From: "kb11troy" <kb10troy@...>
Date: Thursday, March 15, 2012 5:57 AM
Subject: Re: Durability and lightness
Date: Thursday, March 15, 2012 5:57 AM
Subject: Re: Durability and lightness
--- In BugHLG@yahoogroups.com, "raincityflyer" <lewis08@...> wrote:
>
> Durability is an interesting tradeoff. I once complained to the designer of the Little Nipper/Seeker/Swyft about things being fragile and not surviving my "landings".
>
> His response has served me well. Everything needs to be strong enough without being too heavy. And besides, eventually you stop crashing. My goal is 100% hand catch and that takes a lot of wear and tear off the airframe. I'll come back early rather than stay our there too long. Less walking that way too!
>
> FWIW - I've never broken a CF push rod in a crash. I've found that their flexibility has even saved a rudder or two when I've missed a pop-up hand catch and dropped the poor thing on its tail.
>
> There are lots of options and everyone has their own experience with them.
>
> Alan - I'll try to make some progress this weekend on the tail group and post some photos for you.
>
> Chris in Seattle
>
>
>
Quite right of course- my experience with it is anecdotal. The DLG guys in another forum I read (RCG Handlaunch)say that carbon push rods are the lightest pushrod alternative, but that they don't survive crashes nearly as well as wire pushrods.
I will say this in favor of wire pushrods- they don't require any fancy measures to terminate. Z-bend on the end at the servo and a simple L-bend with a piece of servo wire insulation as a keeper at the control horn end. :)
Rick