in any field large enough and fly them over and over...very easy, no fuel or motors to mess with...granted - you have to keep putting it up on the hi-start but you can put up a lot of take offs and landings in an afternoon w/o driving out to a gas powered club somewhere..
 
Last edited:

Sac

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
124
Reaction score
0
I think the transmitter may also be preference. I am very picky when flying a 20 thousand dollar model jet that I have the best out there. You don't take chances with a bird exceeding 200mph. But for the most part the majority use a standard fm 72mhz system. I won't use FM anymore due to interfearance in my area but again it all depends on a lot of factors too. At least the gliders actually glide. Trying to land an aerodynamic brick dead stick is not fun.
 

BobH48

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
3,370
Reaction score
1
Me too....my first RC plane was a Falcon 56 with an OS 40...good memories!
That makes 3 of us. My first plane was a Falcon 56 and it flew on an OS .25 with a Heathkit radio that I assembled myself.

This was in 1971 and the Falcon came as a 3 channel plane (rudder, elevator, throttle).

Goldberg redesigned it a few year later as the Falcon 56 Mark II set up for 4 channels and beefier construction and it needed at least a .40 to fly well.

I now have a Hitech 3 channel system that I fly in a MiniPiper park flyer but it's over 5 years old now and the receiver seems a bit large by todays standards as do the HS-55 servos. You don't want to use battery box for the receiver. With alkalines it's too heavy. It comes with that because most people will never use it. The BEC uses the motor battery to power the receiver and servos in a powered plane and in a glider you would probably use a liPoly battery to save weight.
 
Last edited:

rokitflite

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
5,105
Reaction score
2
That makes 3 of us. My first plane was a Falcon 56 and it flew on an OS .25 with a Heathkit radio that I assembled myself.

This was in 1971 and the Falcon came as a 3 channel plane (rudder, elevator, throttle).

Goldberg redesigned it a few year later as the Falon 56 Mark II set up for 4 channels and beefier construction and it needed at least a .40 to fly well.

I now have a Hitech 3 channel system that I fly in a MiniPiper park flyer but it's over 5 years old now and the receiver seems a bit large by todays standards as do the HS-55 servos. You don't want to use battery box for the receiver. With alkalines it's too heavy. It comes with that because most people will never use it. The BEC uses the motor battery to power the receiver and servos in a powered plane and in a glider you would probably use a liPoly battery to save weight.
My 3rd plane was a Falcon 56 Mark II :D.
 

georgegassaway

Lifetime Supporter
TRF Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
4,545
Reaction score
388
I’ll leave out how I got started flying R/C, starting with rudder-only pulse, and get to the meat of it.

What I truly learned to fly R/C with in 1978, was a Goldberg Ranger 42, with 2 servos for rudder/elevator control. So, same kind of high wing Cessna with dihedral type, but smaller, an all-foam ARF, and using a Cox .049 Black Widow engine with no throttle and about 5 minutes of fuel.

I was leery of letting it fly near the ground when I was starting to learn, so I just let it climb up and up till the fuel ran out, to 800-1000 feet. Took a pretty long time to glide down, given it’s weight and wing area. I really liked the long glide back down so I never was interested in having it fly screaming along horizontal at 100 feet or so under power like most people would (and as I said, no throttle). Plus, my eventual goal was R/C B/G’s (and R/G’s), which would be boosting up high and gliding down, anway.

What I learned to thermal with was also an old Goldberg model, a Gentle Lady sailplane. The original was lost (battery or wiring went dead and it flew away) but I still have the 2nd one I built. I even used an Astrocam to take photos with it, using a 3rd servo to take the pics.

The Ranger 42 met a sad end in 1980. I didn’t know the receiver had one 1 dead nicad (of 4), and the transmtiter had 3 (of 8) dead nicads, until it went out of control about 300 feet away and from 200 feet up on the first flght I’d made on it iin 1.5 years. It flew out of the greatly diminished range of the transmitter due to the low voltage. It spiraled in with the motor at full whine, and smashed it too far gone to rebuild.

In more recent years my favorite way to fly a non-rocket powered plane is by electric. I converted a unique Hand Launched sailplane (I did the tail section) to Electric power.

- George Gassaway

Veet_1s.jpg
 

MaxQ

Tripoli 2747
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
4,409
Reaction score
56
Location
Central Viginia - USA
I’ll leave out how I got started flying R/C, starting with rudder-only pulse, and get to the meat of it.

What I truly learned to fly R/C with in 1978, was a Goldberg Ranger 42, with 2 servos for rudder/elevator control. So, same kind of high wing Cessna with dihedral type, but smaller, an all-foam ARF, and using a Cox .049 Black Widow engine with no throttle and about 5 minutes of fuel.

I was leery of letting it fly near the ground when I was starting to learn, so I just let it climb up and up till the fuel ran out, to 800-1000 feet. Took a pretty long time to glide down, given it’s weight and wing area. I really liked the long glide back down so I never was interested in having it fly screaming along horizontal at 100 feet or so under power like most people would (and as I said, no throttle). Plus, my eventual goal was R/C B/G’s (and R/G’s), which would be boosting up high and gliding down, anway.

What I learned to thermal with was also an old Goldberg model, a Gentle Lady sailplane. The original was lost (battery or wiring went dead and it flew away) but I still have the 2nd one I built. I even used an Astrocam to take photos with it, using a 3rd servo to take the pics.

The Ranger 42 met a sad end in 1980. I didn’t know the receiver had one 1 dead nicad (of 4), and the transmtiter had 3 (of 8) dead nicads, until it went out of control about 300 feet away and from 200 feet up on the first flght I’d made on it iin 1.5 years. It flew out of the greatly diminished range of the transmitter due to the low voltage. It spiraled in with the motor at full whine, and smashed it too far gone to rebuild.

In more recent years my favorite way to fly a non-rocket powered plane is by electric. I converted a unique Hand Launched sailplane (I did the tail section) to Electric power.

- George Gassaway
Whoah...pulse rudder..you dated yourself w/ that one, an oldie.
Ahhh..............the Ranger 42 and the Gentle Lady...classics.

I still have a Gentle Lady in a box ...was going to modify mine and call it the Rough Bitch.

One flyer at the sailplane club where I flew had modified his with an airbrake on the top rear of the fuselage - like an F-15E Eagle.
Darn thing actually worked.
I did my serious RC training on an Airtronics Olympic 650.
My serious thermaling was done on the most beautiful (IMHO) R/E/S sailplane...a Sagitta 900.

I had many 45 minute flights and she thermaled well....could've been an hour but my neck hurt too bad from looking up for that long.
It met it's untimely end on a winch launch one afternoon...the notorious hardwood wing rod box broke on the climb out...(even though when I built it...I had made the Lee Renaud reinforcement plate "fix")........the metal wing rod broke through the box and the wings folded and down she went.
Would love to build another one. She was a beauty, and so much fun to fly.

 
Last edited:

MaxQ

Tripoli 2747
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
4,409
Reaction score
56
Location
Central Viginia - USA
Something called a "Barnstormer 15t", then a Goldberg Electra.
Have one of those Goldberg Electras myself...started it help my neighbor learn to fly...unfortunately...he moved to Utah.

What was your opinion on the Electra?...hear that can motor that comes with it isn't much...
 
Top