I guess im asking randomly but does any of you know a trick to get back into an instagram account? I was dumb forgot the password. I would appreciate any tips you can give me.
@Christopher Jeffery Thanks for your reply. I got to the site thru google and I'm waiting for the hacking stuff now. Seems to take quite some time so I will reply here later with my results.
No question if you’re looking for something like this you can’t go wrong with a Mini Drak. EWings UK now has similar models available in Europe. I’d love to see you test/review one of those! Everything about this airframe looks sketchy. From the weak long nose to the terribly designed motor area that guarantees noise and lack of efficiency. They definitely sacrificed function for form on this one. Possibly it could be more efficient with a better motor/prop combo.
Yup, form over function for sure, but I will make a small effort to try and bring that equation a bit more towards balance... see if that changes anything! Not going to put another motor yet!
"The lame duck", hahaha, great review. I suspect the duck tail / motor mount to be responsible for poor efficiency. I'd suggest a modification that tapered off the fuse and bought the motor/prop further back. That would also reduce the noise.
Hi Nicola. I used to interact with you on RCG quite a bit but haven't in a while. Plus I got fed-up with the forum and recently bailed. Have always appreciated your work and correspondence, though. I have two Aggressors because I love the looks and size of the plane. The model's huge, flat butt was an obvious aerodynamic issue and design flaw from the first time I saw it but I seldom leave any plane stock. After it arrived I designed a new tapered tail and motor mount. Haven't tested it yet but there's no doubt it will lower drag substantially. The plane is otherwise very clean aerodynamically so there's no other reason for it to perform so poorly. I'll also probably add stationary canards just to aide in stability and make it look cooler. Hope you're doing well. :)
Hey Jeff, nice to hear from you! Yes, I have been thinking about that rear end, and how to make it better, and also move the motor back a bit, to separate it from the tail a bit more! Will print out something in the coming days, and need to test it over the weekend, because next week is promising to make it very hard to fly anything in the rain! Personally I am not sure about those canards... will opt out for the time being, lets see what will happen with the other mods! I am doing well... thank you! I hope all is well with you too!
Not sure on the dimensions of the FPV cam lense, but if you get a CaddX ND filter, it will remove the "jello" from the footage. The camera should automatically slow the shutter speed for the lowered light that is coming into the sensor which in turn, helps to remove the jello.
Right, good tip, thanks! If I ever get it fixed, I might try that! I am guessing some issue with the lens cable has left me with a purple image as the only video coming from the camera now! :)
hello friend, is there any way to buy the planes with everything you need for this type of long-distance flight without having to buy it by pieces, that is, buy it ready to fly
looking at the back, there is a huge area of the rear blocking airflow into the prop. On my dart250 i moved the motor rearwards about 10mm and it helped to improve the speed a bit, i'm wondering if you moved the prop 25mm further back if that would help it's performance
Well... I wonder if you've seen my latest video, I did just that, but moved it 45mm back. Working on further mods now, but it has been snowing for the past 4 days... so have not been able to go out and fly it!
@@ArxangelRC I did, shortly after it was published, glad to know it helped out. That's amazing that you could hear the prop in dirty air that far away!
Hi Nicola... what a surprise when I saw you connected the F765 top BEC with headers just like I did on mine a couple weeks ago for convenience... we are in sync... LOL
@Dyon B I am mostly curious for the Dragonlink setup and for his current antenna tracker setup. If he would do it like a gear walkthrough, it would be the lenght of an entire video, which I think would be great. I would prefer a detailed gear tour over a short mention in a different video.
@Dyon B I am mostly intrested in the antenna tracker too, but just curious of his opinion on the Dragonlink and the cost of such a low frequency long range system.
Great review and testing as always ;-) That's way too expensive of a Plane to be a "Tinker Plane" and that's what it looks like to me. I couldn't believe the Wing separated landing on grass? Thanks for all the work you put into this review as it is much appreciated. See you in the Air!
Go to 2:10 in the video, as the yellow arrow is moving along the cable length of the receiver's antenna, around the middle of the length, above it you will see a small elongated rised piece of foam, those are the CG markings!
Im really suprised that it isnt more efficient... it looks fairly sleek... but it uses the same amps at say 50 kmh as my volantex ranger ex with tundra tyres... wtf? perhaps the motor is super innefficient Nikola? fancy trying a different motor?
Well... judging by the amount of noise... not sure the motor is to blame! I will try moving it back first... see how that affects it! At this point I wouldn't invest any more money in it... don't see a light at the end of the tunnel yet!
im a little bit surprised about your review, i dont fly mine that long (about 6 month), and not as a fpv plane yet, but its heavier than yours i assume (i fly with a twin motor setup and retracts installed) and i never experianced a stall so far, not even in tight turns, and when i forced it to stall it went over the tip but recovered easily afterwards.
Interesting indeed! Perhaps a different weight distribution, and a heavier nose might help! Also... tractor props make the plane behave differently than a pusher one! Has to be taken into account!
I kinda feel like you're judging a plane based on characteristics of it's power plant. I think it needs to have a motor upgrade and maybe a better esc and you'll find it performs better. Also changing the pitch of the prop might have yielded your poor test results as well. I always like to try the original props just to see if they fare better.
Well... literally no other plane has become slower and more hungry by upping the pitch, at least in my experience! Keep in mind I am not testing border limits of the performance of the motor or ESC for this to actually have such a detrimental effect! Pretty sure the issue is not the prop pitch! Also... pretty sure changing the motor will not fix it... a better place to start would be to print out a stand off and mounting further backwards, see how that changes things! At this point I can't find a reason to justify getting a new motor for this!
@@ArxangelRC some motors draw the ideal amperage from certain pitch props. Go up on pitch and if the motor is a higher kv, it will be trying to spin faster but the increased pitch causes more drag and more "load" on the motor. Causing more amp draw at a given rpm. Quadcopter pilots know this as changing pitch greatly affects thrust/flight times inversely. Also pnp models are known for being underpowered as most are tested without fpv gear and when adding weight you also make them even more underpowered. Also also most stock motors are shitty and don't last anyway. If you need to move the motor back it means either your battery is too large or your motor is not large enough. But you still don't see why changing your motor will help. A nice 28 or 30 size sunnysky 1200kv with a 9 or 10" prop would make that plane into a drak clone drawing less than 10 amps at cruise. I'm not trying to argue I'm just saying don't write off a model because you couldn't see what someone else saw when designing it. Sometimes we want different things from our planes. Motors and props change everything.
@@jamesordwayultralightpilot Well sure, but copters and planes work in VASTLY different ways! Whereas on a copter the props are pretty much working stalled all the time, in which case yes, a pitch change will have a detrimental effect much easier, on a plane the prop works stalled may be only on take off! The reason for moving back the motor is not weight, but to move it AWAY from the rear end of the plane, thus improving the airflow to the prop, and making it a good deal quieter! Has nothing to do with weight! My battery is light enough, I am even a good 200 grams, I would assume, under the MTOW, so no issues there! And just to note... even now it cruises around 50km/h at 8-9A... so still under 10A... won't be much of an upgrade! I can tell you exactly what somebody saw when they were designing it - "Well this LOOKS good, lets copy it", without giving a second thought about the flight performance in general! Will do the mods... and we will see! Keeping the stock motor for now until I am certain it is IT causing the increased amp draw, and not wrong design choices for the sake of looks! :)
@@ArxangelRC Okay I wasn't sure why you were moving the motor back. But just remember it will effect CG so you might wind up needing more nose weight as well or you might see a greater tendency to tip stall. I definitely agree with the designers trying to copy an already successful design but I always see the same similarity: they skimp on the hardware. Usually cutting corners with motors and nylon gear servos that usually wind up being swapped out within the first month of flight. I'm very interested to see if you can make this plane fly to it's potential because I feel the design is still good. These developers just want to make an easy extra $100 for a pnp with shoddy parts. Zohd seems to be one of the few companies with reputable hardware and you notice the difference in overall price. Great response tho I'm glad we're getting down to the nitty gritty on this plane. Alishanmao is such a hypeman.
@@jamesordwayultralightpilot Haha, oh yeah, I stopped watching his videos a while back... too... Alishanmao for my taste! As for the servos... they do sound like metal geared ones, and I am still on the fence of the motor being the main culprit in the higher current results... but we will see when I move it back! Also, I have a 600 gram battery up front, which has a good way it can go forward, so no weight will need to be added, don't worry! I've been doing this longer than 2 days you know! :P
I see You are using arduplane. Can You make some tutorials howto configure arduplane? There is hundreds of parameters to input and it is quite difficult. For instance my Ranger 1600 is flying stable, but it is sluggish even in acro mode. There are many problems with arduplane that people encounter, tutorials would be nice :) It is easy to make tutorial for inav or betaflight but ardu is another level. It has support for many sensor types and allows much more options. It is complicated. And yes Matek F7 wing is super cool choice, I this one also :)
Well... aren't there some good tutorials on ardu from a few youtubers already? I distinctly remember Painless360 had quite a few videos on it! Also... the fact that it has the capability to run many sensors in different scenarios does not mean you need all of them at once, especially for regular FPV! I've never used more than a power sensor and a GPS module, if speaking about peripherals! :)
@@ArxangelRC Well there are some, but it is rather that someone is presenting some narrowed case that one has encountered. It does not project to other people planes. Ok, I know it wont give you proper income, as the audience using ardu is limited, BUT... I will present my point of view. Preparing series of movies lets say about ardu and airplanes only, where you explain basic setup, then tuning, then what to do if plane reacts to slow, to fast, is unstable (which parameters are responsible) - comprehensive manual, divided in a series of grouped video tutorials. This might be sth. catchy I think. But to do that You would need to get a lot of experience with ardu, then sort and divide knowledge, and then make videos. It is difficult as writing a book. :) Why I think it is good idea? Here is why: 1. Configuring ardu is about inputing text parameters. There are hunderds of them. Once you read docs about one group of parameters you forget about other. This interface sucks a lot. I am doing 4th try with ardu. 2. Putting this all together and using ardu allows one to use cool features and sensors. Ardu is more advanced than other controllers. For plane for example you can get for 40$ range finder sensor, that will allow plane to land smoothly as it detects altitude preciselly starting from 12 meters above the ground. For copter you can attach optical flow to obtain very accurate position hold. There are many more. People are not using it because ardu is so unhuman with this interface. I hate reading this parameter lists :( I think ardu is neverending topic and once you present what cool thing people can have in their airplanes, quads and so on for very little money and then you will show it is not so complicated if they follow your tutorials. This might be it. This is my guess. I have tried arducopter on my quad twice and failed. I have tried arduplane on my sailplane and it was flying but quite majestic (slow reactions). Then I crashed it because I tried to flip on the back :P I need to figure out why it reacts so slow and howto make it dynamic. There are few parameters to try, but I would appreciate if someone did a video tutorial showing how to change this behavior and safe me one week of my own testing. Probably You have noticed that youtubers burn out. Their videos became more obvious, they don't dig thru the topic. Only repeat what everyone knows and so on. It is difficult to keep good level of presentation all the time. Recently many videos I feel that are wasting my time. They just occupy time by saying obvious things. I went back to written tutorial, as I can read it faster than watch a video :) Quality videos where I can learn sth. are valuable.
@@kdeclinetostatendeclinetos6707 That is correct, but you are also correct about the time it would take to make such a thing! Plus I would have to get at least of those sensors you are talking about and learn how to use them, since I've not done so. Test them, etc., will take time that I sadly currently can't spare due to too many other projects, but I will think about this and see what I can figure out!
Thanks! And sucks, yeah... I will do a few mods... see if that changes anything, in addition to the CG testing! Else... I see very limited use for this plane, at least in my fleet! Only thing it has going for it is the space available!
@@ArxangelRC I wish you made an update on perhaps your older planes in the fleet such as Nimbus or Clouds and show us how have you used em over the years (especially the long range missions)
@@90secondsofaviation86 Right... OK... will give this a thought! Have not used the Nimbus at all after the first few flights, but the Clouds has seen some action... and is now 4 years old... and still going! :)
by looking at the pictures on your blog, It looks like the leading edge is towards the rear??? Shouldn't it always be faced toward the forward direction?? so towards the nose even though the motor is mounted reverse? as in, if you mounted a prop on a motor on a table... numbers up, but on this, numbers down... Correct?!?! or is the pictures creating an optical illusion??? would explain ALOT of the amperage and speed issues you experienced?! I've seen others much easier to gain speed easier it seemed... IDK.... I'm just some guy looking in from some place and some view..... Take this with a grain of salt (but the salt would prob be worth a little more) LOL... Nice review tho man.... your hella in depth!!! SUB'D!!
Well... it won't be a review unless I test it in its pure form first! I will do that... though probably not with stand offs, but will print a whole base because I do want it to be stable and have good support against the plywood... don't want to break that one!
@@EnglishTurbines Yeah... have been pondering the same thing... but some people are just too far removed from the final user... and I guess just have no clue! They just look at something and say "Well this LOOKS good, lets copy it"!
Hey, the Dolphin is built and waiting for its moment, which I hope will be soon! As for subtitles... I don't know Portuguese... so... no idea how to do that, perhaps try using the youtube CC options and set it to your language, for the auto generated subtitles.
@@ArxangelRC Thanks for answering, Dolphin is incredible one day I will buy one, I think he has a perfect format, as the caption I use by cell phone but to give a way
@@ArxangelRC haha true it's pretty pricey. For me, buying all the fpv stuff would cost be like $350 for a nice headset and camera, the DJI is double the price, but double the quality. So for me, it's worth it.
@@J38x729 Well I fly using a monitor, and I rather like it! Never been a fan of goggles on a plane... I get seasick! I can bare it only for a few minutes for the copter races. Sooo... basically for me the cost is just the Vtx, as all else I already have, so... quite a lot cheaper than DJI!
@@ArxangelRC the problem is the manufacturer doesn't know what the right battery is for the plane.the battery they recommend is too light,you try adding a bigger battery and it doesn't fly for me anyway glad to be rid of it
Damn... although that is a common problem! The Volantex models are like this, they always recommend a 3S 2200mAh pack... but there is no chance in hell you can ever balance most of their planes with that weight, so you need a bigger one! Good thing is though, that they fly beautifully with the bigger packs and proper balance... and you get longer flight times!
Hhhuge!! I still want one, they do remind me of a "Bird Of Prey". Kit may seem to be a better option. And I don't know bout throwing 10 inches, mines only 8. Its a Long Range Cruiser Not a Sports Flyer. Enjoy..
Oh yeah, it does look a bit like the Birds of Prey! Also... "Long Range" might be a bit of stretch... mid-range is about right! :) How is it doing at 8"?
@@ArxangelRC This one only ships from China and as the box is probably pretty big it costs that much. Small stuff, like the Racerstar F405 Nano, is good value from China but not the big stuff. In contrast all the kits that they have in EU warehouse like the ZOHD Dart XL ship for free. In any case your report did not seem that enthusiastic about it so I don’t want to buy one anyway.
@@mikegriffiths7487 Oh yeah, the box is quite large, but it is a chunky plane! It is nice to have stuff in EU warehouses... sadly not possible for all of it!
I meant all planes can stall, if you push them, and under the right conditions - no throttle, and full up elevator! Some do MUCH better than others in these conditions! If you apply no up elevator, 99.9% of them will nose down indeed... that is a fact, but not what I meant!
On these videos, you can just sit back and watch it, it is so calm and interesting
Thanks! :)
I guess im asking randomly but does any of you know a trick to get back into an instagram account?
I was dumb forgot the password. I would appreciate any tips you can give me.
@Deshawn Markus instablaster ;)
@Christopher Jeffery Thanks for your reply. I got to the site thru google and I'm waiting for the hacking stuff now.
Seems to take quite some time so I will reply here later with my results.
@Christopher Jeffery It did the trick and I actually got access to my account again. I'm so happy!
Thank you so much you really help me out!
No question if you’re looking for something like this you can’t go wrong with a Mini Drak. EWings UK now has similar models available in Europe. I’d love to see you test/review one of those!
Everything about this airframe looks sketchy. From the weak long nose to the terribly designed motor area that guarantees noise and lack of efficiency. They definitely sacrificed function for form on this one. Possibly it could be more efficient with a better motor/prop combo.
Yup, form over function for sure, but I will make a small effort to try and bring that equation a bit more towards balance... see if that changes anything! Not going to put another motor yet!
"The lame duck", hahaha, great review. I suspect the duck tail / motor mount to be responsible for poor efficiency. I'd suggest a modification that tapered off the fuse and bought the motor/prop further back. That would also reduce the noise.
Yeah, I've been thinking about that as well... so perhaps I will test it, in addition to the CG testing!
Hi Nicola. I used to interact with you on RCG quite a bit but haven't in a while. Plus I got fed-up with the forum and recently bailed. Have always appreciated your work and correspondence, though. I have two Aggressors because I love the looks and size of the plane. The model's huge, flat butt was an obvious aerodynamic issue and design flaw from the first time I saw it but I seldom leave any plane stock. After it arrived I designed a new tapered tail and motor mount. Haven't tested it yet but there's no doubt it will lower drag substantially. The plane is otherwise very clean aerodynamically so there's no other reason for it to perform so poorly. I'll also probably add stationary canards just to aide in stability and make it look cooler. Hope you're doing well. :)
Hey Jeff, nice to hear from you! Yes, I have been thinking about that rear end, and how to make it better, and also move the motor back a bit, to separate it from the tail a bit more! Will print out something in the coming days, and need to test it over the weekend, because next week is promising to make it very hard to fly anything in the rain! Personally I am not sure about those canards... will opt out for the time being, lets see what will happen with the other mods! I am doing well... thank you! I hope all is well with you too!
@@ArxangelRC Hanging in there. I'll contact you from your website and show you what I'm doing with the tapered motor mount.
@@jeffhampton8781 Sure, thanks! Would be useful! :)
Would the camera jell-o disappear If the motor was soft-mounted?
Not really the issue, as it turns out! Moving the prop 45mm further out did remove the jell-o: ruclips.net/video/z_CIgkQqZYQ/видео.html
Not sure on the dimensions of the FPV cam lense, but if you get a CaddX ND filter, it will remove the "jello" from the footage. The camera should automatically slow the shutter speed for the lowered light that is coming into the sensor which in turn, helps to remove the jello.
Right, good tip, thanks! If I ever get it fixed, I might try that! I am guessing some issue with the lens cable has left me with a purple image as the only video coming from the camera now! :)
hello friend, is there any way to buy the planes with everything you need for this type of long-distance flight without having to buy it by pieces, that is, buy it ready to fly
I am not aware of such an option!
Great video and information about this wing. Thanks for the show
Thanks! You are welcome! :)
looking at the back, there is a huge area of the rear blocking airflow into the prop. On my dart250 i moved the motor rearwards about 10mm and it helped to improve the speed a bit, i'm wondering if you moved the prop 25mm further back if that would help it's performance
Well... I wonder if you've seen my latest video, I did just that, but moved it 45mm back. Working on further mods now, but it has been snowing for the past 4 days... so have not been able to go out and fly it!
@@ArxangelRC I did, shortly after it was published, glad to know it helped out. That's amazing that you could hear the prop in dirty air that far away!
@@dagazenterprise Yeah, it was insanely loud... I think the loudest plane I've ever had!
Hi Nicola... what a surprise when I saw you connected the F765 top BEC with headers just like I did on mine a couple weeks ago for convenience... we are in sync... LOL
Haha, yeah, beats soldering the cables at both ends!
Hi , great plane but how is it possible to land and avoid the
propeller touch the ground and destroy the plane? Thanks
Program a brake on the ESC.
Maybe a groundstation/gear walkthrough? Would be interesting to see. Great video!
@Dyon B I am mostly curious for the Dragonlink setup and for his current antenna tracker setup. If he would do it like a gear walkthrough, it would be the lenght of an entire video, which I think would be great. I would prefer a detailed gear tour over a short mention in a different video.
@Dyon B I am mostly intrested in the antenna tracker too, but just curious of his opinion on the Dragonlink and the cost of such a low frequency long range system.
@Dyon B Oh thanks! I'l be sure to check it out! It sounds great!
Pretty sure he is still using the MFD Crossbow Mini antenna tracker. His video: ruclips.net/video/pw1xd_bl6bM/видео.html
@@brubakerjm Yeah, I think so too but still would be a cool video.
Great review and testing as always ;-) That's way too expensive of a Plane to be a "Tinker Plane" and that's what it looks like to me. I couldn't believe the Wing separated landing on grass? Thanks for all the work you put into this review as it is much appreciated. See you in the Air!
Thanks mate! All the best to you!
Hi awesome informative video, where are the CG points on this aircraft?🙏
Go to 2:10 in the video, as the yellow arrow is moving along the cable length of the receiver's antenna, around the middle of the length, above it you will see a small elongated rised piece of foam, those are the CG markings!
were can i find prop's for this plane?
You can get any similar size and pitch prop and it will do the job! APC props are recommended!
Its possibly the Klingon Bird Of Prey it reminds you of from the Star Trek films, very similar shape.
Yup, that's the one!
Im really suprised that it isnt more efficient... it looks fairly sleek...
but it uses the same amps at say 50 kmh as my volantex ranger ex with tundra tyres... wtf?
perhaps the motor is super innefficient Nikola? fancy trying a different motor?
Well... judging by the amount of noise... not sure the motor is to blame! I will try moving it back first... see how that affects it! At this point I wouldn't invest any more money in it... don't see a light at the end of the tunnel yet!
I had that glue problem on an AR Wing Pro. There was not much glue on it.
Yeah, seems to be a trend!
Thank you for your work man
You are welcome! :)
im a little bit surprised about your review, i dont fly mine that long (about 6 month), and not as a fpv plane yet, but its heavier than yours i assume (i fly with a twin motor setup and retracts installed) and i never experianced a stall so far, not even in tight turns, and when i forced it to stall it went over the tip but recovered easily afterwards.
Interesting indeed! Perhaps a different weight distribution, and a heavier nose might help! Also... tractor props make the plane behave differently than a pusher one! Has to be taken into account!
I kinda feel like you're judging a plane based on characteristics of it's power plant. I think it needs to have a motor upgrade and maybe a better esc and you'll find it performs better. Also changing the pitch of the prop might have yielded your poor test results as well. I always like to try the original props just to see if they fare better.
Well... literally no other plane has become slower and more hungry by upping the pitch, at least in my experience! Keep in mind I am not testing border limits of the performance of the motor or ESC for this to actually have such a detrimental effect! Pretty sure the issue is not the prop pitch! Also... pretty sure changing the motor will not fix it... a better place to start would be to print out a stand off and mounting further backwards, see how that changes things! At this point I can't find a reason to justify getting a new motor for this!
@@ArxangelRC some motors draw the ideal amperage from certain pitch props. Go up on pitch and if the motor is a higher kv, it will be trying to spin faster but the increased pitch causes more drag and more "load" on the motor. Causing more amp draw at a given rpm. Quadcopter pilots know this as changing pitch greatly affects thrust/flight times inversely.
Also pnp models are known for being underpowered as most are tested without fpv gear and when adding weight you also make them even more underpowered.
Also also most stock motors are shitty and don't last anyway. If you need to move the motor back it means either your battery is too large or your motor is not large enough. But you still don't see why changing your motor will help. A nice 28 or 30 size sunnysky 1200kv with a 9 or 10" prop would make that plane into a drak clone drawing less than 10 amps at cruise.
I'm not trying to argue I'm just saying don't write off a model because you couldn't see what someone else saw when designing it. Sometimes we want different things from our planes. Motors and props change everything.
@@jamesordwayultralightpilot Well sure, but copters and planes work in VASTLY different ways! Whereas on a copter the props are pretty much working stalled all the time, in which case yes, a pitch change will have a detrimental effect much easier, on a plane the prop works stalled may be only on take off!
The reason for moving back the motor is not weight, but to move it AWAY from the rear end of the plane, thus improving the airflow to the prop, and making it a good deal quieter! Has nothing to do with weight! My battery is light enough, I am even a good 200 grams, I would assume, under the MTOW, so no issues there! And just to note... even now it cruises around 50km/h at 8-9A... so still under 10A... won't be much of an upgrade!
I can tell you exactly what somebody saw when they were designing it - "Well this LOOKS good, lets copy it", without giving a second thought about the flight performance in general! Will do the mods... and we will see! Keeping the stock motor for now until I am certain it is IT causing the increased amp draw, and not wrong design choices for the sake of looks! :)
@@ArxangelRC Okay I wasn't sure why you were moving the motor back. But just remember it will effect CG so you might wind up needing more nose weight as well or you might see a greater tendency to tip stall.
I definitely agree with the designers trying to copy an already successful design but I always see the same similarity: they skimp on the hardware. Usually cutting corners with motors and nylon gear servos that usually wind up being swapped out within the first month of flight. I'm very interested to see if you can make this plane fly to it's potential because I feel the design is still good. These developers just want to make an easy extra $100 for a pnp with shoddy parts.
Zohd seems to be one of the few companies with reputable hardware and you notice the difference in overall price.
Great response tho I'm glad we're getting down to the nitty gritty on this plane. Alishanmao is such a hypeman.
@@jamesordwayultralightpilot Haha, oh yeah, I stopped watching his videos a while back... too... Alishanmao for my taste! As for the servos... they do sound like metal geared ones, and I am still on the fence of the motor being the main culprit in the higher current results... but we will see when I move it back! Also, I have a 600 gram battery up front, which has a good way it can go forward, so no weight will need to be added, don't worry! I've been doing this longer than 2 days you know! :P
Great review
Thank you! :)
mmm I have this one in a box. Going to be modifying that tail end and all the other bits that you pointed out.
Yup, makes a difference!
Another great video.
Thank you! :)
Great review!
Thanks! :)
I see You are using arduplane. Can You make some tutorials howto configure arduplane? There is hundreds of parameters to input and it is quite difficult. For instance my Ranger 1600 is flying stable, but it is sluggish even in acro mode. There are many problems with arduplane that people encounter, tutorials would be nice :) It is easy to make tutorial for inav or betaflight but ardu is another level. It has support for many sensor types and allows much more options. It is complicated. And yes Matek F7 wing is super cool choice, I this one also :)
Well... aren't there some good tutorials on ardu from a few youtubers already? I distinctly remember Painless360 had quite a few videos on it! Also... the fact that it has the capability to run many sensors in different scenarios does not mean you need all of them at once, especially for regular FPV! I've never used more than a power sensor and a GPS module, if speaking about peripherals! :)
@@ArxangelRC Well there are some, but it is rather that someone is presenting some narrowed case that one has encountered. It does not project to other people planes. Ok, I know it wont give you proper income, as the audience using ardu is limited, BUT...
I will present my point of view. Preparing series of movies lets say about ardu and airplanes only, where you explain basic setup, then tuning, then what to do if plane reacts to slow, to fast, is unstable (which parameters are responsible) - comprehensive manual, divided in a series of grouped video tutorials. This might be sth. catchy I think. But to do that You would need to get a lot of experience with ardu, then sort and divide knowledge, and then make videos. It is difficult as writing a book. :)
Why I think it is good idea? Here is why:
1. Configuring ardu is about inputing text parameters. There are hunderds of them. Once you read docs about one group of parameters you forget about other. This interface sucks a lot. I am doing 4th try with ardu.
2. Putting this all together and using ardu allows one to use cool features and sensors. Ardu is more advanced than other controllers. For plane for example you can get for 40$ range finder sensor, that will allow plane to land smoothly as it detects altitude preciselly starting from 12 meters above the ground. For copter you can attach optical flow to obtain very accurate position hold. There are many more. People are not using it because ardu is so unhuman with this interface. I hate reading this parameter lists :(
I think ardu is neverending topic and once you present what cool thing people can have in their airplanes, quads and so on for very little money and then you will show it is not so complicated if they follow your tutorials. This might be it.
This is my guess. I have tried arducopter on my quad twice and failed. I have tried arduplane on my sailplane and it was flying but quite majestic (slow reactions). Then I crashed it because I tried to flip on the back :P I need to figure out why it reacts so slow and howto make it dynamic. There are few parameters to try, but I would appreciate if someone did a video tutorial showing how to change this behavior and safe me one week of my own testing.
Probably You have noticed that youtubers burn out. Their videos became more obvious, they don't dig thru the topic. Only repeat what everyone knows and so on. It is difficult to keep good level of presentation all the time. Recently many videos I feel that are wasting my time. They just occupy time by saying obvious things. I went back to written tutorial, as I can read it faster than watch a video :) Quality videos where I can learn sth. are valuable.
@@kdeclinetostatendeclinetos6707 That is correct, but you are also correct about the time it would take to make such a thing! Plus I would have to get at least of those sensors you are talking about and learn how to use them, since I've not done so. Test them, etc., will take time that I sadly currently can't spare due to too many other projects, but I will think about this and see what I can figure out!
great review . I bought one when it first came out , i hate it , it's probably the worst plane i own . big waste of money
Yeah man
Thanks! And sucks, yeah... I will do a few mods... see if that changes anything, in addition to the CG testing! Else... I see very limited use for this plane, at least in my fleet! Only thing it has going for it is the space available!
@@ArxangelRC I wish you made an update on perhaps your older planes in the fleet such as Nimbus or Clouds and show us how have you used em over the years (especially the long range missions)
@@90secondsofaviation86 Right... OK... will give this a thought! Have not used the Nimbus at all after the first few flights, but the Clouds has seen some action... and is now 4 years old... and still going! :)
@@ArxangelRC Great, why have you not used nimbus tho
It’s so sexy, but i was worried... glad i waited. Maybe v2?
V2... perhaps... but when?
by looking at the pictures on your blog, It looks like the leading edge is towards the rear??? Shouldn't it always be faced toward the forward direction?? so towards the nose even though the motor is mounted reverse? as in, if you mounted a prop on a motor on a table... numbers up, but on this, numbers down... Correct?!?! or is the pictures creating an optical illusion??? would explain ALOT of the amperage and speed issues you experienced?! I've seen others much easier to gain speed easier it seemed... IDK.... I'm just some guy looking in from some place and some view..... Take this with a grain of salt (but the salt would prob be worth a little more) LOL... Nice review tho man.... your hella in depth!!! SUB'D!!
Thanks mate, much appreciated! And just in case you are talking about the prop, I am 100% sure it is pointed the right way! :)
The prop is way too close to the trailing edge of the wing...A Schoolboy design error they insist on keep making for some reason...🤔😳😳🇬🇧
True!
@@ArxangelRC Fit some standoffs, they need to be around 50mm long...See the noise drop and an increase is speed too...So easy to do TBH....🤔🤔😯🇬🇧
Well... it won't be a review unless I test it in its pure form first! I will do that... though probably not with stand offs, but will print a whole base because I do want it to be stable and have good support against the plywood... don't want to break that one!
@@ArxangelRC Sounds like a plan. Anything but what it is now...I really don't understand how they keep making the same design errors...?..😯😯🤔🇬🇧
@@EnglishTurbines Yeah... have been pondering the same thing... but some people are just too far removed from the final user... and I guess just have no clue! They just look at something and say "Well this LOOKS good, lets copy it"!
And the drift ftw
Absolutely!
Great video, do a review of the atomrc dolphin if possible with subtitles in Portuguese
Hey, the Dolphin is built and waiting for its moment, which I hope will be soon! As for subtitles... I don't know Portuguese... so... no idea how to do that, perhaps try using the youtube CC options and set it to your language, for the auto generated subtitles.
@@ArxangelRC Thanks for answering, Dolphin is incredible one day I will buy one, I think he has a perfect format, as the caption I use by cell phone but to give a way
@@yago_s_ Yes, the Dolphin looks pretty good, and is smaller... so should be quicker... less foam to create drag! :)
@@ArxangelRC It's true with a 6s battery it should turn into a rocket
@@yago_s_ Haha, well... for now it will be 6S, we will see about later! :)
you should try out DJI digital FPV system!
I probably would... if I could afford it! :(
@@ArxangelRC haha true it's pretty pricey. For me, buying all the fpv stuff would cost be like $350 for a nice headset and camera, the DJI is double the price, but double the quality. So for me, it's worth it.
@@J38x729 Well I fly using a monitor, and I rather like it! Never been a fan of goggles on a plane... I get seasick! I can bare it only for a few minutes for the copter races. Sooo... basically for me the cost is just the Vtx, as all else I already have, so... quite a lot cheaper than DJI!
I had a lame duck being the freewing mig 15
Really? Was it that bad?
@@ArxangelRC yes for me it was
@@dazspurs9899 Damn... did you ever fix it to improve that?
@@ArxangelRC the problem is the manufacturer doesn't know what the right battery is for the plane.the battery they recommend is too light,you try adding a bigger battery and it doesn't fly for me anyway glad to be rid of it
Damn... although that is a common problem! The Volantex models are like this, they always recommend a 3S 2200mAh pack... but there is no chance in hell you can ever balance most of their planes with that weight, so you need a bigger one! Good thing is though, that they fly beautifully with the bigger packs and proper balance... and you get longer flight times!
Looks good, disappointing performance...appreciate the review!
You are welcome!
Hhhuge!!
I still want one, they do remind me of a "Bird Of Prey". Kit may seem to be a better option.
And I don't know bout throwing 10 inches, mines only 8.
Its a Long Range Cruiser Not a Sports Flyer.
Enjoy..
Oh yeah, it does look a bit like the Birds of Prey! Also... "Long Range" might be a bit of stretch... mid-range is about right! :) How is it doing at 8"?
Discounted cost of PNP version £169, shipping £101 to UK!!!!!!!! They must be joking....
Damn... that is harsh!!! No other options?
@@ArxangelRC This one only ships from China and as the box is probably pretty big it costs that much. Small stuff, like the Racerstar F405 Nano, is good value from China but not the big stuff. In contrast all the kits that they have in EU warehouse like the ZOHD Dart XL ship for free. In any case your report did not seem that enthusiastic about it so I don’t want to buy one anyway.
@@mikegriffiths7487 Oh yeah, the box is quite large, but it is a chunky plane! It is nice to have stuff in EU warehouses... sadly not possible for all of it!
17:45 this is wrong! A good plane begin to dive and don't stall.
I really have to make a video to proof this.
BTW. nice test.
I meant all planes can stall, if you push them, and under the right conditions - no throttle, and full up elevator! Some do MUCH better than others in these conditions! If you apply no up elevator, 99.9% of them will nose down indeed... that is a fact, but not what I meant!
Mind those fingers, great video, but as you say a bit lame duck plane, LTE rambler much better
Yup, would seem that way! :)
I never stalled a plane until after I used autotune on Inav. Really strange.
iNav strikes again... no surprises there I guess! :P As for the stalling as a thing... you push a plane far enough, it will stall! :)
Lol, I gave her that name... 😂🤣👍🏻
Hahahaha, fits her well!
That stall for me would have ended in a pile of foam dust.
haha, oh come on... not that hard to deal with it... just have to have been in a few to know what to do!
Look like mini drak.
Probably! :)