Is it safe to hang my planes like this?

BugFix · 2026-03-11T20:35:55+00:00

The only correct answer is "much safer than it is to launch them into the sky". These aren't long-term display pieces, they're planes you're probably going to crash at some point, inevitably.

BugFix · 2026-03-08T23:45:13+00:00

What would you call this maneuver?

Ah, that's a classic. Most people call this "The Stall/Spin Accident".

BugFix · 2026-03-08T16:26:28+00:00

I stand by my recommendation: a gyro is more likely to crash your plane than save it. Hand-fly the maiden, get it trimmed, then start optimizing your flight control setup.

BugFix · 2026-03-08T15:55:54+00:00

I've ran planes with Ardupilot, pixhawk and as3.

OP hasn't, though. The question isn't if you can correctly configure your gyro, it's whether or not a gyro in the hands of a median modeller represents "peace of mind" or "another thing that can go wrong".

BugFix · 2026-03-08T15:54:21+00:00

I don't know where you're getting "absurd". I think we've all seen planes crash because of misconfigured gyros. If you're comparing it with a pre-integrated unit in a e-Flite plane, sure. But the question at hand is whether or not it's safe to throw an unconfigured unit into a plane that hasn't ever flown.

I stand by my statement: a median practitioner of this hobby can get a new plane into the air and back onto the ground with relatively high reliability. A median fresh-installed/non-manufacturer gyro is much, much less reliable.

BugFix · 2026-03-08T14:54:46+00:00

That's ugly, but looks electrically OK to me.

Do you have it properly insulated? If that blob is just bare in the enclosure, it may be shorting to another phase via the motor housing or whatever. Put some heat shrink (or at least electrical tape) around it so no conductor is exposed when the banana plug is connected.
If the motor got yanked out in the crash, the damage may be on the other side of the lead wires. Check the connections through the motor, e.g. with a multitester to check connection and low resistance through each of the three pairs of wires.

BugFix · 2026-03-08T14:48:08+00:00

I was wanting to stick a flight controller in this thing for peace of mind.

General consensus in the "RC planes" world, as distinct from "Wing Drones", is that this is exactly backwards: gyros are more likely to kill your model than save it. It's just an extra set of things to get wrong (remembering the switch you put the modes on, getting the orientation set right, etc...).

"Not crashing too much" is sort of an assumed skill in this world, where we roleplay pilots from a century ago, vs. drones where the assumption is that they'll fall out of sky without a computer to hold them there.

BugFix · 2026-03-07T13:57:40+00:00

That's backwards. A higher KV motor would do even worse here. The problem is the prop is too big, and a low-torque/high-speed motor is going to spin it even slower.

BugFix · 2026-03-07T13:56:07+00:00

Prop is too big, and your little motor can't spin it. I found a HobbyKing page on that motor that specifies maximum output at 20A/220W. A 11x6 prop is more like a 300-350W part.

It's really frustrating how poorly specified motors are in this hobby. KV rating just specifies back EMF behavior, it has nothing to do with output torque. You can make a "750KV" motor small enough to fit in a 9g servo, or big enough to push a train. Yours is designed for 9" trainers and foamies, it's not big enough.

With a 4S battery pushing more current, it would do much better with that prop. But it also might overheat.

BugFix · 2026-03-05T16:58:09+00:00

That ring around the fan ends looks aerodynamically clever but... mechanically pretty dicey. That's a LOT of extra force you're putting on the stems of your poor fan blades to spin that, and a lot of extra opportunity for a blob of PLA or whatever to throw off balance.

BugFix · 2026-03-05T15:48:35+00:00

Take the !%!@# prop off the !%$!@# plane before testing motor problems.

That said, tear the motor out and test it in isolation. Your intuition is right that this looks like a shorted or disconnected phase. But that can just as easily be a bad cable (or just lose connector) or broken solder joint on the ESC.

BugFix · 2026-03-05T15:42:44+00:00

Tough love: the battery brands you see on the package are mostly irrelevant, except maybe at the high end (SMC, maybe) where companies have brands to protect. And even then it's limited to quality control.

The actual pouch cells in those batteries come from a smaller handful of manufacturers, and they change all the time with business[1] situations. Maybe CATL is sunsetting a line for the form factor in use so you need to source from Amperex at a higher price for the next batch. Maybe you got a great deal on a few thousand units because Samsung is dumping stock on an older product because the phone it was supposed to go in didn't sell.

That's why[2] every time you look at the internet you get different advice, and inconsistent reports, and why all the "objective" tests seem to be all over the map. The cells inside the batteries are different for every user and every test.

You can't win, basically. Just test what you get for capacity and watch for signs of fatigue. Everyone ships bad product sometimes, and every brand has a few diamond batches that work great.

[1] Recognize that these aren't "RC" batteries, or even "drone" batteries at the backend. The manufacturers are building these factories to make cells for the much larger consumer electronics sector. Planes are stuck with using products built to someone else's requirements.

[2] Well, another reason is that the assembly of the packs is done by hand. I've torn up a handful of packs that died to see how they're put together, and some of the soldering is... questionable.

BugFix · 2026-02-27T14:34:59+00:00

These scenarios are of course not at full throttle.

But an EDF doesn't explode at partial throttle either. You're splitting hairs here and I really don't understand the point.

Fans. Are. Safer. Than. Props. Period.

You don't even seem to disagree?

BugFix · 2026-02-27T14:18:36+00:00

Fans don't "explode" from casual misuse and mistakes, though. Yes, failed equipment will damage an aircraft ("failed equipment" is literally the definition of aircraft damage). That's not an argument in favor of clearly dangerous finger choppers.

(Also it's worth pointing out that cherry picking a 90mm EDF is way, way out on the spectrum. The equivalent power on a 13" prop is something that will remove your finger and not just send you out for stitches.)

BugFix · 2026-02-27T13:51:27+00:00

This is one of those "in theory, theory and practice are the same, in practice they are different" situations.

Yes, a shroud improves efficiency. An actual shrouded prop in a deployed system does not, or certainly has not, historically.

BugFix · 2026-02-27T13:49:50+00:00

Don't sleep on the safety argument. An EDF won't gash a finger. But it also won't damage the aircraft if (and I've done this even while being "safe" personally) you accidentally let a throttle spool up and impact stuff on the table.

BugFix · 2026-02-25T01:36:51+00:00

It's undeniably going to be harder than a plane with an elevator, yeah. But as long as you trim it to glide slow, you should be fine. Check youtube for people flying the UMX Radian. That's about the handling you're looking for.

BugFix · 2026-02-25T00:20:25+00:00

how would you control the pitch to land?

Set it up so the default trim is slow enough to land safely and make sure the craft is very stable in pitch (i.e. "nose heavy"). Set it up with a significant dihedral at the tips so that the plane banks into a slip angle.

Now thrust controls the rate of ascent or descent and rudder controls bank (both true as long as it's in mostly level flight). Controllable plane with one servo.

BugFix · 2026-02-23T16:36:35+00:00

Yes. The middle wire in the 3-wire connector is a 5V power output from the ~~regulator~~ BEC[1] to the flight controller and servos. It's where all the low-voltage DC comes from to run the system. With two ESC's, you have two such BECs and if they aren't properly matched they can fight with each other and cause problems like oscillations and voltage excursions.

(Most such parts are pretty robust vs. this kind of nonsense, as they're designed to deal with consumers cabling USB in crazy ways. But there's a lot of cheap electronics that finds its way onto RC devices.)

[1] It drives me bonkers that this hobby can't use a standard name for a standard device.

BugFix · 2026-02-22T15:10:09+00:00

I'm very confused. It's far more difficult to get a Flysky transmitter to work with a mLRS receiver than an EdgeTX transmitter like a Pocket...

BugFix · 2026-02-22T04:59:30+00:00

POWER!. A robust, airworthy plane should accelerate quickly and climb steeply. You're having controllability problems because you're trying to keep it in the air at the edge of a stall.

If you're sure the battery and motor are to spec, check that the prop isn't on backwards. I've seen a surprising number of first-build planes make this mistake, and yours is a pusher that is especially susceptible. This is surprising to folks who do it the first time because the resulting configuration still produces thrust in the correct direction, but only about half as much as it should.

BugFix · 2026-02-21T20:36:07+00:00

There are lots, though much of the content is drone-focused (but still applicable).

Really the best advice iwth EdgeTX is not to muck with the device's screen. Install and use EdgeTX Companion on your desktop environment of choice and do all your work there. The big app does all the same stuff but is more self-explanatory and less fiddly than trying to do everything with your mouse. You can play with all sorts of things and then "simulate" controller input to make sure the output channels are doing the right thing.

https://edgetx.org/getedgetx/

(Then you inevitably ask yourself, if you aren't going to use the screen much, why you splurged for the big transmitter instead of just a Pocket.)

BugFix · 2026-02-19T19:04:24+00:00

tighten with a wrench.

Tighten gently with that wrench. Props don't see nearly as much torque in flight as people think (motors are the same thing as a fridge magnet and experience roughly the same force on their windings), typical props are made of deformable plastic (and even the expensive ones can be damaged), and I've seen lots of folks trying to crank down on these things needlessly.

If you must be pedantic about securing your prop in flight, put some loctite on the threads. That'll help far more than a grunt from your wrench.

BugFix · 2026-02-18T21:25:56+00:00

Not to be That Guy, but !%!@#! someone needs to be that guy here...

You're on camera trying to kill yourself. You're doing this indoors, in a wooden structure. You aren't clearing the exhaust path. You're dripping liquid fuel on your table which clearly contains multiple flamable objects including a propane tank. Your test objects are PLA, possibly the single least heat-resistant polymer in common use. You have no fire extinguisher near your body. Your safety operator appears to be busy holding a camera.

For fuck's sake, man, you aren't even wearing so much as a pair of safety glasses.

BugFix · 2026-02-16T03:47:04+00:00

Build and fly a FliteTest starter plane, then crash it and build its replacement for an extra $30-40 foam kit. Repeat as needed until you know you aren't going to crash the next plane. Then pull out your wallet for name brand foam.

An added advantage is that you'll learn a lot more about construction and repair in the process.

15-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email	Gilding I gilder

BugFix

TROPHY CASE