<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type
content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><DEFANGED_META
content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"><DEFANGED_META
content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2627"
name="GENERATOR"><!-- <DEFANGED_STYLE> --></DEFANGED_STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The street price for my FMA/Kokam packs will be in
the $400.00 range/set(I think), but they need a little more capacity.
Give it a little more time--there are becoming some alternatives that will help
pricing and reliability. Put these critters in a light,
clean airplane like an OMS with retracts and I'd bet you'd have plenty.
Icepoint?!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Richard</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=jeffghughes@comcast.net href="mailto:jeffghughes@comcast.net">Jeff
Hughes</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 01, 2005 5:10
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Glow Engine Vs. Electric
Engine for 2 m' pattern plane</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I also got the electric bug, but the battery cost
always seems to overcome my excitement. I used 8 gallons last year and havent'
got through my first gallon yet this year. Though I typically end up using
10-12 gallons of 15% on my OS1.40's. Which means buying a couple of $700
battery packs totally out of the question. Hopefully this emerging technology
won't drive away even more of the guys like me who are lucky to get
out once a week during the summer. </FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV DEFANGED_STYLE="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=richard.s@allied-callaway.com
href="mailto:richard.s@allied-callaway.com">Richard Strickland</A> </DIV>
<DIV DEFANGED_STYLE="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=discussion@nsrca.org href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">NSRCA</A>
</DIV>
<DIV DEFANGED_STYLE="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 01, 2005
11:25 AM</DIV>
<DIV DEFANGED_STYLE="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Fw: Glow Engine Vs.
Electric Engine for 2 m' pattern plane</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV DEFANGED_STYLE="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
<DIV DEFANGED_STYLE="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A
title=richard.s@allied-callaway.com
href="mailto:richard.s@allied-callaway.com">Richard Strickland</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, June 01, 2005 11:22 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: Glow Engine Vs. Electric Engine for 2 m' pattern
plane</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Guys,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'll jump back in here; Jim, your perceptions
are correct. My decision to go to Electric was based on some fairly
bad luck with engines last year--It was time to up-date power-plants as I
was driving my old stuff to pieces trying to get all the power I could
out of them. I purchased what I thought was going to be the hot ticket
engine and had a series of unfortunate events with it. By the end of
the season, I hadn't done a lot of flying--but had had a load of
problems. It was time to re-evaluate what I was doing. My
business doesn't allow for scads of practice time, so when I get the
chance--I like for it to count. Since I try to do things as right as I can,
I generally end up with three sets of everything eventually--you know; the
Primary, the Back-up, and the One you're building--never seems to
quite work out that way--but at least it's the plan. I was flying
Temptations, but had crashed one and hurried to get the second done and
while pretty good airplanes, I was beginning to think there might be a
change to a wider body style in my future. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>So basically I was looking at a clean
slate. AND I had 15 years of accumulated stuff to sell since
the last time I sold off my stuff to start over. I heard and
read about some of the guys having success with electric and was intrigued,
fooled around with the smaller park and indoor stuff and got to know a
little about it--decided with proper care, all parts of the systems are
pretty reliable and reasonably safe. I talked to a couple of the old
hands and a couple of fairly young guys and they were all enthusiastic about
the larger stuff and so I thought--"Hey, I've got to get to know some new
power-plants anyway--why not get up to speed with electric?! " I
got hooked-up with FMA through the small stuff because they treated me
fairly on some of the issues I was having and were designing some battery
protection features, cell balancing chargers and some new batteries for the
larger stuff.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Initially, I thought about--actually, I had
made up my mind--to do a Plettenberg outrunner so I wouldn't be dealing with
gear-sets. Eventually, It became clear that between what was available
a few months ago and the Hacker--that the Hacker set-up was going to give
better performance. One person likened the Plettenberg to a good 110
system and the Hacker to a good 160 system. That may have changed by
now--but you still have to look at weight vs. performance. I ordered
an Impact--but had the brand new IC powered, reasonably light Temptation
that wasn't selling and decided to convert it. That turned out to be
fairly easy. First I started with a conversion mm kit from Esprit out
of Florida--but we saved 5 oz. by going to a solid CF nose plate and end
grain reinforced balsa in the rear opened up and then the whole front
of the airplane is open for cooling. The batteries mounted exactly
where the tank was--I beefed the mounting up a bit. I put on a set of
Matt's gear. I'm making weight by all of .5 oz. I may be a
smidge tail heavy and may run the rec. batt to the front.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Flying. I'm fooling with the throttle
curve a little--experimenting with the feel. I'm guilty of probably
not experimenting enough sometimes when something already works pretty
well. It's probably not a whole lot different than the difference
between two and four cycle--but my experience is limited there
also.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>There may be some interaction between what the
FMA discharge protection modules(DPMs) and the controller is doing in regard
to throttle response and how the motor surges to signal you're running low
on electrons--but so far, everything is working reliably. We also know
we're driving the hell out of the 3200s--but I can't stand any more
weight--so I'm sorta stuck for now. They've got some experimental 4000
10s2ps that Orland is going to try--but they weigh a few oz. more--but he's
got lighter airplanes and can stand it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I mentioned time--45 CONSECUTIVE flights with a
complete pattern in each. 12 or so trips to the field and power-plant
related problems have not ruined a flight. I haven't had to 'tune' for
the first couple in a session--first is identical to the last. I'm
working on throttle management--it's different. I'm looking at this as
a transitional year--to learn, to see what works best for me, to figure out
the logistics of charging at home and the field--or on the way, to make it
safe--all that good stuff. So far I'm satisfied with the
results.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Got windy again, I see..........</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Richard</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV DEFANGED_STYLE="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original <FONT
face=sans-serif size=2> </FONT><BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Having
flown Tony's Partner only once (but watched it fly quite a bit), and
having seen just a few other electric pattern planes (Jason's, and Billy
Meadows'), the flying advantage of the electric was enough to make me want
to get one going, regardless of the learning curve. From my
perception, the pilot does feel the difference between the glow and
electric setups regarding less vibration. The plane is going to be
easier to setup for a constant speed envelope, where there is less of a
"gap" between slow and full-throttle horizontal velocity. With the
narrowed speed envelope, it MUST be a tad easier to setup the plane as the
"one" setup has a smaller velocity range to work and be consistent
in.</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>I'm just trying to stir up
another side of the discussion. I hope that some of the folks who
have more of the "flying" experience with the electric 2M setup will relay
their experience, and describe to us the piloting differences, trim
differences, etc.</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Thanks
All,</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Jim W.</FONT> <BR><FONT
face=sans-serif
size=2><BR></FONT><BR><BR><BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>