• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.
FT A-10 Warthog

FT A-10 Warthog 1.0

The Hangar

Well-known member
#22
@The Hangar and @JAMplan65 Are you guys connecting your esc's together both a y-lead and running both BEC's? If you are, you are most likely browning out the rX. If you are, remove the red wire from one of the connections to the ESC and you should be good.
On the P-38 I have the esc’s on separate channels for differential thrust, so that shouldn’t be the issue. However on my A-10 I totally forgot and used a y connector to link my two esc’s. It hasn’t given me issues yet, but I should go in and change that before it does. You pull the middle wire out of one of the esc leads, right?
 
#23
On the P-38 I have the esc’s on separate channels for differential thrust, so that shouldn’t be the issue. However on my A-10 I totally forgot and used a y connector to link my two esc’s. It hasn’t given me issues yet, but I should go in and change that before it does. You pull the middle wire out of one of the esc leads, right?
Yes. The red (positive) wire is pulled, as no power from the esc and battery needs to go through the rX twice. Good luck if you decide to rebuild the p-38. Looked really good!
 
#25
I think the idea behind only one BEC connected to the reciever is linked to having one battery with two ESCs connected to them.

ESCs are never perfectly the same, so one will have a BEC that is supplying slightly more voltage lets say BEC2 is 5v and BEC1is 5.1v. The receiver doesn't care, it just needs a voltage above its cutoff, so it takes power from BEC1(cause its higher voltage pushes harder). That BEC2 is hooked up to the same pin, so instead of supplying its 5v, its now at a -.1 net voltage, so begins getting backfed to the battery by .1v from the other BEC1. Eventually, because the circuitry inst design to be backfed, BEC2 shorts out, creating a massive load for BEC1, which then also fails, cutting off any voltage supplied to the receiver.

there are ESCs that are designs to detect this and disable their BEC, Flight controllers that can choose between two different power supplies, and receivers that have isolated power, but for most of the hobby grade stuff, there isn't any protection for this. Thats why you always hear about BECs "fighting each other".

Doesnt matter which channel their plugged into, as most receivers are designed to be powered from any channel, so BECs can override each other from different channels.
 

The Hangar

Well-known member
#26
I think the idea behind only one BEC connected to the reciever is linked to having one battery with two ESCs connected to them.

ESCs are never perfectly the same, so one will have a BEC that is supplying slightly more voltage lets say BEC2 is 5v and BEC1is 5.1v. The receiver doesn't care, it just needs a voltage above its cutoff, so it takes power from BEC1(cause its higher voltage pushes harder). That BEC2 is hooked up to the same pin, so instead of supplying its 5v, its now at a -.1 net voltage, so begins getting backfed to the battery by .1v from the other BEC1. Eventually, because the circuitry inst design to be backfed, BEC2 shorts out, creating a massive load for BEC1, which then also fails, cutting off any voltage supplied to the receiver.

there are ESCs that are designs to detect this and disable their BEC, Flight controllers that can choose between two different power supplies, and receivers that have isolated power, but for most of the hobby grade stuff, there isn't any protection for this. Thats why you always hear about BECs "fighting each other".

Doesnt matter which channel their plugged into, as most receivers are designed to be powered from any channel, so BECs can override each other from different channels.
I don't ever recall seeing anybody pull out the middle wire when using them on separate channels...
 
#27
I'm not saying that a fixed wing ESC designed nowadays isnt capable of taking this, but that was the prevailing convention for the longest time. Your right that you don't see alot of fixed wing builds with this takeing into concern, but literally every brushless multirotor is running OPTO ESCs cause of this, with just a two BECs onboard(5v, 12v).

If you are planning on using all the same electronics and dont have a explanation for why it failed last time, that'd be my guess, and its a easy, cheap reversible fix to try out for some piece of mind. If it works you can forget about it till you have to reuse the ESC, if it doesn't, your not hurting anything.
 

PoorManRC

Well-known member
#32
They’ve dropped a bunch of planes lately and have been re-introducing them in maker foam. Hopefully the A-10 will be coming back soon.
GAWD I HOPE so!! It takes some People (like me) a long time to save up for one of these...
And I've REALLY wanted one!

I used to work on the real thing back in the 80's, at Davis-Monthan AFB... I've been looking forward to building and Flying her! 😭

I'm a Disabled Veteran, and unable to cut something that complex, or I would have done it a lot earlier.
 
#33
“My maiden flight started out good...then I think those long battery wires zapped my transmitter signal 😢
As I made my turn back to the field, was over the grass and heading towards me, it was like someone unplugged the battery. Complete loss of power and signal....”

”Too bad! I had that happen to my P-38 yesterday as well. I was pulling out of a loop and lost all elevator control...”

My Texaco 337 ended up the same way. But, not due to loss of signal! ☺️🤬
 

Attachments

Mr. Gandalf

Well-known member
#34
“My maiden flight started out good...then I think those long battery wires zapped my transmitter signal 😢
As I made my turn back to the field, was over the grass and heading towards me, it was like someone unplugged the battery. Complete loss of power and signal....”

”Too bad! I had that happen to my P-38 yesterday as well. I was pulling out of a loop and lost all elevator control...”

My Texaco 337 ended up the same way. But, not due to loss of signal! ☺️🤬
That stinks!:confused:

That's interesting about the P-38, I'm pretty sure the exact same thing happened to @The Hangar.
 
#35
That stinks!:confused:

That's interesting about the P-38, I'm pretty sure the exact same thing happened to @The Hangar.
Yeah, mine was due to a combination of things. I had a lot of roll I could not trim out. To add to it, I think the incidence of the wing was off. As it was flying away from me, I got slow and although the picture I was seeing did not suggest it was about to stall, the resultant spin into the ground was proof! 😉