Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
ModelsRailroadsRockets
Radio Controlled
Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater Models
ModelGeeks.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Air Models / May 2008



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

.15 glow engine suggestion

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
3for3 - 08 Apr 2008 17:40 GMT
Hello,
I have acquired an Aspect Aviation Hyperbee and would like suggestions on an
engine for this plane.
I'm looking for a .15 size engine that will turn a 8X7 prop at least 16,000
rpm. This should provide approx 100mph.
I see that O.S. has a LA engine. Will this LA turn that fast and provide
longevity? I see that I can convert a 15CV-X into a aero engine with a high
price sticker attached.

I see that MVVS makes a .15. What experience have you had with this engine?

What other engine manafacturers make this size of engine that will meet my
rpm needs?

thanks in advance,
rcs
Ed Paasch - 08 Apr 2008 18:50 GMT
Thunder Tiger manufacturers both a GP-15 and GP-18 engine that might fit
your needs.  The Magnum XLS .15A is another good possibility as it is a dual
ball bearing design instead of a bushed design like LA or GP series.

As for which engines will turn a 8x7 prop at what rpms, I can't speak to
that.  You might check the Tachometer Readings forum on RC Universe and see
if anybody has actually tach'd these engines with an 8x7 prop.

Good luck and good shopping!

> Hello,
> I have acquired an Aspect Aviation Hyperbee and would like suggestions on
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> thanks in advance,
> rcs
Ed Cregger - 08 Apr 2008 18:53 GMT
> Hello,
> I have acquired an Aspect Aviation Hyperbee and would like suggestions on
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> thanks in advance,
> rcs

-------------

I doubt that even a full race .15 with a tuned pipe would swing an 8x7 that
fast.

However, because a .15 sized model is so small, I can guarantee that a
person with at least average vision is going to have one heck of a time
flying a .15 powered model running a 7x4 and keeping up with it at wide open
throttle. The little rascals can get too far away to see well in a hurry.

I flew a model named "The Peppermint Pattie" in the early eighties. This
model resembled a Banshee pattern ship. I hand launched the model, so I did
not use landing gear. I was able to run Peppermint Pattie right past the
piped .60 sized Curare models of the day with an easily visible faster
speed. The pattern ships back then were routinely flying at over 100 mph.
Pattie left them in the dust.

My engine in those days was a baffle piston HB .15 with muffler and Top
Flite 7x4 nylon prop and the engine was burning 10% nitro club fuel. Nothing
exotic. It was all I could do to keep it in sight and my vision was pretty
good back then.

Ed Cregger
fubar1 - 09 Apr 2008 01:24 GMT
What he said.
Very quick plane it is. I have one myself powered with an OS .15FP which is
the precursor of the .15LA. More than enough power and its plenty fast
enough for me! Zing! It's a dot. Zing! It's in your face.
As far as a screamer .15, this OS engine would fit the bill:
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXXD72&P=7

OS 15CV-A engine. Airplane ready, no conversion needed. $110.
I have one that I was going to put on a Sig Wonder but never finished
building the kit for some reason. I have thought briefly of putting it on
the Hyperbee but that might make it supersonic. Also thought of putting an
MVVS on it but if they run anything like the MVVS .26 I have once again, it
might be too fast. Plus I don't like the pipe. Maybe back when I was 20 but
now that 50 is staring me in the face I dunno.
Either way, that Hyperbee is a flyin sumbitch.

Dan
KE6ERB
Fubar of The HillPeople

>> Hello,
>> I have acquired an Aspect Aviation Hyperbee and would like suggestions on
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
>
> Ed Cregger
Robert Reynolds - 09 Apr 2008 05:13 GMT
Those are some pretty ambitious figures for any .15.  I generally run
8x6 props on .20 size engines.  My OS 15 FP usually gets a 7x5,
depending on what plane it's in.

> Hello,
> I have acquired an Aspect Aviation Hyperbee and would like suggestions on an
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> thanks in advance,
> rcs
Bob Cowell - 09 Apr 2008 14:41 GMT
>Hello,
>I have acquired an Aspect Aviation Hyperbee and would like suggestions on an
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>What other engine manafacturers make this size of engine that will meet my
>rpm needs?

I seriously doubt that you are going to find ANY .15 engine that will turn that
prop at that speed.
You are looking at something in the neighborhood of 0,85 HP requirement.

even with the inflated claims of power  and RPM published by most engine
manufacturers, I doubt that you will find anybody claiming much above 0.50 HP

a 7X7 (if such an animal exists) would require approximately 0.49 HP
mike - 09 Apr 2008 17:18 GMT
> I seriously doubt that you are going to find ANY .15 engine that will turn that
> prop at that speed.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> a 7X7 (if such an animal exists) would require approximately 0.49 HP

http://www.pennvalleyhobbycenter.com/images/storesebay/rcatfpp07x9.jpg

for old school Topflite 7x9. used to fly the 7x6W, it think on the
old
K&B sandcast, a real screamer on Missile Mist. Needed really long
lines

**
mike
**
rszanti - 09 Apr 2008 19:27 GMT
You might get close to 100mph with a Cox Special .15, I believe it was
rated at close to 17000rpm on a 7x6 and 30% nitro. Obviously you need
the pitch to get the desired MPH but the planes drag affects how large
you can go with the diameter before you exceed the engines power. If
the drag is low enough, a smaller prop will let you rev the Cox up
even higher.
The Natural Philosopher - 09 Apr 2008 22:32 GMT
>> Hello,
>> I have acquired an Aspect Aviation Hyperbee and would like suggestions on an
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> I seriously doubt that you are going to find ANY .15 engine that will turn that
> prop at that speed.

Indeed. It takes a racing 36 to get an 8x8 to 18K RPM.

> You are looking at something in the neighborhood of 0,85 HP requirement.
>
> even with the inflated claims of power  and RPM published by most engine
> manufacturers, I doubt that you will find anybody claiming much above 0.50 HP
>
> a 7X7 (if such an animal exists) would require approximately 0.49 HP
MJKolodziej - 10 Apr 2008 00:57 GMT
>>> Hello,
>>> I have acquired an Aspect Aviation Hyperbee and would like suggestions
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>
> Indeed. It takes a racing 36 to get an 8x8 to 18K RPM.

TNP, how could he do this with electric?
mk
rszanti - 10 Apr 2008 15:23 GMT
> how could he do this with electric?

Something like a MP Jet 28/10 motor, 7-8 LiPo cells, 100 amps, 7" or
8" prop .......... needs analyzed via Motocalc
The Natural Philosopher - 10 Apr 2008 18:01 GMT
>>>> Hello,
>>>> I have acquired an Aspect Aviation Hyperbee and would like suggestions
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> TNP, how could he do this with electric?
> mk

With extreme difficulty and probably not at the same weight for any
sensible duration.

Top class Hacker B50 and a shed load of cells can do it, but tends to
weigh a lot more.
3for3 - 12 Apr 2008 14:43 GMT
Hi Bob,
you indicated hp vs rpm numbers. What is the math fromula behind this? My
physics is a littly rusty.

Raymond

> Hello,
> I have acquired an Aspect Aviation Hyperbee and would like suggestions on
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> thanks in advance,
> rcs
Morgans - 12 Apr 2008 18:39 GMT
> Hi Bob,
> you indicated hp vs rpm numbers. What is the math fromula behind this? My
> physics is a littly rusty.

       Horsepower = Torque x RPM  /  5252

Unless you have a way of measuring torque, there is not a direct
relationship between HP and RPM.

However, if you know a certain prop requires a certain HP to turn it at a
certain HP, you know about how much torque that engine must be putting out
to do those RPM's.  You then can work backwards to estimate the HP of an
engine, given a similar RPM range.  Indeed, there are "club" props (a chunk
of wood that has no pitch) around that people use to work out HP, lacking a
device to measure torque, like a dynamometer would do.
Signature

Jim in NC

Bob Cowell - 24 Apr 2008 15:06 GMT
>Hi Bob,
>you indicated hp vs rpm numbers. What is the math fromula behind this? My
>physics is a littly rusty.
>
>Raymond

the math is based on some work done many years ago (prior to 1998 for certain)
by Bob Adkins and Brian ????? (I can't remember his last name at the moment)
Their formulas were derived from many engine runs measuring various parameters.
with props in the 7 to11 inch diameter range
(I'm not trying to be vague,  I'm working from memory here)

At one time,  various versions of thrust / HP calculators were online at several
different web sites, and they all seemed to be based on similar math and
assumptions.

I have the formulas stuffed into a calculator,  and in an Excel spreadsheet,
********
DISCLAIMER
********
For MY purposes,  these formulas have served me very well over the years for
predicting prop performance on various planes.
the further away from the observed data you get,  the greater the error in the
predictions.
****************

These formulas have been posted in the newsgroup several times, and almost every
time they were posted, the thread degenerated into a fiasco where the "pure
math" types claimed that the formulas were worthless because they didn't take
into account some specific parameter.

As far as I am concerned,  they work well enough for me,
BUT
I subscribe to the  " T L A R " school of thought
and the "That'll get you close" theory of information management when precise
information is not available.
Ed Cregger - 24 Apr 2008 20:13 GMT
>>Hi Bob,
>>you indicated hp vs rpm numbers. What is the math fromula behind this? My
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
> precise
> information is not available.

------------

I'm with you, Bob. Close enough is close enough.

I can't remember Brian's last name either. Bummer. I wish that he and Bob
Adkins would "come on down" and begin participating on RCU. Who knows? Maybe
they are...8>0

Ed Cregger
Bob Cowell - 24 Apr 2008 21:25 GMT
>I'm with you, Bob. Close enough is close enough.
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>Ed Cregger

I do know that Bob Adkins is still around,  (at least when I checked a couple
weeks ago ;-)  )
It has been years since I last had any contact with Brian,

Not sure if either of them haunt any of the on-line forums,

I know that I don't,  
3 reasons,
SLOW internet connection,
lack of time to go digging,
AND
at least some of the old hands still show up here to help keep us  headed the
right way ;-)
Ed Cregger - 24 Apr 2008 21:46 GMT
>>I'm with you, Bob. Close enough is close enough.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> the
> right way ;-)

-----------

There's not a single thing wrong with being right here. I had brain fade
when I made the comment about RCU. I thought I was there when I made the
comment. Here is just fine.

Ed Cregger
Bob Cowell - 25 Apr 2008 14:44 GMT
>There's not a single thing wrong with being right here. I had brain fade
>when I made the comment about RCU. I thought I was there when I made the
>comment. Here is just fine.
>
>Ed Cregger

"brain fade",,,  I get that a lot,
It doesn't bother me,
the part that bothers me is that mine never seems to fade back in  ;-)

bob
3for3 - 25 Apr 2008 01:54 GMT
Hi Bob,
Will you share your excel spreadsheet?
do you subscribe to RCUniverse? would you PM me ?
3 for 3
Regards
raymond

>>Hi Bob,
>>you indicated hp vs rpm numbers. What is the math fromula behind this? My
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
> precise
> information is not available.
Bob Cowell - 25 Apr 2008 16:41 GMT
>Hi Bob,
>Will you share your excel spreadsheet?
>do you subscribe to RCUniverse? would you PM me ?
>3 for 3
>Regards
>raymond

Share?  sure,  as long as nobody starts asking me silly questions about why the
formulas are what they are,  and why did I build the spreadsheet that way.
AND, remember that others were responsible for all the work involved in deriving
the formulas
The original work was done by Brian Morris and Bob Adkins

( See,  I finally found Brian's last name )

the relevant thread is:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.models.rc.air/browse_thread/thread/f7a6b31673
bf8979/e112a03274ce677c?hl=en&lnk=st&q=#e112a03274ce677c


RCU?  frayed knot,
I don't have the time, patience, or connection speed to warrant spending time
digging around in the online forums.

I CAN e-mail it to you directly in a "Zip" envelope,  (not all mail servers will
pass a "naked" Excel file)

Assuming that your e-mail address is valid, and I massaged it properly,  there
is one on the way to you now,

Otherwise,  contact me at
trash_trap@hotmail.com

with a valid address,  and I will shoot a copy your way

The return address on my newsgroup messages is NOT a valid address,  but it's
keeps the spammers happy.

bob
Scott - 06 May 2008 18:44 GMT
Look at a Nelson Engines .15. The FFers use them and they scream, and they
are not cheap though. I have a .40 and I am turning a 9X6 @ 24k on 15%
nitro.
> Hello,
> I have acquired an Aspect Aviation Hyperbee and would like suggestions on
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> thanks in advance,
> rcs
3for3 - 07 May 2008 23:44 GMT
Scott,
I've googled for this .15 engine and have not found a retailer. Do you know
where I can purchase this engine?
I do see one for sale on Ebay.

thanks,
3for3

> Look at a Nelson Engines .15. The FFers use them and they scream, and they
> are not cheap though. I have a .40 and I am turning a 9X6 @ 24k on 15%
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>> thanks in advance,
>> rcs
fubar1 - 08 May 2008 01:34 GMT
http://www.pspec.com/results.asp?category=2

> Scott,
> I've googled for this .15 engine and have not found a retailer. Do you
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
>>> thanks in advance,
>>> rcs
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.