Lancaster 74 Inches

[Andy Hoffer]

A test bed for the motor installation. 
I ran out of solder to make additional connections and a "Y" connector   
@Michael what size of wires should be used?  I am thinking 14Gauge as appropriate.

I am thinking about eliminating the landing gear to reduce weight and simplify build. 
Hand launch and belly landing. - Doable or not advisable?   

NOTE: @Andy Hoffer and @Frank v B and @Michael before you ask, the 2X4 will not be installed as a wing spar.

Darn @GuyOReilly .  I was thinking that you had chosen the perfect spar for a 74" wing.  It would be bomb-proof!  And it would last a very long time in taxi-only service, also eliminating the landing gear weight issue.  @frank I am sure would have no issue with a 2x4 spar - he would simply add more power. 

When you powered up the test bed did it drag your bar stool around the shop?!!!

If you REALLY feel the need to trim the weight I would be happy to donate a nice piece of 2"x2", oak or pine, your choice!

Ton ami,

Andy

[Michael]

I'm not sure about the wire gauge; just don't go thinner than what's connected to the motors or speed controls.

In my opinion and experience, with 4 motors, you should have no problem carrying the weight of landing gear, or even retracts.

[Frank v B]

Guy,

re: landing gear- it is so much safer for the maiden flight when you have landing gear.  The larger the plane the more I would be in favour of adding landing gear.  In my opinion you are way past the safe hand-launch size... and weight.

FWIIW

Frank

[GuyOReilly]

Testing the 4 motors.  ESC can only take 2 or 3 cells.  Test conducted using 1800 may 2 cells.
Here is a link to the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU3mrdHaMSE&feature=youtu.be

@Frank v B , the original was hand launched.  But I agree that L/G is a better option.  They are ordered.
@Michael , the wiring is good, more Y connectors and a receiver ordered.

Thank you for your advice and suggestions.

[Andy Hoffer]

Hi @GuyOReilly

i your test video would be more interesting if you positioned the test bed so that the motors test the aerodynamic characteristics of adjacent objects lying around the shop, e.g. balsa bits, film covering, othrt aaairplanes, wings, etc. 

Andy

[GuyOReilly]

Now that the DR-1 and Minimoa (Sortamoa) are finished, time to think about the next project.
A few quick searches and calculations showed that the model weighs in at 8 pounds.
This is WAAAYYYY too heavy for the planned power plant.
I will re-configure the fuselage and eliminate planking everywhere - even the tail was covered in balsa.
The main goal will be to reduce weight, yet maintain structural integrity.
Building will start with the nacelles.
Pictures to follow.

[GuyOReilly]

Fuselage started; creating square box.
One side framed up.
The other will be build on top of it to hopefully have 2 identical sides. 

[Wingnutz]

Guy, mon ami, I am reading your thread with interest and rooting for a successful conclusion to an ambitious project!
Earlier in the thread, you made a comment about ensuring models are adequately powered and you have advice from exactly the right TEMACers re weights and power system selection. Consider their advice carefully and choose a power system well suited to your model...trying to build a 6 pound, 6 foot plus structurally sound model with four engines, four ESCs, battery weight and likely retracts is something Rob Pike could probably do and I regard his ability to do that with somehing just short of reverence.
However, for the rest of us mortal buiders, IMHO that build goal is something just short of impossible and if the model is to be robust enough to take the rigours of landings and to's (I agree with your TEMAC mentors, its way too big to hand launch)it will come out close to Simon's prediction and your first build.
Spring for a healthier, stronger, 3S or 4S power system with 700-800W available...
Good luck and LMK when it's maiden time...
PS, you've inspired me and I may yet get back to building things with propellors...